The London Lancet reported, a few years ago, some experiments by an English physician who fed a number of kittens and puppies on pasteurized milk. They died. Kittens and puppies fed on raw milk thrived well.
The digestibility of the milk is markedly impaired. It produces constipation and if fed exclusively, scurvy, rickets, scrofulosis and kindred diseases. Dogs fed pasteurized milk develop mange and other disorders. The same litter, fed on raw milk thrived. Pasteurized milk is simply not capable of sustaining life, health and growth for very long.
The infant death-rate in Toronto, Canada is 20 per cent higher than that of London, England, and double that of rural Ontario. Toronto uses pasteurized milk while both London and rural Ontario use natural milk. When pasteurized milk was substituted for raw milk in Toronto, the death rate in three of the city's largest homes and hospitals for children increased.
In many instances there is nothing wrong with babies except that they are being starved by being fed pasteurized milk. Babies do not thrive, and cease to thrive on heated milk. These same babies do well when changed to raw milk.
S. L. Harris, bacteriologist, Janesville, Wis., says that "pasteurization destroys some of the very important constituents and makes them indigestible. The albuminoids are coagulated. The sugars.are broken down, and to some extent the colloids are agglutinated."
The standards of sanitation demanded of the producers of Grade A raw milk are much higher than those demanded of the producers of pasteurized milk. Dirty milk is almost assured by pasteurization. The false sense of security created by faith in the protective power of the process discourages rigid cleanliness and promotes carelessness in handling on the part of the producer and all concerned. A high standard of cleanliness is not demanded by friends of pasteurization. Milk produced under all kinds of conditions, even though pasteurized afterward, is not as desirable as raw milk produced under sanitary conditions. Pasteurization does not make unclean milk clean.
"By milk I mean safe milk," says Alfred W. McCann, "and the only scientific way of insuring safety is by the process of pasteurizing."
McCann knows that safe milk depends upon: (1) a healthy cow, (2) proper food, sunshine, fresh air and exercise for the cow, (3) clean handling. He knows that healthy dairy cows are extremely rare; that no dairy cow is properly nourished; that their food is always denatured and unbalanced; and that milk is not always handled in a way to keep it clean. What then does he mean by calling pasteurized milk, "safe?" He means this:
If the cow is sick, pasteurize the milk and use it.
If the milk is deficient, due to a deficient diet or lack of sunshine, pasteurize it and use it.
If the milk is dirty, pasteurize it and use it.
We reject such plans and programs as this. If we are to use milk, let us have clean milk from healthy, well-nourished cows. It is not impossible to get such milk.
McCann says:--"In early infancy, during an exclusive milk diet, a few teaspoonfuls of sweet orange juice strained through a clean linen cloth, will offset any so-called disadvantages that here and there the enemies of pasteurized milk have charged against it."
This is ridiculous, although it is the attitude of Sherman, McCollum, Howe, and most other experimenters who recognize the impairing work of pasteurization--and these "so-called disadvantages" are not merely charged against milk by its enemies; they are admitted by its friends.
A few teaspoonfuls of orange juice, or tomato juice, or lemon juice will not and cannot replace the destroyed and impaired substances in pasteurized milk. Dr. Howe says: "If milk is to come from unknown sources. I prefer to have it pasteurized, because I can compensate for the loss of vitamin C by taking enough orange juice." But there is more loss to milk through pasteurization than the mere loss of vitamin C arid orange juice and tomato juice cannot entirely take the place of the qualities lost. The whole theory of denaturing some of our foods and "offsetting" these with foods that have not been denatured is false and ridiculous, whether we are dealing with milk or with white flour.
Assuming that orange juice, lemon juice, or tomato juice will prevent the development of scurvy in infants fed on pasteurized milk; this is not enough. We don't want our infants merely to escape recognizable scurvy. We want the maximum of health and development. A child may present no recognizable signs of deficiency, may appear normal, and still not have the high standard of vigorous positive health that is always desirable.
The false sense of security that the process of pasteurization gives people who use such milk, is only one of the evils of this process. It puts a premium upon carelessness and uncleanliness in the handling of milk.
In those parts of the country where the big dairy interests, with the aid of the Board of Health, have succeeded in getting raw milk outlawed, so that nothing but pasteurized milk is available, there is nothing left for mothers to do except to supplement the milk. This can only be done by feeding orange juice, grape juice, and other juices in much larger quantities than those commonly prescribed.