Nuwe resepte

Rou melk kan meer moontlik uitbraak veroorsaak, sê CDC

Rou melk kan meer moontlik uitbraak veroorsaak, sê CDC


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

'N Nuwe studie van die CDC wat die uitbreek van suiwelverwante siektes van 1993 tot 2006 ondersoek het, sê dat rou melk en rou melkprodukte 150 keer meer geneig is tot uitbrake as gepasteuriseerde melk.

Die opname het bevind dat uit die 121 suiwelverwante uitbrake wat verband hou met gepasteuriseerde of rou melk, 60 persent deur rou melk veroorsaak word.

Die CDC het ook bevind dat 200 van 239 hospitalisasies veroorsaak is deur uitbrake van rou melk, en 75 persent van die uitbrake het plaasgevind in die 21 state waar dit wettig was om rou melkprodukte te verkoop.

Natuurlik, rou melk advokate beweer dat die studie gebrekkig is en die werklike omvang van siektes verkeerd vertoon. Die Weston A. Price Foundation beweer dat "die CDC hierdie data gemanipuleer het en kersies gekies het om rou melk gevaarlik te laat lyk," in 'n persverklaring. Hier is die uiteensetting hieronder.

Die studie: "Hierdie studie toon dat rou melk groot risiko's inhou, veral vir kinders wat ernstiger siektes ondervind as hulle siek word," sê mede-outeur Barbara Mahon in 'n persverklaring van die CDC.

Die reaksie van die rou melk voorstaan: Weston A. Price beweer dat die CDC data gemanipuleer het deur slegs 1993 tot 2006 te dek, en noemenswaardige gepasteuriseerde melkverwante uitbrake gedurende vroeër of later jare uitgelaat het.

Die stigting beweer ook dat die CDC die aantal siektes wat deur rou of gepasteuriseerde suiwel veroorsaak word, moet tel eerder as uitbrake. "As u met rou melk te doen het, is u geneig om kleiner uitbrake te hê as gepasteuriseerde melk," het David Gumpert, skrywer van Die rou melk revolusie, het ons vertel.

Voorts beweer advokate vir rou melk dat in die groot orde van die dag, voedselgedraagde siektes van suiwel ongewoon is. "Daar word gemiddeld 112 siektes per jaar toegeskryf aan alle rou suiwelprodukte, en 203 word geassosieer met gepasteuriseerde suiwelprodukte. Ter vergelyking word daar jaarliks ​​gemiddeld ongeveer 24 000 siektes wat deur voedsel veroorsaak word, aangemeld," het Sally Fallon Morell, president van die Weston A gesê. Price Foundation, het gesê.

Die CDC se reaksie: Verteenwoordigers van die CDC het ons meegedeel dat die studie vanaf 1993 begin het omdat die vorige analise in 1992 geëindig het. Navorsers het 2006 as 'n einddatum gekies omdat dit die mees onlangse jaar van staatsregdata was toe hulle begin het.

"Ons bevindinge stem ooreen met die vorige analise (Headrick et al.), Maar ons gee meer inligting in hierdie studie oor die verband tussen uitbrake en staatswette wat die verkoop van rou melkprodukte geld," het hoofskrywer Adam Langer gesê. "Ons het sedert 2006 voortgegaan om rou melkuitbrake aan te meld."

As u verlede week die debat oor roumelk by Harvard misgeloop het, kan u die volledige uitruil van "hy het gesê," gesê hier.


CDC: Rou melk kan baie meer siektes veroorsaak

Rou melk en rou melkprodukte is 150 keer groter as hul gepasteuriseerde eweknieë om diegene wat dit inneem te kry, volgens 'n 13-jarige oorsig wat Dinsdag deur die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gepubliseer is. State wat rou melk verkoop, het ook meer as twee keer soveel uitbrake van siektes as state waar rou melk nie verkoop word nie.

Die CDC-studie, wat aanlyn in Emerging Infectious Diseases gepubliseer is, het melkeryverwante uitbrake tussen 1993 en 2006 in al 50 state hersien, waartydens die outeurs 121 suiwelverwante siekte-uitbrake getel het wat tot 4133 siektes, 239 hospitalisasies en drie sterftes gelei het.

Ondanks die feit dat rou melkprodukte ongeveer een persent van die suiwelproduksie in die VSA uitmaak, was roumelkerye gekoppel aan 60 persent van die suiwelverwante uitbrake. Boonop was 202 van die 239 hospitalisasies (85 persent) die gevolg van uitbrake van rou melk. Dertien persent van die pasiënte met uitbrake van rou melk is in die hospitaal opgeneem, teenoor een persent van die pasiënte met gepasteuriseerde melkuitbrake.

Vyf-en-sewentig persent van die uitbreek van rou melk het plaasgevind in die 21 state waar die verkoop van rou melk wettig was by die aanvang van die studie in 1993. Vandag laat 30 state die verkoop van rou melk toe, terwyl nog sewe die wet op roumelk oorweeg. verander hierdie jaar.

Die studie het bevind dat individue onder die ouderdom van 20 jaar verantwoordelik was vir 60 persent van diegene wat geraak word deur uitbrake van rou melk, vergeleke met 23 persent wat verband hou met gepasteuriseerde produkte. Kinders was ook meer geneig as volwassenes om ernstig siek te word van patogene bakterieë in rou melk.

Die verskille in die erns van die siekte tussen rou en gepasteuriseerde melk is grootliks te wyte aan die patogene wat in elkeen voorkom: Mense wat van rou melk siek word, neem gewoonlik skadelike bakterieë in, meestal Salmonella of Campylobacter, terwyl gepasteuriseerde melk uitbrake meer gereeld as gevolg van 8220 relatief ligte patogene soos norovirus, volgens die CDC.

Dit is die eerste omvattende opdatering op federale vlak van hierdie soort statistieke oor roumelk sedert 1998, toe die Sentrum vir Voedselveiligheid en Toegepaste Voeding 'n soortgelyke oorsig van rou melkuitbrake van 1973 tot 1992 bekend gemaak het. het tydens die beoordelingsvenster plaasgevind, waarvan 40 in state met wettige verkoop van rou melk.

Destyds het die studie uit 1998 tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die verbruik van rou melk steeds 'n voorkombare oorsaak van siektes is wat deur voedsel veroorsaak kan word. Terselfdertyd het CDC -studie van Dinsdag voorgestel dat sterker beperkings en handhawing oorweeg moet word. ”

Dit is baie nuttig om hierdie getalle op te dateer namate die belangstelling in rou melk toeneem deur aktivistiese groepe, 'sê Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., programbestuurder van die Western Center for Food Safety aan die Universiteit van Kalifornië Davis .

Ek sou nie sê dat die statistieke verbasend is nie, maar dit is handig om te weet dat dinge ongelukkig nie regtig verander het sedert die laaste verslag nie, en dat sy bygevoeg het. Ondanks die feit dat dit in die 21ste eeu is, bly roumelk mense steeds siek. ”

Die studie kom op die hakke van een van die grootste uitbrake van rou melk in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis. Vanaf Dinsdag is 77 mense in vier state siek in 'n Campylobacter -uitbraak wat verband hou met rou melk van Your Family Cow -melkery in Pennsylvania wat einde Januarie begin het. Minstens nege van die slagoffers van die uitbraak is in die hospitaal opgeneem.

