Will this turn milk into butter?

[Green Xenon]

Hi:

 

My favorite bacteria are:

 

1. Not gram-negative

2. Free of lipopolysaccharide

3. Non-pathogenic

4. Non-toxic

5. Non-allergenic

 

In terms of respiration, they are any one of the following:

 

1. Facultative-anaerobes [can use oxygen but don't need it]

2. Obligate anaerobes [can only survive in total or near-total absence of oxygen]

3. Aerotolerant-anaerobes [can survive in oxygen but don't use it for respiration or otherwise require it].

Let’s say the following hypothetical scenario occurs:

 

A sample of fresh, raw, annatto-free, preservative-free, carrageen-free, carrageenan-free, polysorbate-free, purely-natural, disease-free, completely-organic milk of a healthy happy Jersey cow [who grazes solely on natural, organic, healthy, pesticide-free pasture] is gently pumped into a hypothetical container that is eco-friendly, healthy-friendly, oxygen-free, air-tight, vibration-proof and does not let in any light when closed. The tubes connecting the cow’s udder to the container are also light-proof [tubes don’t let light in], eco-friendly, healthy-friendly, oxygen-free, air-tight, and vibration-proof.

 

At no point does any foreign object other than “my favorite bacteria” enter the milk. This is true even when the milk is in the cow’s udder.

 

After the milk is pumped into the container, my favorite bacteria decompose this milk as completely as possible.

 

What will be the end product? Will it be butter? My guess is yes because bacteria cannot decompose saturated fatty acids.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Green Xenon

[ecoli]

the cow suffocates before you can get any milk out of her.

[Mr Skeptic]

There are always bacteria on the cow's udder. I don't think you can sterilize that without taking some skin off or causing tissue damage, and even then I'm fairly certain it would not be eco-friendly nor health-friendly to do so. However, if you are going to ferment the milk, then having the healthy bacteria far far outnumber any stray bacteria should do. Pasteurization can help too.

 

You definitely won't be left with only butter. In fact if any butter at all is produced, it would be in very small quantities. You will probably get curds and whey, but maybe you might get buttermilk or yogurt.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermented_milk_products

[CharonY]

Simple answer: no. Normal butter is not created by bacterial processes.

[Green Xenon]

the cow suffocates before you can get any milk out of her.

 

Why?

[Moontanman]

To make butter you have to churn the warm cream that is allowed to rise to the top of whole raw milk. The butter floats to the top and you are left with buttermilk. Making butter the old fashioned way with a churn and by hand is quite labor intensive but the result is very good.

 

We would allow about five gallons of rich raw cows milk, generally it was mostly cream, (almost any raw milk will work, even human) once it had warmed and turned to what would be called slightly spoiled milk, (called blinking the milk) we would churn it and in a few hours of churning you get butter.

 

You can try it at home by putting a small a mount of warm cream in a jar and shake it until the milk fats separates from the milk. Here is a site that explains it, we used a stone churn with a large wooden plunger (no electricity, so it was hard work)

 

http://goldenrodfarm.tripod.com/BUTTER.HTM

[Green Xenon]

There are always bacteria on the cow's udder. I don't think you can sterilize that without taking some skin off or causing tissue damage, and even then I'm fairly certain it would not be eco-friendly nor health-friendly to do so. However, if you are going to ferment the milk, then having the healthy bacteria far far outnumber any stray bacteria should do. Pasteurization can help too.

 

You definitely won't be left with only butter. In fact if any butter at all is produced, it would be in very small quantities. You will probably get curds and whey, but maybe you might get buttermilk or yogurt.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermented_milk_products

 

My thoughts were that butter would be produced because all the organic compounds other than the saturated fatty acids would decompose.

 

Anyways, would the end product be greasy?

[Moontanman]

BTW Green, believe it or not being exposed to natural occurring bacteria , even bad ones is good for you. Bolsters the immune system, why the emphasis on certain bacteria?

[Green Xenon]

To make butter you have to churn the warm cream that is allowed to rise to the top of whole raw milk. The butter floats to the top and you are left with buttermilk. Making butter the old fashioned way with a churn and by hand is quite labor intensive but the result is very good.

 

We would allow about five gallons of rich raw cows milk, generally it was mostly cream, (almost any raw milk will work, even human) once it had warmed and turned to what would be called slightly spoiled milk, (called blinking the milk) we would churn it and in a few hours of churning you get butter.

