This link will take you to the article published on 1 May 2019. It is a major new development in milk processing and now patented.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2019-05-01/fresh-milk-breakthrough-offers-60-day-fridge-shelf-life/11062284
A new method of ensuring milk is disease free has been developed and is touted as the biggest development in milk processing since pasteurisation.
Pasteurisation is if you think about it, the gold standard to ensure disease free milk is available for users. Heated to around 72C for a short time the milk is then bottled / packaged and sealed, and delivered to customers in a cold chain for use. Shelf life maybe is 2 weeks, if kept well refrigerated.
Or go for UHT milk - refrigeration not needed but shelf life is quite long, although does have a slightly different taste.
This new process is equal to or better than pasteurizing, and while requiring some cold storage gives a shelf life of 60 days. An enormous improvement.
AND an Australian development at that.
Opens up some major new opportunities in various areas including milk processing for speciality non pasteurised cheese manufacture using sea or road transport for the milk to make the downstream value added product. Especially relevant for export of fresh milk and cheese.
Suitable for most if not all milk - cow, sheep, goat, camel, buffalo all included.
Read the article - a massive step into some new industries over time.
Showing posts with label milk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label milk. Show all posts
Thursday, May 02, 2019
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Organic Meat and Milk Tested Against Conventional Product
Organic meat and milk put to the test by British study at Newcastle University
By Sam Murden 17 February 2016
Editorial
image: http://pcm.verticals.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/articles/images/Organic-meat-and-milk-put-to-the-test-by-British-study-at-Newcastle-University-664441-l.jpg
Milk today comes in a lot of different varieties: lactose-free, permeate free, low-fat, high protein, A2-only protein, pasteurised and homogenised milk.
In a similar manner, meat selection has also vastly broadened to include wagyu, free-range, grass-fed, grain-fed, hormone-free, nitrate-free, heart-smart etc.
Consumers are being forced to debate whether it is worth the extra dollars for organic versus about $2.15 for conventional, $9.89 for 450g of organic beef mince versus about $5 for conventional meat.
A new study, the largest of its kind to date, set out to delineate the nutritional differences (ethical differences, are another matter), one arguably of equal or greater importance.
Breaking down the data from 196 studies on milk and 67 on meat from around the world, the British researchers from Newcastle University found that there were clear nutritional differences between conventional and organic meat and dairy.
OMEGA-3 FATTY ACIDS
It was found that both organic milk and meat contain about 50 per cent more beneficial omega-3 fatty acids than conventionally produced products. "Omega-3s are linked to reductions in cardiovascular disease, improved neurological development and function, and better immune function," said study co-author Professor Chris Seal. "But getting enough in our diet is difficult. Our study suggests that switching to organic would go some way towards improving intakes of these important nutrients."
Nutritionist and founder of The Health Clinic Pip Reed adds that our bodies can't produce omega-3 fatty acids so we need them from food. "Studies show that three in five Australians don't eat the recommended two to three serves of 150 grams of oily fish per week required for good heart health," Reed says, "and less than 10 per cent of children meet these recommendations which means that having additional sources of omegas available through organic milk and meats is extremely important."
FURTHER HEALTH BENEFITS
The researchers also found organic meat and dairy contain about 40 per cent more conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and "slightly higher" concentrations of iron, Vitamin E and some carotenoids. "CLA is a natural polyunsaturated fat found in meat and dairy products, and is one of the most popular weight loss supplements," Reed says. "It is technically a natural trans fat, however without the risks that come with artificially made trans fats renowned for damaging our health. "Getting CLA from animal milk products is important, as supplement versions are derived from sunflower and safflower oil, and do not have the same health benefit effect on our bodies."
CONVENTIONAL WIN
Conventional milk, with 74 per cent more iodine and slightly more selenium, was a winner here.
This is significant given that iodine deficiencies in Australia were considered enough of a problem that, in 2009, mandatory fortification of baked bread and iodised salt was introduced.
