Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007

Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

[ Edited ]

I'm getting more than a little sick of having to debate from first principles the logic behind... Well... Modernity. I understand that a lot of people don't know anything about chemistry and are scared and intimidated by the scary sounding words on the ingredients list of most common household products. However, just because a chemical has a long hard to pronounce name, or is associated with heavy industry and weapons... Does not mean its bad for you.

 

Let me list a few examples. The other day I was watching TV and a commercial for dog mouth cleaner came on. I was barely listening until I hear one line that jumped out of me, in an alarming tone the woman narrating exclaimed "some professional treatments contain sodium chloride and other chemicals you can't pronounce" my reaction to that was a moment of shock, followed by... "She did not just stoke fear of science over fvcking table salt... I didn't just hear that..." But I did. Yes sodium chloride is in quite a lot of products... In fact, its in us. Everyone has sodium chloride in their systems because while we probably consume too much of it... Salt... Is an essential nutrient. Which is what that is, salt. Sodium chloride is salt.

 

Lets go with another, Fluoride. That stuff your dentist coats your teeth with everytime you go for a cleaning, and the stuff General Ripper claimed was a commie plot to impurify our precious bodily fluids... Fun fact despite the CDC and the ADA's endorsement of water fluoridation as a cost saving health improving measure which reduces the formation of cavities in all people who just eat food prepared with said water, let alone who drink it... Plenty of people think the satirical insane right wing general was on to something.

 

Its true that sodium fluoride is used in heavy industry, the production of pesticides, and even in weapons production. However its also true that its perfectly harmless when ingested in the amounts present in drinking water, and in fact a nutrient that the human body needs for bone growth. We also need such toxic chemicals as selenium, which is more toxic than fluoride in small levels yet can be found listed in the nutritional information section of most breakfast cereal.

 

Lets take a moment to consider the very long scary sounding chemical compound known scientifically as dihydrogenmonoxide. Some of you should already know where I'm going with it, the rest of you can Google it, is a chemical that is also used in pesticides, industrial applications, weapons production, and nuclear power. Its also in everything we eat and consume, it is... Water, ordinary water. However when stated in an unfamiliar yet more correct scientific name, it sounds like it could be a dangerous chemical and a famous hoax was created out of a crusade to ban this, in which hapless hippies and hipsters were duped into signing petitions to ban water. This helps make the point that I am now getting to.

 

Ron Paul, and Milk. More specifically raw milk. Which "Dr Ron Paul" tells us is our constitutional god given right. What he doesn't mention, which is rather odd considering he claims to be a doctor and apparently was at one point, is that the FDA warns that consuming unpasteurized milk, (apart from having absolutely no dietary, medical, or culinary benefit) is dangerous and carries the risk of potentially deadly bacterial infections including Salmonella, (which I've had, its not fun, believe me) e coli, and listeria, (one of those diseases we stopped worrying about after the civil war.) Pasteurization of milk... Which is what non raw milk is. Its just milk that's run through a steam bath, which raises its temperature high enough to kill most pathogens. Which... Means all we are talking about is warm milk. I don't recall warm milk ever having been a problem to anyone and I can tell you that any warm beverage can later be cooled fairly easily... That's why we have things like ice and refrigerators... Scientific wizardry I know...

 

What do all of these topics have in common you might ask? Well they are all represent common, middle America, god church and king, populist skepticism of what we east coast intellectual elitists know to be true. Which is that science works... Its fear based on ignorance which is then used to propagate conspiracy theories. After all, if you believe these things are bad, and you see that science, and the government support them, then science and the government are bad? Well quite a lot of Ron Paul supporters, and conservatives in general would agree with that. After all, these are the same people that deny climate change and evolution despite the overwhelming scientific evidence for both, and the ability of anyone to see them both at work in the world around us. 

 

That's the thrust of my rant. I don't expect everyone to run out and get a PHD in immunization and biological chemistry, but I would like people to trust that scientists, who's job it is to figure this stuff out, probably know what they are talking about, at least more so than your favorite politician or talk radio host. Who are you going to believe? The global academy of sciences, or Alex Jones? You going to believe the center for disease control, or the libertarian party? Are you going to believe Louis Pasteur, or Ron Paul? It may be against the instinct of some to trust the French guy, but I would recommend that you do.

"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimSuperfan
EtherealGlass
Posts: 3,511
Registered: ‎07-15-2006

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63781851

People will rally against anything that you can make sound scary as long as you've "done the research" for them.
It has always will became difficult to have had use the right tense when having will be talking about time travel.