 

You can try it at home by putting a small a mount of warm cream in a jar and shake it until the milk fats separates from the milk. Here is a site that explains it, we used a stone churn with a large wooden plunger (no electricity, so it was hard work)

 

http://goldenrodfarm.tripod.com/BUTTER.HTM

 

What happens if the cream is kept warm but not churned?

[Moontanman]

My thoughts were that butter would be produced because all the organic compounds other than the saturated fatty acids would decompose.

 

Anyways, would the end product be greasy?

 

Making butter is not exactly a sterile process and unless you churn it you only get spoiled cream. Butter is fat, it is inherently greasy.

[Green Xenon]

BTW Green, believe it or not being exposed to natural occurring bacteria , even bad ones is good for you. Bolsters the immune system, why the emphasis on certain bacteria?

 

I agree, exposure to pathogens does strengthen the immune system if done correctly. I'm just more interested in the bacteria that qualify as "my favorite". Even I don't know why.

[Moontanman]

What happens if the cream is kept warm but not churned?

 

It just turns to clotted cream, eventually it becomes inedible.

(not true really, the end result of these processes can be things like clabbered milk, yogurt, cottage cheese to real cheese) sorry.

 

BTW, none of this works for pasteurized milk, it only goes bad and becomes inedible.

Edited April 13, 2010 by Moontanman
Accuracy

[Mr Skeptic]

My thoughts were that butter would be produced because all the organic compounds other than the saturated fatty acids would decompose.

 

No, anaerobic metabolism is much messier than that. The lactose will be fermented into lactic acid, which will acidify the milk, curdle proteins, and hinder further bacterial action. What do you think would result from anaerobic fermentation of proteins?

 

Anyways, would the end product be greasy?

 

There would be quite a bit of cream in there, but still not that much. Do you consider cheese to be greasy?

[Green Xenon]

What do you think would result from anaerobic fermentation of proteins?

 

Indole, skatole, valeric acid, propionic acid, hydrogen sulfide, and amines.

 

 

 

Do you consider cheese to be greasy?

 

If it's high-fat cheese.

[Rickdog]

I agree, exposure to pathogens does strengthen the immune system if done correctly. I'm just more interested in the bacteria that qualify as "my favorite". Even I don't know why.

 

Beware, that in raw milk you can find a lot of pathogenic bacterias, that if not treated, can kill you before you acquire a strengthened inmune system.

Among them :TBC (Mycobacterium tuberculosis), Salmonella typhimurium, Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli, Staphylococccus aureus, Brucellosis, Pseudomones, Streptococcus, etc.

 

If you`re willing to experiment with your body, go ahead.

In my case, I prefer pasteurized milk, it`s more safer since pasteurization usually destroys most of these pathogens.

 

It just turns to clotted cream, eventually it becomes inedible.

(not true really, the end result of these processes can be things like clabbered milk, yogurt, cottage cheese to real cheese) sorry.

 

BTW, none of this works for pasteurized milk, it only goes bad and becomes inedible.

 

Myth debunked:

http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm079516.htm

Edited April 14, 2010 by Rickdog
Consecutive posts merged.

[Moontanman]

I grew up in rural WV, I drank raw milk, from the time of infancy. We strained the flies out if with cheese cloth. We made butter and butter milk. I knew quite literally hundreds of other people who drank and still drink raw milk. No illnesses, not one, ever.

 

Raw milk is highly unlikely to make you sick, can it? yes it can, so can well water and breathing.

 

Pasteurization allows huge farms to market milk in huge quantities, the milk lasts longer on the shelf than raw milk, it all tastes pretty much the same, no where near as good as raw milk, and protects people from less than scrupulous people who would sell you anything for a dime.

 

Raw milk is not a big health problem.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

There would be quite a bit of cream in there, but still not that much. Do you consider cheese to be greasy?

 

Yes, cheese is greasy, some more so than others but all of it is greasy to some extent, I love cheese blue cheese is great, swiss, Limburger, I love cheese but it all has at least a slightly greasy consistency.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I grew up in rural WV, I drank raw milk, from the time of infancy. We strained the flies out if with cheese cloth. We made butter and butter milk. I knew quite literally hundreds of other people who drank and still drink raw milk. No illnesses, not one, ever.

Probably because you rapidly developed resistance to any bacteria in the raw milk. Give it to someone who's never had it before and their response might be very different.

