Pasteurization is not just a nightmare for cheese gourmets. It is a nuisance for anyone who sees selling and consuming raw milk as their natural right.
Supporters are now ready to lift a 53-year-old ban on unpasteurized milk in Wisconsin, the second largest dairy state in the country. While this is not the first statewide call against pasteurization it is now standing on even more solid ground.
In the past, advocates for raw milk never forgot to boast its taste and nutritional values. They soon found out that mere taste was the least persuasive reason and the nourishing effects of raw milk remained to be seen in lab flasks. The current campaign for unpasteurized milk has taken on a new tone. Pursuit of raw milk mirrors urban residents' uneasiness with a grocery basket full of highly processed foods. Milk straight from the udder is not just a novel return to the envied pastoral life or the intimate memory of a worry-free past. When people equate raw milk to real milk, they are voicing deep concerns about a food market that has gone beyond recognition.
Besides consumers, roughly 13,000 dairy farms in Wisconsin could breath a sigh of relief if the state allows the sale of raw milk. Currently, farms need to send their milk to dairy processors for pasteurization. The cost of transportation and processing invariably drive up the production cost. When this impact was compounded with sluggish dairy prices early in 2009, dairy farmers took an extremely hard hit. The raw milk bills would allow dairy companies to sell unpasteurized milk. Given the market size of unpasteurized dairy products, dairy farmers could generate some extra revenue while the processors would not be significantly affected.
Of course, concerns arose once the state Rep. Chris Danou, D-Trempealeau and state Sen. Pat Kreitlow, D-Chippewa Falls, brought up the bills. E.coli, listeria and salmonella scares show up in bold types, signaling worries about public safety. In this regard, the President of Wisconsin Farmers Union, Darin Von Ruden, has some insightful views. He was quoted by the Chippewa Herald as saying, ""Our society has chosen to allow people the right to eat sushi, steak tartar or raw clams on the half-shell. Why can't we allow people the right to drink raw milk?"" If eating raw food is up to individuals, singling out raw milk does not make a strong point. Remember, steaks and eggs which are not fully cooked could be ideal hosts of E.coli or salmonella.
Actually the bills have been fairly prudent about opening the market door to raw milk. Only licensed on-farm sale would be allowed, and the sale must be done in a sanitary manner. Except for some raw milk buffs, who will bother to drive 20 miles for a gulp from the udder?
Even if opposing voices still threaten to kill the bills, there's one more compromise they could reach: Treat raw milk like cigarettes. Both are feared because of their risks. The law already requires tobacco companies to constantly remind consumers of health implications. A pack of Marlboros, for example, says, ""Smoking seriously harms you and others around you."" In the same way, a new bill could ask raw milk providers to label potential risks of listeria and other harmful bacteria that would be avoided with pasteurization.
On the other hand, a minimum age requirement could be enforced with raw milk sales. This way most health-conscious urban folks could still quench their thirst with their ""100 percent natural"" drink, and teenagers who might be under-informed would be shielded from a possible hazard. A bill would just make sure you know the risks before taking up the jug.
Ahead of Wisconsin, there are 28 states where sale of raw milk is already legal. While caution with raw milk in America's Dairyland is necessary, consumers should be given the choices they long for, and most of all, choices they deserve.
Qi Gu is a junior majoring in journalism. We welcome all feedback. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