Now it affects about 12.8 per cent of Australians. "Iodine and selenium are both important essential minerals that help regulate the thyroid hormones, controlling metabolism, body temperature, improve energy levels, as well as aid in detoxification, providing antioxidants, healthy pregnancy and stabilising healthy weight," Reed says. "These two essential minerals, in excess consumption, can cause toxicity, so unless you are deficient in these minerals and/or not eating a well rounded diet then the increase of iodine and selenium in conventional milk may not be of benefit to you."
VERDICT
The dietitians:
"While we no doubt all agree with not using chemicals if possible and the philosophy of organic farming, we have to question if it can really produce enough food to feed us all?" says Dr Joanna McMillan.
"The cost is still prohibitive for most and at the end of the day are these differences clinically significant? Most people just need to eat more real food before they think about whether they can make the switch to organic."
"This analysis clearly shows that organic milk has higher concentrations of omega 3 fatty acids than conventional milk. However the analysis also found that grass-fed cattle tend to produce milk with higher levels of omega 3 fatty acids," says Nutrition Plus dietitian Melanie McGrice. "We are blessed to be living in a country where most of our cattle are grass-fed, and they are not locked away in stalls.
"The analysis found that organic milk is a more nutritious option, and I'd certainly be in favour of people using it... [but] we don't really drink milk for its omega 3 anyway – for that we should be turning to fish.
"In summary, drink organic milk if you'd like to and can afford it, but conventional milk is still a nutritious choice if you can't."
The study author:
"People choose organic milk and meat for three main reasons: improved animal welfare, the positive impacts of organic farming on the environment, and the perceived health benefits," said the study author, Professor Carlo Leifert. "But much less is known about impacts on nutritional quality, hence the need for this study.
"Several of these differences stem from organic livestock production and are brought about by differences in production intensity, with outdoor-reared, grass-fed animals producing milk and meat that is consistently higher in desirable fatty acids such as the omega-3s, and lower in fatty acids that can promote heart disease and other chronic diseases."
In a similar manner, meat selection has also vastly broadened to include wagyu, free-range, grass-fed, grain-fed, hormone-free, nitrate-free, heart-smart etc.
Consumers are being forced to debate whether it is worth the extra dollars for organic versus about $2.15 for conventional, $9.89 for 450g of organic beef mince versus about $5 for conventional meat.
A new study, the largest of its kind to date, set out to delineate the nutritional differences (ethical differences, are another matter), one arguably of equal or greater importance.
Breaking down the data from 196 studies on milk and 67 on meat from around the world, the British researchers from Newcastle University found that there were clear nutritional differences between conventional and organic meat and dairy.
OMEGA-3 FATTY ACIDS
It was found that both organic milk and meat contain about 50 per cent more beneficial omega-3 fatty acids than conventionally produced products. "Omega-3s are linked to reductions in cardiovascular disease, improved neurological development and function, and better immune function," said study co-author Professor Chris Seal. "But getting enough in our diet is difficult. Our study suggests that switching to organic would go some way towards improving intakes of these important nutrients."
Nutritionist and founder of The Health Clinic Pip Reed adds that our bodies can't produce omega-3 fatty acids so we need them from food. "Studies show that three in five Australians don't eat the recommended two to three serves of 150 grams of oily fish per week required for good heart health," Reed says, "and less than 10 per cent of children meet these recommendations which means that having additional sources of omegas available through organic milk and meats is extremely important."
FURTHER HEALTH BENEFITS
The researchers also found organic meat and dairy contain about 40 per cent more conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and "slightly higher" concentrations of iron, Vitamin E and some carotenoids. "CLA is a natural polyunsaturated fat found in meat and dairy products, and is one of the most popular weight loss supplements," Reed says. "It is technically a natural trans fat, however without the risks that come with artificially made trans fats renowned for damaging our health. "Getting CLA from animal milk products is important, as supplement versions are derived from sunflower and safflower oil, and do not have the same health benefit effect on our bodies."
CONVENTIONAL WIN
Conventional milk, with 74 per cent more iodine and slightly more selenium, was a winner here.
This is significant given that iodine deficiencies in Australia were considered enough of a problem that, in 2009, mandatory fortification of baked bread and iodised salt was introduced.