Baie van diegene wat siek is tydens die uitbraak, is kinders. Ouers wat die ervaring beleef het om te sien hoe hul kind om hul lewe veg nadat hulle rou melk gedrink het, sê nou dat dit net nie die risiko werd is nie, sê dr. Barbara Mahon, mede-outeur van die CDC-studie, in 'n nuusverklaring.

Sedert Januarie 2007, aan die einde van die oorsigvenster van die studie, was daar ten minste 56 bykomende uitbrake deur voedsel wat verband hou met rou melk. Tussen 2010 en 2011 is rou suiwelprodukte verbind met 21 uitbrake en 201 siektes, terwyl gepasteuriseerde suiwelprodukte twee uitbrake en 39 siektes veroorsaak het.

Volgens Jay-Russell kom byna alle gevalle van uitbrake uit gepasteuriseerde suiwel voor as gevolg van besmetting na die pasteuriseringsproses.

Hierdie jaar het Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky en Wisconsin almal veranderinge aan hul wette op die verkoop van rou melk oorweeg. Die meerderheid van die wetsontwerpe wat ondersoek word, sal óf die verkoop van rou melk toelaat waar dit tans onwettig is, óf sekere beperkings op die verkoop daarvan verwyder in state waar dit reeds toegelaat is.

Die federale wet beperk die vervoer van rou melk oor staatslyne, alhoewel verbruikers vry is om oor staatslyne te reis om melk te koop en huis toe te neem, en daar is geen wet teen die gebruik van ongepasteuriseerde melk nie.

Die strewe na losgemaakte reëls vir die verkoop van rou melk in baie lande is in stryd met die beste wetenskaplike aanbevelings wat die CDC en die Food and Drug Administration kan maak op grond van die beskikbare data, het Jay-Russell gesê. Baie voorstanders van rou melk beweer dat rou melk voedingstowwe bied en talle gesondheidsvoordele wat deur die pasteuriseringsproses ontken word, terwyl baie voedselwetenskaplikes sê dat daar geen geloofwaardige wetenskaplike bewyse vir enige van die bewerings is nie.

Dit is 'n [die CDC en die FDA ’s] se aanklag om na die gesondheidstatistieke te kyk en die publiek in kennis te stel en beleidmakers te help om beleid te maak wat sinvol is, 'het Jay-Russell gesê. Maar daar is 'n terugstoot. Sommige groepe wil nie die regering se invloed op voedsel hê nie, dus maak dit 'n baie meer politieke debat as 'n wetenskaplike debat. ”


CDC: Rou melk kan baie meer siektes veroorsaak

Rou melk en rou melkprodukte is 150 keer meer geneig as hul gepasteuriseerde eweknieë om diegene wat dit inneem te kry, volgens 'n 13-jarige oorsig wat Dinsdag deur die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gepubliseer is. State wat rou melk verkoop, het ook meer as twee keer soveel uitbrake van siektes as state waar rou melk nie verkoop word nie.

Die CDC-studie, wat aanlyn in Emerging Infectious Diseases gepubliseer is, het melkeryverwante uitbrake tussen 1993 en 2006 in al 50 state hersien, waartydens die outeurs 121 suiwelverwante siekte-uitbrake getel het wat tot 4133 siektes, 239 hospitalisasies en drie sterftes gelei het.

Ondanks die feit dat rou melkprodukte ongeveer een persent van die suiwelproduksie in die VSA uitmaak, was roumelkerye gekoppel aan 60 persent van die suiwelverwante uitbrake. Boonop was 202 van die 239 hospitalisasies (85 persent) die gevolg van uitbrake van rou melk. Dertien persent van die pasiënte met uitbrake van rou melk is in die hospitaal opgeneem, teenoor een persent van die pasiënte met gepasteuriseerde melkuitbrake.

Vyf-en-sewentig persent van die uitbreek van rou melk het plaasgevind in die 21 state waar die verkoop van rou melk wettig was by die aanvang van die studie in 1993. Vandag laat 30 state die verkoop van rou melk toe, terwyl nog sewe die wet op roumelk oorweeg. verander hierdie jaar.

Die studie het bevind dat individue onder die ouderdom van 20 jaar verantwoordelik was vir 60 persent van diegene wat geraak word deur uitbrake van rou melk, vergeleke met 23 persent wat verband hou met gepasteuriseerde produkte. Kinders was ook meer geneig as volwassenes om ernstig siek te word van patogene bakterieë in rou melk.

Die verskille in die erns van die siekte tussen rou en gepasteuriseerde melk is grootliks te wyte aan die patogene wat in elkeen voorkom: Mense wat van rou melk siek word, neem gewoonlik skadelike bakterieë in, meestal Salmonella of Campylobacter en 8212, terwyl uitbrake van gepasteuriseerde melk meer gereeld die gevolg is van &# 8220 relatief ligte patogene soos norovirus, volgens die CDC.

Dit is die eerste uitgebreide federale opdatering van hierdie soort statistieke oor roumelk sedert 1998, toe die Sentrum vir Voedselveiligheid en Toegepaste Voeding 'n soortgelyke oorsig van rou melkuitbrake van 1973 tot 1992 bekend gemaak het. het tydens die beoordelingsvenster plaasgevind, waarvan 40 in state met wettige verkoop van rou melk.

Destyds het die 1998 -studie tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die verbruik van rou melk steeds 'n voorkombare oorsaak van siektes is wat deur voedsel veroorsaak kan word. Terselfdertyd het CDC -studie van Dinsdag voorgestel dat sterker beperkings en handhawing oorweeg moet word. ”

Dit is baie nuttig om hierdie getalle by te werk namate die belangstelling in rou melk toeneem deur aktivistiese groepe, het Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., programbestuurder van die Western Center for Food Safety aan die University of California Davis, gesê .

Ek sou nie sê dat die statistieke verbasend is nie, maar dit is handig om te weet dat dinge ongelukkig nie regtig verander het sedert die laaste verslag nie, en sy het bygevoeg. Ondanks die feit dat dit in die 21ste eeu is, bly roumelk mense steeds siek. ”

Die studie kom op die hakke van een van die grootste uitbrake van rou melk in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis. Vanaf Dinsdag is 77 mense in vier state siek in 'n Campylobacter -uitbraak wat verband hou met rou melk van Your Family Cow -melkery in Pennsylvania wat einde Januarie begin het. Minstens nege van die slagoffers van die uitbraak is in die hospitaal opgeneem.

Baie van diegene wat siek is tydens die uitbraak, is kinders. Ouers wat die ervaring beleef het om te sien hoe hul kind om hul lewe veg nadat hulle rou melk gedrink het, sê nou dat dit net nie die risiko werd is nie, sê dr. Barbara Mahon, mede-outeur van die CDC-studie, in 'n nuusverklaring.

Sedert Januarie 2007, aan die einde van die oorsigvenster van die studie, was daar ten minste 56 bykomende uitbrake deur voedsel wat verband hou met rou melk. Tussen 2010 en 2011 is rou suiwelprodukte verbind met 21 uitbrake en 201 siektes, terwyl gepasteuriseerde suiwelprodukte twee uitbrake en 39 siektes veroorsaak het.

