Re: CDC November research report on virus viability in pasteurized milk

On 10/9/2024 2:24 PM, RonO wrote:

On 10/7/2024 1:31 PM, RonO wrote:

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/11/24-0772_article
>
This article is in the November news letter.
>
It indicates that the milk supply may not be as safe as the FDA thinks. There are two pasteurization methods.  63 degrees C for 30 minutes and 72 degrees C for 15 to 20 seconds.  The 30 minute method decreased viable virus to below detection level, but the 72 degree C method did not.  This study also found that the virus remained infective for greater than 4 days after pasteurization.  This means that if the 72 degree C method is used there could be live virus in the milk for more than 4 days.
>
The article doesn't mention this, but H5 flu virus detection in city waste water has been an unexplained mystery because symptoms are not being claimed in those cities, but mild gut infections may be going unnoticed.  It might explain H5N1 in waste water where it should not be found.
>
It sounds like the pasteurization method of processing plants accepting possibly infected milk should be checked out.  Diarrhea was one of the symptoms expressed by the Missouri patient.
>
Ron Okimoto
>

 I just found out that the 72 degree C for 15 second pasteurization is the most common method used in the US.  It should be something that they consider in the Missouri case with no known source of infection.
 Ron Okimoto
 

No news sources are commenting on the CDC findings that infective virus survives the most common method of pasteurization.  The CDC hasn't made their usual announcement about it.  They have just published the findings in their November Newsletter.  At the very least the FDA should be panicking at this point because their testing was not adequate to make this determination.
It is a very reasonable possibility that the Missouri patient was infected in this way (the patient had no contact with cattle or poultry).  Missouri has never admitted to having infected herds, and they admit that they just have not looked for them.
Ron Okimoto