The Health Benefits Of Raw Milk From Grass-Fed Animals

[Guest guest]

http://realmilk.com/healthbenefits.html

 

By Ron Schmid, ND

 

In 1970, I went to live on the island of Martha's Vineyard. I was

quite ill with gastrointestinal problems. I began living mostly on

seafood, fresh vegetables and salads, and raw milk and eggs purchased

from a local farmer, with a little meat and whole grain bread. My health

problems, which had been intractable for years, disappeared.

 

Raw milk remained a mainstay of my diet. Since 1981 I have strongly

recommended raw milk to thousands of people who have seen me in my

practice as a naturopathic physician. I practice in Connecticut, where

we enjoy the right to purchase certified raw milk throughout the state

(with the exception of the town of Fairfield, where a fascist local

health board has instituted an unchallenged-for-lack-of-funds town

ordinance prohibiting the sale of raw milk.)

 

The raw milk available in the part of Connecticut where I live is from

Debra Tyler's farm in Cornwall Bridge, called " Local Farm. " Debra has

nine cows on fourteen acres. Eight health food stores in central and

northern Connecticut pick up milk regularly at Local Farm. There are

about a dozen other certified raw milk dairies among Connecticut's 210

dairy farms.

 

Debra has Jersey cows. Most farms have Holsteins, which provide large

quantities of milk, but milk that is lower in protein, fat and calcium.

Jerseys were originally bred by the French to produce milk for cheese

making. The fat content of Debra's milk during the warm months is about

4.8 percent, well above the normal 3.5 percent for whole milk. Debra's

cows eat mostly grass in the spring, summer and fall, and mostly hay in

the winter (each cow consumes a forty pound bale a day!), with a few

pounds a day of ground corn and roasted soybeans (five to one corn to

soybeans ratio).

 

Local Farm milk is certified organic. Certification costs several

hundred dollars a year in fees and considerable paperwork. It also means

that Debra must sometimes pay more for certified feed from faraway

places than for locally produced feed she knows to be organic but which

is not certified. This raises the question—if you know and trust the

local farmers who produce your food, does it really have to be certified?

 

TESTIMONY ON RAW MILK

 

The last time the right of the people of Connecticut to purchase raw

milk was seriously threatened was in 1994 when the state Environmental

Committee held public hearings on the certification of raw milk, before

voting almost unanimously to continue licensing new farms and allowing

raw milk to be sold. I testified at those hearings. My testimony was

framed to respond to objections to raw milk raised by the state health

department and to document the benefits of raw milk. To quote from that

testimony:

 

" The state epidemiologist writes that ‘It has yet to be

demonstrated that raw milk has any beneficial health effects. . . ' He

cites articles attached to his letter. In one article, ‘Unpasteurized

Milk, The Hazards of a Health Fetish' (Journal of the American Medical

Association, 10/19/84), the authors make a series of misstatements about

the research of Francis Pottenger before concluding that raw milk has no

health benefits. I detail these charges as follows in the paper I've

given the members of the Committee.

 

" Now what Pottenger actually did in some of his experiments is

this. He used four groups of cats. All received for one-third of the

diet raw meat. The other two-thirds of the diet consisted in either raw

milk or various heat-treated milks. The raw milk/raw meat diet produced

many generations of healthy cats. Those fed pasteurized milk showed

skeletal changes, decreased reproductive capacity and infectious and

degenerative diseases.

 

" Now just who was Francis Pottenger? He was the son of the

physician who founded the once famous Pottenger Sanatorium for treatment

of tuberculosis in Monrovia, California. He completed his residency at

Los Angeles County Hospital in 1930 and became a full-time assistant at

the Sanatorium. From 1932 to 1942, he also conducted what became known

as the Pottenger Cat Study.

 

" In 1940, he founded the Francis M Pottenger, Jr. Hospital at

Monrovia. Until closing in 1960, the hospital specialized in treating

non-tubercular diseases of the lung, especially asthma.

 

" Dr. Pottenger was a regular and prolific contributor to the

medical and scientific literature. He served as president of several

professional organizations, including the Los Angeles County Medical

Association, the American Academy of Applied Nutrition and the American

Therapeutic Society. He was a member of a long list of other

professional organizations.

