Does milk really have puss in it? - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 02-18-2006, 02:29 PM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Someone told me this once, and i was just wondering if it was true.
GhostUser is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 02-18-2006, 02:31 PM
Administrator
 
Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,871
PETA says it does...



http://www.milksucks.com/pus.asp



They tend to exaggerate and are obviosuly biased. I suppose it can be proven that there are very small amounts. I don't know for sure. Doesn't really matter much to me either way.

Follow me on Twitter - @_jorts
Michael is offline  
#3 Old 02-18-2006, 02:49 PM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
There are many books that mention this. Eat to Live is one book and Marilu Henners Total Health Makeover are just two examples
GhostUser is offline  
#4 Old 02-18-2006, 02:56 PM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Well since even the USDA itself talks about its somatic cell count, and since there's even a mastitis council (mastitis is what causes the pus and blood in milk) it is definately true. (In case you didn't know, "somatic cells" are the correct term for pus.



So yes, milk contains pus. And since 30%-40% of cows suffer from mastitis, every glass of milk contains pus and blood.



Dairy Industry Sources:

http://www.moomilk.com/archive/u-health-20.htm

http://www.milkproduction.com/Librar...unt_Levels.htm

http://services.milk.org/services/pr...sting-scc.html



Lots more but I just don't have the time (just Google "somatic cell count" for more)
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#5 Old 02-18-2006, 08:20 PM
Beginner
 
hippymama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 212
As a breastfeeding advocate, let me step in here.



All milks, including human and cow, have live immune cells. That's a major benefit of breastfeeding. It innoculates the baby against any germs that the mom has encountered. The live cells are the same ones that gobble up invading germs and turn into pus. Technically, they are not pus unless they have done battle with an active, virulent germ. Unitl then, they are white blood cells.



Pasteurization kills all the cells that occur in the milk. So, unless you are drinking raw milk (which is hard to come by in the US), the cells are no longer alive. If the milk you are drinking came from an infected cow, as PP stated, then yes there may be some pus in the milk, thought both the WBCs and bacteria will be killed by pasteurization.



I have heard this arguement stated as if milk is just cow pus. If that was true, baby calves would be horribly malnurished, but impervious to germs.
hippymama is offline  
#6 Old 02-18-2006, 08:38 PM
Beginner
 
tomatotomato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 357
that is so disgusting
tomatotomato is offline  
#7 Old 02-18-2006, 08:49 PM
Beginner
 
Astarte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,780
In that white blood cells are the major constituent of pus, and white blood cells are present in milk, yes, milk contains pus. However, it is not harmful. In and of themselves, a particular type of cell is not a whole lot different than another type of cell. Why are animalian white blood cells grosser than plant cells, for instance?



The pus argument kind of bugs me. It isn't pus in the way we normally think of it, and it seems to be a cheap attempt to gross people out. There are plenty of reasons not to drink milk.. do we have to resort to misleading scare tactics?
Astarte is offline  
#8 Old 02-18-2006, 08:51 PM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by hippymama View Post


I have heard this arguement stated as if milk is just cow pus. If that was true, baby calves would be horribly malnurished, but impervious to germs.

Pus or not, an adult drinking someone else's (a different species) breastmilk is gross. Breastmilk is for that specie's offspring.



I know it isn't all pus. The estimate for the US is 1-7 drops per cup. Go ahead and think pus is good, pop your own zits into your dinner if you please, I just won't be having any; pus OR breastmilk.
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#9 Old 02-18-2006, 08:52 PM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

The pus argument kind of bugs me. It isn't pus in the way we normally think of it, and it seems to be a cheap attempt to gross people out. There are plenty of reasons not to drink milk.. do we have to resort to misleading scare tactics?

Well if it works for those who don't care about animals enough to stop drinking milk for them, then why not use it?
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#10 Old 02-18-2006, 08:58 PM
Beginner
 
catdance62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 123
Eeewwwwww!!!!!!
catdance62 is offline  
#11 Old 02-18-2006, 10:04 PM
Beginner
 
Astarte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebutterfly05 View Post

Well if it works for those who don't care about animals enough to stop drinking milk for them, then why not use it?



I would hope that we'd want to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I guess it depends on how you look at it. Most people won't stop with dairy even with the pus thing, and even if they're set back by it for a moment, anybody who looks deeper into the matter will see that it's a completely insubstantial argument. It's bad for credibility.



Why would a person who eats meat be offset by the word pus for long? What's the real difference between a white blood cell and a muscle or fat cell, aside from the obvious functional differences? I'm sure meat is full of pus too! And red blood, for that matter.



