Family Law Adjudications affecting infant health. . . . . 

This is an extension of the previous post on the poor Australian kids that had to adjust weekly from cow’s to human  milk because of a 2006 law about Shared Parenting.  That’s not sharing, that’s kid-kickball.  That’s jug-juggling.  What set of men (and 2nd wives) dreamed that one up?

Inspired originally by Daniel Slack, whose Newsvine seed said this:

I do not understand why it would be OK to drink from a cow Teat, but not from a human Teat. I have found evidence to the detrimental effect of cow’s milk with Bovine Growth Hormone. One study not only shows evidence that it leads to obesity and excessive male breast development, but suggests that drinking nonorganic milk will give women a 42% higher chance, and men a 20% higher chance of developing Breast cancer.

Mostly, I wrote the article so that people will start questioning why we believe what we believe is OK. Society says it is OK to drink cow milk. Society also says we should expect politicians to lie, judges to take bribes, and car dealers to try to rip us off. How far back are we personally willing to push the boundaries of what society says is acceptable? Is it worth it, to improve your health?

If the government could so intervene in and screw up one of the most basic human instincts, other than making babies (or trying to, or trying NOt to, but still going through the motions), such as eating, specifically sucking it down (“raw,”) perhaps we can learn, individually and communally to stop sucking down the dialectic straight from the government teat, grow out incisors, molars, and wisdom teeth, and chew our own data.

And nurse and educate our own kids, too.

(I promise to stop milking this analogy — in the next post.  Not this one.  It’s just SO appropriate. . . . )

In this post, we progress (discursively, that is), from Human Milk to Cow’s milk (raw), through pasteurization, the regulation of the stalwart “we want it raw” farmers (by the federal government, who else? Protecting the rest of us from Common Sense, or Independence) and then through the natural battle some people, and farmers, go through to SELL it, Raw, and eventually will land back to the topic of how can a separating couple in Australia navigate these treacherous, debate-ridden waters of whose milk to feed, or express, for their growing offspring, after they grew emotionally apart as adults?  Mom’s or Cow’s?

I got to remembering this book, “The Milk of Human Kindness (Is not Pasteurized).”  One benefit of homeschooling, I forgot to mention, is that time to read and browse bookstores (half-priced ones especially) and libraries, helped improve my own literacy level, as well, and that was coming in with two college degrees and professional experience itself pretty varied.  But what about LIFE experience, and then reading up on that?

Sometimes things I read years ago leap alongside my thinking to contribute to the present dialogue.  When thought is actually processed, this happens more and more.

WHAT does this have to do with Fatherhood (proclamations)  and oral fixations?

Well, I think that SOME fathers and men, have a fixation on orating about things of which they have insufficient personal experience.

And it shows in this topic of one basic human nutrient — not Dad, but food.

Paternal Pro/Efficiency (expertise, regulation) vs. Maternal Nurture

I think that ideally the world should be ruled — in small sections only, and somewhat fluid ones — by a balanced partnership between men and women.  I do not think women should rule the world.  I do not think ALL men are tunnel-vision, efficiency-obsessed, better at getting things done (and more callous about who gets hurt in the process), and we already explored that maybe their Corpus Callosus is NOT skinner than ours (and if so, it may or may not be relevant).  I think that the idealized, ritualized, stereotyped MYTHs of MANHOOD (as opposed to manliness, or masculinity which, believe it or not, I DO appreciate, so long as choice is involved and gender stereotypes (his, and mine) is not rammed down my throat, allegorically speaking)  (and which would be a pretty comprehensive description of the previous “marriage”) are deleterious to us all.  The widespread acceptance of these myths (added to pornography), and now enshrined in government declarations, resolutions, policies, and initiatives, show us that the genuine article is probably in short supply. (Or, is otherwise, and more productively, occupied).

OK< . . . . 