SwimPunk
M1911A1
Posts: 83
Registered: ‎02-24-2012

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63781851

Dr. Paul was not promoting raw milk as beneficial.

He was stating that you should have the RIGHT to consume raw milk despite possible health risks.

You are right in that people will demonize various substances for political or financial gain, or even because of some psychological abberation.

That is no reason to pass legislation against these substances unless they pose an inescapable health risk to people who have not purposely exposed themselves to these substances.

The job of government is to inform the public of the possible health riisks involved.

Cyanide should be sold over the counter to any adult. Since it poses a significant health hazard to others, the buyer should be required to consume it immediately, before leaving the premises.

t&e- feminine hygene product or the result of thousands of enemas?
Swimmortal
westpark
Posts: 59,269
Registered: ‎10-26-2005
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63781851

tl;dr

WESTPARK THE KING OF ASMB

"westpark ran a train on this thread" - Stilgar

"Every woman needs a good slap now & again." - Sir Sean Connery
SwimSuperfan
anDaibhalsHusair
Posts: 4,502
Registered: ‎07-21-2011

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63781851

Penn and teller immediately came to mind before reaching that section. These charlitons are dangerously hilarious. I sometimes end uo repressing.into my father yelling "you #### morons" at the tv. Maybe we are mistaken by having the benefit of an up to date education, by assuming that pasterization, and floridization are standard knowledge at a fifth grade level.

Science is a basic understanding for many of us, it is very much "wizards" to others because it makes less sense to them, than pleading their concerns to the sky for answers and favor.
We would be surprised to find ourselves in a universe in which we couldn't live - Lawrence Krauss

Mistakes are some of the best things In life.
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to M1911A1 - Message ID#: 63856869


M1911A1 wrote:

Dr. Paul

 

"Dr" Paul, does not understand the science of evolution and climate change, he has no right to have a PHD, and I resent people calling him Dr. Mr Paul or candidate Paul, or even former congressman Paul would be sufficient.  

 

was not promoting raw milk as beneficial. He was stating that you should have the RIGHT to consume raw milk despite possible health risks.

 

No, he's saying people should have the right to sell a potentially harmful substance to other people. Just like he supports the right of car companies to make death traps with 4 wheels, and the rights of factories and corporations to render the entire surface of the planet uninhabitable all in the name of profit. 

 

The right of people to breath clean air, buy safe products, and live in a world where people don't die in the street of preventable conditions, which may easily be caused by the consumption of unpasteurized milk, does not exist in the twisted world of right wing libertarianism. The rights of common people don't matter, only the rights of the elite count in that hobbesian nightmare. 

 

You are right in that people will demonize various substances for political or financial gain, or even because of some psychological aberration.

That is no reason to pass legislation against these substances unless they pose an inescapable health risk to people who have not purposely exposed themselves to these substances.

 

Of course there is, the whole purpose of food and drug laws are to protect consumers from the ravages of the market and unscrupulous salesmen. 

 

The job of government is to inform the public of the possible health risks involved.

 

You think that's the job of the government. That's your opinion, not a fact. I think the job of the government is to act in the public interest, and its most certainly in the publics interest to feel safe in the knowledge that they can go to any store and buy products that are safe for human consumption, Raw milk is not.  We will never go back to the nightmarish hell that was pre progressive America. The world of the jungle where sweatshop workers watched squealing pigs be strung up on hooks on an assembly line and ground into rotting piles of inedible slop that was then sold to the public. 

 

Cyanide should be sold over the counter to any adult. Since it poses a significant health hazard to others, the buyer should be required to consume it immediately, before leaving the premises.

 

Why not just create suicide booths? It would be cleaner... 


 

"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to anDaibhalsHusair - Message ID#: 63858015

The sick part is they are often better off looking to sky gods, otherwise they start following crackpots like Alex Jones and David Ike... An ignorant bible belt bumpkin is still better than an ak47 wielding, pipe bomb making, militiaman.
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63857411

no one cares
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimSuperfan
anDaibhalsHusair
Posts: 4,502
Registered: ‎07-21-2011
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63860939

Dude, anecdotally most of the people In our area that support climate change claims, also dont have the most basic understanding of the underlying scientific concepts. Just to avoid arguments from small talk with the small minded, I constantly have to restrain myself from correcting their correct answers, that are correct for the wrong reasons.

