Know the science behind raw milk Notes taken by Kris Johnson from lecture by Lee Dexter Milk is the only natural food designed by mother nature to nurture babies, designed to protect mammals. Birth is a messy thing, yet animal babies survive Milk is a biochemical soup - Bioactive ingredients/components with a mission! They are the same across all mammal species. They have a dual purpose: To stimulate the immune system To keep harmful bacteria in check Components: * Lactoperoxidase: this is the 2nd most concentrated enzyme in cows milk - it seeks out and destroys bad bacteria. It is in all mammalian secretions, milk, saliva, tears, urine. it is strongest on day 4 after birth. It is being considered in Europe as a healthier substitute for pasteurization. o Example Lactoferrin ñ which steal iron away from harmful bacteria, but it is destroyed by pasteurization o Another lactoperoxidase steals folic acid from harmful bacteria. o Lactoperoxidase uses thiocyante (CN) to seek out and destroy pathogens. o Researchers have challenged raw milk with pathogens ñ raw milk will not support growth of pathogens, such as campylobactor. Campylobactor is destroyed by CN. These challenge studies done in 1980ís are very useful in court. Poor hygiene in production is the cause for pathogens in raw milk. * Fatty acids ñ essential oils. They are highly anti-bacterial, anti-fungal o Caprylic and caproic fatty acids eat the cell walls of bacteria and fungi. (When oxidized they give a goaty smell to raw goat milk ñ reason to chill rapidly) * Enzymes in raw milk are also helpful - continue to work in frozen milk, so frozen milk only lasts so long or the emulsion begins to break * Polysaccharides (long sugary, fiber type molecules) in milk encourage the good bacteria which line the gut with a protective mucus layer, and prevent unhealthy bacteria from attaching to gut. o This helps to prevent leaky gut syndrome (colon literally porous), so common today, leading to foreign molecules in the blood stream which sends a red alert to the immune system, leading to an overworked immune system that causes all kinds of problems. o Raw milk sets up this physical barrier, which allows the body to cure itself, allows the immune system to relax. Baby can put its efforts into growth. Babies on raw milk are healthier, more robust, skin is better, they are not getting colds, ear infections, no eczemas, donít spit up, and "they donít stink!" * Antibodies in milk help the immune system to relax. They bind to foreign microbes in gut and let immune system take care of them in the gut. There are white blood cells in raw milk to seek out and destroy pathogens. They work in conjuction with medium chain fatty acids, lactoferrin, lysozyme (a fat eating enzyme), and growth factors that promote the growth of health colon cells. So we see that there are redundant systems in the gut with raw milk that protect the baby and all of us! Binder proteins ñ Mother Nature is not stupid! * Goat milk is lower in folic acid, but there is a special binder protein that takes folic acid in goat milk and carries it into blood stream, and babies do fine - * But these binder proteins are destroyed during pasteurization. They are three-dimensional proteins, that are distorted by heat. These distorted proteins have lost their bioactivity and are attacked by the immune system, which gets stressed out. Babies getting this processed milk have all kinds of health problems, eczemas, allergies, and other immune related symptoms etc * There are many special binder proteins in milk that transport nutrients into blood stream, so no supplements are needed. Problems with commercial milk and processing: * 30% of regular commercial milk is contaminated with antibiotics or pesticides * Zanthine Oxidase identified at cause of heart disease - is encapsulated by homogenization into tiny balls so it can enter blood stream and goes to heart and chews on heart muscle. Probably cause of runners who drop dead. * What is adulteration (misused word)? Milk must contain poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to health. A substance not added to food is not an adulterant, if the quantity in food does not normally make it injurious to health ñ Staph aureous is often naturally found in milk, but is not an "adulterant" and unlikely to be injurious. * Pathogen definition - must cross barrier in otherwise healthy person. Need experts qualified by training and experience to sort out these reports of raw milk troubles. If inspectors come to take tests, be sure to send your own samples of the same milk to be tested, to prevent monkey business. * Raw milk is NOT an ideal medium for growing bacteria! But pasteurized milk is. If you are challenged by a regulator, you need to get the facts ñ contact us. * Lactoperoxidase system can be overwhelmed by high numbers of pathogens ñ reason why milk in cities in early 20th century had trouble with contaminated milk. There are small numbers of harmful bacteria even in clean good milk (even human breast milk), but not enough to make a baby sick. (More on why botulism is not in cheese ñ didn't take notes) Results of pasteurization: * Fatty acids, oligosaccharides, and some growth hormones survive pasteurization. Pasteurization sets up children for all kinds of immune system problems ñ asthma, allergies. * Interferon, bifidus factor are destroyed by pasteurization * Decreases the availability of most minerals in milk ñ body canít get at these minerals * Vitamin B6 and folic acid are inactivated * Vitamins C, E, & D and others vitamins are reduced or destroyed. White Egret Farm Website http://www.whiteegretfarm.com/ E-mail us at egretfarm@aol.com Farm> Call us at 512-276-7408 Fax us at 512-276-7489