Volgens Jay-Russell kom byna alle gevalle van uitbrake uit gepasteuriseerde suiwel voor as gevolg van besmetting na die pasteuriseringsproses.

Hierdie jaar het Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky en Wisconsin almal veranderinge aan hul wette op die verkoop van rou melk oorweeg. Die meerderheid van die wetsontwerpe wat hersien word, sal óf die verkoop van rou melk toelaat waar dit tans onwettig is, óf sekere beperkings op die verkoop daarvan verwyder in state waar dit reeds toegelaat is.

Die federale wet beperk die vervoer van rou melk oor staatslyne, alhoewel verbruikers vry is om oor staatslyne te reis om melk te koop en huis toe te neem, en daar is geen wet teen die gebruik van ongepasteuriseerde melk nie.

Die strewe na losgemaakte reëls vir die verkoop van rou melk in baie lande is in stryd met die beste wetenskaplike aanbevelings wat die CDC en die Food and Drug Administration kan maak op grond van die beskikbare data, het Jay-Russell gesê. Baie voorstanders van rou melk beweer dat rou melk voedingstowwe bied en talle gesondheidsvoordele wat deur die pasteuriseringsproses ontken word, terwyl baie voedselwetenskaplikes sê dat daar geen geloofwaardige wetenskaplike bewyse vir enige van die bewerings is nie.

“Dit [die CDC en FDA ’s] vra om na die gesondheidstatistieke te kyk en die publiek in te lig en beleidmakers te help om beleid te maak wat sinvol is, ” Jay-Russell gesê. Maar daar is 'n terugstoot. Sommige groepe wil nie die regering se invloed op voedsel hê nie, so dit maak dit 'n baie meer politieke debat as 'n wetenskaplike debat. ”


CDC: Rou melk kan baie meer siektes veroorsaak

Rou melk en rou melkprodukte is 150 keer groter as hul gepasteuriseerde eweknieë om diegene wat dit inneem te kry, volgens 'n 13-jarige oorsig wat Dinsdag deur die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gepubliseer is. State wat rou melk verkoop, het ook meer as twee keer soveel uitbrake van siektes as state waar rou melk nie verkoop word nie.

Die CDC-studie, wat aanlyn in Emerging Infectious Diseases gepubliseer is, het melkeryverwante uitbrake tussen 1993 en 2006 in al 50 state hersien, waartydens die outeurs 121 suiwelverwante siekte-uitbrake getel het wat tot 4133 siektes, 239 hospitalisasies en drie sterftes gelei het.

Ondanks die feit dat rou melkprodukte ongeveer een persent van die suiwelproduksie in die VSA uitmaak, was roumelkerye gekoppel aan 60 persent van die suiwelverwante uitbrake. Boonop was 202 van die 239 hospitalisasies (85 persent) die gevolg van uitbrake van rou melk. Dertien persent van die pasiënte met uitbrake van rou melk is in die hospitaal opgeneem, teenoor een persent van die pasiënte met gepasteuriseerde melkuitbrake.

Vyf en sewentig persent van die uitbreek van rou melk het plaasgevind in die 21 state waar die verkoop van rou melk wettig was by die aanvang van die studie in 1993. Vandag laat 30 state die verkoop van rou melk toe, terwyl nog sewe die wet op roumelk oorweeg. verander hierdie jaar.

Die studie het bevind dat individue onder die ouderdom van 20 jaar verantwoordelik was vir 60 persent van die mense wat geraak word deur uitbrake van rou melk, vergeleke met 23 persent wat verband hou met gepasteuriseerde produkte. Kinders was ook meer geneig as volwassenes om ernstig siek te word van patogene bakterieë in rou melk.

Die verskille in die erns van die siekte tussen rou en gepasteuriseerde melk is grootliks te wyte aan die patogene wat in elkeen voorkom: Mense wat van rou melk siek word, neem gewoonlik skadelike bakterieë in, meestal Salmonella of Campylobacter —, terwyl uitbrake van gepasteuriseerde melk meer gereeld die gevolg is van &# 8220 relatief ligte patogene soos norovirus, volgens die CDC.

Dit is die eerste omvattende opdatering op federale vlak van hierdie soort statistieke oor roumelk sedert 1998, toe die Sentrum vir Voedselveiligheid en Toegepaste Voeding 'n soortgelyke oorsig van rou melkuitbrake van 1973 tot 1992 bekend gemaak het. het tydens die beoordelingsvenster plaasgevind, waarvan 40 in state met wettige verkoop van rou melk.

Destyds het die studie uit 1998 tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die verbruik van rou melk steeds 'n voorkombare oorsaak van siektes is wat deur voedsel veroorsaak kan word. Terselfdertyd het CDC -studie van Dinsdag voorgestel dat sterker beperkings en handhawing oorweeg moet word. ”

Dit is baie nuttig om hierdie getalle op te dateer namate die belangstelling in rou melk toeneem deur aktivistiese groepe, 'sê Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., programbestuurder van die Western Center for Food Safety aan die Universiteit van Kalifornië Davis .

Ek sou nie sê dat die statistieke verbasend is nie, maar dit is handig om te weet dat dinge ongelukkig nie regtig verander het sedert die laaste verslag nie, en dat sy bygevoeg het. Ondanks die feit dat dit in die 21ste eeu is, bly roumelk mense steeds siek. ”

Die studie kom op die hakke van een van die grootste uitbrake van rou melk in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis. Vanaf Dinsdag is 77 mense in vier state siek in 'n Campylobacter -uitbraak wat verband hou met rou melk van Your Family Cow -melkery in Pennsylvania wat einde Januarie begin het. Minstens nege van die slagoffers van die uitbraak is in die hospitaal opgeneem.

Baie van die wat siek is tydens die uitbraak, is kinders. Ouers wat die ervaring beleef het om te sien hoe hul kind om hul lewe veg nadat hulle rou melk gedrink het, sê nou dat dit net nie die risiko werd is nie, sê dr. Barbara Mahon, mede-outeur van die CDC-studie, in 'n nuusverklaring.

Sedert Januarie 2007, aan die einde van die oorsigvenster van die studie, was daar ten minste 56 bykomende uitbrake deur voedsel wat verband hou met rou melk. Tussen 2010 en 2011 is rou suiwelprodukte verbind met 21 uitbrake en 201 siektes, terwyl gepasteuriseerde suiwelprodukte twee uitbrake en 39 siektes veroorsaak het.

Volgens Jay-Russell kom byna alle gevalle van uitbrake uit gepasteuriseerde suiwel voor as gevolg van besmetting na die pasteuriseringsproses.

Hierdie jaar het Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky en Wisconsin almal veranderinge aan hul wette op die verkoop van rou melk oorweeg. Die meerderheid van die wetsontwerpe wat hersien word, sal óf die verkoop van rou melk toelaat waar dit tans onwettig is, óf sekere beperkings op die verkoop daarvan verwyder in state waar dit reeds toegelaat is.