I blame a lot of our collective ignorance on public education being afraid of our litigous society, so they avoid controversy at any conceivable angle.
We would be surprised to find ourselves in a universe in which we couldn't live - Lawrence Krauss

Mistakes are some of the best things In life.
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to M1911A1 - Message ID#: 63856869


M1911A1 wrote:

 

He was stating that you should have the RIGHT to consume raw milk despite possible health risks.

You are right in that people will demonize various substances for political or financial gain, or even because of some psychological abberation.

That is no reason to pass legislation against these substances unless they pose an inescapable health risk to people who have not purposely exposed themselves to these substances.


 

but guess what, mothers and fathers rights trumpts childrens rights in virtually all households. they don't know about this stuff.

 

you create legislation to protect those that can't protect themselfs, like children. 

 

all hail the crimson king
Swimfamous
desantoos
Posts: 15,783
Registered: ‎08-22-2003
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to M1911A1 - Message ID#: 63856869

Okay, so the reason why raw milk isn't legal to sell is because processes that allow it to be sold widespread enough to be cheap don't garauntee its safety.

 

In this case, while I understand why some amish or whoever would want raw milk, it just seems better to take one for the team.

I shot an arrow toward the sky...
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to anDaibhalsHusair - Message ID#: 63861137

I do the same thing with atheists who make weak or stupid arguments against religion. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend, in fact they can be a total liability.
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63862011

I wouldn't really say that's the best analogy... this isn't the government being paternalistic, its the government fulfilling the social contract that was agreed to in the 20's when our country decided that items sold for human consumption would be regulated to ensure their safety.

Ron Paul and his ilk want to revert to a time before that, and we should never let them spin this as a paternalistic government trying to tell us what we should do. We live in a democracy, we are the government, and we don't wanted tainted milk being sold.

We are the patriots, we are the ones following the vision of the founders, not those anarchist freaks who support Paul and these conspiracy theories.
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimSuperfan
Schizo
Posts: 2,517
Registered: ‎01-11-2004

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

[ Edited ]

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63862011


crapshot2 wrote:

M1911A1 wrote:

 

He was stating that you should have the RIGHT to consume raw milk despite possible health risks.

You are right in that people will demonize various substances for political or financial gain, or even because of some psychological abberation.

That is no reason to pass legislation against these substances unless they pose an inescapable health risk to people who have not purposely exposed themselves to these substances.


 

but guess what, mothers and fathers rights trumpts childrens rights in virtually all households. they don't know about this stuff.

 

you create legislation to protect those that can't protect themselfs, like children. 

 


 Exactly, which is why we should force manufacturers to cook all meat, milk, and eggs before putting them out on grocery store shelves because people are clearly too stupid to know that consuming raw animal products carries a risk of making them sick, and we all know it's impossible to provide basic cooking instrutions on packaging so customers know how to do it. We have to think of the children here.

 

 Although, that would mean no more sashimi, which makes me a sad panda. 

 

 Here's a thought, though: What if we allowed the sale of raw milk, like we do with raw eggs and raw fish, and let people decide for themselves to cook it or consume it raw? It's a revolutiuonary idea, I know - but pasteurization isn't some hard to do magical process. You can do it at home as long as you have a stove, a pot, and a thermometer. It's kind of like...well, cooking I guess. It's stupid to condemn the sale of raw milk when every single non-vegetarian buys raw animal products on a regular basis, and no one thinks twice about it.

The Libertarian Atheist

Religious Tolerance

Proud resident of the seventh circle of hell.
SwimPunk
M1911A1
Posts: 83
Registered: ‎02-24-2012
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63860917

I guess you win by default because these C0CKSUCKERS won't let me post an intelligent reply.

t&e- feminine hygene product or the result of thousands of enemas?
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

[ Edited ]

Reply to Schizo - Message ID#: 63867565


Schizo wrote:

crapshot2 wrote:

 

but guess what, mothers and fathers rights trumpts childrens rights in virtually all households. they don't know about this stuff.

 

you create legislation to protect those that can't protect themselfs, like children. 

 


 Exactly, which is why we should force manufacturers to cook all meat, milk, and eggs before putting them out on grocery store shelves because people are clearly too stupid to know that consuming raw animal products carries a risk of making them sick, and we all know it's impossible to provide basic cooking instrutions on packaging so customers know how to do it. We have to think of the children here.

 

 Although, that would mean no more sashimi, which makes me a sad panda. 