The disgusting part of animal products isn't the substance itself. Meat is meat. Milk is milk. We're made up of exactly the same stuff ourselves. The disgusting part is how these things are gotten. Saying "oh, it's got pus in it" is a cheap attempt to appeal to our sense of aesthetic disgust, not our compassion. The problem of animal agriculture isn't going to be solved by saying "ooh, it's icky... it's made of pus." If it ever happens, it'll be because people see how those creatures live and say they won't stand for it anymore.



That's only my personal opinion though.
Astarte is offline  
#12 Old 02-18-2006, 10:52 PM
Beginner
 
Skylark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 15,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

I would hope that we'd want to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I guess it depends on how you look at it. Most people won't stop with dairy even with the pus thing, and even if they're set back by it for a moment, anybody who looks deeper into the matter will see that it's a completely insubstantial argument. It's bad for credibility.



Why would a person who eats meat be offset by the word pus for long? What's the real difference between a white blood cell and a muscle or fat cell, aside from the obvious functional differences? I'm sure meat is full of pus too! And red blood, for that matter.



The disgusting part of animal products isn't the substance itself. Meat is meat. Milk is milk. We're made up of exactly the same stuff ourselves. The disgusting part is how these things are gotten. Saying "oh, it's got pus in it" is a cheap attempt to appeal to our sense of aesthetic disgust, not our compassion. The problem of animal agriculture isn't going to be solved by saying "ooh, it's icky... it's made of pus." If it ever happens, it'll be because people see how those creatures live and say they won't stand for it anymore.



Preach it, sister!

Q: How many poets does it take to change a light bulb? A: 1001...one to change the bulb, 1000 to say it's already been done.
Skylark is offline  
#13 Old 02-18-2006, 11:46 PM
Beginner
 
tails4wagging's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 168
I agree there. When I tell omnis that wine has geletin,blood and swim bladders of fish they are horrified,but does it stop them from drinking it?.No!. Also they cannot connect with eating meat and the wine.
tails4wagging is offline  
#14 Old 02-19-2006, 12:35 AM
Banned
 
catgirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueberry06 View Post

Someone told me this once, and i was just wondering if it was true.

I seriously doubt it, but it sure tastes like it!
catgirl67 is offline  
#15 Old 02-19-2006, 12:51 AM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
I think using puss as a scare tactic can lead many people to do their own research on the topic, which would lead them to the major reasons not to drink milk. They can find out first hand what happens at factory farms and why they even have to worry about pus. But I think the focus should be more on the state of the animal producing the milk. I wouldn't eat a half rotten apple, so why would you drink milk from a malnourished/depressed/hormone pumped cow?



Not to mention that milk comes from cow boobies, and I wouldn't want to put my lips there, not even if l used a very long mechanical straw

~Wonder
GhostUser is offline  
#16 Old 02-19-2006, 02:07 AM
Beginner
 
kyliemc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 219
I think that when someone hears that milk has pus in it, it will open their eyes to what is really going on with the dairy industry. Nobody wants to drink pus even though our own bodies produce it. I don't open a pus-filled blister from my foot, then drain it into my drink ( I promise I don't have pus-filled blisters), then say "Yummy!". I believe that to be the point of the message. It's just gross. Period. Not to mention the way it was obtained.
kyliemc is offline  
#17 Old 02-19-2006, 04:04 AM
Beginner
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

Saying "oh, it's got pus in it" is a cheap attempt to appeal to our sense of aesthetic disgust, not our compassion.

Aesthetic preferences are a big reason why people eat animal products (or at least meat).



But yeah, this is similar to the question of whether to work inside a problematic framework by appealing to "unnatural" and things like that, or whether to question that framework itself.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#18 Old 02-19-2006, 08:27 AM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

Why would a person who eats meat be offset by the word pus for long? What's the real difference between a white blood cell and a muscle or fat cell, aside from the obvious functional differences? I'm sure meat is full of pus too! And red blood, for that matter.

Maybe that will get them thinking about their meat too then! That's a good thing I think.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

The disgusting part of animal products isn't the substance itself. Meat is meat. Milk is milk. We're made up of exactly the same stuff ourselves.

Exactly. Imagine frying flesh from your own arm, drinking your pregnant friend's breastmilk. When some begin to understand we're all made of the same stuff, the begin to find meat and milk disgusting.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

The disgusting part is how these things are gotten. Saying "oh, it's got pus in it" is a cheap attempt to appeal to our sense of aesthetic disgust, not our compassion.

