The Organic Dilemma

Let me tell you, it's difficult to get through Christmas without milk. Christmas cookies and chocolates are begging for a tall glass of milk. I've turned in desperation to the milk in our fridge from time to time, but it just isn't the same. It's watery and... weird.

I reasoned that really, I don't have a problem with the pasteurization per se, it's just that I like knowing where my milk is coming from, and that it isn't full of hormones, Johnne's, and puss from infected udders. I don't suffer from arthritis, lactose-intolerance, Crohne's disease, or any other problems that raw milk might help treat. So theoretically, if I could find trustworthy organic milk, all of my problems would be solved.

I asked my mom to buy organic milk, but she has read this blog and she knows that most of the organic brands are owned by the mega-corporations that find loophole after loophole to make their CAFO (confined animal feeding operation) milk count as "organic." All organic milk is not created equal. She knows that non-organic milk is produced under conditions that are less than desirable, but she can't buy raw milk and organic milk might not be much better than the normal stuff. Due to the lack of a clear solution, we continue buying the stuff we've always bought.

So once again, the problem comes down to the access to reliable information. What organic milk sticks to the original spirit of the organic label, believing that great milk really does come from happy cows?

Luckily, I found an organic milk scorecard from the Cornucopia Institute (Slogan: "Promoting Economic Justice for Family Scale Farming"). The investigation covered all kinds of dairy products, including ice cream, raw milk, yogurt, and goat milk and cheese. The original study was published in 2006, but Cornucopia's website says the scorecard is "updated". They rated 107 organic dairy brands on many different factors, including:

• the amount of pasture time for the herd
• the use of hormones and antibiotics
• the health and longevity of the cows (cull rate)
• the source of replacement animals (organic or conventional farms)
• their organic farm certifier

(See http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2008/10/29/horizon-aurora-and-woodstock-organic-milk-get-the-smackdown-from-cornucopia/)

We do our grocery shopping either at Giant or Safeway, both of which get milk from suppliers who were rated in the lowest bracket. It's not a better product; it's a rip-off. There are good brands available, though, including Whole Foods 365 Organic and Organic Valley. Kroger's brand is a no-no, but Harris Teeter's brand scored somewhere in the middle. I was surprised that Trader Joe's organic milk is just as bad as Giant and Safeway's.

My favorite part of the scorecard (aside from the fact that now we know what organic brands to buy) is that the #1 rated brand is Animal Farm, located in Orwell, Vermont. Orwell's Animal Farm is where we find the nation's happiest cows? Really?

The Milkless Month

Even though I love the sense of community that comes with a cow share operation, there are certainly drawbacks to being locked into a weekly delivery system. December means the end of the semester, so I'm out of Charlottesville for a month during the break. I had hoped that break would correspond with my cow's dry season, when she'd naturally stop producing milk. Apparently Gertrude is too tough to let the winter slow her down. For the four weeks that I'm gone, the milk doesn't stop coming, and even though I can't pick it up (I'm not quite crazy enough to drive four hours round-trip every Friday) I can't stop paying for it. I'm not really paying for milk, I'm paying a cow boarding fee, after all.

So I'm left with two dilemmas: I'm milk-less, and my milk is homeless.

The homeless milk is the easiest predicament to solve. It turns out that it's pretty easy to find someone who is willing to take on an extra half gallon of milk during the holidays. It's another reason cow shares can be tough--the amount you recieve every week is completely inflexible. You can't get any more or less than your share allows. When I posted my half-gallon as single and ready to mingle on the local raw milk forum, there were many interested parties who needed extra milk.

Of course, it's illegal for anyone to financially compensate me. Nobody can buy it from me. However, bartering and thank you gifts are legal. My holiday milk donations are earning me home made granola and candles.

So my milk isn't going to waste, problem #1 solved. What about me? I'm used to drinking whole, raw milk, and I find myself now with a fridge full of pasteurized 1%.

I'm despondent.

Homemade cheese (and yogurt, and butter)

I think it's worth it to stop for a moment and re-define dairy products we eat without thinking about, and terms that are traditional but have lost their meaning. The reason we call milk "skim" if all the fat has been taken out is because normally the fat floats to the top, and you skim it off with a spoon--then it's "skimmed milk."

You know how we say milk that has gone bad has "soured"? Pasteurized milk just turns bad, but raw milk actually sours thanks to the bacteria still alive inside of if. If I skimmed off the cream from my milk and let it sit out at room temperature, in a couple days it would be totally edible sour cream. The sour cream we buy in stores is from pasteurized cream that is re-introduced to its bacterial friends, then re-pasteurized once the bacteria have done their work. Yogurt is milk that has slightly soured under heat.