“John Stoltenberg (1945^[1]-) is an American radical feminist activist, scholar, author, and magazine editor.^[2] He is the managing editor of AARP the Magazine, a bimonthlypublication of the United States-based interest group AARP (formerly American Association of Retired Persons), a position he has held since 2004. Although he formed a relationship with and eventually married Andrea Dworkin, he considers himself gay.^[1]

Hmmm.  I’ll have to think about this a little more.  I know the book “The End of Manhood” (as a virtual concept) spokes sense to me, a woman whose humanity had to disappear while her sole defining characteristic, allowable in marriage, was my gender, thereby I gather helping bolster a husband that was less secure of himself than he appeared initially.  I will put it together with this one (whose author has actually been decorated by the Fatherhood promoters, like the above book, the title to this one is also misleading:  “Hating Women.”  My copy is dogeared and underlined.  

Review excerpt:  

Boteach’s book is primarily a discussion of image and perception, which he sums up in eight archetypes, four female and four male. He then gives examples of his stereotypes via the media and through his experiences working as a rabbi and counseling. Anecdotal as some of this stuff may be, it’s still powerful. 

(SToltenberg)  He holds degrees in divinity and fine arts. He is well known as a feminist activist and author. He has written a series of books and articles criticizing traditional concepts of manhood or maleness, such as “Refusing to Be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice” (Meridian, 1990), “Why I Stopped Trying to be a Real Man,” [1] and “The End of Manhood: A Book for Men of Conscience” (Penguin USA/Plume, 1994).

He created “the Pose Workshop,” which entailed men adopting the poses that women strike in pornographic shots (intended partly for men attending Christian retreats), a version of which was broadcast on BBC television. He was Andrea Dworkin‘s life partner for thirty-one years. They began living together in 1974; in 1998 they married. He was a founder of the group ‘Men Can Stop Rape’ [2] and conceived and creative directs the group’s ‘My Strength’ [3] campaign which aims to educate young men on sexual relationships, consent and rape.

Stoltenberg is credited with the quote “Pornography tells lies about women. But pornography tells the truth about men.” The quote is from the essay The Forbidden Language of Sex in his book “Refusing to Be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice” (Meridian, 1990).

SUFFICE IT TO SAY (don’t laugh!), I am much more interested in relating to genuine human beings with more than the stereotyped posturing to offer in their dealings with me.  These could be (and have historically been) either male or female.  The topic of Me Tarzan, You Jane is temporarily interesting only, and in certain contexts only, and cannot sufficiently handle all that life requires of all of us these days.  While our sexuality certainly affects and influences the rest of us, JUSTICE should not be tied to GENDER.  And one gender should not have a national totalitarian power to define ITself, the OTHer gender, Childhood, or for that matter, parenting.  Or, as today’s topic is, nutrition, either.  The more I look at the major institutions in this country, the more inhuman they seem to be in origin.  

They are like false idols, bending reality to fit theory, even when it comes to infants, and like the bed of Procrustes, that fits EVERYONE (he says, to potential guests).  “Come on in.“

I will say that some are, and too many of these orally fixated on making pronouncements folks happen to have found an outlet, if not calling in religion, and from there to politics, and from there to regulatory agencies coaching government.  All along the way they are pronouncing esoteric truths, some of which a lowly MD or so will later then expose as, well, not waterproof.

Format of this post:  MOST of it is quotes, generally the titles are the URL, with chronology (years) as headings.  Generally speaking, any emphasis (italic, bold, color) is mine.  Summary comment at the bottom, as usual.  This first, blue, segment, is me, though:

MILK, CONSIDERED

Milk is so basic as to be considered essential to the beginning of life.  It is a noun, literal and figurative, and the verb is also literal, for some involving human contact, and for others, mass-produced mechanical teat-receptors.  The figurative use, “milking the moment” (which I am, in this topic) relates back to the basic format, person milking cow.  By hand.  So let’s consider how this plays into what type of THINKING permeates (or is that saturates) the family law field?

I am old enough (or was raised rural enough?) to remember a milk truck, with cold bottles delivered early, and cream at the top, and old ones turned back in.  Now, homogenization is the rule, in education as well as in milk, as well as in legislation.

The Exodus of Insight:

For example, in California, it used to be possible to get raw cow’s milk.  There was a concerted effort to outlaw it.  This had nothing to do with health and everything to do with politics.  Pasteurization may clean things up, but it also (due to heat) destroys enzymes, which we NEED.  And the presence of pasteurization, this book asserts, ended up covering up some pretty squalid additions to cow’s milk, on the basis it was all sterilized to s start with.

