Organic Vs Non-Organic Milk

[SirPhilip]

I happened upon this strawman of a site: http://www.stoplabelinglies.com, which seems to revolve around calling organic food companies on the carpet for mislabeling their products, and touting them as equal to factory farmed products. While in Horizon's case, this is interesting, the rest is nonsense, as anyone who has drank "regular" milk (MacArthur, Velda Farms, Publix, or other brands) then tried either Horizon's (better), Promised Land (much better), and Organic Valley (best) knows these products have a much fuller, fresher, superior taste.

 

[Sally]

Does organic milk make any health claims?

I would stand behind there mission to make Organic farms abide to the set standard and punish those that did not.

I find Organic milk does taste better. Most likely from the lack of hormones and antibotics in the product. I never thought it was "healthier" than factory farmed milk.

It is strictly a consumers choice option.

 

[Jorghnassen]

Does organic milk make any health claims?

Probably in their sales pitch, just like pretty much all other food producers do (like Weston sliced white bread, which supposedly has all the virtues whole grain bread, though sugar is the second ingredient...). And it's probably riddled with of statements of dubious scientific value, but that's part of any marketting operation. Now if consumers are willing to pay a certain price for food produced in a certain way, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to put that on the label in a concise way.

 

[jon]

The idea that 'milk is milk' is BS - it varies depending on breed of cow, diet etc. In the UK, organic cows tend to eat more forage - so there's evidence that organic milk may contain more omega 3 fats (though opinions on this differ - see http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1611/ and http://www.guardian.co.uk/food/Story/0,,1861619,00.html).

Knowing about how a cow was raised would probably be a better way to know about what its milk, meat etc. were likely to be like; in the absence of this, however, I guess labels like 'organic' (or grassfed, etc...) can be helpful

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I happened upon this strawman of a site: http://www.stoplabelinglies.com, which seems to revolve around calling organic food companies on the carpet for mislabeling their products, and touting them as equal to factory farmed products.

What is their straw man? I'm afraid I don't see it.

While in Horizon's case, this is interesting, the rest is nonsense, as anyone who has drank "regular" milk (MacArthur, Velda Farms, Publix, or other brands) then tried either Horizon's (better), Promised Land (much better), and Organic Valley (best) knows these products have a much fuller, fresher, superior taste.

How do you measure the taste quality?

I think you are the one constructing the straw man - the site seems to be mostly focussed on the nutrition, safety, and honesty involved. The site states, on the front page, "The purpose of this web site is to challenge companies to act responsibly and to help consumers by publicizing examples of false and misleading food and other product labels and their associated marketing campaigns." You are immediately dismissing the site based on your assumption that organic milk tastes better.

If it is true that companies need to label their products with, "No difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-supplemented (or treated) cows and non-supplemented cows" if they say they don't use it, then obviously the site has a valid point - companies are improperly labelling their products.

That being said, I don't like milk. I only use it as an ingredient, I don't know what the regulations are, and I can't differentiate between any brands. In fact, my choice to buy a specific brand was based solely on the fact that the carton had a cap. I can never tear the other kind open properly...
So I'm no expert.

 

[Jorghnassen]

If it is true that companies need to label their products with, "No difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-supplemented (or treated) cows and non-supplemented cows" if they say they don't use it, then obviously the site has a valid point - companies are improperly labelling their products.
.

How is that mislabeling? It's up to the consumers to decide if they want milk from rbST treated cows or not, whether there is an actual difference in the milk or not. Might as well go on a crusade against any health claims on food packaging (but, as that website is probably funded by other milk producers who want to sell their own stuff, it's not going to happen). Tons of foods are labeled "cholesterol free" or "no trans fat" to make them appear healthier than they actually are, it's not like this kind of "mislabeling" tactic is exclusive to organic milk producers...

 

[Bikewer]

A few months ago, NPR ran an amusing segment that's somewhat related. Seems a fellow who had aspirations of becoming a gentleman farmer purchased a farm which included several dairy cows.
Shortly after he made the purchase, he was approached by certain individuals interested in purchasing "whole" (unpasteurized) milk from same.
Seems that the state where this took place, as with many, has made the commercial sale of such unpasteurized milk illegal. However, the owner of the cow (or cows) could use all they liked.
So, it was customary in this particular little enclave to sell "shares" of the dairy cows. The legal "owners" of the cow could therefore use the unpasteurized milk without legal consequence.

Of course, they could experience the joys of salmonella poisoning and other infectious diseases as well, but everyone knows that milk "right out of the cow" is better for you....