The buttermilk you can buy in the store is not anything like the milk left over after you make butter. (To make butter at home, just buy 100% cream, put it in a jar, and shake it around for about 15 minutes. The fat separates from the liquid and you get butter and butter milk--see picture). Buttermilk from a store is actually slightly fermented milk, which they make by adding lactic acid to pasteurized milk.

Believe it or not, cheese, like milk, does not spontaneously appear on grocery store shelves, nor is its creation dependent upon a factory. I've actually experimented with cheese making at home for a couple years, so my experience here pre-dates all awareness of raw milk. The simplest way to make cheese is to heat milk to just under boiling point, then add in acid of some kind (vinegar, or lemon or lime juice work well) to make the milk curdle. After that you pour the curds and whey through cheese cloth (remember Little Miss Muffet?), letting the whey drain off and holding onto the curds. Press the curds together, and presto! Home made soft cheese!

What I find so amazing is that raw milk manages to preserve itself naturally, which explains how it was used so extensively by many cultures without any method of pasteurization. Cheese keeps longer than milk, as do fermented and soured milk products. The acid in fermented milk products keeps harmful bacteria from growing, making it safe to eat for a longer period of time. People have been finding ways for thousands of years to get the health benefits of dairy without constantly consuming fresh milk. What's more, they had to make the products on their own, without fancy machines or labels. Home made mozzarella is within your grasp!

A Brush with Reality (and Oniony milk)

In late October, this email graced my in-box, highlighting the joys and pitfalls of free range cattle operations. I laughed, then prepped for onion milk cheese-making. Normally we drink our milk so fast that I don't want to spare any for cheese, or even butter. I was honestly a little disappointed when my milk turned out to be onion-free that week.

"Hi Shareholders.

Last week we fenced off a paddock from the milking herd where we had spotted some fresh, wild onions. Unfortunately, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence and our girls, who care more about presumed pasture delicacies than fresh breath, broke through the fence. Although this has never happened before, we can't guarantee that it won't happen again. We can assure you that it won't happen again this season because the girls devoured all the onions!

Off-tasting milk is not yummy to drink but still good for you so here are some recommendations for onion-flavored milk:

Sausage Corn Chowder

• 1 pound sausage
  
• 1 cup diced onions
• 1 cup diced red bell peppers
• 2 tablespoons all-purpose flour
• 4 cups milk
  
• 12 ears corn, sliced from cob and creamed slightly in food processor
  
• 1/4 teaspoon garlic powder
• salt and pepper to taste
• 3 teaspoons sliced green scallions (optional)

Over medium-high heat, brown and crumble sausage in soup pot. While sausage begins to brown, add onions and red peppers, cook until tender and sausage is no longer pink. Drain. Add flour, stir well into mixture and cook 5-6 minutes. Add milk and combine with sausage mixture. Add cream corn and simmer for 20-25 minutes until base thickens. Add garlic powder, salt and pepper. Garnish with scallions on top in soup bowl.

Yogurt Cheese

~1 quart plain raw yogurt
~cheese salt
~herbs (basil, garlic, chives, black pepper, and dill)

After making fresh yogurt, pour into colander lined with cheesecloth. Tie corners of the cloth into a knot and hang the bag to drain for 12 - 24 hours, or until the yogurt has stopped dripping and has reached the desired consistency. Remove cheese from bag; add salt and herbs to taste. Store in covered container in the refrigerator for up to 2 weeks. A tasty treat on crackers or bagels.

Feel free to email if you have any questions we might answer regarding the cows' untimely onion episode. We're sorry if this has left a bad taste in your mouth and are sure the future will prove better with predictably delicious milk. Thanks so much for your understanding."

Meet Gertrude

Even though the dairy industry insists that there's no difference between organic, non-organic, and raw milk, we've probably all seen the commercials for California dairy with the tag line, "Great milk comes from happy cows." My cow's name is Gertrude. According to the farmer who milks her every day, she's a very gentle cow and to date has never attempted to kick him. Good girl. When I met her on the farm's "Shareholder Appreciation Day: A Chance to Give thanks for Udders," she was wearing a rather rumpled winter coat and a blue bow on her tail so that I could identify her. She rotates through various pastures with the other cows and a flock of deliciously free-range chicken friends, who are tasked with scattering the manure into more effective fertilizer. I know that she's tested negative for TB, and Virginia is a brucellosis-free state, so there's no worry there. She's also old enough that she would have died already if she carried Johne's disease. She is fed a little grain each day (it makes milking time rather exciting for a cow), but spends most of her time grazing.

I'll admit, this is all still a little weird to me. You have to understand that about three months ago I was a "normal" milk drinker. My parents don't even buy organic. I absolutely did not get milk from a cow with a name and an easily identifiable diet.

Yet I found myself driving the two hours from Charlottesville to Amelia in order to see my cow first hand, because that's what this is all about, right? A direct relationship with your food source, human and animal. And if you're going to get raw milk, I think you'd better know where it's from and who is handling it before it gets to you. Plus it was an adventure, and an excuse to road trip to a new part of Virginia at a time when gas prices had fallen to well below $2.

