You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
112 points
*

Being anti pasteurization is the one that really gets me. Like it’s just heating up the milk slightly for a brief period of time. It’s really simple and not scary science that’s easily misunderstood. Like what about heating up milk is dangerous?

The only thing I’ve been able to come up with is that it’s a conspiracy theory of manufactured panic to send people down the right wing pipeline.

permalink
report
reply
-13 points

Raw milk that is carefully and intentionally produced for direct human consumption is a low-risk food with superb nutritional benefits.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

While it’s tastier raw, though that’s subjective I suppose, no significant amount of nutrients are lost during pasteurization. Most minerals aren’t destroyed by that heat. Bacteria and most viri are destroyed however.

The vitamins lost by pasteurization aren’t that significant that it compares to the chance of contracting salmonella.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Can you even destroy minerals by heat? If there’s an element there it won’t go away. Though I guess the molecule could change and it could be less bioavailable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Why am I being downvoted for stating something and providing a link to back up what I wrote? It’s not like I posted a bad link. In the previous link, it described how pre-pasteurized milk is categorically different from raw milk intended for direct human consumption. I think it’s interesting to note how preparation for pasteurization can affect the product.

Also this link shows that there are indeed many nutritional benefits not available from pasteurized milk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Many, but not all, of the anti -pasteurization people believe that there is an invisible “life force” in the milk that is killed by processing. This is an old idea, but this unfalsifiable and unprovable “life force” thinking undergirds a lot of pseudoscience. People believe in getting energy aligned and unblocked and so on, and believe that drinking milk with mysterious life force is more natural.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

My personal theory:

First off, raw milk does taste noticably different than pasteurized and homogenized milk you find at the store.

Pasteurization: heating the milk triggers the unfolding of proteins (Denaturation). This is what kills the bacteria but can also change the flavor of the milk.

Homogenization. This process breaks up the fat into smaller segments so they stay in solution in the milk. The result is a less creamy flavor.

People instinctually associate flavor with nutritional value. They think that better flavored food = better for you. This sort-of works in tomatoes and a few other fruit/vegetables. However taste perception is a complex blend of genetics, environmental conditions, and psychology. So the results are inherently unpredictable and completely unreliable.

The unpasteurized crowd all fall for the 'it tastes better so it must be better". They then make all sorts of excuses to justify their instinct. " Big corporate milk is evil!!" Blah blah blah.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The only time I ever liked plain milk was still warm out of the cow. These days, I just don’t drink milk except for a very rare (couple of times a year) chocolate milk or milkshake where I don’t taste the milk itself, really.

Breed and diet definitely impact milk flavor and fat percentage, but some types of pasteurization seem to as well.

This is not an endorsement to drink milk that has not been pasteurized.

Aside from that, particularly with regard to colostrum, some people think treating the milk can damage things. As mentioned, I’m not a milk drinker to begin with, but I have no idea if (a) there are any studies showing benefits or even effects of drinking colostrum, particularly as an adult and from something other than a human or (b) regardless of point a if there is even any study on heat damaging it. I watch a lot of farming/homesteading content and some people are really into this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

UHT has a very different taste to pasteurised milk, but is pasteurised to raw milk such a big difference?

permalink
report
parent
reply

It does taste different.l but it’s still milk.
I’ve grown up on a farm, and milk can even taste different from cow to cow, or at different times of the year if that changes their alimentation.
Raw milk also usually has a higher fat content than what most people buy.
Ours would average 4.5%.

Different breeds also taste different, holsteins, ayrshires, jerseys, etc.

I’ve never been a big fan of milk, so I can’t into much details on flavor.

I personally wouldn’t procure raw milk from a farm I didn’t know very well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I don’t think it’s the heating up from milk that gets these people. It’s the mandate that it must be done.

Same with masks. They want the FrEeDoM to do whatever the fuck they want, even if it hurts someone else.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

There’s a whole subset of idiots that believe that you need to expose yourself to harmful shit to have a strong immune system. (See: all the people licking toilets and crap during lockdown)

There’s some credible science to it, in the way that, an immunization is literally putting “harmful” stuff in you to train your immune system. This is known science that I should be able to mostly hand wave around since most people already know this. Immunizations are usually focusing on a key indicator, eg, for COVID, it’s the protein on the outside of the vital cell wall (all the spiky bits in the illustrations) or whatever… I’m no scientist. For other viruses and bacteria, it’s a deactivated version of the virus… It’s essentially “dead” for all intents and purposes. It just resembles the virus so closely that it effectively trains your immune system to recognize it.