 

[The Mad Hatter]

How is that mislabeling? It's up to the consumers to decide if they want milk from rbST treated cows or not, whether there is an actual difference in the milk or not. Might as well go on a crusade against any health claims on food packaging (but, as that website is probably funded by other milk producers who want to sell their own stuff, it's not going to happen). Tons of foods are labeled "cholesterol free" or "no trans fat" to make them appear healthier than they actually are, it's not like this kind of "mislabeling" tactic is exclusive to organic milk producers...

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't trying to argue that the FDA regulation is justified. By "improper labelling," I just meant it didn't follow regulation. I agree with most of what you just said.

I'm reminded of Arrested Development though... "The frozen banana that won't make you sick and die!!"

 

[Gilmar]

I don't eat organic food. My doctor put me on a low-carbon diet.

 

[jon]

A few months ago, NPR ran an amusing segment that's somewhat related. Seems a fellow who had aspirations of becoming a gentleman farmer purchased a farm which included several dairy cows.
Shortly after he made the purchase, he was approached by certain individuals interested in purchasing "whole" (unpasteurized) milk from same.
Seems that the state where this took place, as with many, has made the commercial sale of such unpasteurized milk illegal. However, the owner of the cow (or cows) could use all they liked.
So, it was customary in this particular little enclave to sell "shares" of the dairy cows. The legal "owners" of the cow could therefore use the unpasteurized milk without legal consequence.

Of course, they could experience the joys of salmonella poisoning and other infectious diseases as well, but everyone knows that milk "right out of the cow" is better for you....

Agree that the 'better for you' argument is BS, but unpasteurised milk does have a different taste. If people want to drink the stuff, I'm not convinced that the state should stop them (just put a warning on the packet so they know what they're getting).

 

[Dogdoctor]

Just a little comment about raw milk. Diseases that can be spread by raw milk include bacterial infections from Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, E. Coli, Brucella, Yersinia, Tuberculosis, streptococcus, and staphylococcal food poisoning. Also there have been cases of consumption of raw milk from cows who died of rabies where all the people who drank it were put on rabies post exposure shots.

 

[tube]

If the Horta nursed her young, presumably she would produce inorganic milk...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horta_(Star_Trek)

 

[Jorghnassen]

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't trying to argue that the FDA regulation is justified. By "improper labelling," I just meant it didn't follow regulation. I agree with most of what you just said.

Of course, if it doesn't follow FDA regulations, it is another matter. And I'm all for reasonable legislation when it comes to putting outrageous or dubious claims packaging for food. There are gray areas when it comes to saying what is and isn't in there...

 

[SirPhilip]

What is their straw man? I'm afraid I don't see it.

They misrepresent the claims of organic milk manufacturers, while claiming both types of milk are of the same quality. They aren't.

How do you measure the taste quality?

The same way you measure the the quality of a Godiva chocolate bar to a Hershey. Organic milk has a fuller bodied, creamier, fresher taste. Common store brands taste watery and bland by comparison. It would be childslplay to discern either blindfolded (although arguably, Parmalat still makes the most delicious tasting milk in the world).

I think you are the one constructing the straw man - the site seems to be mostly focussed on the nutrition, safety, and honesty involved.

It is declaring "milk is milk", while misrepresenting how organic milk products are marketed, and why people consume them. Milk is not just milk. Organic milk is superior.

You are immediately dismissing the site based on your assumption that organic milk tastes better.

The site is a strawman for agribusiness, promoting a nonissue as something consumers should be aware of. This is akin to Pontiac making a consumer advocacy site claiming Lexus misleads car buyers because both vehicles are made on an assembly line and run on gasoline. What this site does raise concern about is the dubious nature of agribusiness, which I wasn't even aware funded it (although I had to suspect what the motive was here) until I read this.

If it is true that companies need to label their products with, "No difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-supplemented (or treated) cows and non-supplemented cows" if they say they don't use it, then obviously the site has a valid point - companies are improperly labelling their products.

Promised Land, for one, has this exact statement on the carton.

That being said, I don't like milk.

You are in the wrong thread, then.

 

[exarch]

A few months ago, NPR ran an amusing segment that's somewhat related. Seems a fellow who had aspirations of becoming a gentleman farmer purchased a farm which included several dairy cows.
Shortly after he made the purchase, he was approached by certain individuals interested in purchasing "whole" (unpasteurized) milk from same.
Seems that the state where this took place, as with many, has made the commercial sale of such unpasteurized milk illegal. However, the owner of the cow (or cows) could use all they liked.
So, it was customary in this particular little enclave to sell "shares" of the dairy cows. The legal "owners" of the cow could therefore use the unpasteurized milk without legal consequence.

