Dr. Francis M. Pottenger, lecturing at the University of California, Los Angeles, has given a most striking example of the deficiencies of pasteurized milk as compared to raw milk. He fed rats over a long period of time, and found that those on pasteurized milk failed to grow, while those on raw milk thrived as healthy rats. Those rate on pasteurized milk suffered malnutrition.
It has been reported by the United States Health Service that 97 percent of the population is using pasteurized milk. Dr. James H. Steele, Chief Veterinarian of the United States Public Health Service, Chief Veterinarian of the United States Public Health Service, has reported that undulant fever has increased sixty- fold in the past two decades. would that indicate that pasteurization has protected out children from the ravages of this disease?.
Vital Nutrients in Milk Destroyed by Pasteurization.
N. Philip Norman, M.D., formerly a lecturer in the Department of Gastroenterology, New York Polyclinic Hospital and Medical School, now Consulting Nutritionist of the Departments of Health and Hospitals of the City of New York, has given the following report:.
A quart of fresh, unpasteurized milk contains a third of the adult requirement of Vitamin C. Pasteurization robs us, every year, of as much ascorbic acid as is contained in the entire citrus crop of the United States; it also robs us of some calcium, which pasteurization of the milk converts into an unassimilable form.
Dr. Harold F. Hawkins, former Associate Professor of Bacteriology, University of Southern California, has stated that raw milk from healthy cows that have been suitably tested is of the highest biological value; pasteurization should not be used to make milk safe, for one-half of the calcium is destroyed by this process.
Dr. Frank W. Stockton, D.D.S., in an article entitled The Practical and Preventive Measure Against Dental Disease, states; “The three mighty enemies to dental health in the childs diet are: refined sugar, white flour, and pasturized milk”.
DIPHTHERIA.
Diphtheria anti-toxin came into existence in 1895 and since that time the death rate from diphtheria has steadily increased, in spite of the attempt of the manufacturer of serum to prove to the contrary.
In Germany 19,000 children die annually in spite of the serum treatment, and only 400 of this number are 15 years and older.
In the diphtheria epidemic in Cologne the mortality rose to 32 percent, in spite of injections of serum up to 15,000 units.
In private practice before anti-toxin, the mortality from diphtheria never exceeded 20 percent.
Let us now consider the REDUCTION of the CASE MORTALITY among those NOT treated with anti-toxin, as compared to those treated WITH anti-toxin.
The Metropolitan Asylums Board of London exercises its function over probably the largest area and population in the world. In order to test the value of anti-toxin in the treatment of diphtheria, as many patients as would consent to treatment without anti-toxin were carefully isolated from all other patients. The treatment given them was fresh air, liquid diet and plenty of fresh drinking water; no medication was used. The authoritative official report of this Board carries great weight and may be regarded as conclusive. Especially is this the case when the evidence afforded is contrary to that which the compiles would have wished to present.
The following figures are copies from the tables contained in the annual reports of the above Board from 1895 to 1907:.
Case treated WITH ANTITOXIN from 1895 to 1907:.
Death Average for the Whole Period………… 14.09 percent.
Case Treated WITHOUT ANTITOXIN form 1895 to 1907:.
Death Average for the Whole Period………… 6.00 percent.
Below we show the Paris statistics over the same period of time:.
Case Treated WITH ANTITOXIN:.
Death Average for the Whole Period………. 14.49 percent Cases Treated WITHOUT ANTITOXIN:.
Death Average for the Whole Period……… 9.42 percent.
In conclusion, I wish to state that the end results of modern methods of living and preventive medicine indicate specifically that a radical change must be made not only in the method of treating the sick, but also in preventive medicine.
There is but one school of medicine that relies upon a definite law of practice: the homoeopathic school. The homoeopathic concept, like by like, has been definitely proven by our present understanding of modern physics. All disease have their own specific frequency which is met by a like frequency of the remedy; thus there is now available proof that the end result of treatment can be vastly improved by carefully following of the concepts of Samuel Hahnemann.
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON.
DISCUSSION.
DR. ARTHUR W. YALE [San Diego, California]: I want to congratulate Dr. Bryant for having enough to get up before this audience and speck on pasteurized milk. Three years ago, before our California State society, a very able paper was read along similar lines, and the Board of Censors got hold of it and would not allow it to be published.
There is only one reason for pasteurizing milk, and that is so that the big dairies can keep their milk for five days. That is the only logical reason. You cannot destroy a virus in milk under 262 degrees. You will increase its growth and multiply it if you heat the milk to 268 degrees.
The idea of bringing up our children on pasteurized milk, and then having to feed them orange juice and additional vitamins because the milk is pasteurized, is certainly ridiculous. I want to congratulate Dr. Bryant and thank him.
DR. W. W. SHERWOOD [Santa Monica, California]: 1,too, want to congratulate Dr. Bryant on this paper. Like every paper he has ever presented, this is well filled with worthwhile remarks. The regrettable part of it is that about the only place it will published is in our own magazine.
This is something that should be spread. While I am not particularly in sympathy and accord with trying to teach lay people too many things, I think this is one thing that should be put into the hands of lay people so that they can read it and study it.
All Dr. Bryant has said about devitalized food is right to the point. My experience in devitalized foods-sending a person to a store to get something-even to a health store-has been very disappointing, because the average health store in business today is in business to get money.
I would like to find one such store that would be glad to sell an individual healthy food instead of a lot of vitamins on the side.
DR. CARL H. ENSTAM [Los Angeles, California]: I would like to commend Dr. Bryant for his choice of subject, because the subject of pasteurization of milk is a very unpopular one, which he loves to tackle. He is my idea of a knight in shining armor. Nothing will make him back up when he has the truth by the tail. There is no doubt but that his idea is sound, and I think all any reasoning person need do is to recall this fact:.
We are not preventing this trouble at its source when we pasteurize a dirty product supposedly to make it right.
I want to say that I grew up in the milk business, and I learned the difference between raw milk and pasteurized milk and the certified brand. To me, certification means that your producer obtains and produces the finest breed of animal that he can obtain, and that he insists on the care of the animal and its yield to meet hygienic and sanitary conditions.
Raw milk, as far as I am concerned, probably should be classified as an unpasteurized and probably rarely fit milk, to be used only if its is cooked. I think Dr. Bryant has done a very fine thing. Too many times we are called upon to endorse a process or a method which does not meet with the approval of well-trained medical minds.
DR. VIOLA M. FRYMANN [La Jolla, California]: I would like to thank Dr. Bryant for a very excellent and stimulating lecture on a very necessary subject at this time. The fist point I should like to emphasize is this insistence that we get back to natural foods.
The structure of the human body is very important to health, but if we feed the human body all natural whole food from the start, beginning with the infant, then we shall find that we have an almost perfect structure.
If we come across a patient who has an abnormal structure it is not enough to normalize the structure-we must provide wholesome food, because the body is built of the food that is put into it, and the body can be no better than the food that is put into it.
The second point to which I would like to refer is that of inoculations-immunization-vaccinations. It is a point which I feel, as homoeopaths, we should take a very definite stand upon. We are all familiar with the cases that have suffered this or that ailment since diphtheria immunization, or vaccination, or whatever it might have been. These ailments become chronic, and they may last from twenty to forty years. Unless we take a stand against the evil which is producing them at the beginning, we are falling down on the principles to which we adhere.
Seattle.
Chairman, Bureau of Surgery