 

" Pottenger's experiments met the most rigorous scientific

standards. His outstanding credentials earned him the support of

prominent physicians. Alvin Foord, MD, Professor of Pathology at the

University of Southern California and pathologist at the Huntington

Memorial Hospital in Pasadena, co-supervised with Pottenger all

pathological and chemical findings of the study.

 

" One particular question that Pottenger addressed in his study is

one that modern science has largely ignored. It has to do with the

nutritive value of heat-labile elements—nutrients destroyed by heat and

available only in raw foods.

 

" In his article ‘Clinical Evidences of the Value of Raw Milk,'

Pottenger writes: ‘Some of the factors transmitted by milk are

thermo-labile [sensitive to heat]. Though their destruction may not

produce death, their deficiency may prevent proper development of the

child. This may show in the development of an inadequate skeleton or a

decrease in resistance. . . . delay in development of osseous centers is

noted more frequently in those children. . . receiving heat treated

milk. It is particularly absent from the raw milk fed children. . . . I

am basing this discussion on analysis of 150 children whose parents have

consulted me because of respiratory allergies. Many other workers. . .

have also shown that treating milk by heating interferes with its proper

assimilation and nutritional qualities. . . . The best milk from a

nutritional standpoint is raw milk. . . . Heat-treating milk interferes

with calcium metabolism causing. . . delay in bone age and small bones.

.. . . The interference with calcium metabolism as shown in the bones is

only a physiological index of disturbed metabolism throughout the body.'

 

" I have prescribed raw milk from grass-fed animals to my patients

for nearly fifteen years. Time and again I have seen allergies clear up

and dramatically improved health. Particularly in children, middle ear

infections usually disappear and do not recur on raw milk. Both children

and adults unable to drink pasteurized milk without problems have

thrived on raw milk. In hundreds—perhaps thousands—of my patients using

raw milk, not one has ever developed a salmonella, campylobacter, or

other raw-milk-related infection.

 

" In the letter cited above, the state epidemiologist states that

‘The processes of certification and/or inspection do not guarantee that

raw milk will not be contaminated with pathogenic organisms.' He also

lists a host of microorganisms that are alleged to be transmitted by raw

milk, not mentioning that, as the literature accompanying his letter

makes clear, the only organisms even potentially associated with the

consumption of certified raw milk are salmonella and campylobacter. And

in one of the articles he cites, ‘The Hazard in Consuming Raw Milk' (in

The Western Journal of Medicine), the authors actually state that

‘Salmonella and campylobacter diseases in humans are generally not

serious. But in persons with compromised health (particularly those with

malignant conditions and immunosuppressed by disease or therapy), these

infections may be serious.'

 

" So, the gist of the state's argument against certified raw milk is

that it might possibly on isolated occasions cause serious disease in

some people whose immune systems have been compromised by the toxic

effects of chemotherapy. And because of this very slight risk, those of

us who might choose to drink certified raw milk for the benefits I have

catalogued should be denied that right. "

 

Fortunately, the members of the Environmental Committee saw through the

shallowness of the state's argument and voted in favor of raw milk.

Milk in History and Evolution

 

Not everyone agrees that milk should be part of the human diet after

infancy. The argument is made that just as all other species drink no

milk after weaning, neither should we, especially that of another

species. Many adults have difficulty digesting pasteurized milk, and

allergies to pasteurized milk products are common. While this lends

credence to arguments against milk, such reactions are usually due to

pasteurization itself and the poor quality of conventionally produced

milk and milk products. While for some individuals genetic influences

play a role, for most people, the body's reaction to milk depends

largely upon the quality and state of the particular milk used.

 

The Swiss of the Loetschental Valley were one of the few native groups

Weston Price studied that used milk. (The others were certain African

tribes, including the Masai.) The Swiss valley-dwellers used raw whole

milk, both fresh and cultured, cheese and butter, all in substantial

quantities. The milk was from healthy, grass-fed animals and was used

unpasteurized and unhomogenized. Such foods clearly can play a major

role in a health-building program for the individual genetically enabled

to utilize these foods well. They are a rich source of fat-soluble

vitamins A and D and other crucial nutrients in short supply in diets

lacking in high quality animal fats. (Contrary to popular opinion,

liberal amounts of animal fats, particularly from grass-fed animals, are

essential for good health and resistance to disease.)

