Ammo for raw milk people

[furholler]

I know most raw milk advocates are well versed in the benefits of it, but I posted an interesting article on my blog written by Jo Robinson of www.eatwild.com It is always good to stay abrest of the information that is out there so that people can be educated. Read the article by clicking the link to my blog below my signature. Then, let me know what you think by either leaving a comment at the blog or posting here.

[milkinpigs]

The author is incorrect on the amount of cows that are grazed as well as giving false numbers as far as cows being injected with rbst.

You were incorrect on another thread ;Walmart no longer accepts milk with rbst;not sure what you meant by the feedlot grain remark.

Obvious that both were written with a bias......and no, I don't run a mega dairy,we are milking less than a hundred cows and they are on pastureyear round,except when they are in the barn milking.

[haypoint]

I've never heard of any of thos studies that were sited there, so I can't converse on their validity.
That cows today produce three time what they did 50 years ago may be, in part, to diet, but most of it has been the breeding of better cows. A.I. has improved milk production more in the past 40 years than in the previous 200.
While corn is generally a part of a dairy cow's diet, so is pasture, chopped, preserved corn stalks, soy beans and dried grass and clover.
I cannot fault someone for slanting the facts to help create a niech market for their lower producing cows. However, to do it with a strong Christian slant stinks.

[THETOOLMAN]

that grass fed beef looked really good in that picture. I'll bet you 5c that my grain fed tastes better!

[AC Spectre]

There is no test that accurately detects rbst. Walmart says they no longer accept rbst milk but all this means is that they have farmers sign an affidavit that says they don't use rbst. Whether these farmers honor their word is something impossible for Walmart to know unless they actually witness the farmers injecting their cows.

I hate to sound cynical, but I have absolutely no doubt that even places like Walmart and Ben & Jerry's have a certain amount of rbst in their milk and milk products.

[arabian knight]

Originally Posted by THETOOLMAN

that grass fed beef looked really good in that picture. I'll bet you 5c that my grain fed tastes better!

Yes and so will mine that I am raising right now, and will do it mostly on GRAIN. And the taste and tenderness is way better then grass fed imo.

[AC Spectre]

We have a local farmer in my area that raises and sells grass fed beef. He has created quite a niche market for himself here and does rather well. I rankled his feathers recently when I told him that I was raised on grass fed beef. I grew up on a dairy farm and we simply castrated a bull calf and when we weened him we put him on pasture with our dry cows until he was big enough to butcher. He insisted that there was much more involved in the process than that, but I remain unconvinced.

I don't begrudge him his success but he is certainly not getting $6 a pound from me for hamburger.

[furholler]

Originally Posted by haypoint

I've never heard of any of thos studies that were sited there, so I can't converse on their validity.
That cows today produce three time what they did 50 years ago may be, in part, to diet, but most of it has been the breeding of better cows. A.I. has improved milk production more in the past 40 years than in the previous 200.
While corn is generally a part of a dairy cow's diet, so is pasture, chopped, preserved corn stalks, soy beans and dried grass and clover.
I cannot fault someone for slanting the facts to help create a niech market for their lower producing cows. However, to do it with a strong Christian slant stinks.

What are you accusing me of? I happen to believe in the health benefits of raw milk, sorry it ruffles the feathers of some folks. It is a fact that cows were made to eat grass, not live in a feed lot. And milk production probably has more to do with rBGH than A.I does.

[AC Spectre]

Originally Posted by furholler

What are you accusing me of? I happen to believe in the health benefits of raw milk, sorry it ruffles the feathers of some folks. It is a fact that cows were made to eat grass, not live in a feed lot. And milk production probably has more to do with rBGH than A.I does.

rBGH only became available to farmers within the last 15 years or so and while it does significantly increase milk production, haypoint is correct, advances in nutrition and especially AI are much more responsible for increases in milk production.

[milkinpigs]

"and milk production PROBABLY has more to do with milk production than A.I."

Furholler, you are certainly entitled to your opinion but when you don't know what you are commenting on please don't represent it as fact.

Monsanto advertised a 10 pound increase in production at best and only if catle were started on Posilac at peak lactation and fed more of a higher quality feed.

Even those dairies that rely on grazing (such as ours) look at how much poteential milk production a bull should add through his daughters.Perhaps you should check out the web site for New Zealand Genetics;the Kiwis are in class by themselves when it comes to grazing type dairying.....they depend on genetics to increase milk production....not a needle.

[Tad]

Originally Posted by AC Spectre

There is no test that accurately detects rbst. Walmart says they no longer accept rbst milk but all this means is that they have farmers sign an affidavit that says they don't use rbst. Whether these farmers honor their word is something impossible for Walmart to know unless they actually witness the farmers injecting their cows.

I hate to sound cynical, but I have absolutely no doubt that even places like Walmart and Ben & Jerry's have a certain amount of rbst in their milk and milk products.

I would like to think the best of us farmers but there are wierd ones in every buch. Before getting some organic herds of our own our co-op bought organic milk to fill some fluid milk orders and turned away more than one organic load when it tested hot for antibiotics.

[AC Spectre]

Originally Posted by Tad

I would like to think the best of us farmers but there are wierd ones in every buch. Before getting some organic herds of our own our co-op bought organic milk to fill some fluid milk orders and turned away more than one organic load when it tested hot for antibiotics.