Now it affects about 12.8 per cent of Australians. "Iodine and selenium are both important essential minerals that help regulate the thyroid hormones, controlling metabolism, body temperature, improve energy levels, as well as aid in detoxification, providing antioxidants, healthy pregnancy and stabilising healthy weight," Reed says. "These two essential minerals, in excess consumption, can cause toxicity, so unless you are deficient in these minerals and/or not eating a well rounded diet then the increase of iodine and selenium in conventional milk may not be of benefit to you."
VERDICT
The dietitians:
"While we no doubt all agree with not using chemicals if possible and the philosophy of organic farming, we have to question if it can really produce enough food to feed us all?" says Dr Joanna McMillan.
"The cost is still prohibitive for most and at the end of the day are these differences clinically significant? Most people just need to eat more real food before they think about whether they can make the switch to organic."
"This analysis clearly shows that organic milk has higher concentrations of omega 3 fatty acids than conventional milk. However the analysis also found that grass-fed cattle tend to produce milk with higher levels of omega 3 fatty acids," says Nutrition Plus dietitian Melanie McGrice. "We are blessed to be living in a country where most of our cattle are grass-fed, and they are not locked away in stalls.
"The analysis found that organic milk is a more nutritious option, and I'd certainly be in favour of people using it... [but] we don't really drink milk for its omega 3 anyway – for that we should be turning to fish.
"In summary, drink organic milk if you'd like to and can afford it, but conventional milk is still a nutritious choice if you can't."
The study author:
"People choose organic milk and meat for three main reasons: improved animal welfare, the positive impacts of organic farming on the environment, and the perceived health benefits," said the study author, Professor Carlo Leifert. "But much less is known about impacts on nutritional quality, hence the need for this study.
"Several of these differences stem from organic livestock production and are brought about by differences in production intensity, with outdoor-reared, grass-fed animals producing milk and meat that is consistently higher in desirable fatty acids such as the omega-3s, and lower in fatty acids that can promote heart disease and other chronic diseases."
------------------------
The story is somewhat mixed - a British study using data from many sources at the British University of Newcastle, yet with comments about Australia.
True, in Australia [and NZ] most livestock products are produced predominantly outdoors by grazing animals on pastures, also beneficial for food quality.
The bottom line is that normal dairy products are okay - although there may be a very minor benefit from some specialist products including organic. It does seem to say that it is an expensive option and other actions could be more useful nutritionally eg eat more fish.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Radical New Genetic Pathways to Change Livestock Breeding
It seems as if Australian science has delivered another major advance in agriculture, this time in the methodology of livestock breeding. It could have very important ramifications for almost all livestock groups, but especially cattle. Now a driver in dairy cow improvement, it is coming to beef production soon.
And so far, once again, other parts of the world have been quick to implement it's use.........with Australia lagging behind.............AGAIN!
-------------------
Genetic breakthrough to change livestock breeding
18/06/2009
WHEN Mike Goddard reflects on the path that led him into livestock genetics the response takes time.
"It seemed like a fun topic."
It is an incongruous reply for a Melbourne born and bred man who has dedicated himself over the best part of 40 odd years to improving methods for genetic selection, but one Professor Goddard has never seen as a disadvantage.
But taking Professor Goddard's modesty aside (when asked his reaction to a recent honourary doctorate awarded by the Norwegian University of Life Science he said "it was nice") Australia's and the world's advancement in livestock genetics has been a slow and often lonely road.
"We have been trying to use genetic markers since about 1990 but it is only in recent years that it has started to take off," he said. "The technology was never quite been good enough and in fact a lot of people gave up."
So where are we at now, and just what role does Australia play?
Questions Professor Goddard takes great pride in answering.
In terms of the future, he says genetics is about to take off - the technology is working and the world's need to produce more food from less has governments seeking solutions.
The dairy industry in the United States has started using a new Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) chip that can test 50,000 gene markers at once, and New Zealand, Holland and Australia are following closely. "This means instead of having to wait five years while a bull's progeny are tested, producers can test for DNA markers when the bull is born, and when the bull is a year old and semen available it can be used."
