Supporting Good, Clean, and Fair Food

The Slow Food USA Blog

The Revolution Will Not Be Pasteurized

Posted on Tue, April 08, 2008 by Jerusha Klemperer
2 Comments | Categories: Dairy, Food Justice,

Print Icon Print this Page Email Icon Send to a Friend
Bookmark and Share

by Slow Food USA staffer Makalé Faber Cullen

This month's Harper's magazine features an excellent article by Nathanael Johnson who takes on the North American black market in raw milk and it's odd bedfellow… high tech "bio-active" dairy.

The defense of the fresh stuff (aka "green top milk") has been a steady, under-the-radar activity and a 20-year Slow Food campaign since the US Food and Drug Administration banned interstate sales of unpasteurized milk in the 1980s. Most of us, in fact, have been raised to believe pasteurization is a good thing. It protects us from salmonella and E-coli poisoning. It prolongs the shelf life of dairy products, which means more people in more places have access to them.

But as Johnson explains, it's not the fresh milk from a Holstein grazing on grass that's producing health threats. It's the other way around. To put it simply, grass-grazing cows eat in a way that allows them to produce milk containing enzymes that are often beneficial to us humans. "Dirty milk," an insider's phrase, comes from modern dairies which, in their clamor for high volume and high profit, use pasteurization as license to be unsanitary, to feed inappropriate food to cattle and engage in other unsavory activities. Ever colorful, Johnson says, "After a century of pasteurization, modern dairies, to put it bluntly, are covered in shit. Most have a viscous lagoon full of fit. Cows lie in it." And with that, Johnson navigates us through the public health thicket of industrial milk production and the volatility of raw milk markets, with regular tours through the anatomy of cattle and how we try to alter it.

The issue is far, far more complex than I've described above and Johnson remains respectably objective. Please read the article. Johnson is an entertaining writer. His piece is reference quality and yet doesn't compromise a bit on good storytelling.

I support the idea of people's right to sell and buy raw milk and raw milk products—often of finer quality since the proteins and sugars haven't been altered by heat. To reference Gil Scott Heron's potent and poignant 1971 release, The Revolution will not be Televised is to commit to taking the investigation and the story a bit further. Slow Food USA's Raw Milk Cheese Producers Association is trying to do just that –change by the producer for the producer.

While thinking about Gil Scott and the fight for justice, I'm reminded of a February post about the Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. debacle. Industrial food workers, whether they're in dairies or meat packing plants deserve humane treatment as much as animals do. What's the story on dairy workers forced to put in 19-hour days in these "lagoons?"


Member Comments

From dayne201 on Wed, April 16, 2008

Sad, very sad. Think about it. Factory farming affects more than meat production. It also affects dairy and egg production, and relies heavily on grain and soy feeding, and possibly even more grotesque foods (not grass, which
cows are supposed to eat. Their stomachs are designed to eat grass, over and over again).
I imagine dairy workers do have to work in dirty environments, especially with the high concentration of cows and of course, their waste products. Cows nor dairy workers should not have to endure the conditions they do. If cows were grass fed, and chickens left to roam, I think both the workers and the animals would lead happier, healthier lives, along with more nutritious products (eggs, milk, cheese, butter, etc.)
Pardon my french, but if cows did not sit in their crap all day, I don’t think the safety of raw milk would be in question. Besides, doesn’t cow manure make good compost? Why not put it to good use on the farm or in the fields, rather than let it sit around or throw it into large waste lagoons?
It frustrates me that raw milk costs so much as well. While it is sold here in the state of Washington, the prices are outrageous compared to pasteurized. I went to Larry’s Market one day, and the half gallon was about $8.00.  I rely on dairy for calories and nutrition pretty much every day, I just couldn’t afford it.
Cost is the main barrier that is preventing most people from giving raw milk, or raw milk products, a try.
The title of a class I am taking in school is “Food and Communities.” What has happened with most communities? Food has nothing to do with their communities. Their milk does not come from cows 1o or even an hour away. This is not necessarily bad or wrong; however it erodes the connection people have with their milk supply, and they have no way of telling what kind of product they are truly getting. Also, if they never experience what raw milk is like, or the benefits of it, they will probably not demand it like someone who drank raw milk, and then had to switch to store bought, pasteurized milk would. Finally, if they saw the workers at a factory farm, people who drank the milk would likely be frustrated or saddened by the worker’s conditions (if they were dirty, unsafe, or unsanitary). If milk was more of a community-based product, people might even know their milk farmers by name, or at least by farm name, and get to see just how the dairy is produced, how the workers are treated, how the cows are treated, if they even get to graze on grass or not, and maybe be willing to pay a little (not a lot) more for milk, butter, eggs, etc. Quality over quantity

From Salmonella on Fri, September 11, 2009

The issue is far, far more complex than I’ve described above and Johnson remains respectably objective. Please read the article. Johnson is an entertaining writer. His piece is reference quality and yet doesn’t compromise a bit on good storytelling.



Post Your Comment

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Monthly Archives

Category Archives

Find Slow Food in your State