It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Milk was priced, like most liquids, on the basis of simple volume until the very late 19th century.
However, anyone making dairy products knew that milk was far from uniform. The composition of milk
varied by producer, individual cow, stage of lactation, season, and other less explainable factors. Even
today, some milk can easily contain twice as much fat as some other milk. The Babcock test, developed in
1890, was a simple, fast, and accurate way of measuring the milkfat content of milk. It fairly directly
established the amount of cream or butter that could be produced from milk and also provided a fairly
accurate means of predicting cheese yields. The Babcock test revolutionized milk pricing and was rapidly
adopted by plants buying milk.
As the commercial dairy industry developed, measurement of the quantity of milk shifted from a volume
basis to weight because accurate determination of weight was generally easier. The use of the Babcock
test and the change to weighing milk led to the milk pricing method that would dominate throughout
most of the 20th century: dollars per 100 pounds, adjusted for milkfat content with a butterfat differential.
Another pricing method, dollars per pound of milkfat has been used for cream and was sometimes
used for milk. It never was a satisfactory pricing method for many uses of milk and fell entirely out of
favor as skim solids became more valuable.
Articles from American Journal of Public Health (New York, N.Y. : 1912) are provided here courtesy of
Red Cap: Whole Milk
Purple Cap: Reduced-Fat (2%) Milk
Green: Low-Fat (1%) Milk
Light Blue: Skim Milk
Brown Cap: Chocolate Milk
Pink Cap: Strawberry Milk
Yellow Cap: Buttermilk
Orange Cap: Half and Half
Magenta Cap: Whipping Cream
Myth – Milk contains hormones that are harmful to humans
Fact – Canada does not allow the use of growth hormones to increase milk production in
cows. Therefore, no added growth hormones are found in any Canadian milk or milk
products. There are also no antibiotic residues in any Canadian milk or milk products.
Natural hormones from the cow do pass into the milk - however they have no effect on
humans when consumed and are digested like any other protein. Bovine Growth
Hormone (BGH), also known as recombinant Bovine Somatotropin (rBST), is currently
used in the United States to increase milk production in cows. rBST is not present in
milk that is produced in Canada.
The FDA approved the use of rBGH, a synthetic version of BGH, in 1993. The injection of rBGH into cows has become standard practice on many dairy farms, as it has the ability to unnaturally increase a cow’s output of milk by up to 20% (according to the rBGH manufacturer).
Cows treated with rBGH were found to have a 25% increased risk of acquiring an udder infection (mastitis). Other major side effects (as noted by the manufacturer of rBGH) include infertility, lameness, cystic ovaries, uterine disorders, digestive disorders, lacerations, and calluses of the knee
Even more seriously, rBGH milk is contaminated with high levels of the natural Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1), which regulates cell growth, division and multiplication throughout life, particularly in infants and young children; Eli Lilly, in its application for registration of rBGH, admitted that IGF-1 blood levels of injected cows are increased up to ten-fold. IGF-1 is resistant to pasteurization and digestion, and is readily absorbed from the small intestine. Monsanto's own data revealed that feeding IGF-1 to adult rats for only two weeks significantly increased body and liver weights, and bone length.
More critically, increased IGF-1 blood levels have been incriminated as a major cause of cancer. IGF-1 induces uncontrolled growth of normal human breast cells in tissue culture, and has been incriminated in their transformation to cancer cells.
Revealingly, Hudson uses the term rBST, recombinant Bovine Somatotropin, avoiding any reference to the word "Hormone" in Monsanto's original acronym rBGH.
In 2009, President Obama appointed Michael Taylor as a senior adviser for the FDA. Consumer groups protested the appointment because Taylor had formerly served as a vice president for Monsanto, the controversial agricultural multinational at the forefront of genetically modified food
N.J. company charged with using tainted milk in its ricotta cheese
The company paid cash for the discounted milk from D.A. Landis Trucking Inc. of Lancaster, although dairy farmers had pledged to dispose of it, prosecutors said. Lebanon sold the ricotta cheese to restaurants, delis, ravioli manufacturers and others.
Landis Trucking and President Dean Landis have agreed to plead guilty Friday in Allentown to conspiracy to falsify driver log books.
β-Lactam antibiotics (beta-lactam antibiotics) are a broad class of antibiotics, consisting of all antibiotic agents that contains a β-lactam nucleus in their molecular structures. This includes penicillin derivatives (penams), cephalosporins (cephems), monobactams, and carbapenems. Most β-lactam antibiotics work by inhibiting cell wall biosynthesis in the bacterial organism and are the most widely used group of antibiotics. Up until 2003, when measured by sales, more than half of all commercially available antibiotics in use were β-lactam compounds.
Adverse drug reactions
Common adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for the β-lactam antibiotics include diarrhea, nausea, rash, urticaria, superinfection (including candidiasis).
Infrequent ADRs include fever, vomiting, erythema, dermatitis, angioedema, pseudomembranous colitis.
Pain and inflammation at the injection site is also common for parenterally administered β-lactam antibiotics.