With this science, Professor Goddard said there is the potential to double the rate of genetic gain.
As far as Australia's role in genetic advancement, considering its size "we have been at the forefront in livestock all along".
"If you were to nominate one scientific area where Australia contributes more to world knowledge than expected from its population size, it would be in genetic improvement of livestock," he said.
In 2001 Professor Goddard and his colleague Ben Hayes authored a paper that showed how to predict the total genetic value of an animal using genome-wide dense DNA markers. This work, the Meuwissen, Hayes and Goddard paper, widely revered in genetic communities as breakthrough science, has since become proven thanks to the commercial release of a SNP chip for cattle in 2004.
The ability to track tens of thousands of genes in the one test, as predicted by Professor Goddard and his colleagues, has opened the flood gates on the potential for rapid genetic gain, and word travelled quickly. In the world's leading genetic early adoption country, the United States, 4500 progeny-tested dairy bulls have been tested and thousands more are scheduled. In Australia where Professor Goddard admits it has been an "unfortunately slower" around 2000 dairy bulls have been tested.
For beef and sheep, DNA testing is not a new concept, but Professor Goddard says we can't yet predict genetic merit in beef and sheep as accurately as in dairy cattle. "In dairy there is not the multiple breed problems - if it works in Holstein that is three quarters of the job done."
What Professor Goddard and his colleagues are aiming for is a commercial arrangement with a DNA company such as Pfizer, but to retain a centralised common estimated breeding value database from which producers can benchmark stock.
"For years it has been relatively easy to find the gene for traits that are controlled by a single gene such red coat color, but many traits are controlled by lots of genes which each have a small effect so the advantage with the SNP chip is that we can test up to 50,000 markers all at once."
Beef will be next to follow the dairy lead, and sheep after that, he says.
Professor Goddard, a former tropical livestock genetics expert at James Cook University Townsville, has acquired an international reputation for his broad grasp on livestock genetics.
His passport wears the mismatched marks of a seasoned traveller who is regularly fronting international genetics conventions, and in Australia his unique skill set has him stretched across duties within the Melbourne University, Department of Primary Industries and Beef CRC - as a start.
His professional career has coincided with the livestock genetics movement.
It began as a young veterinary graduate, in the 1970s, when he completed his PhD on a breeding program for guide dogs for the blind at University of Melbourne. It was working with the genetics/breeding scheme of dogs that Professor Goddard's unfaltering intrigue in genetic possibilities started. Livestock, he said, was just the next natural step.
Looking back he said it is difficult to conceptualise that a lot of the work has only just started to eventuate, but he has no doubt that genomic selection will spawn a whole new way of selecting animals.
Already he said work is being done in the beef and dairy industries on identifying genes for feed conversion traits, and in time there is the hope that producers and processors will be able to test livestock and decide for which market the animal would be best suited. "Gradually genetic selection will be introduced into all livestock sections and it will revolutionise them."
"This I have no doubt of."
extract from Queensland Country Life 18 June 2009
And so far, once again, other parts of the world have been quick to implement it's use.........with Australia lagging behind.............AGAIN!
-------------------
Genetic breakthrough to change livestock breeding
18/06/2009
WHEN Mike Goddard reflects on the path that led him into livestock genetics the response takes time.
"It seemed like a fun topic."
It is an incongruous reply for a Melbourne born and bred man who has dedicated himself over the best part of 40 odd years to improving methods for genetic selection, but one Professor Goddard has never seen as a disadvantage.
But taking Professor Goddard's modesty aside (when asked his reaction to a recent honourary doctorate awarded by the Norwegian University of Life Science he said "it was nice") Australia's and the world's advancement in livestock genetics has been a slow and often lonely road.
"We have been trying to use genetic markers since about 1990 but it is only in recent years that it has started to take off," he said. "The technology was never quite been good enough and in fact a lot of people gave up."
So where are we at now, and just what role does Australia play?
Questions Professor Goddard takes great pride in answering.
