eftfnc, I disagree that pasteurization takes out anything healthy out of milk. It removes some natural, but unhealthy, things like the bacterium that causes tuberculosis. Pasteurization does result in small losses (less than 10%) of folate and some other vitamins, but these losses are largely insignificant from a human health perspective. Some bovine enzymes are denatured, but these would be denatured in the human stomach when the milk was drunk anyway.

Pasteurization heats the product below the boiling point with the idea of reducing the numbers of organisms in the product by at least 5 orders of magnitude. This reduces them to such small numbers that they are unlikely to cause a health problem. http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2004/504_milk.html

This is what Weston Price has to show on the subject:
http://www.realmilk.com/ppt/CampaignForRealMilk-13APR2008.PPT
and http://www.realmilk.com/ppt/index.html

This is what Stephen Barrett has to say about Weston A. Price, his ideas and how these ideas are being used http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/holisticdent.html

Excellent Agronomist. Finally, some sense.

I notice there was also some discussion of homeopathy on that QuackWatch site. See here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3798760.ece for a recent win of reason over this fraudulent "therapy".

Oh golly gosh people. Before you mention this person think about how you line yourselves up regarding his non-intelligence.I thought you were smarter then that!
Please do research on Stephen Barrett, M.D.(unlicensed)
http://www.iahf.com/antiquackbusters/20020105a.html
and http://www.stephenbarrettmd.blogspot.com/

eftfnc, I pointed to Stephen Barrett’s comments simply because it saved me repeating the same ad nauseum. It is not actually necessary to practise medicine to talk sense. You just need to be able to read and sort the wheat from the chaff. I suggest Barrett does this reasonably well. If you disagree with this assessment, please detail the places where Barrett has got it wrong and what is wrong with each particular issue and I will be happy to discuss them with you.

The point I was making was that the work of Weston A. Price is being used as a support for all sorts of quackery. Price was enamoured with the idea of the noble savage even going so far as to conclude that traditional diets would solve a host of ills that mankind suffers including heart disease and cancer. In this he was incorrect. However, some would seek to have these ideas as the basis of modern disease management. It is a bit like suggesting we should base modern medicine on the principles espoused by Samuel Hahnemann.

For these reasons, I can’t take the utterings of an organization based on the ideas of Weston A. Price seriously. Particularly when their argument was that in the 1920s heart disease and cancer were rare, but that these have become more common in the absence of raw milk. http://www.realmilk.com/why.html I should point out that coincidence is not causality. Male life expectancy in the US has increased from 56 to 76 over the same