 

Now, the CDC (according to the link) says 800 people have fallen ill due to raw milk since 1998. Given how many thousands of people probably drink raw milk, the percentage is probably quite small. But then consider how many people drink milk at all, and how many people would get sick if everyone drank unpasteurized milk.

[Moontanman]

Probably true, but the link provided makes it look like raw milk is practically poison.

[Rickdog]

That link is from the FDA ( US Food & Drug Administration ), who`s main concern is to worry about which foods or drugs are safe for the consumers, specially US citizens, and which types of food aren`t. There is a lot of myths concerning diferent types of food, being the "milk" one of the most important ones, due to its valuable importance in our nutrition.

 

The word Pasteurization, comes from Louis Pasteur`s last name, who discovered the importance of applying heat to destroy numerous bacterias in foods. This is off-topic, so I will not say any more about him, but he gave his name to this process, and before its existence, back in the 19 th century, the rates of mortality and morbility of milk origin pathogenic bacterial diseases in the USA and as the rest of the world was huge (same figure as in 1998, 800, but multiplied by thousands or maybe more), being more evident after one or two days of it being gathered.

 

If your herds are healthy, you may not suffer problems from milk consumption if it is collected following strict rules of hygiene and a strict chain of refrigeration till the consumer, but if not, milk is probably the best place where bacterias can multiply and a potential "bomb" for the outbreak of diseases. The same goes for the ellaboration of milk based products.

 

[vordhosbn]

Probably because you rapidly developed resistance to any bacteria in the raw milk. Give it to someone who's never had it before and their response might be very different.

 

Now, the CDC (according to the link) says 800 people have fallen ill due to raw milk since 1998. Given how many thousands of people probably drink raw milk, the percentage is probably quite small. But then consider how many people drink milk at all, and how many people would get sick if everyone drank unpasteurized milk.

And what if all humans were obliged to drink raw cow milk every day throughout their whole lives for a relatively long period of time (100 generations)?

There would be almost no lactose intolerant people and everybody will have pretty good immunity against the bacteria in raw milk.

 

Now if we imagine another exaggerated hypothetical situatiuon - a man that has been kept in sterile, isolated environment since he was born. What do you think will happen to him if you give him a glass of raw milk? Certain death?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Now if we imagine another exaggerated hypothetical situatiuon - a man that has been kept in sterile, isolated environment since he was born. What do you think will happen to him if you give him a glass of raw milk? Certain death?

 

Depends on what's in it, but there'd certainly be a very high risk of dangerous infection. Heck, sneezing near him would be a high risk.

[Moontanman]

That link is from the FDA ( US Food & Drug Administration ), who`s main concern is to worry about which foods or drugs are safe for the consumers, specially US citizens, and which types of food aren`t. There is a lot of myths concerning diferent types of food, being the "milk" one of the most important ones, due to its valuable importance in our nutrition.

 

The FDA does such a wonderful job... not... Yes lots of myths do surround food and one of them is the "extreme" danger of raw milk.

 

The word Pasteurization, comes from Louis Pasteur`s last name, who discovered the importance of applying heat to destroy numerous bacterias in foods. This is off-topic, so I will not say any more about him, but he gave his name to this process, and before its existence, back in the 19 th century, the rates of mortality and morbility of milk origin pathogenic bacterial diseases in the USA and as the rest of the world was huge (same figure as in 1998, 800, but multiplied by thousands or maybe more), being more evident after one or two days of it being gathered.

 

 

Do you have anything to back up this assertion?

 

If your herds are healthy, you may not suffer problems from milk consumption if it is collected following strict rules of hygiene and a strict chain of refrigeration till the consumer, but if not, milk is probably the best place where bacterias can multiply and a potential "bomb" for the outbreak of diseases. The same goes for the ellaboration of milk based products.

 

 

So you don't eat butter or cheese or yogurt? Of course you have to take reasonable care and make sure your cows are healthy and such but the danger is exaggerated IMHO

[zule]

It just turns to clotted cream, eventually it becomes inedible.

(not true really, the end result of these processes can be things like clabbered milk, yogurt, cottage cheese to real cheese) sorry.

 

BTW, none of this works for pasteurized milk, it only goes bad and becomes inedible.

 

I used to make yogurts from pasteurized and uperised milk when I was a child, there is no problem because of that.

[Moontanman]

I used to make yogurts from pasteurized and uperised milk when I was a child, there is no problem because of that.

 

Did you add a bacterial culture to it?

[zule]

Did you add a bacterial culture to it?

 

Yes. I added a spoon of previously made yogur.