Yes but some don't care about the cruelty. What if there was someone who hated animals but thought the pus thing was gross...would it be better to say nothing so that they'd just continue drinking it? Face it, it's bad for your health, there's nothing wrong with trying to explain that. If it works, I don't see the problem. They don't get severe psychological damage from being told about the pus do they? So what's the problem?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

The problem of animal agriculture isn't going to be solved by saying "ooh, it's icky... it's made of pus." If it ever happens, it'll be because people see how those creatures live and say they won't stand for it anymore.

No it won't solve everything (who here ONLY talks about the pus and not the cruelty?? [by the way the pus signals the cruelty, because mastitis is caused by us and causes cows to suffer, therefore the pus (from the mastitis) is about cruelty!). It won't solve all the problems BUT it can change SOME people. ONE person is worth alot. A lot of people have cut out cow's milk because of that, so...what's the problem??
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#19 Old 02-19-2006, 08:29 AM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by ctbwonder View Post

I think using puss as a scare tactic can lead many people to do their own research on the topic, which would lead them to the major reasons not to drink milk. They can find out first hand what happens at factory farms and why they even have to worry about pus. But I think the focus should be more on the state of the animal producing the milk. I wouldn't eat a half rotten apple, so why would you drink milk from a malnourished/depressed/hormone pumped cow?



Not to mention that milk comes from cow boobies, and I wouldn't want to put my lips there, not even if l used a very long mechanical straw

~Wonder

Well said. I agree
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#20 Old 02-19-2006, 08:33 AM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Here's an example:



PETA has stickers that say "Got pus? Milk does. MilkSucks.com"

When people see this, they often want to know if it's true. So they go to MilkSucks.com, where they learn about both health AND animal reasons to cut out milk. If the sticker said something about animal cruelty instead, some will say "damn treehuggers" and never even go to the site. (Not saying everyone doesn't care, but these stickers could be a good way to get people onto the site that wouldn't have gone there if they knew it was just about animal rights.)
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#21 Old 02-19-2006, 08:50 AM
Beginner
 
Cissy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 11,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

I would hope that we'd want to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I guess it depends on how you look at it. Most people won't stop with dairy even with the pus thing, and even if they're set back by it for a moment, anybody who looks deeper into the matter will see that it's a completely insubstantial argument. It's bad for credibility.



Why would a person who eats meat be offset by the word pus for long? What's the real difference between a white blood cell and a muscle or fat cell, aside from the obvious functional differences? I'm sure meat is full of pus too! And red blood, for that matter.



The disgusting part of animal products isn't the substance itself. Meat is meat. Milk is milk. We're made up of exactly the same stuff ourselves. The disgusting part is how these things are gotten. Saying "oh, it's got pus in it" is a cheap attempt to appeal to our sense of aesthetic disgust, not our compassion. The problem of animal agriculture isn't going to be solved by saying "ooh, it's icky... it's made of pus." If it ever happens, it'll be because people see how those creatures live and say they won't stand for it anymore.



That's only my personal opinion though.



Cissy is offline  
#22 Old 02-19-2006, 09:26 AM
Beginner
 
isowish's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astarte View Post

I would hope that we'd want to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I guess it depends on how you look at it. Most people won't stop with dairy even with the pus thing, and even if they're set back by it for a moment, anybody who looks deeper into the matter will see that it's a completely insubstantial argument. It's bad for credibility.



Why would a person who eats meat be offset by the word pus for long? What's the real difference between a white blood cell and a muscle or fat cell, aside from the obvious functional differences? I'm sure meat is full of pus too! And red blood, for that matter.



The disgusting part of animal products isn't the substance itself. Meat is meat. Milk is milk. We're made up of exactly the same stuff ourselves. The disgusting part is how these things are gotten. Saying "oh, it's got pus in it" is a cheap attempt to appeal to our sense of aesthetic disgust, not our compassion. The problem of animal agriculture isn't going to be solved by saying "ooh, it's icky... it's made of pus." If it ever happens, it'll be because people see how those creatures live and say they won't stand for it anymore.



That's only my personal opinion though.

isowish is offline  
#23 Old 02-19-2006, 09:53 AM
Beginner
 
sproutsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 132
'Last year, the average liter of milk in America contained only 323 million pus cells, according to Hoard's Dairyman, [March 2001 edition] the dairy industry magazine.'



'In Europe and Canada, regulators are aware that the higher

the pus cell count, the less healthy is the milk. Milk in

Europe and Canada cannot legally be sold if the level of pus

cells per liter exceeds 400 million.