I enjoy celebrating the small farm. What seems like a bizarre relationship to many of us now was not just a few decades ago. My parents had easy access to raw dairy growing up, and some of my older cousins grew up drinking raw dairy. More to the point, they grew up drinking milk and eating other food that came from a farm they were familiar with. Although this is anecdotal evidence, none of my family members are dead yet (at least on account of dairy-related diseases), and I'm not either.

The Consumer's Right to Choice

"It's my body, I do what I want!" --Cartman

There is an inherent tension between the public’s right to safety and the individual right to choice. The major question, then, is how dangerous is raw milk, relative to everything else we consume?

William Campbell Douglass II, a major advocate of raw milk and author of The Milk Book: The Milk of Human Kindness is not Pasteurized, says not very. Douglass points out that in the past 30 years, outbreaks of disease related to pasteurized milk have led to over 200,000 cases of food poisoning and over 600 deaths. Annually, dairy (raw and pasteurized) accounts for only one percent of food-related illnesses. In 2005, the CDC reported that raw dairy accounted for 30 percent of all dairy related outbreaks. The biggest threat is produce, which accounted for 38 percent of food-borne illness between 1990 and 2004. Poultry was responsible for 20 percent, and beef 16 percent.

Yet our chicken isn’t sold to us cooked in order to protect us from bacteria, and nobody is calling for the pasteurization of spinach before it reaches our salad bowls. Parents who give their children raw milk might be increasing their risk of exposure to dangerous pathogens, causing the skin of experts at the CDC to crawl, but the rising rates of childhood obesity suggest that parents are making other unhealthy, but legal, dietary decisions for their children. So why is raw milk the boogey man?

“I have no idea,” answered Kathryn Russell, who has struggled against state regulators to keep her raw milk operation open in Virginia.

The modern dairy complex as a whole has a vested interest in keeping down small distributors and putting the kibosh on raw milk, because direct from the farmer to the consumer operations interfere with price controls, the profits of milk processing plants, and overall loosen the death grip that a few large companies have over the US milk supply. According to Food and Water Watch, a nonprofit watchdog organization, for every dollar that consumers spent on milk in 2007, only $0.27 went back to dairy farmers. The rest went to dairy processing firms. Dairy Farmers of American (DFA) is a large cooperative that collects and markets a third of the milk produced in the US. In some regions, DFA is the only supplier to Dean Foods, a company that controls 40 percent of the liquid milk supply and 60 percent of the organic milk supply. As a result, farmers are often forced to go through DFA or go out of business. Cutting out all of the middlemen means a loss of profit to DFA and distributors like Dean Foods, making pasteurization seem like a very good idea.

The fight for raw milk is one battle in the larger war against big food industry. In 2005, four companies (Tyson, Cargill, Swift&Co, and National Beef Packing) slaughtered 83.5 percent of cows. Smithfield, Tyson, Swift & Co., and Cargill slaughtered 64 percent of hogs, and just two companies (Tyson and Pilgrim’s Pride) control 47 percent of birds slaughtered. The recent resurgence of farmer’s markets and international movements like Slow Food International are a product of the growing desire to eat healthier, tastier food and lessen the burden on our environment. A quarter of our nation’s dairy is trucked across the country from California, and much of the rest of it comes from other southwestern states where low rainfall makes it easier to accommodate thousands of cattle with little shelter. The ecological stress caused by mega-dairies unnerves many people. Over 2.5 million cows live in Texas, New Mexico, and California, and dairies use up to 150 gallons of water per cow per day to rinse manure off of the concrete floors. The stress on local water reserves is incredible. A dairy with 1,000 cows (a normal size for a California dairy) produces between 50,000 and 75,000 gallons of liquid manure a day.

Advocates of raw dairy are not suggesting that mega dairies ship raw milk thousands of miles across the country and sell it in major grocery stores. Pasteurization would be necessary to assure some degree of safety from milk produced and handled in the standard manner. What advocates do want, however, is to be able to go to a farm and buy milk from the farmer, or to buy locally produced milk from a local grocery store. Farms that produce raw milk often also provide free-range eggs, chicken, pork, and other farm-fresh produce. Rather than rely on the organic label, which is increasingly being controlled by large corporations as well, consumers are looking to local sources.

Part of the resistance to raw milk must be a knee-jerk reaction from an establishment that saved countless babies with mandated pasteurization and sees little to no consequences for continuing to demand compliance. How many consumers or regulators can we expect to stop and question a process that has been carried out regularly for almost 100 years?

