RSS

Another study shows kids raised on farms suffer less allergies

12 Jun

Why do kids raised on farms have less allergies?  (HT: Ray Sawhill)

The leading theory behind the uptick in childhood allergies, says Andy Nish, a physician with a private practice in Gainesville, Ga., is the hygiene hypothesis. Paradoxically, the theory goes, we’re too clean.

“It looks like with our modern conditions and cleanliness that we have fewer and fewer germs to fight off,” Nish says. Our immune systems protect us by learning to fight off foreign invaders, whether they’re harmless or not. We can’t train our defenses if we don’t get exposed. And if you’re allergic to one thing, you’re likely allergic to a number of things.

[…]

Studies show children who live on farms have low rates of allergies. Dr. Mark Holbreich, an allergist in Indianapolis and a fellow of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, calls it “the farm effect.”

Holbreich recently did a study, published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, which found very low rates of allergies among Amish children living on farms in Indiana. He says the reason may be because the children get exposed very early on to dirty environments, and to a variety of dust and germs. Even young kids are often in the barn, working with animals, and drinking raw milk.

“We think there’s something about milk,” Holbreich says. “That’s key, along with exposure to large animals, particularly cows.”

So maybe pasteurization isn’t the end-all, be-all, after all…  Sadly, even Holbreich can’t stomach the implications of his own studies, as in the next breath, he “cautions against drinking raw milk or serving it to your child. It contains too many dangerous, disease-causing bacteria”, despite his own findings.  What cognitive dissonance he must suffer…

This isn’t the first such study to find raw milk prevents allergies, either…

So why does the government continue to persecute raw milk enthusiasts?  Why do politicians continue to oppose lifting the bans?

And why can’t the type of ‘conservatives’ who rightly sneer at the totalitarian instincts of vegetarians and vegans, stop lumping them in with others pursuing different alternative diets, such as raw milk, paleo, and organic food enthusiasts, and support an end to the tyrannical, anti-freedom ban on raw milk?

 
14 Comments

Posted by on June 12, 2012 in culture, law, Uncategorized

 

14 responses to “Another study shows kids raised on farms suffer less allergies

  1. angie

    June 12, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    This North American raw milk ban is SO stupid; I grew up on raw milk, so did my brothers/sisters, my cousins, my friends, my parents, my grandparents, everybody I knew and then everybody that all the people in my social circle knew. And nobody ever got sick from it, I even drank milk straight from the cow when I was a kid!

    I live in a European country where such nonsense didn’t reach us yet, and I’ve got to say that American milk tastes like water compared to the real thing.

     
  2. Will S.

    June 12, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    Hi angie, thanks for stopping by.

    The ban is indeed quite stupid. I’ve had raw milk at farmer friends’ and their relatives’ and friends’ homes, and never suffered on account of it. It does indeed taste so much better than what one can buy here at the store…

     
  3. Keoni Galt

    June 12, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    The ban is not stupid, it is profitable. It’s using the government enforcement of regulations to gain a cartel advantage in the dairy marketplace.

    Small time dairy farmer doesn’t have enough money to buy the pasteurization equipment, nor do they have the excess money to pay the regulatory inspection fees to certify their milk.

    But the big Ag Corporations gladly pay such fees….they’re buying their cartel, who’s regulators keep the small time competitors out.

    A side benefit, of course, goes to Big Pharma (Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Oil…they’re all inter-related by the way). When people get allergies and other problems from the hygiene paradox and only consuming pasteurized milk products, sales for allergy meds go up….

     
  4. Keoni Galt

    June 12, 2012 at 6:57 pm

    BTW – thanks for the linkage again, Will!

     
  5. Raman

    June 12, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    What Keoni said. It’s all about the money. America is run by corporations after all, and they’ll do what they can to get dat green. With the politicians in their pockets, there’s no one to stop them either.

     
  6. Will S.

    June 12, 2012 at 8:20 pm

    Good points, Keoni and Raman; indeed, if one looks at it from the standpoint of it being deliberate, it certainly makes more sense…

    Hey, you’re welcome, Keoni. Always like how you make people think about things. 🙂

     
  7. electricangel1978

    June 12, 2012 at 10:11 pm

    @KG,

    The ban is not stupid, it is profitable. It’s using the government enforcement of regulations to gain a cartel advantage in the dairy marketplace.

    Small time dairy farmer doesn’t have enough money to buy the pasteurization equipment, nor do they have the excess money to pay the regulatory inspection fees to certify their milk.