 

Yet it is possible to attain optimal health without dairy foods. Price

discovered groups using no dairy foods that had complete resistance to

dental decay and chronic disease; their diets invariably included other

rich sources of animal fats, calcium and other minerals. The soft ends

of long bones were commonly chewed, and the shafts and other bones were

used in soups.

 

Modern medicine has discovered the importance of a substantial intake of

calcium. Several recent studies have linked high blood pressure and

other problems to chronic subclinical calcium deficiency, including

increased incidence of colon and prostate cancers in men and

osteoporosis and osteoarthritis in both men and women. Paradoxically,

other problems are associated with high consumption of dairy foods; this

has not gone unnoticed by researchers, nutritionists and holistic

physicians.

 

The difference between fresh raw milk from grass-fed cows and processed

milk explains the paradox. This concept has not been considered in

attempts by today's medical community to explain the health effects of

dairy foods.

 

Domesticated animals were first used for milk eight to ten thousand

years ago, as a genetic change affecting mostly people in Europe, the

Middle East and parts of Africa enabled them to digest milk as adults.

Milk from domesticated animals then began to become important as a human

food. With domestication and settlement, fewer wild animals were

available; as groups of people roamed less, they hunted less, eating

more grains and vegetables. In some cultures, milk replaced animal bones

as the chief source of calcium and some other minerals.

 

In indigenous cultures where adults used milk, often it was used as

cultured or clabbered milk. This is similar to homemade raw yogurt, and

it is partially predigested—much of the lactose (milk sugar) has been

broken down by bacterial action. This process must be accomplished over

a period of several hours in the stomach when one drinks fresh milk;

yogurt or clabbered milk is much more easily digested than fresh milk.

 

Adaptations in evolution are always the effects of particular causes.

Humans developing the ability to digest milk into adulthood possessed a

survival advantage; such changes are the basis of evolution. Put simply,

many human beings evolved the ability to easily digest raw milk because

raw milk from healthy, grass-fed animals gave them an adaptive

advantage; it made them stronger and more able to reproduce. Such milk

remains a wonderful food that provides us with fat-soluble nutrients,

calcium and other minerals that are by and large in short supply in the

modern diet.

 

In the six years since I presented the testimony quoted above, I have

become more convinced than ever of the value and importance of raw milk

in the diets of people of all ages. For many of the people who eat in

the manner I recommend, raw milk is the chief source of enzymes. I

believe enzymes are a critical component in recovering from disease and

establishing and maintaining health. Hundreds of people I've seen have

used Local Farm raw milk as an essential part of their naturopathic

treatment.

 

There isn't a day that goes by that I'm not thankful that I live in a

state where bureaucrats and medical monopolists have not stripped us of

what should be an inalienable, constitutional right. I mean the right to

purchase raw milk and other healthy, locally produced foods directly

from the people who produce them.

 

It's impossible to overestimate the importance of the work Debra Tyler

and farmers like her are doing. I long to see the day when all Americans

have the right to purchase locally produced raw milk, meat, fowl and

other farm products directly from the farmers who produce them. I hope

to see the day when the current yoke of prohibitions and bureaucratic

red tape will be thrown off, and we once again will be free to produce

and consume truly healthy foods. The men and women who founded this

country did not intend for commercial interests to control the food

supply and thus our health. These are rights of the people, and they are

rights that have been stripped away. We need to work together to regain

them.

About Ron Schmid

 

Dr. Ron Schmid has practiced as a licensed naturopathic physician in

Connecticut since graduating from the National College of Naturopathic

Medicine in 1981. A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of

Technology as well, he has taught courses and seminars in nutrition at

all four of the accredited naturopathic medical schools in the United

States. He served for a year as the first Clinic Director and Chief

Medical Officer at the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic

Medicine. He is a member of the American Association of Naturopathic

Physicians and the Connecticut Society of Naturopathic Physicians, and

is on the Honorary Board of the Weston A. Price Foundation. He is also

the manufacturer of 100% pure, additive free nutritional supplements.

Dr. Schmid is the author of Traditional Foods Are Your Best Medicine,

first published in 1986.

 

A Campaign for Real Milk is a project of The Weston A. Price Foundation

PMB 106-380, 4200 Wisconsin Ave, NW, Washington DC 20016