
- With Mayo Clinic nutritionists
Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.
read biographyclose windowBiography of
Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.
Katherine Zeratsky and Jennifer Nelson
Jennifer K. Nelson, M.S., R.D., L.D., C.N.S.D.
Jennifer Nelson is your link to a better diet. As specialty editor of the nutrition and healthy eating guide, she plays a vital role in bringing you healthy recipes and meal planning."Nutrition is one way people have direct control over the quality of their lives," she says. "I hope to translate the science of nutrition into ways that people can select and prepare great-tasting foods that help maintain health and treat disease."
A St. Paul, Minn., native, she has been with Mayo Clinic since 1978, and is director of clinical dietetics and an associate professor of nutrition at Mayo Clinic College of Medicine.
She leads clinical nutrition efforts for a staff of more than 60 clinical dietitians and nine dietetic technicians and oversees nutrition services, staffing, strategic and financial planning, and quality improvement. Nelson was co-editor of the "Mayo Clinic Diet" and the James Beard Foundation Award-winning "The New Mayo Clinic Cookbook." She has been a contributing author to and reviewer of many other Mayo Clinic books, including "Mayo Clinic Healthy Weight for EveryBody," "The Mayo Clinic Family Health Book" and "The Mayo Clinic/Williams Sonoma Cookbook." She contributes to the strategic direction of the Food & Nutrition Center, which includes creating recipes and menus, reviewing nutrition content of various articles, and providing expert answers to nutrition questions.
Katherine Zeratsky, R.D., L.D.
As a specialty editor of the nutrition and healthy eating guide, Katherine Zeratsky helps you sort through the facts and figures, the fads and the hype to learn more about nutrition and diet.A Marinette, Wis., native, she is certified in dietetics by the state of Minnesota and the American Dietetic Association. She has been with Mayo Clinic since 1999.
She's active in nutrition-related curriculum and course development in wellness nutrition at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and nutrition related to weight management and practical applications of nutrition-related lifestyle changes.
Other areas of interest include food and nutrition for all life stages, active lifestyles and the culinary arts.
She graduated from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, served a dietetic internship at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, and worked as a registered dietitian and health risk counselor at ThedaCare of Appleton, Wis., before joining the Mayo Clinic staff.
Latest entries
- Restaurants get on board with gluten-free cooking
May 25, 2013
- Juicing and blending with a focus on flavor
May 22, 2013
- Safe juicing and blending
May 14, 2013
- Is NEAT part of your weight-control plan?
May 1, 2013
- Exercise, hunger and weight loss
April 25, 2013
Nutrition-wise blog
-
April 23, 2010
Raw milk debate heats up
By Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.
The question of whether to ease restrictions on the sale of raw milk, also known as unpasteurized milk, has stirred up considerable debate.
In 1987 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began requiring that milk be pasteurized to kill bacteria. Raw milk contains numerous pathogens, such as salmonella and E. coli 0157:H7, that cause significant food-borne illness and can lead to hospitalization, kidney failure and even death.
Raw milk proponents say the requirement is unfair and point out that farmers are allowed to sell raw meat and raw vegetables — the two biggest sources of food-borne illness. They argue that raw milk shouldn't be treated differently.
Fans of raw milk assert that it tastes sweeter and fresher. They also claim that it fights allergies, digestive problems, eczema, autism, arthritis and learning disabilities, and boosts immunity — properties that they say are removed by pasteurization. The FDA and other public health officials, however, point out that these claims aren't supported by research.
Proponents of pasteurization remind us that prior to pasteurization, raw milk accounted for up to 25 percent of outbreaks of food- and water-borne illness. Now dairy products account for only about 1 percent of outbreaks — 70 percent of those are attributed to raw milk or raw milk cheeses.
Where do you stand on this question? Do you see it as an issue of big government versus the rights of individual producers and consumers? Are you concerned that in this case freedom of choice comes with risk of serious illness?
- Jennifer
53 comments posted
October 15, 2012 10:34 p.m.