Die federale wet beperk die vervoer van rou melk oor staatslyne, alhoewel verbruikers vry is om oor staatslyne te reis om melk te koop en huis toe te neem, en daar is geen wet teen die gebruik van ongepasteuriseerde melk nie.

Die strewe na losgemaakte reëls vir die verkoop van rou melk in baie lande is in stryd met die beste wetenskaplike aanbevelings wat die CDC en die Food and Drug Administration kan maak op grond van die beskikbare data, het Jay-Russell gesê. Baie voorstanders van rou melk beweer dat rou melk voedingstowwe bied en talle gesondheidsvoordele wat deur die pasteuriseringsproses ontken word, terwyl baie voedselwetenskaplikes sê dat daar geen geloofwaardige wetenskaplike bewyse vir enige van die bewerings is nie.

Dit is 'n [die CDC en die FDA ’s] se aanklag om na die gesondheidstatistieke te kyk en die publiek in kennis te stel en beleidmakers te help om beleid te maak wat sinvol is, 'het Jay-Russell gesê. Maar daar is 'n terugstoot. Sommige groepe wil nie die regering se invloed op voedsel hê nie, dus maak dit 'n baie meer politieke debat as 'n wetenskaplike debat. ”


CDC: Rou melk kan baie meer siektes veroorsaak

Rou melk en rou melkprodukte is 150 keer meer geneig as hul gepasteuriseerde eweknieë om diegene wat dit inneem te kry, volgens 'n 13-jarige oorsig wat Dinsdag deur die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gepubliseer is. State wat rou melk verkoop, het ook meer as twee keer soveel uitbrake van siektes as state waar rou melk nie verkoop word nie.

Die CDC-studie, wat aanlyn in Emerging Infectious Diseases gepubliseer is, het melkeryverwante uitbrake tussen 1993 en 2006 in al 50 state hersien, waartydens die outeurs 121 suiwelverwante siekte-uitbrake getel het wat tot 4133 siektes, 239 hospitalisasies en drie sterftes gelei het.

Ondanks die feit dat rou melkprodukte ongeveer een persent van die suiwelproduksie in die VSA uitmaak, was roumelkerye gekoppel aan 60 persent van die suiwelverwante uitbrake. Boonop was 202 van die 239 hospitalisasies (85 persent) die gevolg van uitbrake van rou melk. Dertien persent van die pasiënte met uitbrake van rou melk is in die hospitaal opgeneem, teenoor een persent van die pasiënte met gepasteuriseerde melkuitbrake.

Vyf-en-sewentig persent van die uitbreek van rou melk het plaasgevind in die 21 state waar die verkoop van rou melk wettig was by die aanvang van die studie in 1993. Vandag laat 30 state die verkoop van rou melk toe, terwyl nog sewe die wet op roumelk oorweeg. verander hierdie jaar.

Die studie het bevind dat individue onder die ouderdom van 20 jaar verantwoordelik was vir 60 persent van diegene wat geraak word deur uitbrake van rou melk, vergeleke met 23 persent wat verband hou met gepasteuriseerde produkte. Kinders was ook meer geneig as volwassenes om ernstig siek te word van patogene bakterieë in rou melk.

Die verskille in die erns van die siekte tussen rou en gepasteuriseerde melk is grootliks te wyte aan die patogene wat in elkeen voorkom: Mense wat van rou melk siek word, neem gewoonlik skadelike bakterieë in, meestal Salmonella of Campylobacter, terwyl gepasteuriseerde melk uitbrake meer gereeld as gevolg van 8220 relatief ligte patogene soos norovirus, volgens die CDC.

Dit is die eerste omvattende opdatering op federale vlak van hierdie soort statistieke oor roumelk sedert 1998, toe die Sentrum vir Voedselveiligheid en Toegepaste Voeding 'n soortgelyke oorsig van rou melkuitbrake van 1973 tot 1992 bekend gemaak het. het tydens die beoordelingsvenster plaasgevind, waarvan 40 in state met wettige verkoop van rou melk.

Destyds het die studie uit 1998 tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die verbruik van rou melk steeds 'n voorkombare oorsaak van siektes is wat deur voedsel veroorsaak kan word. Terselfdertyd het CDC -studie van Dinsdag voorgestel dat sterker beperkings en handhawing oorweeg moet word. ”

Dit is baie nuttig om hierdie getalle op te dateer namate die belangstelling in rou melk toeneem deur aktivistiese groepe, 'sê Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., programbestuurder van die Western Center for Food Safety aan die Universiteit van Kalifornië Davis .

Ek sou nie sê dat die statistieke verbasend is nie, maar dit is handig om te weet dat dinge ongelukkig nie regtig verander het sedert die laaste verslag nie, en dat sy bygevoeg het. Ondanks die feit dat dit in die 21ste eeu is, bly roumelk mense steeds siek. ”

Die studie kom op die hakke van een van die grootste uitbrake van rou melk in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis. Vanaf Dinsdag is 77 mense in vier state siek in 'n Campylobacter -uitbraak wat verband hou met rou melk van Your Family Cow -melkery in Pennsylvania wat einde Januarie begin het. Minstens nege van die slagoffers van die uitbraak is in die hospitaal opgeneem.

Baie van die wat siek is tydens die uitbraak, is kinders. Ouers wat die ervaring beleef het om te sien hoe hul kind om hul lewe veg nadat hulle rou melk gedrink het, sê nou dat dit net nie die risiko werd is nie, sê dr. Barbara Mahon, mede-outeur van die CDC-studie, in 'n nuusverklaring.

Sedert Januarie 2007, aan die einde van die oorsigvenster van die studie, was daar ten minste 56 bykomende uitbrake deur voedsel wat verband hou met rou melk. Tussen 2010 en 2011 is rou suiwelprodukte verbind met 21 uitbrake en 201 siektes, terwyl gepasteuriseerde suiwelprodukte twee uitbrake en 39 siektes veroorsaak het.

Volgens Jay-Russell kom byna alle gevalle van uitbrake uit gepasteuriseerde suiwel voor as gevolg van besmetting na die pasteuriseringsproses.

Hierdie jaar het Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky en Wisconsin almal veranderinge aan hul wette op die verkoop van rou melk oorweeg. Die meerderheid van die wetsontwerpe wat hersien word, sal óf die verkoop van rou melk toelaat waar dit tans onwettig is, óf sekere beperkings op die verkoop daarvan verwyder in state waar dit reeds toegelaat is.

Die federale wet beperk die vervoer van rou melk oor staatslyne om te verkoop, hoewel verbruikers vry is om oor staatslyne te reis om melk te koop en huis toe te neem, en daar is geen wet teen die gebruik van ongepasteuriseerde melk nie.

Die strewe na losgemaakte reëls vir die verkoop van rou melk in baie lande is in stryd met die beste wetenskaplike aanbevelings wat die CDC en die Food and Drug Administration kan maak op grond van die beskikbare data, het Jay-Russell gesê. Baie voorstanders van rou melk beweer dat rou melk voedingstowwe bied en talle gesondheidsvoordele wat deur die pasteuriseringsproses ontken word, terwyl baie voedselwetenskaplikes sê dat daar geen geloofwaardige wetenskaplike bewyse vir enige van die bewerings is nie.