Nursing, then has (d)evolved in this country, I gather, from Mom’s mammaries, raw (although I’m sure the word “raw” dated closer to pasteurization, to Cow mammaries, RAW, to Cow mammaries, Pastuerized, and then sooner or later we have Dr. McDougall, among others probably, being an M.D., noticing a few things about pasteurized milk.  

And we then have…

1985

The Milk of Human Kindness, even if Bovine, is Raw, not Pasteurized, and here’s why:

According to “TheMilkBook.com

(Review:) The Milk Book – The Milk Of Human Kindness Is Not Pasteurized –

The Milk Book – How Science Is Destroying Nature’s Neatly Perfect Food. Children are denied whole milk because pediatricians are obsessed with the cholesterol myth. These same gutless wonders don’t say anything about children drinking half-a-dozen bottles of Coca-Cola a day, stating before breakfast! But kids can’t get a decent glass of milk. Adding vitamin D to milk is a risky business. The New England Journal of Medicine reported many cases of vitamin D intoxication resulting from excessive fortification of commercial milk. Today, you can’t get a decent glass of milk. Even if you buy whole milk, thinking it is better than that sickly blue stuff called skim, you can’t win, because all of the commercial milk is homogenized. I am convinced that homogenization is even more detrimental to the nutritional quality of milk than the heat processing called pasteurization.

– William Campbell Douglass II, MD (I believe this book,which I have read, came out about 1985.)

What is the logical thing to do then?  Outlaw raw (cow’s) milk, naturally. Dirty, natural, dangerous stuff, just a step above, say, breastfeeding from a human.  Disgusting!  In Mad Cow Loco mood, the Federal Government squirts some sense into the populace:

NOT TO BE OUTDONE,

1986

“In 1986, the federal government banned all interstate shipments of raw milk, cream and butter.”

1989

• ScienceDaily (Aug. 5, 2005)— An analysis of 21 studies that have investigated the link between ovarian cancer and the consumption of milk products and lactose has found some support for the hypothesis that high intake is associated with increased cancer risk. The results of this analysis, published online August 5, 2005 in the International Journal of Cancer, the official journal of the International Union Against Cancer (UICC), found that support was stronger in cohort studies, compared to case-control studies, which offered varying results. The article is available via Wiley InterScience at http://www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/ijc   
• 
  
• Since a positive correlation between ovarian cancer risk and the consumption of milk products and lactose was first reported in 1989 , many epidemiological studies have further examined the relationship. However, these studies have yielded conflicting conclusions. 
• 
  
• To better understand the uncertain relationship, researchers led by Susanna C. Larsson of the National Institute of Environmental Medicine at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, conducted a meta-analysis of relevant case-control and cohort studies., many epidemiological studies have further examined the relationship. However, these studies have yielded conflicting conclusions. To better understand the uncertain relationship, researchers led by Susanna C. Larsson of the National Institute of Environmental Medicine at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, conducted a meta-analysis of relevant case-control and cohort studies.

2003 (URL):    

 

 

 

Ron Shmid, ND, a naturopathic physician, outlined the laws governing sales of raw milk in his 2003 book The Untold Story of Milk:

“Twenty-five states technically allow on-farm sales of raw milk, but nearly all place restrictions on the farmer by limiting the amount he may sell, banning advertising, imposing excessive fees or regulations, or allowing local town Boards of Health to ban sales. Two of those 25 states limit sales to raw goat milk… Eleven of these 25 states have provisions allowing for some retail sales, but in most such sales are limited by many of the same restrictions… In practice, however, raw milk is available in stores only in Arizona, California, Connecticut, and Maine…

Six states allow sales of raw milk for animal consumption only, without requiring the addition of dyes… Two states make all sales of raw milk illegal with the exception of raw goat milk when prescribed in writing by a licensed physician… In two states, Montana and Washington, the situation is murky. Regulations could be interpreted to allow sales of raw milk but state officials do not follow these interpretations… Sixteen additional states and the District of Columbia make all sales of raw milk illegal…

In 1986, the federal government banned all interstate shipments of raw milk, cream and butter.”