I drink Pennsylvania certified organic raw milk. It is tested once per week and is perfectlty safe to drink. You should not drink raw milk from any place at all. I must come from a clean source, of course and from grass fed cows. The FDA is so currupt! They put flouride in our water, allow high fructose corn syrup and artificial sweetners in food - to hell with anyting the FDA says about food safety.
- Greg
September 1, 2012 11:24 p.m.
I agree with most of the comments here including this one by Tony: So when exactly did the Mayo Clinic discontinue the Milk Cure?
- No name given
July 2, 2012 9:42 p.m.
I think that anyone who has researched the pros and cons, then sees fit to drink raw milk to gain the enormous benefits, does so as an informed individual. Government needs to butt out, afterall, why trust them, they advocate adding fluoride - a know toxin to our water. I know what I want in my body, and I am am intelligent enough to find a clean place to get raw milk. people who want to drink it, are well researched on the subject. I think that one of the reasons it is frowned upon, is that it is of such great benefit to the body that it may actually heal and cure some illnesses where pharmaceuticals will kill you.
- Liz
April 30, 2012 11:12 a.m.
I have endometriosis, and my husband has a hard time sleeping which caused him to have chest pain. I'm 29 and he's 30. For him to have chest pain at his age isn't good at all. We found a farm 61 miles away from us that sales raw milk and decided to check it out 3 days ago. It was very clean and they millked the cows right infront of us. Although the milk wasn't cheap at a whopping $10 per gallon, it was worth it! My endometriosis hasn't acted up and my husband was able to sleep without the aid of medication and hasn't had any chest pain since. I will never buy store bought milk again! By the way, the feds are nothing but a bunch of money hungry people. The drug companies pay them billions of dollars each year to keep the more natural cures away saying that they're not safe. END THE FED!!
- Emily
April 18, 2012 10:11 p.m.
"The FDA and other public health officials, however, point out that these claims aren't supported by research." It is nothing more than a grand demonstration of the art of misinformation. The GABRIELA study is indeed a very comprehensive study involving several thousand European school aged children. The empirical evidence is absolutely clear regarding the benefits of raw fresh milk. Yet, the FDA points states "these claims aren't supported by research". This is the food we do not want to eat! Jim
- Jim
April 4, 2012 12:48 p.m.
Raw milk must be an individual choice. If there are health concerns you should address the causes of those issues, such as cleanliness. If we outlawed every food that made anyone ill there would no longer be any foods left. I want to be able to buy fresh produce (including cantalopes), non-irradiated meats, raw eggs, etc. Anyone selling raw milk through retail outlets should be regulated and inspected just like the farms providing the carrots. Conventional milk really is produced under the most toxic (hormones, antibiotics, no grass) filthy conditions imaginable, that "milk" has to be pasturized as there is nothing safe about it. Milk for the raw market must be produced under very strict guidelines. However, if there are farmers who want to do that, and people that want to buy it, then we need to support and encourage it as clean raw milk is a wonderful food packed with healthy fats and vitamins. I buy raw milk from a local farm, that I have visited. Luckily in my state, one of the few, it's totally legal.
- Dee
March 30, 2012 7:15 p.m.
I love raw cheese, and support farms that treat there animals well.
- Cristal
February 7, 2012 11:20 p.m.
From the time I was 13 to about 19, my parents had their own milk cow. This was in the 1990's by the way. That was the only milk, cream, cheese and butter we had. Never once did I get sick consuming these products. My father's cholesterol actually improved while consuming these raw dairy products. Our cow was like a family pet. She was well cared for and well fed and we knew that cleanliness was a must. I am convinced that raw dairy from a small, clean dairy is safer and much more nutritious than pasteurized, store-bought milk. Why do you think they have to add Vitamin D and other nutrients to pasteurized milk? It's because the natural nutritive properties of the milk are destroyed as part of the pasteurization process.
- Smithy
January 30, 2012 3:40 p.m.
Over 500 people contracted E coli from raw oysters between '95 and '05 and over 250 died. There was an outbreak of E coli from pasteurized cheese in 2010 leaving 38 sick and 15 hospitalized. These are two small examples of food borne illnesses which are never discussed or draw SWAT style raids of federal agents. Knowledge is power - quit being so gullible and swallowing everything the feds feed you.