Of course, they could experience the joys of salmonella poisoning and other infectious diseases as well, but everyone knows that milk "right out of the cow" is better for you....

I know the better types of French Brie or Camembert are apparently made with "lait cru" (i.e. "raw" milk). I'm assuming this means the milk wasn't pasteurized?
Of course, when they turn the milk into cheese, there's other processes taking place that probably kill the bacteria. Like having fungus growing on it.

 

[dogbite666]

The same way you measure the the quality of a Godiva chocolate bar to a Hershey. Organic milk has a fuller bodied, creamier, fresher taste. Common store brands taste watery and bland by comparison. It would be childslplay to discern either blindfolded (although arguably, Parmalat still makes the most delicious tasting milk in the world).

So, because something tastes better to you it must be better for everyone. You make two grave mistakes in your assumption.

1 - Just because it tastes better doesn't mean it is actually doing your body any more or less good than other milk. Skimmed milk is arguably better for you than full fat, although it tastes like dishwater.

2 - Other people might not agree with you that organic milk tastes better. The only way to tell is by doing a taste test over a large randomized group. The fact you say it tastes creamier make me think it has higher fat content, which isn't better for you!

It is declaring "milk is milk", while misrepresenting how organic milk products are marketed, and why people consume them. Milk is not just milk. Organic milk is superior.

According to you it is superior. Superior in which way? taste? Fat content?

The site is a strawman for agribusiness, promoting a nonissue as something consumers should be aware of. This is akin to Pontiac making a consumer advocacy site claiming Lexus misleads car buyers because both vehicles are made on an assembly line and run on gasoline.

No, the claim of organic milk, or organic products in general is that they are better for you because they contain less 'man-made' chemicals, (if there is such a thing!). The reality is that they cannot make this claim without stating which harmful compound is present in non organic milk which isn't in organic milk. I'm yet to meet anyone who can answer that question with regard to organic food in general. If non organic milk contains harmful compounds then it is up to the Food Safety Standards Board to remove them from the milk, organic or non organic.

Organic food is simply a fashion band wagon which the marketing companies have jumped on to make us pay more for less.

 

[exarch]

It seems to me like SirPhilip never claimed organic milk was "better for you" or healthier than plain milk, you did. We call this a straw man argument.
He just said that he personally feels it tastes better (which is obviously true, or he wouldn't have said so).

And there is of course a chance that organic milk does indeed taste better than plain milk, which could be easily established with a simple taste test.

 

[Rara]

milk is a matter of taste...like most things.

our cow is tested regulary for TB etc, we drink the raw milk,but cannot sell it.

Raw milk will taste different according to many things,feed,time of year etc.

shop milk,will be never usually vary,although different dairies taste...well differently.

some people here love the milk produced on the island...others buy milk from britain.

i would hope that organic milk was better from normal,from the point of view of less antibiotics(not zero in an organic system),better feedstuff,less stress, and many other things.

 

[dogbite666]

It seems to me like SirPhilip never claimed organic milk was "better for you" or healthier than plain milk, you did. We call this a straw man argument.
He just said that he personally feels it tastes better (which is obviously true, or he wouldn't have said so).

And there is of course a chance that organic milk does indeed taste better than plain milk, which could be easily established with a simple taste test.

The essence of the site quoted in the first post by sirPhilip is that they are against the organic milk companies claiming that organic milk is healthier than non organic milk. There is no straw man in that argument. In fact the claim of organic food companies in general is that organic food is healthier than non organic.

Whether he prefers organic or not is not a debatable issue.

 

[Sally]

The essence of the site quoted in the first post by sirPhilip is that they are against the organic milk companies claiming that organic milk is healthier than non organic milk. There is no straw man in that argument. In fact the claim of organic food companies in general is that organic food is healthier than non organic.

Whether he prefers organic or not is not a debatable issue.

I am curious about that site.

Where is this claim being made? That organic milk is HEALTHIER that non-organic.

Sure it may say rBGT free or no Antibotics but I never saw a claim of being healthier.

It is peoples impression ..ohhh organic must be healthier the government can not regulate people being misinformed. The organic v. non organic food question really is one of personal preference.

I believe organic milk taste better so I drink it. I believe organic meat to be juicer so I eat it.