Weston A. Price Foundation
Media Contact: Kimberly Hartke, press@westonaprice.org
Read this article in: Spanish
FORΒ IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 3, 2013–Washington, D.C.–( GlobeNewswire)–A recent CDC study claims that unpasteurized milk and products made withΒ unpasteurized milk cause 150 times more outbreaks than pasteurized milk or products made from pasteurized milk. After careful analysis, The Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF) finds the CDC study to be substantially flawed andΒ misleading.
In 2013, bills to expand raw milk accessΒ are being introduced in as many as sixteen states. The CDC report was issuedΒ during the 2012 legislative season. Raw milk proponents say the CDC report couldΒ have an impact on a number of state bills in 2013 that aim to broaden consumer access to raw milk. Raw milk bills in Indiana, Iowa and Wyoming died in committee. Another example would be Wisconsin where Assistant Majority LeaderΒ Glenn Grothman plans to introduce a raw milk bill. Last week, Wisconsin public health officials and medical βexpertsβ put out an anti-raw milk statementΒ that relied heavily on the CDC study.
TheΒ study by Langer et al can be viewed here:
βThe CDC data released in the Langer paper, March 2012, actually showed noΒ statistical difference in the rate of illness attributed to raw milk or products produced from raw milk compared to those produced from pasteurized milk,β saysΒ Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, βso CDC used the numberΒ of βoutbreaksβ to make raw milk look bad.Β Β CDCΒ defines an outbreak as two or more illnesses, and outbreaks involving raw milkΒ or raw milk products involve far fewer individuals than outbreaks involvingΒ pasteurized milk. What really counts is the number of illnesses.β See WAPF pressΒ release, February 2012, CDC Cherry Picks Data to Make Case Against RawΒ Milk.
TheΒ Weston A. Price Foundation is a worldwide nutrition education nonprofit. TheirΒ Campaign for Real Milk ( realmilk.com)Β works to restore this traditional food to its rightful place in the human diet.
TheΒ report has numerous scientific flaws that call in to question itsΒ credibility.Β For instance the report claims that there are more outbreaks in states that allow raw milk sales.Β The premise that allowing raw milk sales in a state leads to more outbreaks is not valid because the researchers lumped all dairy products together forΒ analysis rather than limiting it to fluid milk. βSince they fail to present analysisΒ that compares laws concerning fluid milk and outbreaks attributed to fluid milk, we must conclude that they didnβt find any statistical difference,β says Fallon Morell. βDespite the obvious motive to demonstrate a link between changing the laws to permit raw milk and increased public risk, they in fact demonstrate thatΒ they are unable to find any such consequences.β
βTheΒ CDC clearly documents the fact that it has no data to show a statistical increase in illnesses in those states that legalized sale.Β The real effect of changing these lawsΒ is to enhance the public health and increase the number of families that haveΒ access to wholesome, unprocessed milk with its vital nutrition and enzymesΒ intact,β explains Fallon Morell.
AΒ close examination of reports on illness associated with raw milk reveals that there are an average of 41 illnesses attributed to raw milk each year, of whichΒ about 23 are confirmed illnesses.Β According to a federal agency phone survey, 3.04 percent of theΒ population consumes raw milk. The most recent figures from the CDC published inΒ March 2013 report that there are an estimated 876,209 foodborne illnesses perΒ year in the U.S.
βUsing these figures, we might expect to see 26,637 foodborne illnesses per year amongΒ those people drinking raw milkβ says Dr. Ted Beals, a retired pathologist whoΒ has made a study of raw milk safety.Β βOf those illnesses we see only about 41 illnesses per year attributed to the raw milk they drink.Β Only 0.2%Β of their illnesses attributed to all the foods they eat are associated with the raw milk they drink almost daily. These government numbers show us that raw milkΒ is a very safe food.β
The report confirms that there have been no deaths from fluid raw milk over the period of the report. By contrast,Β three people died from pasteurized milk in Massachusetts in 2007.Β The government reports 15 deaths perΒ year from raw oysters and 30 deaths per year from eggs.Β βClearly government agencies areΒ applying a double standard to raw milk, singling it out as βinherently dangerousβ when other foods obviously pose a greater threat to health,β says Fallon Morell.
βWeΒ donβt want anyone to get sick from raw milk,β says Fallon Morell, βand withΒ reasonable management practices by farmers and consumers, we could reduce theΒ number of illness even more than the extremely low numbers now experienced.Β Continued government opposition toΒ freedom of choice is unproductive.Β Health officials need to acknowledge consumer demand for this nutritious food.Β Producer and consumer groupsΒ are capable of setting reasonable and effective standards. Health departmentsΒ need to cease their entrenched antagonism and support both public and private measures that benefit raw milk safety. And when illnesses do occur, we need to take an unbiased look at what went wrong so that we can improve milkΒ safety.β
The Weston A. Price Foundation is aΒ Washington, DC-based nutrition education 501(c)(3) with the mission ofΒ disseminating science-based information on diet and health. Named after WestonΒ A. Price, DDS, author of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, WAPF publishes aΒ quarterly journal for its 15,000+ members, supports 572 local chapters worldwideΒ and hosts a yearly international conference. Contact at (202) 363-4394, westonaprice.org, info@westonaprice.org.Β
Media Contact:Β Kimberly Hartke, 703-860-2711, cell 703-675-5557,Β press@westonaprice.org
π¨οΈ Print post


Leave a Reply