- Hunchman
January 30, 2012 3:02 p.m.
Pasteurization was developed as a result of growing urban populations and the huge unsanitary dairy farms which were needed to feed the masses. It was a godsend at the time and considering how disgusting most mega-dairies are, it still is. But milk from a well run, well tested raw dairy is safe. Safer than the white fluid your buying at WalMart. Mega-Dairy hates the growth of demand of raw-milk because they can't compete - they're too dirty and they know they can't afford to create sanitary dairy's to meet the growing demand. Are you still believing the crock that the Feds are somehow a branch of 'We The People'? They're the gestapo goons for corporations - all large corporations. Just bc the feds attribute illness to their enemy number one, it doesn't, and never has had to be the truth.
- Jim
December 12, 2011 5:48 p.m.
I really do not care if people choose raw milk- I eat raw oysters and wild mushrooms but I am tired of the health claims that are not backed by any science. These folks are the same as the science denying climate change disbelievers.
- GOTSCIENCE?
November 29, 2011 8:33 a.m.
I grew up in Ireland in the 1970s. Then you could still buy raw milk from farmers - straight from the cow. The regular instances of bacterial infections in children and old people because of raw milk were very frightening. Raw milk carries disease . It can kill you! Not everything that's natural is good for you... like Bovine TB.If you disagree with pasteurization for some reason avoid all milk.Its not possible to choose a farm and decide it safe every day !
- mairead
August 17, 2011 11:01 p.m.
There is a major logical hole in the following insinuation: "Proponents of pasteurization remind us that prior to pasteurization, raw milk accounted for up to 25 percent of outbreaks of food- and water-borne illness. Now dairy products account for only about 1 percent of outbreaks" It could be that before the 1900s, prior to pasteurization's adoption, the pumping, storing, handling, transportation, and home storage of milk were all factors THEN (not necessarily TODAY) in such outbreaks. For instance, home refrigerators only became widely adopted after 1930, well after pasteurization. Relevance? E Coli does not multiply nearly as much under refrigeration as it does at room temperature.
- Parisa
April 30, 2011 9:56 p.m.
Just started drinking raw kefir. I was amazed that it cleared up a problem I had been having for months within just a few days. Something that the pasteurized version had not helped. I'm an educated adult perfectly capable of making nutrition decisions for myself and my family.
- Rachael
April 8, 2011 3:57 p.m.
I have never had raw milk but I have been trying to get it for over a year. I would like to be able to decide for myself if drinking it makes any difference I can get raw fish, spinach, chopmeat,and peanut-butter all which have been recalled for contamination. The only reason I see for raw milk being illegal is in that it really does help all these health problems and Big Pharma would have the money sucked out of it's pockets and kept in the consumer's pockets when their pills aren't needed. I'm tired of the government playing my parent and telling me that it know's better than I do what's good for me. I may not always make the right choices but isn't what freedom is all about, to make even a wrong choice sometime.
- Barbara
April 7, 2011 3:23 p.m.
Weston Price was also an advocate of including "healthy fats" in one's diet. http://www.westonaprice.org/
- Lori
April 7, 2011 3:17 p.m.
I live in Chicago and I've been drinking raw milk for over six years. I have never gotten sick from it. In fact, I rarely, if ever get sick anymore.I was in a car accident that left me with severe nerve damage, arthritis, and osteo-necrosis(bone death) I never have any more joint pain. Our bodies need healthy bacteria to cleanse itself. Raw milk contains raw fat. We need some "healthy fats" to pull toxins out of our bodies. (Avocados and coconuts are also healthy fats) A low fat diet is not entirely healthy. Raw fats have a regenerative quality of building and cleansing that is necessary. It saddens me that our present day health care system is purely driven by the profit motive.
- Lori
March 25, 2011 1:00 p.m.