With all that being said, not all bacteria and viruses are something we can develop a natural immunity to, partly because some of them just kill us, partly because there’s something that is preventing it. Again I’m not a scientist.

Regardless, these idiots think that by exposing yourself to “natural” viruses and bacteria, you can strengthen your immune system. Bluntly, it’s possible to do that, and why the fuck would you want to do it that way? It’s literally a randomized version of a science we already have that’s tried, tested, and proven effective, called immunizations. With immunizations, you get all the benefits of surviving the horrors of some of the most nasty viruses and bacteria out there, without suffering through what those viruses and bacteria are going to do to you.

The whole thing is stupid.

If anyone argues about “good” bacteria, tell them to eat yogurt. FFS.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

There’s a whole subset of idiots that believe that you need to expose yourself to harmful shit to have a strong immune system.

And then they are anti-vaccine. ¯\(ツ)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Ironic. Amirite?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If we just go with it and give them some cyanide, arsenic, and a rod of spent uranium to boost their immunity, it would be a self solving problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

There was a king of ancient times who would microdose poison in order to become immune. To his defense, he lived in ancient times.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Say that to Styrian arsenic eaters. Cyanide and uranium though are fair. Though there was an “energy drink” with thorium once.

And there’s also the practice of mithridatism, but at least there is some evidence to support some of its instances.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Eating a uranium rod would give them plenty of calories to last the rest of their life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Can we put them in a box and call shroedinger?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

It’s just unscientific thinking. People think virus and bacteria are the only thing you have to worry about, but lots of the time it’s the bacteria producing toxins as part of their metabolism that’s dangerous to us. In other words, their shit is poison.

One of the reasons we don’t want some groups of bacteria growing on our foodstuff is because they turn stuff literally toxic to us, completely unrelated to immune responses. Same way some molds can be toxic while others are not. It’s not because the fungus starts growing inside your body and has an epic free for all with your immune system. Its byproducts are just toxic. Like some berries or some plants are toxic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Hey, stop trying to be logical. These people don’t understand it, and that’s mean.

/s

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

yeah, mycotoxins (ie: toxic byproducts from fungi/mold decomposing your food stuffs) don’t always get broken down during cooking. So, while cooking according to standard food safety specs may have killed the mold, their shit is still everywhere ready to fuck your shit up.

Not to mention that you have to survive an infection before it matters that you immune system learned to detect the infectious agent. Yes, the first inoculation techniques were literally just minor exposure to the infectious agent (eg: grinding smallpox scabs and blowing the resulting powder up the nose – wtf). While it technically worked, the mortality rate was still pretty damn high, just not quite as high as ya know getting smallpox the normal way, and thus really only used when a serious outbreak was occuring. We’ve gotten so much better at making vaccination safer and more effective, because we now know so much more about what is actually occuring biologically and know to use attenuated virus or just the benign protein coat alone to achieve results. Why would you ever want to go back to scab-snorting (or toilet licking, apparently, lol)?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Some people are just defiant against reason and if someone they don’t like told them it’s safer or better that will assume the opposite conclusion then look for any terrible reason that agrees with their already accepted conclusion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

There is beneficial bacteria from what I hear, but of course the risk of harmful bacteria is leagues higher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

I think it’s partly leftover dribble from the inane Gaia “theory” that was so strong in hippie circles. Everything natural (like bacteria in milk) is good, and you know, gut bacteria, yogurt, 's all good, right?

Combine that with “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” beliefs that they don’t realize come from right wing nuts and you got a perfect diarrhea inducing cocktail that we all get to pay for with our taxes and our nerves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

*drivel

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

It’s interesting to see how a lot of the hippie “natural is good” memes got a new, completely different segment of the population to live on.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Memes

!memes@sopuli.xyz

Create post

Post memes here.

A meme is an idea, behavior, or style that spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme.

An Internet meme or meme, is a cultural item that is spread via the Internet, often through social media platforms. The name is by the concept of memes proposed by Richard Dawkins in 1972. Internet memes can take various forms, such as images, videos, GIFs, and various other viral sensations.

  • Wait at least 2 months before reposting
  • No explicitly political content (about political figures, political events, elections and so on), !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca can be better place for that
  • Use NSFW marking accordingly

Laittakaa meemejä tänne.

  • Odota ainakin 2 kuukautta ennen meemin postaamista uudelleen
  • Ei selkeän poliittista sisältöä (poliitikoista, poliittisista tapahtumista, vaaleista jne) parempi paikka esim. !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca
  • Merkitse K18-sisältö tarpeen mukaan

Community stats

  • 7.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 974

    Posts

  • 10K

    Comments