Immunologically mediated adverse reactions to any β-lactam antibiotic may occur in up to 10% of patients receiving that agent (a small fraction of which are truly IgE-mediated allergic reactions, see amoxicillin rash). Anaphylaxis will occur in approximately 0.01% of patients. There is perhaps a 5%-10% cross-sensitivity between penicillin-derivatives, cephalosporins, and carbapenems; but this figure has been challenged by various investigators.
Nevertheless, the risk of cross-reactivity is sufficient to warrant the contraindication of all β-lactam antibiotics in patients with a history of severe allergic reactions (urticaria, anaphylaxis, interstitial nephritis) to any β-lactam antibiotic.
A Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction may occur after initial treatment of a spirochetal infection such as syphilis with a β-lactam antibiotic.
SCREENING TESTS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF
APPENDIX N. FOR BULK MILK PICKUP TANKERS:
1. Performance Tests/Controls (+/-):
a. Each lot of kits purchased is tested by positive (+) and negative (-) controls.
b. Each screening facility runs a positive (+) and negative (-) control performance test each
c. All NCIMS Approved Bulk Milk Pickup Tanker Screening Tests Include The Following
Format: All presumptive positive test results are to be repeated in duplicate as soon as
possible at the direction of the Regulatory Agency on the same sample with single positive
(+) and negative (-) controls by a certified analyst (Official State Laboratory, Officially
Designated Laboratory or Certified Industry Supervisor) using the same or equivalent test
(M-I-96-10, latest revision). If the duplicate tests, with appropriate control (+/-) results are
negative (-), the tanker is reported as negative. If one or both duplicate test(s) is positive (+),
the test result is reported to the Regulatory Agency of the State in which the testing was
conducted, as a screening positive.
d. All positive (+) controls used for drug residue testing kits are labeled to indicate a
specific drug and concentration level for that drug.
(1) For tests that only detect Penicillin, Ampicillin, Amoxicillin and Cephapirin, the
positive (+) control is Pen G @ 5 ± 0.5 ppb.
(2) For test kits validated for the detection of Cloxacillin, the positive (+) control may be
Cloxacillin @ 10 ± 1 ppb.
(3) For test kits validated for one (1) drug residue only, the positive (+) control is ± 10%
of the safe level/tolerance of the drug residue detected.
2. Work Area:
a. Temperature within specifications of the test kit manufacturer's labeling.
b. Adequate lighting for test kit procedure.
3. Test Kit Thermometers:
a. Thermometer traceable to a NIST Certified Thermometer.
b. Graduation interval not greater than 1°C.
c. Dial thermometers are not used to determine temperatures of samples, reagents,
refrigerators, or incubators in milk laboratories.
a. Test kit reagent storage temperature specified by manufacturer.
5. Balance (Electronic):
a. 0.01 g for preparation of positive (+) controls.
b. Balance with appropriate sensitivity for calibration of pipetting devices within a tolerance
of ± 5%. These devices may be calibrated at another location acceptable to the State LEO.
6. Screening Test Sampling Requirements:
a. Temperature of milk in the bulk milk pickup tanker determined and recorded.
b. Representative bulk milk pickup tanker sample for drug residue testing collected.
c. Samples tested within seventy-two (72) hours of collection.
7. Screening Test Volumetric Measuring Devices:
a. Single use devices provided by kit manufacturers are acceptable for Appendix N.
b. NCIMS Certified Laboratories require calibrated pipetting/dispensing devices. These
devices may be calibrated at another location acceptable to the State LEO.
c. Measuring devices with tips bearing calibration lines provided by test kit manufacturers
are acceptable for Appendix N. screening.
IV. ESTABLISHED TOLERANCES AND/OR SAFE LEVELS OF DRUG RESIDUES
"Safe levels" are used by FDA as guides for prosecutorial discretion. They do not legalize
residues found in milk that are below the safe level. In short, FDA uses the "safe levels" as
prosecutional guidelines and in full consistency with CNI v. Young stating, in direct and
unequivocal language, that the "safe levels" are not binding. They do not dictate any result; they
do not limit the Agency's discretion in any way; and they do not protect milk producers, or milk
from court enforcement action.
"Safe levels" are not and cannot be transformed into tolerances that are established for animal
drugs under Section 512 (b) of the FFD&CA as amended . "Safe levels" do not:
1. Bind the courts, the public, including milk producers, or the Agency, including individual
FDA employees; and
2. Do not have the "force of law" of tolerances, or of binding rules.
Notification, changes or additions of "safe levels" will be transmitted via Memoranda of
Originally posted by Aquarius1
.. I know why, they don't want the competition and obviously don't want us healthy.
Originally posted by Golf66
I personally have consumed raw milk and raw milk products my whole life - I have never gotten sick from drinking raw unpasteurized milk from either a goat or a cow.
Originally posted by Aquarius1
I have also drank raw milk from time to time but no longer live near a place where it's sold.. Sadly I have read that in some states the sale of raw milk is banned.
I have a question, why is that Organic Milk has a much longer shelf life then the other stuff?
Originally posted by another_lurker
OMG, this thread is so informative. I am deathly allergic to penicillin and have avoided milk in large quantities for years due to it giving me "hives" same as the penicillin did when I was young.
You seriously hit the nail on the head with this thread. I'm not allergic to milk as I thought, it's the crap in it causing the reactions.