“Dit [die CDC en FDA ’s] vra om na die gesondheidstatistieke te kyk en die publiek in te lig en beleidmakers te help om beleid te maak wat sinvol is, ” het Jay-Russell gesê. Maar daar is 'n terugstoot. Sommige groepe wil nie die regering se invloed op voedsel hê nie, dus maak dit 'n baie meer politieke debat as 'n wetenskaplike debat. ”


CDC: Rou melk kan baie meer siektes veroorsaak

Rou melk en rou melkprodukte is 150 keer meer geneig as hul gepasteuriseerde eweknieë om diegene wat dit inneem te kry, volgens 'n 13-jarige oorsig wat Dinsdag deur die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gepubliseer is. State wat rou melk verkoop, het ook meer as twee keer soveel uitbrake van siektes as state waar rou melk nie verkoop word nie.

Die CDC-studie, wat aanlyn in Emerging Infectious Diseases gepubliseer is, het melkeryverwante uitbrake tussen 1993 en 2006 in al 50 state hersien, waartydens die outeurs 121 suiwelverwante siekte-uitbrake getel het wat tot 4133 siektes, 239 hospitalisasies en drie sterftes gelei het.

Ondanks die feit dat rou melkprodukte ongeveer een persent van die suiwelproduksie in die VSA uitmaak, was roumelkerye gekoppel aan 60 persent van die suiwelverwante uitbrake. Boonop was 202 van die 239 hospitalisasies (85 persent) die gevolg van uitbrake van rou melk. Dertien persent van die pasiënte met uitbrake van rou melk is in die hospitaal opgeneem, teenoor een persent van die pasiënte met gepasteuriseerde melkuitbrake.

Vyf-en-sewentig persent van die uitbreek van rou melk het plaasgevind in die 21 state waar die verkoop van rou melk wettig was by die aanvang van die studie in 1993. Vandag laat 30 state die verkoop van rou melk toe, terwyl nog sewe die wet op roumelk oorweeg. verander hierdie jaar.

Die studie het bevind dat individue onder die ouderdom van 20 jaar verantwoordelik was vir 60 persent van diegene wat geraak word deur uitbrake van rou melk, vergeleke met 23 persent wat verband hou met gepasteuriseerde produkte. Kinders was ook meer geneig as volwassenes om ernstig siek te word van patogene bakterieë in rou melk.

Die verskille in die erns van die siekte tussen rou en gepasteuriseerde melk is grootliks te wyte aan die patogene wat in elkeen voorkom: Mense wat van rou melk siek word, neem gewoonlik skadelike bakterieë in, meestal Salmonella of Campylobacter —, terwyl uitbrake van gepasteuriseerde melk meer gereeld die gevolg is van &# 8220 relatief ligte patogene soos norovirus, volgens die CDC.

Dit is die eerste uitgebreide federale opdatering van hierdie soort statistieke oor roumelk sedert 1998, toe die Sentrum vir Voedselveiligheid en Toegepaste Voeding 'n soortgelyke oorsig van rou melkuitbrake van 1973 tot 1992 bekend gemaak het. het tydens die beoordelingsvenster plaasgevind, waarvan 40 in state met wettige verkoop van rou melk.

Destyds het die studie uit 1998 tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die verbruik van rou melk steeds 'n voorkombare oorsaak van siektes is wat deur voedsel veroorsaak kan word. Terselfdertyd het CDC -studie van Dinsdag voorgestel dat sterker beperkings en handhawing oorweeg moet word. ”

Dit is baie nuttig om hierdie getalle op te dateer namate die belangstelling in rou melk toeneem deur aktivistiese groepe, 'sê Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., programbestuurder van die Western Center for Food Safety aan die Universiteit van Kalifornië Davis .

Ek sou nie sê dat die statistieke verbasend is nie, maar dit is handig om te weet dat dinge ongelukkig nie regtig verander het sedert die laaste verslag nie, en dat sy bygevoeg het. Ondanks die feit dat dit in die 21ste eeu is, bly roumelk mense steeds siek. ”

Die studie kom op die hakke van een van die grootste uitbrake van rou melk in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis. Vanaf Dinsdag is 77 mense in vier state siek in 'n Campylobacter -uitbraak wat verband hou met rou melk van Your Family Cow -melkery in Pennsylvania wat einde Januarie begin het. Minstens nege van die slagoffers van die uitbraak is in die hospitaal opgeneem.

Baie van diegene wat siek is tydens die uitbraak, is kinders. Ouers wat die ervaring beleef het om te sien hoe hul kind om hul lewe veg nadat hulle rou melk gedrink het, sê nou dat dit net nie die risiko werd is nie, sê dr. Barbara Mahon, mede-outeur van die CDC-studie, in 'n nuusverklaring.

Sedert Januarie 2007, aan die einde van die oorsigvenster van die studie, was daar ten minste 56 bykomende uitbrake deur voedsel wat verband hou met rou melk. Tussen 2010 en 2011 is rou suiwelprodukte verbind met 21 uitbrake en 201 siektes, terwyl gepasteuriseerde suiwelprodukte twee uitbrake en 39 siektes veroorsaak het.

Volgens Jay-Russell kom byna alle gevalle van uitbrake uit gepasteuriseerde suiwel voor as gevolg van besmetting na die pasteuriseringsproses.

Hierdie jaar het Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky en Wisconsin almal veranderinge aan hul wette op die verkoop van rou melk oorweeg. Die meerderheid van die wetsontwerpe wat ondersoek word, sal óf die verkoop van rou melk toelaat waar dit tans onwettig is, óf sekere beperkings op die verkoop daarvan verwyder in state waar dit reeds toegelaat is.

Die federale wet beperk die vervoer van rou melk oor staatslyne om te verkoop, hoewel verbruikers vry is om oor staatslyne te reis om melk te koop en huis toe te neem, en daar is geen wet teen die gebruik van ongepasteuriseerde melk nie.

Die strewe na losgemaakte reëls vir die verkoop van rou melk in baie lande is in stryd met die beste wetenskaplike aanbevelings wat die CDC en die Food and Drug Administration kan maak op grond van die beskikbare data, het Jay-Russell gesê. Baie voorstanders van rou melk beweer dat rou melk voedingstowwe bied en talle gesondheidsvoordele wat deur die pasteuriseringsproses ontken word, terwyl baie voedselwetenskaplikes sê dat daar geen geloofwaardige wetenskaplike bewyse vir enige van die bewerings is nie.

“Dit [die CDC en FDA ’s] vra om na die gesondheidstatistieke te kyk en die publiek in te lig en beleidmakers te help om beleid te maak wat sinvol is, ” Jay-Russell gesê. Maar daar is 'n terugstoot. Sommige groepe wil nie die regering se invloed op voedsel hê nie, dus maak dit 'n baie meer politieke debat as 'n wetenskaplike debat. ”


CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

Raw milk and raw milk products are 150 times more likely than their pasteurized counterparts to sicken those who consume them, according to a 13-year review published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday. States that permit raw milk sales also have more than twice as many illness outbreaks as states where raw milk is not sold.

The CDC study, published online in Emerging Infectious Diseases, reviewed dairy-related outbreaks between 1993 and 2006 in all 50 states, during which time the authors counted 121 dairy-related illness outbreaks resulting in 4,413 illnesses, 239 hospitalizations and three deaths.