I agree with you that it would be nice to think that people were as good as their word, but I'm realistic about things as well. Money drives people to do strange things. The milk truck drivers could give you the most accurate assessment of which farmers were using bst. They could spot injection cycles by observing spikes in overall production.

I never understood why farmers would try to ship milk they knew contained antibiotics. Those are easy to test for and in our co-op if your milk tests positive you have to pay for the whole truckload.

[wstevenl]

On the Feedlot type dairy situation... I recently watched the "Dirty Jobs" episode where he went to a dairy with 32,000 cows.... they never showed any grass, fields, etc. all the cows seemed to be under roof and on concrete or sand stalls all the time.

[furholler]

Originally Posted by wstevenl

On the Feedlot type dairy situation... I recently watched the "Dirty Jobs" episode where he went to a dairy with 32,000 cows.... they never showed any grass, fields, etc. all the cows seemed to be under roof and on concrete or sand stalls all the time.

This is what is being talked about here. And I apologize to another poster on this, but, I don't trust squat from Monsanto.

And no, I am not a dairy farmer and I don't want to be one. We milk our own cow for ourselves and enjoy the healthy milk way more than the store stuff.

[sammyd]

In 1935 the average cow gave 4184 pounds of milk,
in 1984 it was 12541, in 1994 it was 16179. Monsanto didn't come up with Prosilac until 94.
There were huge gains made in the dairy industry through breeding AI.

Cows have been domesticated for thousands of years, it makes little difference what they were made to eat., humans have been molding them for quite some time.
Anybody who says they weren't made to eat grain is full of it. Grain is nothing more than the seeds of the grasses they are "supposed to eat".

[wstevenl]

Eating straight grain from a bucket or trough is NOT the same as eating the seed heads along with grass. Come on, haven't you ever heard of acidosis in cattle? There are real problems with feeding too much grain. A small amount isn't going to hurt the animal, but it does make their fat less healthy for us.

[furholler]

Originally Posted by sammyd

In 1935 the average cow gave 4184 pounds of milk,
in 1984 it was 12541, in 1994 it was 16179. Monsanto didn't come up with Prosilac until 94.
There were huge gains made in the dairy industry through breeding AI.

Cows have been domesticated for thousands of years, it makes little difference what they were made to eat., humans have been molding them for quite some time.
Anybody who says they weren't made to eat grain is full of it. Grain is nothing more than the seeds of the grasses they are "supposed to eat".

It's not so much the grain as it is the crap that they mix in with it. i.e. chicken poo, ground up cow left overs, you know-fillers (Chronic Wasting disease.). No, it is NOT natural for cows to eat grain as their entire diet. I don't care how long they've been domesticated. Only 50-60 years ago people raised fine animals on just grass. It is since the industrial revolution that the whole idea and mentality of the feed-lot style, agribusiness (not agriculture) came to be. Think about it.

[AC Spectre]

Originally Posted by furholler

It's not so much the grain as it is the crap that they mix in with it. i.e. chicken poo, ground up cow left overs, you know-fillers (Chronic Wasting disease.). No, it is NOT natural for cows to eat grain as their entire diet. I don't care how long they've been domesticated. Only 50-60 years ago people raised fine animals on just grass. It is since the industrial revolution that the whole idea and mentality of the feed-lot style, agribusiness (not agriculture) came to be. Think about it.

Even the large feedlot farms do not feed straight grain. As stated above, a straight grain diet is not healthy for the animals and it would be far too expensive for the farmers. Most dairy farms, large or small, feed grain mixed with things like corn silage, grass silage, hay, and grazing.

The FDA does not allow animal fillers in grain that is fed to animals contributing to our food supply. This is stringently enforced as evidenced by the extremely low number of instances of mad cow disease in this country.

While I certainly support your desire to drink raw milk that is as pure as you can get it, the articles you cite in your original post are not credible and have several actual falsehoods in them. Those of us who are dairy farmers or have been in the past tend to take things like that to heart.

[sammyd]

50 years ago they raised animals that could only produce a quarter of what they produce today, that isn't "fine", which is why they kept improving the animal.
Yes I've heard of acidosis. And nobody except maybe a beef guy will raise an animal on a totally grain ration. BTW 50 years ago grain was a part of the ration, grain is not something just invented in the last 10 years.
And yes I do think about it on a daily basis. I realize that maybe 50 years ago a cow that made 5000 pounds a year was acceptable to most. And I suppose it's quite acceptable to some when you can create a niche market and publish articles to scare folks into buying your 6 dollar a gallon milk.

[texican]

I would guess that the vast majority of all cattle are raised on grass... even dairy cows, until they freshen. The last month or two of their lives, they're fattened on grain, to improve the tenderness of the meat.

I've eaten every variation of cow and (and wildlife) imaginable, and all things considered, cattle fattened on grain are tenderer.

Since rbst is a naturally occurring hormone, isn't it impossible to 'test' for artificial vs. natural rbst?

Like others mentioned, ethics and high ideals are fine, but when money is involved, do what Reagan did... Trust but Verify... which, unless you squeeze your own, you'll never really know...