This is in response to an article (April 1) on the raw milk legislation.
I find it difficult to believe the bill was defeated purely on alleged altruism concerning public safety. I think if you “follow the money,” you might find that the cadre of Maine milk producers may have had a hand in the defeat, as there has been an increasing demand for raw milk.
Also, the Food and Drug Administration offers financial assistance to states to quash use of raw milk.
This is the same FDA that won’t tell the public if we are eating GMO adulterated foods or foods contaminated with herbicides and insecticides that are banned in most western countries.
People should be aware of those who might have an interest in pushing an agenda.
Pasteurization does indeed remove dangerous organisms from milk, but those organisms shouldn’t be there in the first place. Healthy cows, clean apparatus and proper storage temperatures eliminate most nasty problems.
According to some reports, pasteurization can allow for farmers to be less careful about cleanliness and contamination.
Empirically speaking, I spent time every summer of my young life from the age of one year on my uncle’s farm and drank and ate only unpasteurized dairy products. I am 68 and still here.
I believe raw milk has more nutrients and enzymes. No vitamin D3, however. Commercial milk companies must add it.
Many, many states have legalized farm milk sales. People can check online to get more information. People should decide for themselves.
Educate, don’t legislate.
Diana Tozier, Poland
Send questions/comments to the editors.