[Editor’s Note: ProCon.org received an e-mail from the Weston A. Price Foundation on Sep. 27, 2007, alerting us to the fact that as of Dec. 1, 2004, the states of Washington, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina also began allowing the sale of raw milk in stores. That brings the total to eight states that allow in store sales of raw milk (This information was confirmed by ProCon.org through additional research in Sep. 2007 and again in Sep. 2008). For a listing of all state laws pertaining to raw milk please see (etc.)

2004, Dr. Mercola:

Joseph Mercola, DO, an osteopathic physician, stated in his April 24, 2004 article “The Real Reasons Why Raw Milk Is Becoming More Popular,” published on his website:

“Raw {COW’s} milk is a highly health-promoting food… While it is certainly possible to become sick from drinking contaminated raw milk, it is also possible to become sick from almost any food source. But it seems that raw milk has been unfairly singled out as a risk, when only a very small risk exists…

Raw milk is an outstanding source of nutrients including beneficial bacteria such as lactobacillus acidophilus, vitamins and enzymes, and it is, in my estimation, the finest source of calcium available…

 People who have been allergic to pasteurized milk for many years can typically tolerate and even thrive on raw milk. Raw milk is truly one of the most profoundly healthy foods you can consume, and you’ll feel the difference once you start to drink it.”

2005 

Well, 20 years later, the local yokels are fighting back, some.  Here’s commentary:

(TOM PHILPOTT, 11/28/2005)

RAW MILK, HOT COMMODITY

Despite a recent crackdown, Washington State’s raw-milk policy might point way forward.

In a nation riddled with diet-related maladies like obesity and diabetes, the official fear that greets raw milk is impressive.

You can waltz into any convenience store and snap up foods pumped liberally with government-subsidized high-fructose corn sweetener, deep-fried in government-subsidized partially hydrogenated soybean oil. Yet in many states, teams of bureaucrats devote themselves to “protecting” us from raw milk — and imposing onerous fines on farmers who dare sell it.

Some states ban raw milk outright; others have erected elaborate barriers between farmer and consumer. Here in North Carolina, for example, I have to pretend I’m buying animal fodder when I visit a nearby dairy farm to pick up a gallon or two of raw milk.

Even so, consumers are increasingly demanding it, banding together with farmers to form Prohibition-like cells from New York City to Portland. To me, it tastes better, more alive, than even the best pasteurized milk; and I tend to believe the health claims made for it.

According to this AP article, Washington State is stepping up enforcement of its raw-milk restrictions, which are actually relatively enlightened. The article says that in Washington, farms that sell raw milk must be “licensed through the state, which requires monthly testing of the milk and inspection of the farm and milk bottling room.” Further, “each bottle must contain a warning label saying it may contain harmful bacteria.”

However, a law that went into effect July 1 allows the milk to be hand-bottled. That means farms don’t have to lay out large investments in bottling equipment — a requirement that would eliminate milk sales as a potential revenue source for many small operations.

As long as compliance costs are low, Washington’s raw-milk code could actually help build the market for the product. While I think that consumers are their own best health inspectors — I wouldn’t buy raw milk from a farm I hadn’t inspected myself, or whose operator didn’t have a top-notch reputation in his or her community — many people don’t feel comfortable consuming something as potentially dangerous as raw milk without government oversight.

(There is of course a bitter irony here: The government has long shown itself to be more responsive to corporate dictates than public-health concerns. To cite just one example: The FDA continues to countenance the use of hydrogenated oil, despite decades of evidence of its deadly effects.)

Direct-marketed raw milk is a potential boon to dairy farms that have languished for years under the heel of rising costs and stagnant prices for their goods. Consolidation in the dairy-processing industry means that in most places, a single buyer exists for a farm’s milk output. By selling direct to consumers, farmers have more leverage to get a decent price.

2006

California, too!

Raw Milk in the News

Randall Neustaedter OMD

 (Sept. 2006)

First, bags of spinach were found to be contaminated with E Coli, which made people sick. The strain of E Coli in the spinach (0157:H7) was the same strain found in those people who were sick. Now four children who consumed raw dairy products from Organic Pastures dairy have become ill with E Coli as well. At least one of these children had the strain 0157:H7 confirmed on lab tests, the same strain present in the contaminated spinach. However, tests of the raw dairy products have failed to detect any E Coli in samples.

