On 2008-10-03, Yowie <yowie9644.DIESPAMDIE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> J Lunis wrote:
> Since most modern countries have standards for milk, dictating the
minimum
> amount of things like protein, fat and lactose in them to be considered
> 'whole milk', and cow's milk has a seasonal variation in the level of
such
> things as protein, fat and lactose, the milk is adjusted by the addition
of
> permeate (as well as its opposite, retentate) as necessary to keep
within
> specification. This results in us consumers having a consistant quality
of
> milk year round rather than having variable quality of milk depending on
the
> season.
>
> I don't know where you are, but here we have 'generic' brands of milk as
> well as 'brand name' milk. The reason why generic brands of milk
> occasionally taste 'less creamy' than name brands is - not surprisingly
-
> because they are. The 'generic' milk still has to stick within the
> Australian specifications of 'whole milk' but they don't concern
themselves
> so much with keeping the product *very* consistant. So therefore, if the
> cream (fat) content is lower than 'usual' but still within the
Australian
> specifications, the 'generic' brand will still be ****pped out, whilst
the
> 'brand' name may receive an addition of cream so that it meets the
*brand
> name* standards which are higher than the Australian specification. For
> example, the specification for whole milk in Australia says that it has
to
> contain 32g or more of fat per kilo, but <brand name> milk might
internally
> decide that their milk will have a minimum of 35g and a maximum of 38g
of
> fat per kilo. Generic brand may only state that they will have a minimum
of
> 32g and not worry about what the maximum might be. Notice how no-one is
> making a great fuss about the addition of cream to an
'underspecification'
> milk, but its the same principle.
>
> If we paid for milk in terms of percentage fat, the beat-up would make
> sense. We here in Australia don't. Skim milk costs if anything more than
> regular milk, because it costs more to process than whole milk. The
beat-up
> started smelling suspiciously like a paid advertisement for 'A2' brand
milk
> to me.
>
> What permeate is and how its used:
>
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/newsroom/factsheets/factsheets2008/milkpermeateapril2003903.cfm
>
> The alleged scandal:
> http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=455784
>
>
> Yowie
All correct. Here, (.ie) milk must contain a certain amount of milk fat,
(3.5% AFAIK, its been a while since I had anything to do with producing
milk.) Some processors will pay according to protein as well. Cows milk
is `thin` compared to other mammals, AFAIK, I have notebooks full of all
that data, but they are somewhere in that heap. Fermenting, possibly.
Generally, other mammals milk has twice the solids of cows milk, for
instance, human milk (one rich USAian had human milk every day when he got
old) is twice as rich as cows. Some cows milk, for instance Jerseys and
Guernseys, produce very rich milk, and it is sold as that. After calving,
for the first few days, cows milk is called `beastings` and is not
supposed to be sold for human use, its full of substances that promote
robustness in the calf. I remember one hospital, years ago, that was
supplied by one farmer , the nurses used say that they could tell when his
cows were calving (because constipation would not be a problem with the
patients).
There are by-products of milk production, artificial milk for lambs, dogs,
etc, which are `strengthened` with other substances for use, but are
forbidden for human use.
--
Greymaus
.
.
....
|