We are familiar and comfortable with pasteurization now, and people who want raw milk can seem, to be honest, a bit loony. Yet many consumers believe that the idea that milk comes from grocery stores and not from cows is the loonier notion. The truth of the matter is that the majority of us have grown up thinking that food comes from supermarkets and not out of dirt or animals. When one of my friends found out I was researching raw milk, he was baffled, asking me “Raw milk, straight from the cow? Is it… warm?” When I assured him that it was, in fact, chilled when it reached consumers, the thought of milk going straight from the cow to the consumer inspired in him only one thought: “Gross.”

Clearly, raw milk is not for everyone. Some people are prone to trusting the government when it says something is categorically dangerous, and are happy to continue drinking the pasteurized milk that has always worked for them. Many people will not be willing to spend $10 a gallon on raw milk. But the people who have become disillusioned with massive supermarkets and the modern milk industry should be allowed a way out. People should be able to know and control where their food comes from, and what has been done to it before it reaches them.

Unfortunately, the government is constantly pressured by large corporations to limit consumer choice by restricting access to information. Large food distributors don’t want to publicize where food comes from, how it was produced, and what it contains. For example, it is illegal to identify food that contains genetically modified ingredients like corn or soybeans. The argument is that there is no nutritional difference between regular corn and corn that contains a pesticide-producing gene, so the label is misleading because it implies there is a difference. Regardless of the many reasons consumers may have to avoid genetically modified produce (what if it were illegal to mark foods “kosher,” on the grounds that it’s nutritionally equivalent?), the government has sided with big businesses in making sure that we can’t.

Even in states where raw milk sales are legal, distributors constantly face the threat of new regulations that will eliminate sales or otherwise drive raw milk dairies out of business. It is always a battle of David versus Goliath. However, raw milk advocates are a tenacious bunch. Kathryn Russell believes that the rising popularity of raw milk is making it harder to knock down, even though agencies opposed to raw milk become more frantic as the popularity increases. “They have to be more careful now,” she said, because more people are going to pay attention when regulators bully raw dairy operations. We can expect to see the raw milk movement and resistance to modern dairy practices, along with resistance to the doctrine that “bigger is better” continue to grow.

The Drop-Off

Before the first drop-off I was a little nervous, not knowing what kind of company to expect. A lot of Birkenstocks? Hemp shirts and handbags? Conspiracy theorists and health nuts, for sure. Anything described as a "drop-off" is going to be a shady operation, and the fact that we were exchanging a substance illegal to consume in many states made me a little giggly. Was I supposed to scuttle in with my face covered and dash away before anyone could recognize me or halt the transaction? The fact that it was happening in the back parking lot of a church added to the weirdness of the operation. Needless to say, I didn't bother to tell many of my friends where I went on Fridays at 3:30.

I was expecting someone to be sitting in a nondescript vehicle, dolling milk out of the trunk. As I drove into the massive parking lot I moved slowly, looking into cars to see if they were occupied. I didn't want to miss my dealer.

It turns out I didn't have to worry about missing the drop-off. There was a large white van with license plates that said "IGOTMLK" and a huge yellow sign on the side that said "RAW MILK DROP-OFF." So much for secrecy. Children cavorted about the parking lot as their mothers dropped off checks and picked up their promised gallon or two. Everyone looked relatively normal, including the farmer family dropping off the milk. If anything, the only unusual quality about everyone present was how happy they were. I avoided the optional taste-test, having already decided to commit myself to raw dairy (go raw or go home!). I picked up the bottle that looked like a bleach container and secured my milk jug with a seat belt, determined not to let it turn itself into butter by the time I got home.

At home I reached the moment of truth. Eventually I had to drink the stuff. I was careful to mix the milk and cream before pouring myself an ever-so-tiny glass.

Turns out the stuff is pretty good.

The Safety of Raw Milk

“Got Milk? Make Sure It’s Pasteurized” --Title of an article in September-October 2004 FDA Consumer Magazine

John Sheehan, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s division of Dairy and Egg Safety, says drinking raw milk is “like playing Russian roulette with your heath,” and that they see “a number” of illnesses related to the consumption of raw milk. Raw milk can contain bacteria campylobacter, escherichia, listeria, salmonella, yersinia, and brucella. The CDC claims that more than 300 people got sick from drinking raw milk or eating raw milk products in 2001, and nearly 200 in 2002.

The FDA reports that between 1998 and 2005, raw milk or cheese was implicated in 39 outbreaks in 22 states, causing an estimated 831 illnesses, 66 of which resulted in hospitalization and one in death. However, this accounts for only 0.4 percent of all cases of food born illness.

The Weston A. Price Foundation, an organization dedicated to the legalization of raw milk, believes that even 0.4 percent is an exaggeration. In a slide-by-slide rebuttal of the FDA’s PowerPoint presentation attacking raw milk, WAPF identifies multiple potential sources of bias in outbreak investigations. Investigators often ignore other potential sources of illness when they find out that someone consumed raw dairy. For example, infected people can spread disease to previously uncontaminated milk or dairy products. Demonstrating that raw milk cheese is contaminated is not the same as proving that it is the source of contamination.

