Problem fixed and NOBODY got sick!
Web Link

Mr. Big - weblink dates from March 2012. The article above says six people are seriously ill now, in 2015.

Maybe there's a three year incubation period. (Yes, I'm joking, since sarcasm doesn't carry in text)

Raw milk is delicious, but this is the risk that it has. I'm happy that CA allows it. Every other state except CT bans it, and in CT, it's harder to get since grocery stores don't carry it. My family raised cows when I was a child, and if you like milk, raw milk from cows that eat grass is delicious!

So they had gastroenteritis. People get sick from food every day. People get food poisoning from restaurants. Where's the hysterical fact-less reporting when that happens?

As an addendum, if pasteurization is so great, let's all take antibiotics all the time and also pasteurize our entire digestive system. We'd never get as much as the sniffles and be perfectly healthy. Bacteria all gone.

I'm glad too that CA allows Raw Milk. Stories like this unnecessarily frighten people. Our culture is all about being germ-free even though there are 9 times as many bacterial cells in the human body than human cells. There are 2 or 3 lbs of good bacteria in the digestive track that do all kinds of useful things for the body. Don't give up on raw milk because of this news story. It's good for you. Especially if you're lactose intolerant and pasteurized milk doesn't work.

The article makes two statements:
1. At the beginning of the article it says 6 people have campylobacteriosis after consuming raw milk. It does not say that the raw milk was determined to have caused the illness.

2. The end of the article says that no reported illnesses were associated with the products.

In another article I read that the quarantine was lifted because there is no contamination and no illness was proved to be associated with the milk.

Unfortunately the state Dept of Public Health has taken the opportunity to do a little fear mongering to scare the public into believing that raw milk can be deadly. Their agenda (promoted by their buddies in the big dairy lobby) for years has been to shut down the raw milk dairies. The media is being irresponsible in reporting this story, with no facts behind it, along with adept of Public Heakth's "warnings" also with no factual basis.

Johns Hopkins just published a study on raw milk. It shows that you are 100 times more likely to get foodborne illness from raw milk than from pasteurized milk.

Web Link

Johns Hopkins? pshh. What a hack organization. Clearly they are not one of the premier medical facilities in the entire world.
If they disagree with me then they must be wrong because, well because I want to believe I'm right, even when all facts prove I am at a higher risk...10x higher, I'm going to claim everything is totally fine.

Sorry...100X higher...if you believe science. But again, pssh, science isn't science if it doesn't prove me right

Yea I got sick last week so how do I know it was the milk or cheese, spinach, chicken, fish or any other thing I ate or touched? I was on VTA on mon better clean all the buses

They actually have ways of determining the source of contamination, like they do when people get sick from eating tainted hamburger, spinach, cantaloup melons, etc. More science involved in that process as well. It's the same way they determine the source of contaminants in other cases. You'll see, in time they'll be able to drill it down to the particular supplier, just like the listeria cases that came from contaminated melons from the farm in CO.

Web Link

"We're lucky in California because (raw milk) is legal and it's being tested on a regular basis. All raw milk dairies have a clean record. They can't afford not to have clean milk."

So much for the clean record. Oh, wait, it was never clean.

I don't see what the fuss is. Chances of illness are small. Same with vaccines.

"So they had gastroenteritis"

No :

"All six patients were diagnosed with campylobacteriosis,"