Nonetheless, the California State Veterinarian, Dr. Richard Breitmeyer, has placed a temporary ban and recall of all raw milk products from Organic Pastures as a precautionary measure

Like most foods, the less processing that dairy products undergo, the more nutritious it is. Although pasteurization will kill potentially harmful bacteria in milk, it also destroys bacteria and enzymes that help people digest and absorb nutrients in milk. The benefits of consuming raw milk have been advocated by many groups. The website www.realmilk.com (operated by the Weston A. Price Foundation) describes these many benefits (www.westonaprice.org). Others are critical of dairy product consumption by humans in any form (www.notmilk.com).

An alternative to raw milk is organic, non-homogenized (cream top) pasteurized milk. Homogenization distributes the fat in milk throughout the solution, but also makes the fat unavailable. The fat is needed for calcium absorption and is a good source of saturated fat for children.

Parents who have found that switching to raw milk products solves the problems associated with processed milk, may have more difficulty now obtaining raw milk, and will get more pressure to use pasteurized dairy products. And the whole issue of dairy product consumption is a hotbed of controversy.

It is illegal for dairies to produce and sell raw milk in 23 states. Consumers have found ways to get around these laws by buying milk directly from farmers. And in California and other states where raw milk is legal, dairies have been able to supply consumers with their products through health food stores. But state health departments frown on raw milk production and often go after dairies.

In California the health department has forced the Organic Pastures dairy to indefinitely stop all distribution and recall all raw dairy products from stores because of an alleged connection to four children who have E Coli illnesses. 

 

So far, this is still about the condition/quality of COW’s milk (just a reminder)

2008

From: , Organic Consumers Association, More from this Affiliate 
Published April 7, 2008 08:22 AM

California Threatens to Outlaw Sales of Raw Milk

California raw milk producers warn that a new law to impose strict requirements on raw milk, will outlaw and require the disposal of perfectly safe milk. AB 1735 requires that all raw milk sold in California be tested for 10 coliform bacteria per milliliter or less. But raw milk producers and activists say that most coliform bacteria is perfectly safe, and that tests are already carried out for a handful of such bacteria, including E. coli 0157:h7 and Listeria monocytogenes, that can cause disease in humans. The new law does not require testing for those bacteria.

“My customers’ choices are now being limited by a law that makes no sense,” said Mark McAfee, owner of the country’s largest raw dairy, Organic Pastures. “Why test for coliform bacteria when you can test for pathogenic bacteria directly?” 

“Officials cite health risks to raw milk, but once milk has been pasteurized, all the anti-microbial and immune-supporting components are reduced or destroyed,” said Sally Fallon, founder of “A Campaign for Real Milk.” 

. . . 

MAY, 2008, some Canadians ex-press themselves on the general interface between raw milk, government health care (require raw-milk drinkers to opt out of health care coverage?), government interferences in daily life, and choice to smoke cigarettes, eat Twinkies, etc.

 

And here’s an interesting discussion, pro, con, complete with testimony and statements from propononents and opponents:

Is raw (cow’s) milk more healthful than pasteurized milk?

(A few links above led here also):

Now, back to Mama and MOTHER’s MILK (NB:  I think you need to have been a mother, or at least pregnant, before you can produce, although not having tried myself before I became pregnant, I can’t say for sure.) Anyhow, for the sake of consistency, I prefer “Mother’s” to “Human” milk.

2009

The Milk of Human Kindness – Uses for Human Breast Milk

News Type: Event — Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:19 AM PDT

Every year, the citizens of the United States drink on average 21 gallons of milk. Most of this milk is from cows. Ever since I heard that PETA wanted Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream to use human milk, {{For the record, yes, I DO object, women are not cows!  We are already being treated as surrogate mothers in the courts, and sometimes functioning as them in life.  Let’s keep it to the first part of life, and OK?  STOP the ObamaInterventionProgram to get them babies away from them Mamas and into child care (and her into WalMart or somewhere else) and put them back with their Moms.  It’s better for Moms, too.  Let’s learn how to take care of our relationships, for once in our life!}}{{There are already ads enough for women and men of a certain age to sell their eggs and sperm;DNK if blood;  too bad I missed them while trying to collect child support arrears}}

I {author, not blog author} have been researching about the advantages and uses of it. Here is what I have come up with.