Federal and state agents can be quick to blame dairy farms for outbreaks of disease, even with little to no evidence. For example, in 1966 the L.A. County Department of Health Services reported seven cases of Q fever (Coxiella burnetti) among people who lived near dairies. Raw milk sales were and are legal in California, and the Department concluded that the best way to control C. burnetti would be to require the pasteurization of all milk, even though the disease is contracted through inhalation and none of the infected individuals had consumed raw milk.

The judgments in favor of pasteurization seem arbitrary, and farmers are suspicious that state governments are simply looking for an excuse to shut down raw dairy operations. Kathryn Russell’s farm was investigated when one of her shareholders became ill. Russell insisted on having her family veterinarian present to take control samples when the state investigators came to test for diseases. Investigators later called her and informed her that they had lost their original samples and needed to return. Once again, Russell insisted upon having her veterinarian present to take control samples. The investigators never returned.

In Ohio, only one dairy provided raw milk in 2002. The dairy had been operating since 1958 and provided milk to 1.35 million customers. Between 2002 and 2003, 62 people were infected with Salmonella, 40 of whom were customers. All 31 stool samples taken from the dairy cows tested negative, and county health authorities concluded after the investigation that pasteurization may not have prevented the outbreak. However, the county health authorities suspended the sale of raw milk “temporarily until further notice” and suggested that the dairy relinquish its license to sell raw milk, which it did. Ohio’s only source of raw milk had been shut down.

The handling of this case contrasts sharply with a case in Pennsylvania where 38 people tested positive for the antibiotic resistant S. typhimurium in 2000. The milk implicated in this case was pasteurized, and investigators concluded that the contamination probably occurred after pasteurization. However, instead of shutting down the dairy, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture integrated employee training with its routine inspections, and the dairy hired a consultant to help it meet FDA standards. The investigators further concluded that the majority of milk contamination occurs after pasteurization, and is not a result of insufficient pasteurization.

Supporters of raw milk say the FDA makes two important mistakes: it addresses the safety of raw milk outside of the context of food safety in general, and it promotes pasteurization as the only way to make milk safe for human consumption. Consuming raw milk is risky, of course, but supporters don’t believe that raw milk is any riskier to consume than hot dogs, store bought spinach, or even pasteurized milk, which has caused massive outbreaks of disease when machinery failed.

What troubles many public health officials is that individuals who believe in the health benefits of raw milk feed it to people who are the most susceptible to illness: children, the elderly, and individuals who are already ill and suffering from weakened immune systems. Many consumers of raw milk believe that the probiotic agents in raw milk provide health benefits that keep children healthy, reducing the prevalence of asthma and allergies as well as many diseases. For the same reason, people who suffer from autoimmune diseases often seek out raw milk in order to bolster their natural defenses. For many state officials, this behavior pushes the issue beyond a matter of consumer choice and justifies bans on raw milk sales and cow share operations.

Doctors are also split on how to view raw milk. Some people have been turned away by doctors who refuse to treat them until they stop drinking raw milk. One woman I interviewed who lives on a farm became extremely ill with a gastro-intestinal problem. When she went to her doctor, however, instead of telling her to quit raw milk, he encouraged her to eat yogurt made with raw milk as the best treatment.

With the FDA and CDC vehemently opposed to raw milk, and supporters attacking the safety of pasteurized milk, it is difficult to make heads or tails out of the situation. While some doctors blame raw milk almost immediately for illness, others prescribe it as a cure and drink it regularly. The same goes for many employees of state agriculture and health departments. Is raw milk worth the risk? Is there really a greater risk in consuming raw milk than there is in consuming anything else?

Raw Milk Underground

After my botched taste-test, I didn't think of raw milk for several months. One night I found myself babysitting and bored, having put the kids to bed. Charlottesville is home to an inordinate number of parents who are fundamentally opposed to cable television, so I scrounged through their reading material and found a magazine devoted to healthy farming practices. One of the articles featured Organic Pastures, a massive raw dairy operation in California, and its recent scuffs with the law. The magazine interviewed the owner, who explained why people love raw milk, even though the government is hell-bent on shutting them down.

The whole issue struck me as bizarre and fascinating, do I decided to learn more. After a few Google searches, I found out that raw milk is illegal to buy or sell in Virginia, and that the only way for me to get raw milk was to buy a cow, or at least part of one. The hunt was on.

I quickly found out that the farm nearest to Charlottesville with a cow share operation was maxed out, or at least I assumed that to be the case based on the non-response to any of my emails inquiring about share availability. (I later found out that the farm could handle many more shareholders, but they opt to milk the cows once a day and let the calves have their mommies for the rest. Talk about cow-share.)