 

 Here's a thought, though: What if we allowed the sale of raw milk, like we do with raw eggs and raw fish, and let people decide for themselves to cook it or consume it raw? It's a revolutiuonary idea, I know - but pasteurization isn't some hard to do magical process. You can do it at home as long as you have a stove, a pot, and a thermometer. It's kind of like...well, cooking I guess. It's stupid to condemn the sale of raw milk when every single non-vegetarian buys raw animal products on a regular basis, and no one thinks twice about it.


again, children do not know this ####. a baby, who is more susceptible to the diseases associated with raw milk and eggs can not make the decisions that are needed.

 

is an infant going to cook his milk? 

 

also people are idiots and don't know what they are talking about, they just want to be against the man even though they don't know anything. I will prove that right now. in connecticut it is legal for raw milk sales and they have, yearly(couple of times a year), giant Ecoli outbreaks that are caused by raw milk sales. in fact in the 8 states where raw milk is legal they have ecoli outbreaks that kill every year, and it just isn't people who drink the milk. ecoli spreads. I just read a story how a neighbor child died because of ecoli that was spread from raw milk from his neighbor.

 

the reason you pasturize at the farm is to prevent the spread of desease. ecoli will spread like wildfire and if left unchecked a tiny bit of ecoli in milk will mean a gallon of ecoli when it gets to a persons home. I'm just not making that up, it happens in connecticut

 

there are reasons we have laws. the fact that the 8 states where raw milk is legal have ecoli outbreaks all the time based on raw milk sales is more enough a reason that it should be banned permanently. if it where otherwise, hey I'm all for it however it isn't, it does happen even with these *responsable* people, and the people who end up suffering are others.

 

also, in homogination(I don't think you are talking about that, but I'm not sure) it requires a special machine.

all hail the crimson king
SwimPunk
M1911A1
Posts: 83
Registered: ‎02-24-2012
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63867843

E-coli is not a commuicable disease unless you like to drink toilet water or are some kind of scheizer freak.

t&e- feminine hygene product or the result of thousands of enemas?
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

[ Edited ]

Reply to M1911A1 - Message ID#: 63867981


M1911A1 wrote:

E-coli is not a commuicable disease unless you like to drink toilet water or are some kind of scheizer freak.


not talking about that. there are multiple ways of spreading disease.

 

you are at home and get out the milk and a tiny bit splashes on your counter/table. later on you place your hand on the ecoli then go to the supermarket.

 

you touch everything including apples and banana's. or even the vegetables that are being constantly being sprayed.

 

later on some other person buys the apple and eats it. he just got ecoli. while that bit of pathogen gets in the water mix of the vegetable(those things just keep recycling the same water) and you have a nice culture for ecoli to spread. a kid gets the bag of chipsyou touched and eats it at home, he just got ecoli(he touches the bag all over, puts his hand in to get a chip and wham)

 

 

and I'm just not making that up, there is a reason why farmers/government take ecoli Salmonella and other pathogens so seriously and it's because what I just said happens. and if you just do a simple google search for connicticut and ecoli you will find that it happens a LOT there. in fact there have been numerous links between ecoli in drinking water and raw milk, direct links

all hail the crimson king
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to Schizo - Message ID#: 63867565

Note, this is the guy who tried to defend ron paul's racist neo nazi newsletter as being taken out of context, and once defended Lew Rockwell then later pretended he didn't know who that was.

He's not to be taken seriously or responded to like someone with a legitimate point of view.
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to M1911A1 - Message ID#: 63867749

those black un helicopters blocking your brain waves again? Isn't that what the tin foil hat is for?
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to M1911A1 - Message ID#: 63867981

Actually, it is, fecal bacteria can be present on any surface of the house in which someone used the restroom and has it. when you flush a toilet small amounts of it are spread into the air. They did a segment on that in myth busters and concluded fecal chloroform bacteria exist on every surface of a house, not just in the bathroom. I once got Salmonella from mango slush that had been left out... The last thing we need is libertarian morons carrying potentially deadly bacterial infections, especially if they think its also their right to ignore the signs telling them to wash before leaving the bathroom, the free thinkers that they are, perhaps dish soap is also a NWO Zionist controlled commie plot just like fluoride.
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to GaiusIuliusCesar - Message ID#: 63868351

it just amazes me that people want to go back to the dark ages where simple things like this ravaged entire towns.

 

it's like being safe from this stuff has made them think we are immune to it. but the only reason we tend to think that is because  of all the safety protocols we have now that ron paul wants to do away with. 

 

i mean, there are places in the world that exist in the dark ages that he wants to take us back to where e-coli outbreaks kill thousands of people

all hail the crimson king
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63868443

They really should consider moving to somalia. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXIbWHWCm4g
"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimSuperfan
Schizo
Posts: 2,517
Registered: ‎01-11-2004
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

[ Edited ]

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63867843


crapshot2 wrote:

again, children do not know this ####. a baby, who is more susceptible to the diseases associated with raw milk and eggs can not make the decisions that are needed.

