Jersey-style raw milk cheese BS

Posted: February 16th, 2011 - 3:38pm by Doug Powell

What is it with New Jersey?

I’ve got Sopranos on in the background, a Jersey colleague telling me how great The Clash are (they aren’t) and then I get an e-mail from another colleague who snapped this photo at a Jersey retailer.

As the correspondent noted, the sign states as a matter of fact rather than opinion that raw milk cheese tastes better, but alleges that pasteurization does not make cheese safer, kills bacteria that may not be there, and destroys vitamins A and D. Pasteurization was and continues to be a huge benefit to the public health. Vitamin destruction is minimal. Bacterial destruction is real and is necessary, even if some good ones go with the bad. … at the very least you should advise pregnant women, small children, old people, and the immunocompromised to avoid unpasteurized products.

Jersey is the train-wreck that is compelling to watch. Not Snooki.
 

Your rating: None (3 votes)
Bookmark and Share
Categories: Raw Food
Tags: Cheese, clash, food safety, new jersey, raw milk, snooki

Comments

crs says:

Something else to notice -- bacteria are described on the sign as "flavor molecules". Come on guys, even if bacteria did taste good, they're hardly molecules are they?

Posted on February 16th, 2011 - 6:54pm

Anonymous says:

You've got one moron making idiotic statements about raw milk and everyone has to blame Jersey. Enough with the jokes. We can't control all 8 million of us and at least our legislative kicked the raw milk proposals out of the assembly. Face it the only way we are going to stop this raw milk BS is to make the sale of raw milk illegal - everywhere. FDA can do it! They can enact the Public Health Service Act, which can make any wholesale sale of milk interstate or intrastate illegal. They did it for 100% Juice they can do it for milk. All it needs is an act of Congress (don't hold your breath).

Posted on February 17th, 2011 - 8:01am

Anonymous says:

Pasteurization "destroys all of the natural bacteria that milk contains". Let's remember that milk, as it is secreted from the cow, doesn't contain any bacteria; it is sterile. Those microorganisms that are in raw milk... those would be "contaminants". Pathogenic or not, those organisms can't be called "natural" to the milk.

Posted on February 17th, 2011 - 9:22am

PHIGuy says:

It would be interesting to find out who is advertising this, since the sign constitutes advertising, and there are standards for that, a complaint could be registered.

Posted on February 17th, 2011 - 3:13pm

Anonymous says:

One would think an educated man like yourself would not use stereotypes against a state to defend his point.

Posted on February 17th, 2011 - 11:47pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.