In terms of the future, he says genetics is about to take off - the technology is working and the world's need to produce more food from less has governments seeking solutions.
The dairy industry in the United States has started using a new Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) chip that can test 50,000 gene markers at once, and New Zealand, Holland and Australia are following closely. "This means instead of having to wait five years while a bull's progeny are tested, producers can test for DNA markers when the bull is born, and when the bull is a year old and semen available it can be used."
With this science, Professor Goddard said there is the potential to double the rate of genetic gain.
As far as Australia's role in genetic advancement, considering its size "we have been at the forefront in livestock all along".
"If you were to nominate one scientific area where Australia contributes more to world knowledge than expected from its population size, it would be in genetic improvement of livestock," he said.
In 2001 Professor Goddard and his colleague Ben Hayes authored a paper that showed how to predict the total genetic value of an animal using genome-wide dense DNA markers. This work, the Meuwissen, Hayes and Goddard paper, widely revered in genetic communities as breakthrough science, has since become proven thanks to the commercial release of a SNP chip for cattle in 2004.
The ability to track tens of thousands of genes in the one test, as predicted by Professor Goddard and his colleagues, has opened the flood gates on the potential for rapid genetic gain, and word travelled quickly. In the world's leading genetic early adoption country, the United States, 4500 progeny-tested dairy bulls have been tested and thousands more are scheduled. In Australia where Professor Goddard admits it has been an "unfortunately slower" around 2000 dairy bulls have been tested.
For beef and sheep, DNA testing is not a new concept, but Professor Goddard says we can't yet predict genetic merit in beef and sheep as accurately as in dairy cattle. "In dairy there is not the multiple breed problems - if it works in Holstein that is three quarters of the job done."
What Professor Goddard and his colleagues are aiming for is a commercial arrangement with a DNA company such as Pfizer, but to retain a centralised common estimated breeding value database from which producers can benchmark stock.
"For years it has been relatively easy to find the gene for traits that are controlled by a single gene such red coat color, but many traits are controlled by lots of genes which each have a small effect so the advantage with the SNP chip is that we can test up to 50,000 markers all at once."
Beef will be next to follow the dairy lead, and sheep after that, he says.
Professor Goddard, a former tropical livestock genetics expert at James Cook University Townsville, has acquired an international reputation for his broad grasp on livestock genetics.
His passport wears the mismatched marks of a seasoned traveller who is regularly fronting international genetics conventions, and in Australia his unique skill set has him stretched across duties within the Melbourne University, Department of Primary Industries and Beef CRC - as a start.
His professional career has coincided with the livestock genetics movement.
It began as a young veterinary graduate, in the 1970s, when he completed his PhD on a breeding program for guide dogs for the blind at University of Melbourne. It was working with the genetics/breeding scheme of dogs that Professor Goddard's unfaltering intrigue in genetic possibilities started. Livestock, he said, was just the next natural step.
Looking back he said it is difficult to conceptualise that a lot of the work has only just started to eventuate, but he has no doubt that genomic selection will spawn a whole new way of selecting animals.
Already he said work is being done in the beef and dairy industries on identifying genes for feed conversion traits, and in time there is the hope that producers and processors will be able to test livestock and decide for which market the animal would be best suited. "Gradually genetic selection will be introduced into all livestock sections and it will revolutionise them."
"This I have no doubt of."
extract from Queensland Country Life 18 June 2009
Friday, January 02, 2009
Milk Company Manager in Court
While now many months after the events in late 2008, a recent short newspaper article indicated that the woman who was the Managing Director of Sanlu - the major milk company involved in the problems - has been in court.
Information available so far indicates she knew of the problem several months before advice went to the Chinese government.
There is potential for her to be executed if found guilty.
That will not bring back the dead children, however.
Information available so far indicates she knew of the problem several months before advice went to the Chinese government.
There is potential for her to be executed if found guilty.
That will not bring back the dead children, however.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Would YOU Buy Milk from China? Or Any Food from China?
Credibility comes and so easily goes. It can be destroyed so easily, and even by others.
