Quote:

---

Originally posted by mincingbeast:
Never said anything about human blood. Or urine.

Human tears are my preferred beverage, but its hard to get enough to really quench your thirst.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Sure, but I don't drink cow's milk OR human milk and I think y'all are weird.

Additional note: Even after pasteurization, milk can become contaminated. Psychologically the concern here is disease spread, there's a good reason why, as the article says, adults have a hardwired response about drinking body fluids.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Still a concern.

I really wouldn't want to accidentally drink milk with even destroyed HIV in it that got through the screening process. The thought is alarming and disturbing. And I'm not sure if a retrovirus might be resistant to normal forms of pastuerization, I could imagine ways in which it might me. A retrovirus has TWO coats, what if you only end up destroying one of them?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:


More disturbing is how they are getting the milk. Do they pay mothers? Do mothers volunteer? Why would you send you milk to a restaurant - why not a bank for babies, which happens here? What makes anyone think - oh, I think I going to express some milk for the cafe up the road. What a great idea.

---

Quote:

---

I can't figure out if this sentence is saying contracting a disease from a cow or goat is more likely or contracting from a human is more likely. Both are viable contagion pathways

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I re-iterate, the biggest reason this is a bad idea is the same as monetizing water.

---