Image by peta2flickr
Over the holidays I was warned of the sheer abundance and dire consequences of pus in mass-produced milk. I’ve been well aware of the crusade against milk for some years, but this was a new argument for me. The theory is that cows are given hormones to produce more milk and therefore require more milking. And this increased milking leads to udder injuries which produce pus. This pus finds its way into the milk and eventually down the eager gullets of our children. Thus, with every glass of milk you are undoubtedly consuming a large quantity of oozing, sickly pus.
As an unrepentant fan of milk, I could not allow these claims to go unchecked. It turns out that those advocating against milk are actually conflating pus and somatic cells in general. Somatic cells are simply cells that make up the body. Pus, according to the dictionary, is a liquid plasma in which white blood cells are suspended. So, yes, pus contains somatic cells, but it is dishonest to use statistics for somatic cells and apply them to pus.
Okay, so the oft-cited stastics don’t actually indicate anything about pus levels, but what about somatic cells? Those are actually monitored and regulated, so perhaps that’s of concern. The somatic cell count is primarily of interest to dairy producers because it affects yield. There are, however, implications that could affect the consumer: poor flavor and decreased shelf life. No health risks are noted. If you’d like to read all the gory details, check out the study on this topic from UC Davis (pdf).
The verdict: milk lives another day in my household.
Related TOE posts:
- Melamine in Milk
- The Three Fairies of Good Health
- Answer Your Phone, Already
- Ghirardelli :: Milk Chocolate Peanut Butter
- The Voluntary Eunuch
I grew up drinking a glass of milk with every dinner and plenty in my cereal. I mean good ol’ vitamin D, red-capped, thick, whole milk. None of that watery other stuff.
But now, it just grosses me out.
With a little research of my own, I do agree that the “somatic cells” are probably not the problem that PETA and sites like milksucks make it out to be. However, it just seems unnatural to continue consuming milk that is solely intended for little ones, and of another species! Once we are weaned, we ought to be satisfied.
Lastly, I came across this table showing lactose intolerance according to ethnic groups. I can’t verify the statistical significance, but the idea alone that so many adults are unable to process milk also deters me from drinking it.
Harmful or not, I don’t want to consume cow’s pus. The FDA allows a certain amount of pus as acceptable in milk. In England, there is a public campaign to resist to that mimicks the famous commercial of a pretty lady with a milk mustache saying “got milk?”, only that theirs say “got pus?”
Patricia, did you read the post at all? Wnu clearly stated that there is an incorrect conflation between “pus” and somatic cells in all of this anti-milk campaigning. We’re not drinking “pus” as PETA and other crusaders want us to believe.
However, I agree with Bridget. The idea of consuming milk intended for another baby animal is weird to me. I don’t drink milk anymore, but it’s hard to ween myself off of cheese and ice cream… I’m not afraid of milk, just weirded out by it.