I remember as a kid the milkhouse where our milk was strained into milk cans to be picked up by the milk hauler. The milk cans were kept in a spring fed cooling tank. We kids would take a glass into the milkhouse, lift the strainer and put our glasses under to catch the warm, delicious milk. Didn't get any better than that. Now I can't drink milk at all. I must buy almond or coconut milk because I don't like the taste of soy. Lot pricier than raw milk could be and not nearly as tasty. There were 9 kids in my family. None of us got the "usual" sicknesses (except measles, chickenpox, mumps which we passed around on purpose). I truly believe we have sanitized our way into superbugs and other diseases we have no resistance to because we haven't be naturally inoculated against them.
- NJ
January 15, 2011 9:01 p.m.
I realize that the focus of this blog is health; however, this issue raises critical legal issues as well. We have become far too complacent in allowing government intrusion into the most private and personal aspects of our lives. Regardless of what we believe about the health benefits of raw milk, it is completely unacceptable and intrusive for the government to require that we ingest processed foods of any kind--including pasteurized milk. Check the labels on your pasteurized skim and 1% or 2% milk. You will see two additives--Vitamin A palmitate and Vitamin D3. Do some Internet research on what those are: synthetic, chemically created (using toxic solvents) additives that replace what is lost when the butterfat is skimmed off. And not on the label: powdered milk (made by a process that some scientists say increases the risk of artheosclerosis) is added in to replicate the flavor lost when the cream is skimmed. Pasteurization is more than just heat treatment--we need to educate ourselves, then take back our right to choose our food.
- Elizabeth
December 3, 2010 11:10 p.m.
So when exactly did the Mayo Clinic discontinue the Milk Cure?
- Tony
September 7, 2010 12:24 a.m.
I have read 2 articles on the Mayo Clinic website and am very disappointed in both. the first article was on dioxins coming from plastic. Zeratsky blames soil water fat fires & burning household trash w/o explanation, while giving "chemical & industrial processes" very little blame. This is a person bent on blaming individuals and nature for dioxin contamination when this is known not to be the case - When it comes to the focus of her article, plastics in the microwave or fridge transferring dioxins to food, she states "this isn't thought to be true" - What? The Mayo Clinic's nutrition representative, writing an article on dioxins in our food, blames people & nature for dioxin contamination then says she doesn't know if plastic contaminates food, then lists things to do to avoid the contamination she claims may not occur... - Now with the story on raw milk, Zeratsky displays the same disrespect for the truth as she had in the dioxin story. She uses fear-mongering "cause significant food-borne illness and can lead to hospitalization, kidney failure and even death" to scare us into line with the corporate philosophy regarding milk consumption - Unfortunately I am not surprised, but very disappointed - Michael
- michael0156
September 3, 2010 7:44 p.m.
I'm surprised that the Mayo Clinic doesn't come out on the side of raw milk. It's not processed like white flour and most pre-packaged foods and it's been around for thousands of years. The Mayo Clinic used a raw milk therapy once upon a time, what happened?
- Ritchie
August 20, 2010 11:38 p.m.
nice post, Having a choice is never a bad thing.
- Lose Weight Naturally
August 19, 2010 9:58 a.m.
Controversy! http://www.draxe.com/is-milk-hurting-or-helpi
ng-your-bones/ - Dr. Josh Axe
July 25, 2010 12:47 a.m.
We bought our own cow after raw milk helped cure my husband of chronic illness. I used to think it was just the dairy lobbies trying to shut down sales from private one-cow families but now I think it's even more than that. I finished reading "The Milk Diet" by a doctor who cured patients of virtually everything with his special raw milk protocol. I learned that one of the founders of the Mayo Clinic was also a raw milk proponent and reported excellent results. What this means is that if correct use of raw milk can cure ourselves of most diseases without the aid of toxic drugs with debilitating side effects (which beget the use of even more drugs) then raw milk is indeed threatening to a very big (and political) industry. When I bought my cow, I had to show her papers to no less than three USDA agents and they parked in front of my house for several days after that (I presume to see if I was selling milk). Talk about paranoia. I wish they would go after the meth users and illegal immigrants as much as me and my one little cow.
- Sharon
Share on:


53 comments posted