 

is an infant going to cook his milk? 

 

also people are idiots and don't know what they are talking about, they just want to be against the man even though they don't know anything. I will prove that right now. in connecticut it is legal for raw milk sales and they have, yearly(couple of times a year), giant Ecoli outbreaks that are caused by raw milk sales. in fact in the 8 states where raw milk is legal they have ecoli outbreaks that kill every year, and it just isn't people who drink the milk. ecoli spreads. I just read a story how a neighbor child died because of ecoli that was spread from raw milk from his neighbor.

 

the reason you pasturize at the farm is to prevent the spread of desease. ecoli will spread like wildfire and if left unchecked a tiny bit of ecoli in milk will mean a gallon of ecoli when it gets to a persons home. I'm just not making that up, it happens in connecticut

 

there are reasons we have laws. the fact that the 8 states where raw milk is legal have ecoli outbreaks all the time based on raw milk sales is more enough a reason that it should be banned permanently. if it where otherwise, hey I'm all for it however it isn't, it does happen even with these *responsable* people, and the people who end up suffering are others.

 

also, in homogination(I don't think you are talking about that, but I'm not sure) it requires a special machine.


 Is the infant going to cook his eggs? His chicken? His fish? His vegetables? I think you're missing my point here. I'm not advocating the consumption of raw milk products, I'm advocating the sale of raw milk because it's absolutely no different than the sale of any other raw animal product. At worst the contamination rate of raw milk is 12%, which is less than..say, chicken. The contamination rates of raw chicken up in the Seattle area, for example, is 65% for Camplyobacter, 19% for Salmonella, 2% for e. coli, and 10% for MRSA (out of 100 samples collected from 10 different farms).

 

 Look at it this way - most people buy their meat raw at the store. Most take it home and cook it thoroughly before they eat it, and some don't. If it's not contaminated, then all is well. If it is, the people who eat it raw or undercooked are more than likely going to have a nasty case of e.coli or some other unpleasant stomach bug. Further, any food the contaminated meat came into contact is also likely to become contaminated and will cause disease if not properly cleaned and cooked. That's how contamination worse, yes? 

 

 So if the possibility of contamination and subsequent illness is enough reason to keep one food banned from retail, then it should logically apply to all other foods. Hence, no more raw chicken, beef, or eggs at the grocery store because they could be contaminated and mom/dad might actually be dumb enough to serve raw or undercooked food to Junior. Sushi and sashimi could become foods of the past. Raw egg diets would disappear. Rare steaks would stopped being served in restaurants. I doubt you agree with this solution, however, so there's no reason to support it for the retail sale of raw milk as well, because there's absolutely nothing different about the situation. Some people will consume their food raw because that's how they want to do it. Most of us, however, will buy the raw product and cook it. That is the only point I'm trying to make. I'm not talking about raw-milk products, but raw milk itself, because it's something you can cook at home to make safe for consumption. It's no more "dark age" than arguing for the continued sale of raw chicken because I like to prepare my food my own way.

 

Also, there are 25 states that allow raw milk sales. Ten states at a retail level, fifteen states from the farm only. I was describing pasteurization in my post, not homogenization. 

 

The Libertarian Atheist

Religious Tolerance

Proud resident of the seventh circle of hell.
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: Fluoride, milk, chemistry, and Ron Paul.

[ Edited ]

Reply to Schizo - Message ID#: 63874443

sorry, I didn't think you knew the difference.

 

and yes it should be banned because of it's accessibility and how the general ignorance of the populace will harm the individual, that is afterall why we have laws. with raw meat and chicken you HAVE TO cook it in order to be able to eat it. it looks different, it smells different etc....

 

with raw milk that is not the case. the safety mechanism for meat is inherent, not for milk.

 

look man, your case doesn't float for one simple reason, there are states where it is legal to buy milk and people get sick because of said milk. if that didn't happen maybee you would have a case but they aren't, and I would not want my child to go to a neighbors house not knowing if she is going to drink poison or not(because milk does the body good, unless your parents are idiots and forget to cook the milk!).

 

like here. do you know where that kind of #### doesn't happen? the places where farmers have to cook their milk. do you know where it does happen, connicticut. I don't know about you but  hemolytic uremic syndrome  doesn't sound pleasent. 

 

we have health protocols for a reason

all hail the crimson king