Thanks for the suggestions, hooked. And thanks for sticking up for me hydroponica. Oh, and thanks to the people who said they got a laugh out of my post. I try. Let me extend my deepest and most ground-scrapingly prostrate apologies to the Dieties of Organic Gardening for not having been born with the knowledge of their peculiar rules of what is and is not organic. Silly me, I thought that "Organic" was defined by what it excluded. That would be things that don't have an organic origin, right? FFS, why can't people just be happy someone isn't spraying fossil fuel products on their lawn rather than whipping out the "oh you're not organic ENOUGH to play in my sandbox" yardstick. Geez, what a nice welcome. I'm trying to keep the backyard garden simple, okay? I don't want to get all mad scientist out there with soil testing and crazy mixtures of god knows what. Plants grow just fine in the soil already. I'm just looking for something to make sure they're as happy as I can make them without going to a lot of effort, okay? Does it really make me so evil if I just want to use an organic shotgun style fertilizer on my garden? You make it sound like I'm killing puppies or something because I'm not treating my soil like it's my kids or something.

Oh boy, this really is a tough subject area... First thing I wanted to state is that I never wanted to be a plumber or whatever, if that's what I wanted to be, I would have went to school for that. Second, I feel the working at McDonalds reference was a bit extreme, I know for sure I can find better than that. I did have the ability to go to college for whatever I wanted, but the two things I wanted to do is horticulture and cabinet making, which are both considered dead end career paths. Anything else I would be going to school just for money, and not every money making career will necessarily make you money either; my cousin went to college for eight years to be a lawyer, and he's 30 making minimum money as a magazine writer because he can't find a job. The issue with the way I go in the career path is that it may be heavily influenced by future lifestyle changes. Right now, I don't even have a wife and kids in mind (don't even have a girlfriend), and all I need is four wheels, clothes on back, a place to live, and food to keep me happy, I don't need a lot of fancy toys. However though, later on I may care more about supporting a family than I do my job. I may also decide later in a few years that there's a better paying industry I'm into. Right now I'm going to college completely free so it's not a huge loss if I chose to go to college for something else. However, if I stay in the field, I do have some stuff in mind. Right now, it's still early, but I've been the best in my class, and I will make deans list easily at this pace. The ideal realistic careers I want to get into are campus groundskeeper and possibly landscape/garden design. Campus groundskeeper usually doesn't pay well, but it offers great benefits like housing, healthcare, steady employment, and money towards degrees. Landscape design is similar to the cabinet industry; if you are determined to do what you do and make a name for yourself, you will be alright, otherwise though, no. I may actually have an advantage there because I am into that and do it as a hobby currently.

After a long absence from gardenweb, I stumble on this new forum. What a coincindence because I have been absent because I told myself no cruising the web until I had finally eradicated the ivy that is threatening to strangle the north border of my property. I bought a 40 year old home from the original owner. This owner had done the original landscaping way back when so i had some very nice, well established plants...mostly natives. Pinus contorta contorta, Doug Fir, Redwood, Coffeeberry, Manzanita, a glorious and huge ceanothus, Port Orford Cedar. But I also got ivy plants that went on forever, a dying pear tree, a dying Monterey Pine, liquid ambers and norway maples planted way to close together. I have thought of the seven year process more a rehabilitation process. I went at it like triage: remove the dying pine, thin the maples, prune and try to bring back the pear. Little by little remove that damn ivy. I finally got back to the two mother plants.....with stems as big around as my upper arm. IT has been a three year process gettign rid of it two lawn waste bins a week. I have had great fun replanting that denuded area....using natives only....tiarella, saxifrage, heucheras, dicentra, ribes, Oso berry, ceanothus, evergreen huckleberry, more manzanita, native hazelnut, mountain mahogany. I am glad it took me so long to remove it all because it gave me time to reallythink about what I wanted there. 7 years ago Iwas largely ignorant of CA natives having moved here from the midwest. I have always been an organic gardener so ecological principles go without saying.What I have noticed during this whole process is to get it done right takes enormous patience, hard work and knowledge. OR lots of money so you can hire the right folk to do it for you pronto. Unfortunately the average person seens not to have any or all of the above. Not that it is theei fault. Americans work longer hours than most of our first world counterparts. Because we want to or because we must just ot make ends meet. So when I look around my forty year old neighborhood I see either sadly neglected and overgrown yards....or unispired bonsaid/poodle cut plants tended to by mow/blow/go guys. There are a few folk who like to garden and have "restored" their yards but only after patronizing the big box retail/hardware places and ending up with the safe things: margurites, junipers, roses, agapanthus, etc. The natives dont seem to be considered even though we have at least 3 wonderful native plant nurseries nearby. I hope this can change and look upon my little back yard restoration as a step in the right direction. Claire