Despite raw milk products accounting for approximately one percent of dairy production in the U.S., raw milk dairies were linked to 60 percent of those dairy-related outbreaks. In addition, 202 of the 239 hospitalizations (85 percent) resulted from raw milk outbreaks. Thirteen percent of patients from raw milk outbreaks were hospitalized, versus one percent of patients from pasteurized milk outbreaks.

Seventy-five percent of the raw milk outbreaks occurred in the 21 states where the sale of raw milk was legal at the study’s onset in 1993. Today, 30 states permit the sale of raw milk, while another seven are considering raw milk legislation changes this year.

The study found that individuals under the age of 20 accounted for 60 percent of those affected by raw milk outbreaks, compared with 23 percent associated with pasteurized products. Children were also more likely than adults to become seriously ill from pathogenic bacteria in raw milk.

The differences in illness severity between raw and pasteurized milk are largely due to the pathogens present in each: People sickened from raw milk typically ingest injurious bacteria — most commonly Salmonella or Campylobacter — whereas pasteurized milk outbreaks more often result from “relatively mild” pathogens such as norovirus, according to the CDC.

This is the first comprehensive federal-level update to raw milk statistics of this kind since 1998, when the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition released a similar review of raw milk outbreaks spanning from 1973 to 1992. That study found that 46 raw milk outbreaks occurred during the review window, with 40 of them in states with legal raw milk sales.

At the time, the 1998 study concluded that “consumption of raw milk remains a preventable cause of foodborne illness.” Similarly, Tuesday’s CDC study suggested that “stronger restrictions and enforcement should be considered.”

“It’s really helpful to have these numbers updated as interest in raw milk increases through activist groups,” said Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., program manager of the Western Center for Food Safety at University of California Davis.

“I wouldn’t say the statistics are surprising, but it’s helpful to know that, unfortunately, things have not really changed since the last report,” she added. “Despite being in the 21st century, raw milk continues to make people sick.”

The study comes on the heels of one of the largest raw milk outbreaks in U.S. history. As of Tuesday, 77 people in four states have been sickened in a Campylobacter outbreak linked to raw milk from Your Family Cow dairy in Pennsylvania that began in late January. At least nine of the victims from that outbreak have been hospitalized.

Many of those who are ill in that outbreak are children. “Parents who have lived through the experience of watching their child fight for their life after drinking raw milk now say that it’s just not worth the risk,” said Dr. Barbara Mahon, co-author of the CDC study, in a news release.

Since January 2007, the end of the study’s review window, there have been at least 56 additional foodborne illness outbreaks associated with raw milk. Between 2010 and 2011, raw dairy products were linked to 21 outbreaks and 201 illnesses, while pasteurized dairy products caused two outbreaks and 39 illnesses.

According to Jay-Russell, nearly all instances of outbreaks from pasteurized dairy occur because of contamination after the pasteurization process.

This year, Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky and Wisconsin have all considered changes to their raw milk sales laws. The majority of the bills under review would either permit the sale of raw milk where currently illegal, or remove certain restrictions on its sale in states where it’s already permitted.

Federal law restricts the transport of raw milk across state lines for sale, though consumers are free to travel across state lines to purchase milk and take it home, and there is no law against consuming unpasteurized milk.

The push for loosened raw milk sales rules across many states runs counter to the best scientific recommendations the CDC and Food and Drug Administration can make based on the available data, Jay-Russell said. Many raw milk proponents argue that raw milk provides nutrients and numerous health benefits negated by the pasteurization process, while many food scientists say there’s no credible scientific evidence for any of those claims.

“It’s [the CDC and FDA’s] charge to look at the health statistics and inform the public and help policy makers create policy that makes sense,” Jay-Russell said. “But there’s a push-back. Some groups don’t want government influence over food, so it makes it a much more political debate than a scientific one.”


CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

Raw milk and raw milk products are 150 times more likely than their pasteurized counterparts to sicken those who consume them, according to a 13-year review published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday. States that permit raw milk sales also have more than twice as many illness outbreaks as states where raw milk is not sold.

The CDC study, published online in Emerging Infectious Diseases, reviewed dairy-related outbreaks between 1993 and 2006 in all 50 states, during which time the authors counted 121 dairy-related illness outbreaks resulting in 4,413 illnesses, 239 hospitalizations and three deaths.

Despite raw milk products accounting for approximately one percent of dairy production in the U.S., raw milk dairies were linked to 60 percent of those dairy-related outbreaks. In addition, 202 of the 239 hospitalizations (85 percent) resulted from raw milk outbreaks. Thirteen percent of patients from raw milk outbreaks were hospitalized, versus one percent of patients from pasteurized milk outbreaks.

Seventy-five percent of the raw milk outbreaks occurred in the 21 states where the sale of raw milk was legal at the study’s onset in 1993. Today, 30 states permit the sale of raw milk, while another seven are considering raw milk legislation changes this year.

The study found that individuals under the age of 20 accounted for 60 percent of those affected by raw milk outbreaks, compared with 23 percent associated with pasteurized products. Children were also more likely than adults to become seriously ill from pathogenic bacteria in raw milk.

The differences in illness severity between raw and pasteurized milk are largely due to the pathogens present in each: People sickened from raw milk typically ingest injurious bacteria — most commonly Salmonella or Campylobacter — whereas pasteurized milk outbreaks more often result from “relatively mild” pathogens such as norovirus, according to the CDC.

This is the first comprehensive federal-level update to raw milk statistics of this kind since 1998, when the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition released a similar review of raw milk outbreaks spanning from 1973 to 1992. That study found that 46 raw milk outbreaks occurred during the review window, with 40 of them in states with legal raw milk sales.

At the time, the 1998 study concluded that “consumption of raw milk remains a preventable cause of foodborne illness.” Similarly, Tuesday’s CDC study suggested that “stronger restrictions and enforcement should be considered.”

“It’s really helpful to have these numbers updated as interest in raw milk increases through activist groups,” said Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., program manager of the Western Center for Food Safety at University of California Davis.

“I wouldn’t say the statistics are surprising, but it’s helpful to know that, unfortunately, things have not really changed since the last report,” she added. “Despite being in the 21st century, raw milk continues to make people sick.”

The study comes on the heels of one of the largest raw milk outbreaks in U.S. history. As of Tuesday, 77 people in four states have been sickened in a Campylobacter outbreak linked to raw milk from Your Family Cow dairy in Pennsylvania that began in late January. At least nine of the victims from that outbreak have been hospitalized.

Many of those who are ill in that outbreak are children. “Parents who have lived through the experience of watching their child fight for their life after drinking raw milk now say that it’s just not worth the risk,” said Dr. Barbara Mahon, co-author of the CDC study, in a news release.

Since January 2007, the end of the study’s review window, there have been at least 56 additional foodborne illness outbreaks associated with raw milk. Between 2010 and 2011, raw dairy products were linked to 21 outbreaks and 201 illnesses, while pasteurized dairy products caused two outbreaks and 39 illnesses.

According to Jay-Russell, nearly all instances of outbreaks from pasteurized dairy occur because of contamination after the pasteurization process.