A friend of mine who works at a natural food store told me that a dairy in Amelia, Virginia was thinking of starting up weekly raw milk deliveries to Charlottesville. Suddenly I was the member of a Yahoo! discussion group and found myself fully tapped into the raw milk underground culture.

The cost can be prohibitive: a share cost $100 (one time cost), and monthly boarding fees are around $40. A share only gets you a gallon of milk a week, so many families buy multiple shares. We also have to pay $2.50 for the weekly deliveries and an additional fee for bottles. I opted for the half-share option (half a gallon of milk a week) and split the cost with my sister and a roommate. I crossed my fingers that the milk would be as delicious as they said it was. For $10 a gallon, it better be.

After I sent in my check, all I had to do was wait for enough other people to sign up. Then the drop-offs would start.

Raw What?

Many of the people who seek out raw dairy do so because they grew up on the stuff, either on a farm or in a rural area where people still got milk from their neighbors, or in a foreign country where raw milk is tolerated (the British royal family still drinks raw milk).

I encountered raw milk for the first time when one of my roommates started working for a produce co-op. She got a free gallon of raw milk every week, and the stuff befuddled me. Raw dairy? What? I snuck an experimental glass with one of my friends and was almost knocked flat. Holy heavy whipping cream, Batman! I didn't understand how anyone could drink the stuff. It was so rich I felt as though I might as well have eaten a stick of butter.

When I confessed my misadventure to my roommate, she explained that not only is raw milk not pasteurized, it's unhomogenized, meaning that all of the milk fat sits nicely on top. I didn't know any better, so I hadn't shaken the milk before I poured a glass. What I drank didn't just taste like pure cream, it was pure cream. Whoops. Chastised, I left other people's foodstuffs alone.

The Rebellion

“You are what you eat, eats too.” --Michael Pollan, In Defense of Food

Kathryn Russell owns a farm 15 minutes outside of Charlottesville, Virginia, a state in which it is illegal to sell raw milk. She cares for 20 cattle; 11 are currently milking cows. Technically the milk cows don’t belong to her—they are owned by a multitude of shareholders, who purchase a fraction of a cow and pay a monthly boarding fee in order to legally obtain raw milk. Selling raw milk in Virginia is illegal, but consuming the raw milk from a cow that you legally own is not. (In many states, including Maryland, shareholder operations are illegal.) Shareholders must pay the up front cost of the share and a monthly boarding fee, and in return they get a weekly amount of raw milk. Shareholders are also responsible for any unusual vet bills. But shareholders know the name of their cow, and they know Kathryn Russell, and they are welcome to visit the farm any time. Even though the FDA warns people not to drink raw milk, Russell’s shareholders feel more secure knowing exactly where their milk comes from, rather than purchasing a gallon of milk from a grocery store that has been pooled and traded hands many times in the milk production and processing system. In fact, 30 percent of Russell’s shareholders are medical professionals.

Russell and many other producers and consumers of raw milk believe that the face-to-face interaction between farmer and consumer creates greater accountability, and fosters a sense of community often lost in today’s mass-produced world. With the recent outbreaks of e-coli and salmonella traced to tomatoes, Romaine lettuce, and spinach, many people feel less than secure buying produce from unknown origins and with unknown handling practices.

Modern dairy farms do not remotely resemble the images depicted on milk cartons of rolling hills sparsely populated by peaceful cows. Cows are kept in stalls approximately five by six feet, where they are milked daily until they die. The life span of a pastured cow is 12-15 years, but the life span of a cow in a confined dairy operation is an alarming 42 months. In his book Dairy Cattle Science, David Ensminger says that “40 percent of all dairy cows have some form of mastitis,” or infection of the mammary gland. Cattle are usually kept on concrete floors, and their grain-heavy diet softens their hooves and causes lameness in 15-50 percent of the herd. “Downer” cows that can no longer stand are sold to slaughter. Although some states have restrictions against selling downer cows for human consumption, requiring cattle to be able to walk when they are slaughtered, a video from a California dairy shot undercover by the U.S. Humane Society in January showed dairy workers ramming a cow with a forklift, poking her in the eye, and administering electrical shocks in an attempt to get her to stand. The video was doubly disturbing because the facility sells cows to slaughterhouses that distribute meat to needy families and California’s public schools.

Even though the cows are confined and unhealthy, they produce large quantities of milk up until their dying day. In 1950 the average cow produced just under two gallons of milk a day; today the average cow produces six due to a specialized diet of grains, industrial byproducts, and hormones. A pamphlet produced by the University of Kentucky called “Using Byproducts to Feed Dairy Cattle” cites two benefits for feeding cattle byproducts: it may decrease feeding costs, and “helps dispose of these byproducts in an ecologically sound manner.” Byproducts currently fed to dairy cows include the grain left over from distilleries and breweries, fishmeal, feather meal, meat meal, rendered beef fat, and urea.

