firsthand exerience in handling milk reveals Authorities' mendacity

[Guest guest]

this is further to the commotion in British Columbia, where Health Authorities have slandered our dairy by mis-informing the public that our milk was "highly contaminated" and unfit to drink.

The first-hand experience related in the message I received from a man who managed one of the local commercial farms, blows the Health Authorities out of the water, >

One wonders if they really are that ignorant of how milk is tested?

my old man used to say "never discount stupidity"

the critical factor in all this, is that the Health Authorities were testing milk which was anywhere from 6 to 13 days old, and was received at their lab at 40 F> ============================> > Hi Gordon> I can tell you what my experience has been with high bacterial count. First of all when I was herdsman for ( name removed /it is in the original ) farms we > were in the top three herds in B.C for low somatic milk count.

> Regarding the testing on milk pick up day ( every two days) the milk truck driver would take a sample and immediately put it in a cooler with ice. The milk truck driver could refuse to pick up milk over 3 degrees centigrade. ***

With individual cow test program (10 times a year) the sample vial has a preservative in it I believe as the samples are not cooled. >

In the last three years there has been instigated a milk safe program in dairy herds. It is now mandatory. Originally there was a grant to install the equipment . That grant has now finished. The equipment is around $2000 . What it does is digitally record the temperatures for start and finish for the wash cycles, of the milking equipment, and the bulk tank. Also it records how quickly the > milk is cooled, and how well the cooler keeps the milk cool. >

There is also an "idiot " switch to prevent anyone starting the wash cycle without removing the pipe from the milk tank. This is all very good, because I can tell you from personal experience > things can go wrong without you knowing ( like a hot water tank failing, or a cooler developing a fault.) >

The B.C. Provincial Milk inspector (an Englishman) is very good at sorting out problems with the milk, he also takes care of the goat milk. There are a lot of things that can go wrong with the equipment, but I can tell you the two biggest things to watch for, are not having hot enough > temperatures for the wash cycle, and not cooling the milk fast enough ( as those bacteria can multiply very fast in warm temperatures.)

> Regarding individual cows, one cow sick and with a high count can put up your bulk count, and sometimes these cows are not showing obvious signs. So I believe individual cow > testing is a good thing ( these tests are done at Pacific labs in Chilliwack.) They can really highlight any cows with a high count, but not showing any obvious signs of mastitis. Usually of course the obvious mastitis prone cows will be your high count > cows. Incidentally a really low count is not always a good thing, it could mean the cows immune system is not working well! > > There are so many factors affecting mastitis and high somatic cell counts. When I was relief milking ( I relief milked on about 20 herds in the Fraser valley) I observed some > interesting things, one of which was that there was not always a correlation between dirty bedding and high cell count. Though obviously clean dry bedding is a good thing.

There are > other factors involved, chief of which I believe is the condition of the teat. If the teat end is damaged so the end cannot close properly those cows are prone to mastitis. Another > big factor is stress of one kind or another. >

It seems we have a double standard going on here, main stream dairy producers do not have their milk tested in the way Home on the Range milk was tested , if it was tested like that , I think there would be some pretty irate producers.> > Dave