This year, Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky and Wisconsin have all considered changes to their raw milk sales laws. The majority of the bills under review would either permit the sale of raw milk where currently illegal, or remove certain restrictions on its sale in states where it’s already permitted.

Federal law restricts the transport of raw milk across state lines for sale, though consumers are free to travel across state lines to purchase milk and take it home, and there is no law against consuming unpasteurized milk.

The push for loosened raw milk sales rules across many states runs counter to the best scientific recommendations the CDC and Food and Drug Administration can make based on the available data, Jay-Russell said. Many raw milk proponents argue that raw milk provides nutrients and numerous health benefits negated by the pasteurization process, while many food scientists say there’s no credible scientific evidence for any of those claims.

“It’s [the CDC and FDA’s] charge to look at the health statistics and inform the public and help policy makers create policy that makes sense,” Jay-Russell said. “But there’s a push-back. Some groups don’t want government influence over food, so it makes it a much more political debate than a scientific one.”


CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

Raw milk and raw milk products are 150 times more likely than their pasteurized counterparts to sicken those who consume them, according to a 13-year review published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday. States that permit raw milk sales also have more than twice as many illness outbreaks as states where raw milk is not sold.

The CDC study, published online in Emerging Infectious Diseases, reviewed dairy-related outbreaks between 1993 and 2006 in all 50 states, during which time the authors counted 121 dairy-related illness outbreaks resulting in 4,413 illnesses, 239 hospitalizations and three deaths.

Despite raw milk products accounting for approximately one percent of dairy production in the U.S., raw milk dairies were linked to 60 percent of those dairy-related outbreaks. In addition, 202 of the 239 hospitalizations (85 percent) resulted from raw milk outbreaks. Thirteen percent of patients from raw milk outbreaks were hospitalized, versus one percent of patients from pasteurized milk outbreaks.

Seventy-five percent of the raw milk outbreaks occurred in the 21 states where the sale of raw milk was legal at the study’s onset in 1993. Today, 30 states permit the sale of raw milk, while another seven are considering raw milk legislation changes this year.

The study found that individuals under the age of 20 accounted for 60 percent of those affected by raw milk outbreaks, compared with 23 percent associated with pasteurized products. Children were also more likely than adults to become seriously ill from pathogenic bacteria in raw milk.

The differences in illness severity between raw and pasteurized milk are largely due to the pathogens present in each: People sickened from raw milk typically ingest injurious bacteria — most commonly Salmonella or Campylobacter — whereas pasteurized milk outbreaks more often result from “relatively mild” pathogens such as norovirus, according to the CDC.

This is the first comprehensive federal-level update to raw milk statistics of this kind since 1998, when the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition released a similar review of raw milk outbreaks spanning from 1973 to 1992. That study found that 46 raw milk outbreaks occurred during the review window, with 40 of them in states with legal raw milk sales.

At the time, the 1998 study concluded that “consumption of raw milk remains a preventable cause of foodborne illness.” Similarly, Tuesday’s CDC study suggested that “stronger restrictions and enforcement should be considered.”

“It’s really helpful to have these numbers updated as interest in raw milk increases through activist groups,” said Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., program manager of the Western Center for Food Safety at University of California Davis.

“I wouldn’t say the statistics are surprising, but it’s helpful to know that, unfortunately, things have not really changed since the last report,” she added. “Despite being in the 21st century, raw milk continues to make people sick.”

The study comes on the heels of one of the largest raw milk outbreaks in U.S. history. As of Tuesday, 77 people in four states have been sickened in a Campylobacter outbreak linked to raw milk from Your Family Cow dairy in Pennsylvania that began in late January. At least nine of the victims from that outbreak have been hospitalized.

Many of those who are ill in that outbreak are children. “Parents who have lived through the experience of watching their child fight for their life after drinking raw milk now say that it’s just not worth the risk,” said Dr. Barbara Mahon, co-author of the CDC study, in a news release.

Since January 2007, the end of the study’s review window, there have been at least 56 additional foodborne illness outbreaks associated with raw milk. Between 2010 and 2011, raw dairy products were linked to 21 outbreaks and 201 illnesses, while pasteurized dairy products caused two outbreaks and 39 illnesses.

According to Jay-Russell, nearly all instances of outbreaks from pasteurized dairy occur because of contamination after the pasteurization process.

This year, Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky and Wisconsin have all considered changes to their raw milk sales laws. The majority of the bills under review would either permit the sale of raw milk where currently illegal, or remove certain restrictions on its sale in states where it’s already permitted.

Federal law restricts the transport of raw milk across state lines for sale, though consumers are free to travel across state lines to purchase milk and take it home, and there is no law against consuming unpasteurized milk.

The push for loosened raw milk sales rules across many states runs counter to the best scientific recommendations the CDC and Food and Drug Administration can make based on the available data, Jay-Russell said. Many raw milk proponents argue that raw milk provides nutrients and numerous health benefits negated by the pasteurization process, while many food scientists say there’s no credible scientific evidence for any of those claims.

“It’s [the CDC and FDA’s] charge to look at the health statistics and inform the public and help policy makers create policy that makes sense,” Jay-Russell said. “But there’s a push-back. Some groups don’t want government influence over food, so it makes it a much more political debate than a scientific one.”


CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

Raw milk and raw milk products are 150 times more likely than their pasteurized counterparts to sicken those who consume them, according to a 13-year review published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday. States that permit raw milk sales also have more than twice as many illness outbreaks as states where raw milk is not sold.

The CDC study, published online in Emerging Infectious Diseases, reviewed dairy-related outbreaks between 1993 and 2006 in all 50 states, during which time the authors counted 121 dairy-related illness outbreaks resulting in 4,413 illnesses, 239 hospitalizations and three deaths.

Despite raw milk products accounting for approximately one percent of dairy production in the U.S., raw milk dairies were linked to 60 percent of those dairy-related outbreaks. In addition, 202 of the 239 hospitalizations (85 percent) resulted from raw milk outbreaks. Thirteen percent of patients from raw milk outbreaks were hospitalized, versus one percent of patients from pasteurized milk outbreaks.

Seventy-five percent of the raw milk outbreaks occurred in the 21 states where the sale of raw milk was legal at the study’s onset in 1993. Today, 30 states permit the sale of raw milk, while another seven are considering raw milk legislation changes this year.

The study found that individuals under the age of 20 accounted for 60 percent of those affected by raw milk outbreaks, compared with 23 percent associated with pasteurized products. Children were also more likely than adults to become seriously ill from pathogenic bacteria in raw milk.

The differences in illness severity between raw and pasteurized milk are largely due to the pathogens present in each: People sickened from raw milk typically ingest injurious bacteria — most commonly Salmonella or Campylobacter — whereas pasteurized milk outbreaks more often result from “relatively mild” pathogens such as norovirus, according to the CDC.

This is the first comprehensive federal-level update to raw milk statistics of this kind since 1998, when the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition released a similar review of raw milk outbreaks spanning from 1973 to 1992. That study found that 46 raw milk outbreaks occurred during the review window, with 40 of them in states with legal raw milk sales.

