Thread: Nanny State Again

Originally Posted by landy

My point is that it is knowingly sold for human consumption.

And used for that purpose.
That is clearly shown in the link I posted earlier in this thread.

some food/drink for thought
Raw Milk Questions and Answers | Raw Milk | Food Safety | CDC

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Ah, yes. All fine suggestions but, getting back to what I think the point of the OP, all knee jerk reactions that fix a problem that doesn't exist. The problem is parents are knowingly feeding this product to their toddlers. You want to solve the problem? Solve that one. Anything else is pointless nanny state compliance.

Thanks Mick, very well said

Originally Posted by d2dave

Thanks Mick, very well said

What part of a child just died is it you don't understand?

I viewed an interview with the lady who was producing the cosmetic grade milk that killed the child and the producer did not really see what the issue was and drank the stuff herself and I formed the opinion that she was selling the "raw" milk as a cosmetic product to get around the food rules.

Yes lots of reasoned arguments on the forum on this issue but I agree with the ban.

I just dont get why it is for sale in the form it is. It should be sold as a poison in a completely different container, with a child proof lid if people that are so vain really need it. You cant just whip down to your local deli and buy Botox and even if you could it is not in an easily child accessible container.
That is point one.
The second point is why the hell would you risk your childs life even having it in the fridge.
Point 3, why would people knowingly give this too their children and it does occur due to beliefs? Surely with the pasteurization process this is reckless endangerment.

No different to your kids walking into the shed and drinking weed killer and why we all keep it in the shed and locked away.
We can all rant about a nanny state and our so called rights, but garbage like that will never bring this child back and all it does is risk others for vanity.

Originally Posted by incisor

which is why i think it should be banned as an off the shelf product.

it has no useful feature that isn't covered by a non dangerous product.

they want to buy that sort of milk they should have to drive out to a dairy and buy it not just be able to pull it off a shelf.

imho

Totally agree.

It should be banned. And stiff fines for those that sell non-pasteurised milk.

I see the whole thing as a way to sell raw milk, legally, because there is a market. Retailers would have to know that it's really for drinking and not beauty purposes.

As for new laws/nanny state mutterings/kids dying. Ideally I'd live it if there were fewer laws and more common sense and more people to take responsibility. Life is a bitch, and the simplest of things can bring people unstuck. People will always die in one way or another. (I'm not saying the death is not a sad event) Making a 'new law' is merely a way people can in the future tut-tut tongues and say "they were breaking the law. Bad parent". With the insinuation that they themselves are a good one of course.

At school I learnt about Louis pasteur and his contributions to pasteurisation. I learnt enough to be happy the milk in the supermarket is pasteurised. (I hope people still learn about people like this. Given the chance, I will however accept the bottle of milk given by friends that milk a cow.

Know the risks, manage them, make informed decisions and own the consequences - good or bad.

Maybe I would like one law - outlawing stupid people.