"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
Jim Webster wrote:

"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
Jim Webster wrote:

"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
Jim Webster wrote:


But my point is that if you don't notice any of those differences
then
perhaps your perceptivity might not be trusted as to differences
between
cows reactions to GM vs non-GM feed.

stop being silly

we are not talking about arbitary perceptions but people who are
monitoring
high yielding dairy cows so closely that a 5% drop in yield against
predicition is a cause for major investigation.

Yield is one important thing, but some people will pay for qualities,
won't they?

not s noticable proportion of the UK population

So many are trying to coach down the quest for organic quality.

When the top milk is butter it can no longer be poured on the
pudding.


BF, Protein and Lactose have been measured on a twice weekly basis (at
least) in UK milk for over 20 years. All these things are carefully
monitored

Measured in quantity.

I used to think that the processing was causing the trouble - that the
milk would be being agitated more in processing so that the journey in the
delivery truck would finish the churning to butter of the top milk.
Now I am thinking of the different fatty acid composition of the BF
because of feed.


In the US we have bred Holsteins to give skim milk is one of the reasons
there is little butter fat.

Gordon