At the time, the 1998 study concluded that “consumption of raw milk remains a preventable cause of foodborne illness.” Similarly, Tuesday’s CDC study suggested that “stronger restrictions and enforcement should be considered.”

“It’s really helpful to have these numbers updated as interest in raw milk increases through activist groups,” said Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., program manager of the Western Center for Food Safety at University of California Davis.

“I wouldn’t say the statistics are surprising, but it’s helpful to know that, unfortunately, things have not really changed since the last report,” she added. “Despite being in the 21st century, raw milk continues to make people sick.”

The study comes on the heels of one of the largest raw milk outbreaks in U.S. history. As of Tuesday, 77 people in four states have been sickened in a Campylobacter outbreak linked to raw milk from Your Family Cow dairy in Pennsylvania that began in late January. At least nine of the victims from that outbreak have been hospitalized.

Many of those who are ill in that outbreak are children. “Parents who have lived through the experience of watching their child fight for their life after drinking raw milk now say that it’s just not worth the risk,” said Dr. Barbara Mahon, co-author of the CDC study, in a news release.

Since January 2007, the end of the study’s review window, there have been at least 56 additional foodborne illness outbreaks associated with raw milk. Between 2010 and 2011, raw dairy products were linked to 21 outbreaks and 201 illnesses, while pasteurized dairy products caused two outbreaks and 39 illnesses.

According to Jay-Russell, nearly all instances of outbreaks from pasteurized dairy occur because of contamination after the pasteurization process.

This year, Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky and Wisconsin have all considered changes to their raw milk sales laws. The majority of the bills under review would either permit the sale of raw milk where currently illegal, or remove certain restrictions on its sale in states where it’s already permitted.

Federal law restricts the transport of raw milk across state lines for sale, though consumers are free to travel across state lines to purchase milk and take it home, and there is no law against consuming unpasteurized milk.

The push for loosened raw milk sales rules across many states runs counter to the best scientific recommendations the CDC and Food and Drug Administration can make based on the available data, Jay-Russell said. Many raw milk proponents argue that raw milk provides nutrients and numerous health benefits negated by the pasteurization process, while many food scientists say there’s no credible scientific evidence for any of those claims.

“It’s [the CDC and FDA’s] charge to look at the health statistics and inform the public and help policy makers create policy that makes sense,” Jay-Russell said. “But there’s a push-back. Some groups don’t want government influence over food, so it makes it a much more political debate than a scientific one.”


CDC: Raw Milk Much More Likely to Cause Illness

Raw milk and raw milk products are 150 times more likely than their pasteurized counterparts to sicken those who consume them, according to a 13-year review published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday. States that permit raw milk sales also have more than twice as many illness outbreaks as states where raw milk is not sold.

The CDC study, published online in Emerging Infectious Diseases, reviewed dairy-related outbreaks between 1993 and 2006 in all 50 states, during which time the authors counted 121 dairy-related illness outbreaks resulting in 4,413 illnesses, 239 hospitalizations and three deaths.

Despite raw milk products accounting for approximately one percent of dairy production in the U.S., raw milk dairies were linked to 60 percent of those dairy-related outbreaks. In addition, 202 of the 239 hospitalizations (85 percent) resulted from raw milk outbreaks. Thirteen percent of patients from raw milk outbreaks were hospitalized, versus one percent of patients from pasteurized milk outbreaks.

Seventy-five percent of the raw milk outbreaks occurred in the 21 states where the sale of raw milk was legal at the study’s onset in 1993. Today, 30 states permit the sale of raw milk, while another seven are considering raw milk legislation changes this year.

The study found that individuals under the age of 20 accounted for 60 percent of those affected by raw milk outbreaks, compared with 23 percent associated with pasteurized products. Children were also more likely than adults to become seriously ill from pathogenic bacteria in raw milk.

The differences in illness severity between raw and pasteurized milk are largely due to the pathogens present in each: People sickened from raw milk typically ingest injurious bacteria — most commonly Salmonella or Campylobacter — whereas pasteurized milk outbreaks more often result from “relatively mild” pathogens such as norovirus, according to the CDC.

This is the first comprehensive federal-level update to raw milk statistics of this kind since 1998, when the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition released a similar review of raw milk outbreaks spanning from 1973 to 1992. That study found that 46 raw milk outbreaks occurred during the review window, with 40 of them in states with legal raw milk sales.

At the time, the 1998 study concluded that “consumption of raw milk remains a preventable cause of foodborne illness.” Similarly, Tuesday’s CDC study suggested that “stronger restrictions and enforcement should be considered.”

“It’s really helpful to have these numbers updated as interest in raw milk increases through activist groups,” said Michele Jay-Russell, Ph.D., program manager of the Western Center for Food Safety at University of California Davis.

“I wouldn’t say the statistics are surprising, but it’s helpful to know that, unfortunately, things have not really changed since the last report,” she added. “Despite being in the 21st century, raw milk continues to make people sick.”

The study comes on the heels of one of the largest raw milk outbreaks in U.S. history. As of Tuesday, 77 people in four states have been sickened in a Campylobacter outbreak linked to raw milk from Your Family Cow dairy in Pennsylvania that began in late January. At least nine of the victims from that outbreak have been hospitalized.

Many of those who are ill in that outbreak are children. “Parents who have lived through the experience of watching their child fight for their life after drinking raw milk now say that it’s just not worth the risk,” said Dr. Barbara Mahon, co-author of the CDC study, in a news release.

Since January 2007, the end of the study’s review window, there have been at least 56 additional foodborne illness outbreaks associated with raw milk. Between 2010 and 2011, raw dairy products were linked to 21 outbreaks and 201 illnesses, while pasteurized dairy products caused two outbreaks and 39 illnesses.

According to Jay-Russell, nearly all instances of outbreaks from pasteurized dairy occur because of contamination after the pasteurization process.

This year, Indiana, New Jersey, Iowa, Idaho, New Hampshire, Kentucky and Wisconsin have all considered changes to their raw milk sales laws. The majority of the bills under review would either permit the sale of raw milk where currently illegal, or remove certain restrictions on its sale in states where it’s already permitted.

Federal law restricts the transport of raw milk across state lines for sale, though consumers are free to travel across state lines to purchase milk and take it home, and there is no law against consuming unpasteurized milk.

The push for loosened raw milk sales rules across many states runs counter to the best scientific recommendations the CDC and Food and Drug Administration can make based on the available data, Jay-Russell said. Many raw milk proponents argue that raw milk provides nutrients and numerous health benefits negated by the pasteurization process, while many food scientists say there’s no credible scientific evidence for any of those claims.

“It’s [the CDC and FDA’s] charge to look at the health statistics and inform the public and help policy makers create policy that makes sense,” Jay-Russell said. “But there’s a push-back. Some groups don’t want government influence over food, so it makes it a much more political debate than a scientific one.”


Kyk die video: Reën maak reddingspoging dringend (Mei 2022).


Kommentaar:

  1. Faujinn

    What useful topic

  2. Andres

    Dankie vir 'n heerlike samelewing.

  3. Dontaye

    Hoe interessant klink dit nie

  4. Preruet

    Jy is nie reg nie. Ek kan die posisie verdedig. Skryf vir my in PM.



Skryf 'n boodskap