)Human Breast Milk has been used as a medication for thousands of years. In the ancient world, breast milk was sometimes consumed as Medicine, in Fertility Rituals, and in other religious ceremonies. The Ancient Egyptians used are honey and human breast milk as medicine. Not only did they have medicinal values, they also are believed to have been used to ward off evil spirits and demons. It is even theorized that our ancestors not only breast fed their children during long migrations, but also breast fed their men too!

7) It helps fight off long term health problems. Breast milk can help prevent ear infections. People who drink it are less likely to develop asthma, Multiple Sclerosis, and help prevent some food allergies. It is said that Breastfeeding protects against cancer, helps prevent heart disease and even relaxes tension caused by stress . People with GI disorders and organ donation recipients also benefit from the immunologic powers of human breast milk. Talk about a health drink!!

Antibodies (also called Immunoglobulins) are made by the body’s immune system in an attempt to protect it from harmful substances such as bacteria, viruses, fungus, or animal dander. The antibodies work by attaching to these substances so that the immune system can destroy them.

There are five major types of antibodies: IgA, IgG, IgM, IgE, and IgD. All are found in breast milk. IgA antibodies protect body surfaces that are exposed to outside foreign substances. They are found primarily in the nose, breathing passages, digestive tract, ears, eyes, vagina, saliva and tears. This makes IgA particularly important for babies who are always putting things in their mouths.

In patients that are suffering from immunilogical diseases, such as AIDS, Leukemia, or Hepatitis, or patients recieving a therapy that deteriorates the immune system, such as chemo or radiation therapy, have shown the benefit when supplimenting their diets with human breast milk.

For more information:
http://www.breastfeeding.com/allabout.html

6) People are always complaining in the USA, about stupid people doing stupid things. People cutting us off, insulting us, and even lacking common sense. Well, turns out that Human Breast Milk may actually increase intelligence. Studies show breastfed infants have higher IQ s than bottle fed infants.

For more information:
http://www.breastfeeding.com/all_about/all_about_iq.html

5) Breastfed babies grow up to be leaner than bottle fed babies. Maybe it has to do with the fact that babies digestive systems are still in development. Then again, it maybe just that babies are trying to fill a psychological need with food. When a baby nurses with its mother, he is learning the basics of relationships. He is learning the recognize boundaries for good behavior, and what is not acceptable. The closeness that develops during breast feeding carries over to any relationships later in life. We, as Humans, learn by example.

Read more at: http://www.schizophrenia.com/sznews/archives/004125.html

{{NOTE:  this is a MAN speaking!  He’d never qualify for a government post….}}

There are more and more people considering the advantages of breast milk not just for the treatment of illness.

4) PETA wants Ben and Jerry’s ice cream made from Human Milk. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sent a letter to Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, co founders of Ben & Jerry’s Homemade Inc., urging them to replace cow’s milk they use in their ice cream products with human breast milk, according to a statement recently released by a PETA spokeswoman.

more on this :
http://www.wptz.com/news/17539127/detail.html

3) Swiss restaurant to serve meals cooked with human breast milk . The owner of the Storchen restaurant in the exclusive Winterthur resort will improve his menu with local specialties such as meat stew and various soups and sauces containing at least 75 per cent of mother’s milk.

more on this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2976181/Swiss-restaurant-to-serve-meals-cooked-with-human-breast-milk.html

2) In France, a “dairy” produces Human Milk Cheese. Founded in 1947, the cheese Cosma was able to recover the wealth of a farmer ancestral tradition Ardennaise forgotten until then. Indeed, the Petit Singly, the only cheese with woman’s milk , has long remained in the shadow of specialty cheeses, ordinarily milk cow, goat or sheep.

In France, no other product of this quality is listed, the Petit Singly has managed over time refining its taste thanks to the expertise of the master cheese maker, Patrice Cosma. Tinged with a touch of hazelnut and a subtle caramel color, sweetness and its basis will only tempt you.

For more information on this:
http://membres.lycos.fr/petitsingly/

1) A Business in Miami, FL wants to promote the virtues of Human Breast Milk Ice cream. U.S. citizens consumed an average of 23 gallons of bovine milk in 2001. Quite an astonishing amount when you consider that Homosapiens are the only organisms known to consume milk beyond infancy. Even more extraordinary is the fact that humans are the only organisms that consume the milk of other animals!