By applying European and Canadian safety standards, USDA

officials would also have to dump milk in the following

states:



Alabama (441 million pus cells per liter), Arkansas (427

million pus cells per liter), Georgia (409 million pus cells

per liter), Kansas (428 million pus cells per liter),

Louisiana (476 million pus cells per liter), Mississippi

(448 million pus cells per liter), South Dakota (409 million

pus cells per liter), and Tennessee (420 million pus cells

per liter). Puerto Rico's average liter of milk contained

475 million pus cells.
'



All from notmilk.com. There are other sites that tell you how much pus is allowed to be in your milk where you live. As for it not being bad for you, there are laws everywhere about legal amounts for health reasons, not randomly. Possibly, I suppose, the pus is merely indicative of the general quality of the milk, rather than itself contributing to the unhealthfulness of it. Still, knowing these things definately helps our case more than appearing as ignorant as the average person is about what milk etc actually are and contain. People will always throw the health issue into the debate, so knowing the facts can only help us along, regardless of which issue will sway them in the end.



Quote:
Originally Posted by hippymama View Post

If the milk you are drinking came from an infected cow, as PP stated, then yes there may be some pus in the milk, thought both the WBCs and bacteria will be killed by pasteurization.

Most of them will be... 1987 study
sproutsfan is offline  
#24 Old 02-19-2006, 10:05 AM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by sproutsfan View Post

There are other sites that tell you how much pus is allowed to be in your milk where you live. As for it not being bad for you, there are laws everywhere about legal amounts for health reasons, not randomly. Possibly, I suppose, the pus is merely indicative of the general quality of the milk, rather than itself contributing to the unhealthfulness of it. Still, knowing these things definately helps our case more than appearing as ignorant as the average person is about what milk etc actually are and contain. People will always throw the health issue into the debate, so knowing the facts can only help us along, regardless of which issue will sway them in the end.

I agree.
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#25 Old 02-19-2006, 10:14 AM
Beginner
 
redfurrymonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 74
Ewwwwww.... now I really, really want to give up milk more then ever
redfurrymonster is offline  
#26 Old 02-19-2006, 10:34 AM
Beginner
 
Bluebutterfly05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 644
See what I mean? It is gross, and it does help to motivate people to cut out dairy. So why not tell people? It's not like we're lying. It's definately fact that milk contains pus.
Bluebutterfly05 is offline  
#27 Old 02-19-2006, 12:57 PM
Beginner
 
Quip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 72
It certainly does cause a visceral reaction that can help reinforce the desire to not eat dairy!
Quip is offline  
#28 Old 02-19-2006, 10:22 PM
Beginner
 
kyliemc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebutterfly05 View Post

Here's an example:



PETA has stickers that say "Got pus? Milk does. MilkSucks.com"

When people see this, they often want to know if it's true. So they go to MilkSucks.com, where they learn about both health AND animal reasons to cut out milk. If the sticker said something about animal cruelty instead, some will say "damn treehuggers" and never even go to the site. (Not saying everyone doesn't care, but these stickers could be a good way to get people onto the site that wouldn't have gone there if they knew it was just about animal rights.)

That's funny you mention that. My 16 y-o daughter took a bunch of those stickers to her high school and gave some out and also put some on the lunch tables. Her friend is spending the night tonight and has one of those stickers on the back of her cell phone. She said after she found out what was in milk and also in cheese, that she won't eat cheeseburgers anymore. I know, burgers but no cheese, lol, but it's a step in the right direction. So yeah, the stickers make a statement.
kyliemc is offline  
#29 Old 02-19-2006, 10:25 PM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
lol with you on the ewwww. Thanks for the info and debates you guys. Didnt expect to get this many replies. Now im so craving a glass of chocolate soy milk. taste just like regular. yum!
GhostUser is offline  
#30 Old 02-20-2006, 03:54 AM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyliemc View Post

That's funny you mention that. My 16 y-o daughter took a bunch of those stickers to her high school and gave some out and also put some on the lunch tables. Her friend is spending the night tonight and has one of those stickers on the back of her cell phone. She said after she found out what was in milk and also in cheese, that she won't eat cheeseburgers anymore. I know, burgers but no cheese, lol, but it's a step in the right direction. So yeah, the stickers make a statement.

Just tell her that the burger she's eating is the spent dairy cow whose milk she wouldn't drink. If you wouldn't drink the milk from a sickly cow, why would you eat it's flesh?

~Wonder
GhostUser is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off