Anonymous ID: a0b4b0 Feb. 6, 2022, 3:32 p.m. No.15563552   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>3606 >>3737

Guess who started the pasteurization of milk?

You will never guess it.

 

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1946/apr/10/pasteurization-of-milk

 

PASTEURIZATION OF MILK.

HL Deb 10 April 1946 vol 140 cc643-75

 

LORD ROTHSCHILD rose to call the attention of His Majesty's Government to

644

the urgent need for compulsory pasteurization of milk in as many parts of the United Kingdom as is practicable; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, in spite of your Lordships' well-known indulgence towards beginners, I imagine there are few who do not feel considerable apprehension on the occasion of their maiden speech in this Chamber. I feel this particularly because there are so many noble Lords who are better qualified to speak on the Motion in my name than I am. Nevertheless, I am fortified to a certain extent by the fact that the Motion has the backing of a number of learned institutions such as the British Medical Association, the Society of Medical Officers of Health, the Joint Tuberculosis Council, the Royal College of Surgeons and the Royal College of Physicians.

 

§

It will not be necessary for me to say much about the benefits of pasteurized milk or, as it is known in these days, heat treated milk. Your Lordships are aware that a large number of people die each year through drinking milk contaminated with the bovine tuberculosis germ. I will not weary your Lordships with statistics, but will merely mention that if all the members of this House were killed twice a year—and I think your Lordships will agree that this would be a matter of some gravity—the number of deaths would be of the same order as that caused in the United Kingdom by drinking raw milk contaminated with the germ of tuberculosis. I need not remind your Lordships that the number of casualties from this germ far exceeds the number of deaths; but no precise figures are available to me on this point, though the number of casualties has been estimated at about five times the number of deaths. If we put the number of deaths per year at 1,600, the number of casualties will be between 7,000 and 8,000. These casualties, which require months of hospital treatment, are a source of misery and anxiety to their families and grave expense to the State.

 

§

Of course tuberculosis is not the only disease caused by drinking raw milk contaminated with germs. Undulant fever claims an unknown number of victims each year—un-known because it is a difficult disease to diagnose—while outbreaks of typhoid and paratyphoid fever, dysentry, food poisoning, scarlet fever, and diphtheria

645

are known to be caused from time to time by the drinking of raw milk. During the war, well authenticated milk-borne examples of each of these diseases were reported in the medical Press. Possibly the noble Lord who replies for the Government may be able to tell your Lordships if there have been any outbreaks of disease caused by drinking contaminated raw milk in the United Kingdom during 1946.

 

§

It would appear obvious from the few words I have said that considerable benefits would accrue to the population of this country by removing a perfectly clear cut source of disease and death from the population's milk; and on the assumption that this side of the case is not in dispute, I will turn to the other side which concerns the arguments put forward by the opponents of pasteurization. May I say at the start that I neither can nor shall attempt to deal with the economic aspects of this matter? Your Lordships are well aware that one of the criticisms of any scheme involving the compulsory pasteurization of milk in the United Kingdom is that it will have an adverse effect on the small producer-retailers. Your Lordships may have something to say about the relative merits of killing off numbers of the population each year and maintaining the economic interests of a relatively small section of the community, though the words "as far as is practicable" in my Motion indicate that I appreciate the difficulties of extending any scheme of heat treatment to special or rural parts of the country. If I may, I shall return to the question of the producer-retailer later.

…

Anonymous ID: a0b4b0 Feb. 6, 2022, 4:14 p.m. No.15563845   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>3866

>>15563825

None of it makes even sense.

So you are not allowed to say "nigger", but "n word" is somehow okay despite it simply being a replacement for nigger.

 

"I hate niggers"

"I hate n words"

means literally the same.

"n word" is basically "haha, I can imply nigger and you can't do a thing about it".

 

And yes, if its fine in rap music, it should be fine everywhere else.

Anonymous ID: a0b4b0 Feb. 6, 2022, 4:21 p.m. No.15563875   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>15563869

Why don't they help themselves?

Stop complying.

And establish your own economy, your own system.

Pay cash.

Don't spend money in big chains/corporations.

Get food from local farmers.

Cancel smartphone contracts.

Throw smartphones away.

etc.

 

Every single purchase one does is a choice and a vote for or against something or someone.