Female mothers in the Class Mammalia produce nutrient-rich milk for consumption by their own newborn babies. Humans have attained the unique (and bizarre) position in the food web from which they exploit the reproductive cycle of other animals (particularly Bovidae) for food. Adding to the cultural mystique of milk consumption is the widely held taboo against consumption of human breast milk either by unrelated individuals or persons beyond some generally unspecified age.

It is the mission of MMICCo. to challenge the traditional paradigm that there is nothing abnormal about conversion of mammalian milk into luxury food items. Mother’s milk is a natural creation that we should celebrate, but is the milk of other species truly fair game for human consumption? If so, why isn’t human milk? Our hope is to provide a delicious frozen product while framing this conversation in a way that leads to fruitful progress in consideration of the ecological niche of Homosapiens.

For more information on this:
http://www.bio.miami.edu/muscarella/mothersmilkicecream.html

I do not understand why it would be OK to drink from a cow Teat, but not from a human Teat. I have found evidence to the detrimental effect of cow’s milk with Bovine Growth Hormone. One study not only shows evidence that it leads to obesity and excessive male breast development, but suggests that drinking nonorganic milk will give women a 42% higher chance, and men a 20% higher chance of developing Breast cancer.

Mostly, I wrote the article so that people will start questioning why we believe what we believe is OK. Society says it is OK to drink cow milk. Society also says we should expect politicians to lie, judges to take bribes, and car dealers to try to rip us off. How far back are we personally willing to push the boundaries of what society says is acceptable? Is it worth it, to improve your health?

Here are some more informative sites for further information:

This one is the world famous La Leche League, promoting Worldwide Awareness to the benefits of Brestfeeding

Legislative records show that raw milk dairies were specifically discussed during the debate on AB 1735, but neither raw milk producers nor consumers were consulted on the legislation

Hmm, there is a certain parallel to the low-income parents who were being randomly studied, categorized, and legislated about when it comes to family law, as well.  Not to mention, I do not recall a NATIONAL poll at any time on the wisdom of fatherhood becoming the new state religion, moreso than, say, motherhood.  I wonder how many of the about 50% of the US population (women, i.e.) were indeed consulted by the legislators (primarily male), governors (I believe ditto), and pastors (probably still so), etc. promoting these policies.

Finally, my last “find” on the issue of, at least, cow’s milk.  Be sure to check out the study on link to cancer:

http://www.milksucks.com/index2.asp

A question comes up, as to pushing milk in the school cafeterias.  I have worked in an urban area (more than one, actually), where it could be sarcastically but with some relevance said, the major health risks were homicide and diabetes.  Some people, and populations, have allergies to cow’s milk.  The aspect of the public schools as a dairy-dumping ground comes to mind.  

Just because it can be mass-produced doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.

I think this commentary goes for almost any primary aspect of life, including parenting, education, families, fatherhood, and nursing.

I think trying to indoctrinate an entire country from the top-down is an oppressive, fat burdensome Big Brother.  Or is that, “Mama”?

Only, it ain’t motherhood, these days, it’s fatherhood.  Time to let go of the oral fixation on making pronouncements, in private, and enforcing them upon the general public.  And when they don’t work out as planned, making more pronouncements, and telling the general public, we’re out of funding.

Let’s get off that virtual teat, OK?

And create (how?) a brave, new, world than this one.

On reflection, I omitted an important year, in my chronology of human food, above:

1984

 Like George Orwell’s 1984, this novel (Brave New World) depicts a dystopia in which an all-powerful state controls the behaviors and actions of its people in order to preserve its own stability and power. But a major difference between the two is that, whereas in 1984 control is maintained by constant government surveillance, secret police, and torture, power in Brave New World is maintained through technological interventions that start before birth and last until death, and that actually change what people want. The government of 1984 maintains power through force and intimidation. The government of Brave New World retains control by making its citizens so happy and superficially fulfilled that they don’t care about their personal freedom. In Brave New World the consequences of state control are a loss of dignity, morals, values, and emotions—in short, a loss of humanity.