    It’s Gresham’s law applied to milk, Dave. Milk does not naturally have the bacteria that cause disease, but they can easily be introduced by failing to maintain sterile conditions. It’s easy for cow manure to splash up onto teats and spread E Coli. An ethical farmer cleans the cow beforehand, and maintains sterilized bottles and tubes. A slob does not, and has to boil the milk to kill off the bacteria that he introduced with poor farming practices. As this article mentions, “How did these bacteria come to be in the milk? From sloppy proprietors who did not take care to exercise precautions like properly cleaning their cows and equipment. Thus all milk had to be pasteurized for safety, driving the careful proprietor into an economically disadvantageous situation relative to the slob, and turning milk into a commodity: Gresham’s law applied, and bad practices drove out good husbandry.”

    The problem really rests with commoditization. We allow the farmers to sell “corn” or “strawberries” or “milk.” When I see a bunch of adjectives in front of a food-related noun, I know that an artisanal producer with pride and care has prepared my food, and I am more incluned to buy.

    @Will,

    You need to read Zmirak, and Wendell Berry. I offer a link to a review of his “Bad Catholic’s Guide to the Seven Deadly Sins”, and a specific link to a Cosmo-style quiz on temperance; of course, read the main article here.

     
  8. Will S.

    June 12, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    @ EA: Also good points; indeed, pasteurization no doubt has had its purposes, but yeah, if all farmers were hygienic in their practices, it would not be necessary at all.

    Zmirak is interesting, and from what I’ve read of Berry, he is, too.

    But I don’t think his Zmirak’s four choices at that company dinner scenario there are enough; my reaction would be somewhere between (a) and (c), in that I think I’d order something a bit more feast-worthy than a fricking salad, but would try to be reasonably prudent both in calorie intake and expense-wise, while still nevertheless taking proper advantage of my boss’ generosity that day. The occasional feast is hardly intemperate or gluttonous, esp. if you don’t normally eat that way, and doesn’t necessarily require fasting for ‘balance’. Sorry, but you Papists will never convince this Prot of the need for fasting, even if I can and do acknowledge that fasting is Biblical, and is not without some benefits; but I don’t see it as absolutely required, by our faith.

     
  9. Will S.

    June 12, 2012 at 10:41 pm

    Oh, and like most Canadians who overuse the word ‘sorry’ (it’s a national failing), in such contexts as these (‘sorry, but’), as opposed to genuine contrition over actual wrongdoing, I’m not really sorry at all. 🙂

     
  10. electricangel1978

    June 12, 2012 at 10:41 pm

    @Will,

    I first got the idea about the evolutionary basis of fasting from The Black Swan, Second Edition. I could link you to Mark’s Daily Apple on Fasting. I have found that it is, in fact, purifying, and it improves mental function (except: A 40-day fast in the desert? There’s no way I would have resisted the temptation to turn stones into bread.). It helps get rid of old, defective nerve cells. God does not prescribe or do that which is bad for us.

    I have done intermittent fasting for weight loss and body composition change. This one’s REAL easy. Eat nothing except between noon and 9PM, fast for 15 hours per day.

    I need to get you to read the 7 deadly sins book. I can send you a copy, if you’ll review it for Patriactionary. See: http://www.amazon.ca/gp/offer-listing/082452585X/ref=sr_1_1_olp?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1339555206&sr=1-1&condition=new

     
  11. Will S.

    June 12, 2012 at 10:46 pm

    @ EA: I agree that intermittent fasting can have its benefits, from a health perspective, certainly. I just don’t see it as critical from a spiritual perspective, but one does well to incorporate it into a program of overall exercise and diet personal reform, IMO.

    You need me to read that book, do you now? And you’re offering to buy me a copy, if I’ll review it for here? Okay, sure! 🙂

     
  12. electricangel1978

    June 12, 2012 at 10:53 pm

    @Will,

    I just don’t see it as critical from a spiritual perspective, but one does well to incorporate it into a program of overall exercise and diet personal reform, IMO.

    Descartes, call your office! I never figured you for a gnostic, Will, with a distinction between the soul (pure, not in need of fasting to improve) and the vessel that holds it, which definitely DOES require fasting for reconstructive autophagy.

    I’ll ask you privately about the address, and we’ll go from there.

     
  13. Will S.

    June 12, 2012 at 10:57 pm

    I’ve sent you my address. 🙂

    Oh, I’m no gnostic, but as a Protestant, my view of the body and soul is probably less holistic than yours. 😉

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s