Despite the nauseating menu, dairy scientists claim that milk produced by cattle in confined feeding operations is nutritionally equivalent to milk produced by cows fed a more natural diet. In fact, the milk is usually fortified with vitamins A and D, theoretically making it nutritionally superior.

Many consumers of organic and raw dairy products find the health claims hard to believe, especially as nutritional science seems to stumble and reverse frequently. “Nutritionally equivalent” can only be measured with the bluntest instrument of nutritional understanding, by breaking down milk into the amount of fat, protein, vitamins, etc. The repeated failure of food industries to come up with infant formula that is demonstrably equivalent to breast milk proves how complicated milk is as a substance. Heat destroys probiotic active cultures that aid in digestion and may harm or inactivate proteins that aid in nutrient absorption or vitamin activation, like the heat-sensitive lactoglobulin. Pasteurization also destroys the “good bacteria” living in milk that produce lactase, the enzyme that breaks down lactose. While most lactose intolerant individuals can drink raw milk thanks to the bacterial support, destroying the bacteria makes people who cannot digest lactose on their own unable to drink milk.

Some people aren’t concerned with the vitamins in milk; they’re concerned with all of the extra goodies that make their way into pasteurized milk. The recombinant bovine growth hormone (rGBH) is one additive that causes consumers to be concerned. Banned in Canada and European countries, rGBH makes cows produce more milk, but it also increases the prevalence of lameness by 50 percent and mastitis by 25 percent, which in turn increases the amount of pus and antibiotics in the milk. rGBH also increases the amount of insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1), which has been linked to breast cancer.

Another concern is Johne’s disease, which causes cows to develop diarrhea, become emaciated, and eventually die. Mycobacterium avium paratuberculosis, or MAP, the pathogen that causes Johne’s, is excreted directly into the milk, and pasteurization does not destroy it. An estimated 40 percent of the modern dairy herd has Johne’s, and government agencies worry that if the disease is not controlled, infection rates will reach 100 percent. Scientists are beginning to worry about the effect the disease may have on humans, since people are being exposed to the live agent at an alarming rate. Johne’s has been linked to Crohn’s disease, a chronic inflammation of the intestinal tract. The USDA does not refute the link, but claims that the presence of MAP is due to post-pasteurization contamination. Although some researchers in the FDA have called for a re-evaluation of pasteurization standards (which the U.K. has done in response to MAP), the agency has been slow to act, drawing criticism that it is trying to protect the dairy industry from consumer panic if the Johne’s epidemic is publicized.

Many informed consumers are skeptical of the FDA’s claim that pasteurized milk is the safe option, and that non-organic, pasteurized milk is nutritionally equivalent to raw milk. However, alternative options provided by small, local farms have been evaporating for the past 50 years. In 1950, 3.7 million American farms had milk cows, with a farm average of six cows. By 2000, only 105,250 farms had milk cows, and the average number of cows increased to 88.

However, with the popularization of the local food movement, small farmers may be making a comeback, and consumers are regularly willing to go to great lengths to obtain what they believe to be safer and healthier milk and other produce. This is where farmers like Kathryn Russell come in, providing a reliable face for locals who are willing to pay upwards of $10 per gallon through a cow share program for local milk. In 2000 there were only five cow share programs operating in Virginia. Currently there are at least 30, many of which have sold every available share. The popularity of raw milk is growing, despite the FDA’s warnings.

"The Gentle Cow"

When milk is raw
Just from the farm
It’s full of germs
While may do harm

But safe it is
And highly prized,
When it is boiled
Or pasteurized

Ice cream, cheese
And butter fat,
Come from milk,
You all know that

Made from raw milk
We can see,
They might harm
Both you and me.

Emily Berliner, Muddy Jim and other Rhymes (1919)

The Birth of Modern Dairy

The roots of modern dairy regulations can be traced all the way back to the War of 1812. The war against the British disrupted trade relations, and America’s access to whiskey from the British West Indies. The domestic market exploded, and distilleries popped up outside of every major city. By 1829 there were over 1,000 distilleries in New York alone.

One of the natural by-products of the distilling process is “whiskey slop,” the acidic left-over parts of grain that remain after all of the starch and alcohol are removed. Distillery owners realized that cows fed whiskey slop produced more milk at a lower cost than any other method, and it became common to house dairy cattle next to a distillery and channel the hot slop directly into the feeding troughs. It was a perfect system that allowed distillery owners to capitalize on the growing demand in cities for both whiskey and milk.

The cows were kept packed tightly in pens, deep in their own filth, and quickly became sick on their deficient diet. The milk they produced so abundantly was thin and bluish, and too low in butterfat to be used to make butter or cheese. Dairy owners frequently added starch, flour, plaster of paris, and chalk to thicken up the milk and correct the color before they sent it into the cities in non-air conditioned train cars, pooled with the milk from many other dairies.

