Actually, raw milk has many benefits
The article headed "Got milk? Not if it is raw" (June 13) is erroneous and misleading.
• It notes that 22 states ban sales of raw milk for human consumption, implying that 28 allow it. Wrong. Only approximately four states allow it.
• The E. coli outbreak in 2006 was ultimately attributed to spinach, not milk.
• Dairy farmers are not prohibited from drinking raw milk from their own cows.
• The FDA's arguments against raw milk are not bold-faced lies, but are sins of omission rather than commission.
I researched the subject for at least two years, pros and cons, before becoming a devotee.
I found no studies to substantiate the statements that it is "an inherently dangerous product" or that it has "sickened hundreds of people."
When raw milk was blamed for a disease outbreak, it was ultimately found that it was not the milk, but something else (like spinach).
• As they are open to FDA inspection at any time, without advance warning, legal raw milk dairies can be more closely monitored than conventional dairies which are FDA-inspected at limited times, with advance warning.
They can clean up problems which arose between inspections and which they depend upon pasteurization to eliminate.
• Yes, pasteurization eliminates "bad" bacteria, but it destroys beneficial bacteria, not to mention natural enzymes.
• It does not have any magical powers, but lactose-intolerant people can drink it because the enzymes needed for lactose digestion have not been destroyed.
• A word limitation prevents my listing all the benefits of raw milk and the detrimental effects of pasteurization. If you're interested, do the research; you might be surprised.
Judith A. Carlson
Des Plaines