Is raw milk dangerous?

raw milk began to appear more often in reports at the beginning of the twentieth first century, because of a number of books about it and advocates of organizations that promoted the idea that raw milk was healthier than pasteurized milk. In many areas of the United States, however, the sale of raw milk for human consumption is forbidden and many health organizations also strongly speak against the consumption of raw milk. With these two different opinions, many consumers have been wondering how dangerous raw milk is. The dull truth is that raw milk is potentially more dangerous than pasteurized milk, but when it is handled correctly, it is relatively safe and nutritional analysis suggests that it is better for you.

When milk is not pasteurized or homogenized, it is determined as raw. Pasteurization invented in the 18th century Louis Pasteur, who learned that heating food at 161 degrees Fahrenheit (71 degrees Celsius) for 15 seconds would kill most of the harmful bacteria in it. They have appliedMilk snakes were immediately realized and safe and healthy milk became easily accessible for many other people at reasonable prices. For people who are worried about health, milk safety has always been a big problem because it is an ideal culture medium for many bacteria, especially salmonella, brucelosis, tuberculosis and Camplyobacteriosis. Pasteurization of milk is significantly reduced.

When farmers harvest raw milk for human consumption, they must be processed very carefully. Perhaps more carefully, because it is not subject to another process of pasteurization or homogenization that traditional milk goes through. In the ideal process of raw milk, the cows are first moved in a very clean environment and their udder is shaken before milking to remove any sources of contamination. Withis glove, farmers pull out a small amount of milk to remove bacteria that can lurk nAnd the tip of the teat, and ensure that the milk is clean and healthy. Then a milking machine is connected to the cow and the milk is directly expressed in the cooled tank. The raw milk must be detained in a cold chain before folding up to consumption and the device must be free from the device.

raw milk supporters say it is healthier than conventional milk, because the process of pasteurization, which is subject to conventional milk, also kills friendly bacteria or good bacteria that can help with digestion and immune system. The pasteurization process can also remove some vitamins that occur in raw milk such as B6. Other enzymes and minerals can also be removed during the pasteurization process. Proponents of raw milk also claim that raw milk tastes better than pasteurized milk.

those who argue against raw milk, City Center for Disease Control (CDC) reports on diseases that result in raw milk consumption. Because raw milk does not pass through the process of removing harmful bacteria, toTeré pasteurized milk is subject to, it can open its consumers to greater health risks. Traditional milk supporters report this potential health danger, along with any significant difference in taste as reasons to stick to pasteurized milk.

Perhaps the real question in evaluating the danger associated with raw milk is the cleanliness of the milk in which raw milk was produced. Those raw dairy, which extensively test their product for bacteria and contamination and make these test results available, may be less dangerous for drinking. However, people who are immunocompromised should consult a doctor before consuming raw milk.