Based on what the FDA has said it’s in pasteurized milk too. Also this is from Gizmodo so most likely it’s not real or it’s from one tweet on the Internet or something like that.
Edit: Depending on the state if a cow tests positive for the virus it is pulled off the line by a raw milk seller. Also milk is pulled from one cow at a time lessening the chance for transfer. However, as per scientificAmerica.com, due to milking methods for large industry milk companies the virus is being transferred through equipment to other cows. There is also no evidence for or against pasteurization killing the virus totally.
I’d like to see a source for the very bold claim that pasteurization doesn’t kill the virus. As far as I’ve read, viral fragments are still detectable in the pasteurized milk but they’re all broken and inert. I am not aware of any pathogen in milk that survives pasteurization.
“The detection of viral RNA does not itself pose a health risk to consumers, and we expect to find this residual genetic material if the virus was there in the raw milk and was inactivated by pasteurization,” she says.
My case rests, broken pieces of a virus != infectious virus.
There is also no evidence for or against pasteurization killing the virus totally.
Ok, but no evidence here is meaningless. That means we haven’t looked to double check that the thing we do to kill every virus continues to kill every virus.
Absence of evidence is only weak evidence of absence. There’s a lot of strong evidence that pasteurization kills viruses indiscriminately. So no, these are absolutely not the same thing.
There is also no evidence it’s transfered through milk. Pasteurization isn’t meant to kill viruses, it’s meant to kill all the bacteria in the milk. I’ll leave it at this. I don’t like arguing online because it’s a waste of time. I hope you enjoy the article, I did.
Based on what the FDA has said it’s in pasteurized milk too. Also this is from Gizmodo so most likely it’s not real or it’s from one tweet on the Internet or something like that.
Edit: Depending on the state if a cow tests positive for the virus it is pulled off the line by a raw milk seller. Also milk is pulled from one cow at a time lessening the chance for transfer. However, as per scientificAmerica.com, due to milking methods for large industry milk companies the virus is being transferred through equipment to other cows. There is also no evidence for or against pasteurization killing the virus totally.
I’d like to see a source for the very bold claim that pasteurization doesn’t kill the virus. As far as I’ve read, viral fragments are still detectable in the pasteurized milk but they’re all broken and inert. I am not aware of any pathogen in milk that survives pasteurization.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/as-bird-flu-spreads-through-cows-is-pasteurized-milk-safe-to-drink/
From your article:
“The detection of viral RNA does not itself pose a health risk to consumers, and we expect to find this residual genetic material if the virus was there in the raw milk and was inactivated by pasteurization,” she says.
My case rests, broken pieces of a virus != infectious virus.
Ok, but no evidence here is meaningless. That means we haven’t looked to double check that the thing we do to kill every virus continues to kill every virus.
Absence of evidence is only weak evidence of absence. There’s a lot of strong evidence that pasteurization kills viruses indiscriminately. So no, these are absolutely not the same thing.
There is also no evidence it’s transfered through milk. Pasteurization isn’t meant to kill viruses, it’s meant to kill all the bacteria in the milk. I’ll leave it at this. I don’t like arguing online because it’s a waste of time. I hope you enjoy the article, I did.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/as-bird-flu-spreads-through-cows-is-pasteurized-milk-safe-to-drink/