Business dealings with the Chinse always tend to have overtones of someone on the make. The old “whats in it for me” concept. Or often, how can I make something out of the transaction....even a bit more than the normal. The usual middle man syndrome.
This week the news all over Asia is the story of contaminated Chinese milk products. Not just a bit contaminated with a few E.coli or as sometimes happens, a small piece of glass or metal that came off equipment. No, this time it is a full blown deliberate addition of nothing less than the toxic chemical, melamine.
And the reason? A deliberate attempt it seems to obfuscate the system by boosting milk protein levels with the addition of the melamine. Just to make a lot more money, as milk is sold on protein content.
After all, even China bans melamine in food products, including milk. Companies it seems may not have been testing for the melamine.........but then, did they really expect the middlemen, those who consolidate milk supply from small producers and deliver to the milk processors, would be ADDING a toxic product to help boost protein levels and hence their profits?
This seems to be the story. No doubt there is more to emerge over the next few days and weeks.
Sure, the factories have been caught out big time. And senior people appear to have been suspended or resigned from the factories already.
Consumers are being screwed again over poor products. This time they are killing children, or making them very unwell. Emotive material and there are widely shown images on Asian TV channels.
Westerners might be crowing a little with the range of regulatory checks and balances, and may seem to show the western style checking schemes of both self regulation and an overarching regulatory system of the government in a good light.
There are already some trends towards increased regulation of previously self regulated areas in western societies. Will this trend accelerate?
Experiences in China reinforce a view that while laws may exist, the regulatory framework and an attitude in business / society seem to thumb their noses at their existence, or use corrupt practices to circumvent them. Has this been the case here?
There is a lot at stake...........including the credibility of much of food production and regulation in China. And do not forget, a lot of fresh Chinese products are exported......quite a few shipments get refused entry to countries over food safety already, without much publicity, eg toxic residues in food, high residual agrochemicals. Not to mention the past problems with lead paint on children's toys.
The stakes are high. Not to mention Chinese government credibility. Will the Australian government impose generally tighter regulations for Chinese food imports to Australia for example?
Business dealings with the Chinse always tend to have overtones of someone on the make. The old “whats in it for me” concept. Or often, how can I make something out of the transaction....even a bit more than the normal. The usual middle man syndrome.
This week the news all over Asia is the story of contaminated Chinese milk products. Not just a bit contaminated with a few E.coli or as sometimes happens, a small piece of glass or metal that came off equipment. No, this time it is a full blown deliberate addition of nothing less than the toxic chemical, melamine.
And the reason? A deliberate attempt it seems to obfuscate the system by boosting milk protein levels with the addition of the melamine. Just to make a lot more money, as milk is sold on protein content.
After all, even China bans melamine in food products, including milk. Companies it seems may not have been testing for the melamine.........but then, did they really expect the middlemen, those who consolidate milk supply from small producers and deliver to the milk processors, would be ADDING a toxic product to help boost protein levels and hence their profits?
This seems to be the story. No doubt there is more to emerge over the next few days and weeks.
Sure, the factories have been caught out big time. And senior people appear to have been suspended or resigned from the factories already.
Consumers are being screwed again over poor products. This time they are killing children, or making them very unwell. Emotive material and there are widely shown images on Asian TV channels.
Westerners might be crowing a little with the range of regulatory checks and balances, and may seem to show the western style checking schemes of both self regulation and an overarching regulatory system of the government in a good light.
There are already some trends towards increased regulation of previously self regulated areas in western societies. Will this trend accelerate?
Experiences in China reinforce a view that while laws may exist, the regulatory framework and an attitude in business / society seem to thumb their noses at their existence, or use corrupt practices to circumvent them. Has this been the case here?
There is a lot at stake...........including the credibility of much of food production and regulation in China. And do not forget, a lot of fresh Chinese products are exported......quite a few shipments get refused entry to countries over food safety already, without much publicity, eg toxic residues in food, high residual agrochemicals. Not to mention the past problems with lead paint on children's toys.
The stakes are high. Not to mention Chinese government credibility. Will the Australian government impose generally tighter regulations for Chinese food imports to Australia for example?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)