As the distilleries and slop operations expanded, the city infant mortality rate grew at an alarming rate. Throughout the 1800s, the infant mortality rates in many cities grew until they approached 50%. The reformer Robert Hartley began to research this troubling trend in the 1830s. Hartley observed that even though poverty was a major issue in European cities, infant mortality had been steadily declining in Europe during the same time it had been increasing in the U.S. For example, in London the mortality rate of children younger than five fell from 74.5 percent in 1729 to 31.8 percent in 1829. Yet the causes normally associated with mortality—overcrowding, extreme poverty, and malnutrition—were much less prevalent in American cities than in European ones.

Hartley determined that the important difference was milk. Europeans drank bad milk, but much less of it. The average European family could only afford a quart of milk a week. In American cities, an average family went through a quart of milk a day. Additionally, Hartley believed that the brewery slop fed to European cows was less damaging than the distillery slop fed to American cows.

The idea that milk was the cause of many disease outbreaks began to take hold. When an outbreak of typhoid occurred in Oakland in 1893, the source was traced to a local dairy farm. Although the cows were found to be in good condition, and none tested positive for disease, the New York Times concluded, “nothing can be proved, it is true, but the probability is that the ravages of typhoid in Oakland were due to this milk.”

Two movements began to develop as milk was increasingly linked to outbreaks of diseases and infant mortality. One was the move towards supplying pasteurized milk, led primarily by the philanthropist Nathan Strauss, who donated pasteurization stations to many cities. The other was the campaign for “certified” milk, which would come from dairies that had been inspected and certified to be sanitary and disease free. The certified milk movement approached the milk problem by trying to eliminate bad dairy practices, requiring farmers to test their cattle for tuberculosis, keep the cows in a healthy condition, milk the cows in a sanitary manner, and transport the milk in clean, refrigerated vehicles. Investigators found that frequently the employees at dairy farms were ill, providing a source of contamination and potentially spreading their diseases to consumers.

At first many saw pasteurization as a stopgap measure until the quality of dairies, transportation methods, and distribution centers could be appropriately regulated and monitored. Regulations passed in Chicago in 1912 created two grades of milk: “inspected” and “pasteurized,” with the understanding that the pasteurized milk was of lower quality than the milk inspected and certified disease-free. Legislators were wary of pasteurized milk, and one said it could mean “cooked dirt, cooked dung [… and that] a false sense of security is conveyed by the term ‘pasteurized’” The majority of medical professionals were in favor of certified milk, believing that certified milk would contain very few dangerous pathogens.

The certified milk movement could not tackle the problem quickly enough, however. Even as cities experimented with a mixture of certification standards and pasteurization, they were beset by a wave of epidemics traced to milk. Epidemics of tuberculosis, hoof and mouth disease, and infant paralysis inspired health commissioners to take harsher stances on milk regulations, and mandatory pasteurization was implemented first as a temporary measure, and then permanently as it was credited for limiting outbreaks of diseases.

Although many doctors remained convinced of the superior quality of certified milk, and many consumers protested the flavor of pasteurized milk, pasteurization became a social cause that was taken up by social health advocates and infant welfare societies. The idea that unpasteurized milk was inherently dangerous began to take root and hold as the number of epidemics slowed, and children were taught ditties that ingrained in them the dangers of raw milk. Pasteurized milk was finally accepted, and then expected by consumers.

The Milk Problem: Why a Growing Number of Consumers Want it Raw

When most people grab a gallon of milk off of the shelf in the grocery store, they don’t stop to think about the process that put the milk on the shelf. The milk we consume is pasteurized, homogenized, and fortified, theoretically making it safe, no-hassle, and healthy. Most of us view the pasteurization of milk as a rote scientific procedure that leads to unquestionably better results, like fluoridation of water or childhood vaccination.

The FDA regards un-pasteurized or raw milk as an inherently dangerous substance, and in most states it is illegal for a farmer to sell raw milk. Many states go farther, making it illegal for farmers to give away raw milk for free. Yet there is a small but active movement in defense of raw milk. Proponents of raw milk range from doctors and patients who believe in its health benefits, to farmers who have been consuming their own raw milk for years, to food purists searching for unprocessed, local food. All believe the blanket demonization of raw milk to be unwarranted.

This blog explores the history of milk pasteurization, covering the origins of mandatory pasteurization requirements, the emergence of the raw milk movement, and the current debate today. I also tell my own story, as I learn about the world of raw dairy first hand as the new owner of a cow share (purely for the sake of research, of course!).

For most people, myself included, the debate isn’t over whether or not pasteurized milk should be eliminated; it is about an educated consumer’s right to choose what to put into his or her body and the return to a more direct relationship between producers and consumers.