Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vl3gso$2ps9n$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: FDA wants to test cheese made from raw milk
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2025 07:44:56 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vl3gso$2ps9n$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: rokimoto557@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="23552"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KQbCPFh+w8HYNYEWmdsmIM4LEjQ=
Return-Path: <news@eternal-september.org>
X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
	id 153D2229782; Wed, 01 Jan 2025 08:45:09 -0500 (EST)
	by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B5E3229765
	for <talk-origins@ediacara.org>; Wed, 01 Jan 2025 08:45:06 -0500 (EST)
	by pi-dach.dorfdsl.de (8.18.1/8.18.1/Debian-6~bpo12+1) with ESMTPS id 501Diwj2850852
	(version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 2025 14:44:59 +0100
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.eternal-september.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B7005FD69
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Wed,  1 Jan 2025 13:44:57 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: name/5B7005FD69; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
	id D500BDC01A9; Wed,  1 Jan 2025 14:44:56 +0100 (CET)
X-Injection-Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2025 14:44:56 +0100 (CET)
X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX1+ofksP6NXZfj2PVpmCwY9CE62srnsMBDY=
Content-Language: en-US
	FREEMAIL_FORGED_REPLYTO,FREEMAIL_REPLYTO_END_DIGIT,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED,
	RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,
	USER_IN_WELCOMELIST,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.6
	smtp.eternal-september.org
Bytes: 4394

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/fda-testing-aged-raw-cows-milk-cheese-bird-flu/story?id=117222065

The FDA announced that they were going to test cheese made from raw milk 
for the dairy virus.  I do not think that any one thinks that the virus 
could survive the 60 day aging process required to sell cheese made from 
raw cows milk, but the FDA is going to test the cheese anyway.

What should be noted is that the FDA still has not acted on their claims 
that they would verify the safety of pasteurization 2 months ago, 
actually 3 months ago because they first claimed that they were going to 
do it Oct 3rd the same day that the CDC published their article 
indicating that the dairy virus could survive the most common 
pasteurization method and survive in refrigerated milk for 4 days.

The FDA proposed a stupid protocol that was designed to fail to test the 
milk supply accurately.  They claimed to be looking for volunteer 
dairies and milk processing plants, when what they needed to do was go 
to plants in regions that were known to have infected herds and test the 
milk coming into random plants and then test the milk after 
pasteurization.  They needed to review the process and determine if the 
current pasteurization methods were being employed properly, and how the 
process was quality checked and maintained.  That never seems to have 
happened.  The child in California whose only contact with dairy cattle 
was the milk they drank and the same with the Missouri patient indicate 
that the pasteurization process may fail often enough to have infective 
virus in dairy products.  The process might be 100% effective when it is 
implemented properly, but the FDA needed to determine where the failure 
points were like start up, maintenance and shift changes.  The milk may 
be 99.9% safe, but that doesn't help the people that drink that 0.1%.

Ron Okimoto