Rothschilds FORCED milk pasteurization. Pasteurization removes Lactoferrin. Do some research and tell us what Lactoferrin does.
Executive summary
Victor (Nathaniel Mayer) Rothschild did indeed press the UK Parliament in 1946 to expand pasteurization of milk; he spoke about it in the House of Lords and the government accepted the motion [1][2]. Scientific literature shows pasteurization—especially Holder and higher‑temperature treatments—reduces lactoferrin levels in milk and donor human milk (reductions reported ~61% and up to ~66% in studies) though retention varies by method and temperature [3][4][5]. Lactoferrin is a multifunctional iron‑binding glycoprotein with documented antimicrobial, antiviral, immunoregulatory, antioxidant and iron‑transport roles, particularly important in newborns [6][7][8].
1. Rothschild and the politics of pasteurization — a clear historical intervention
Victor Rothschild lobbied actively for compulsory pasteurization in the House of Lords in April 1946; the parliamentary record shows Lord Rothschild’s motion and the government’s acceptance that expanding heat treatment of milk was essential [1]. Multiple biographies and archival pages confirm he spoke on pasteurisation twice in the Lords that year [2][9][10]. Contemporary and later popular sources sometimes embellish this into broader conspiracy narratives; such claims are social commentary, not primary evidence of malicious intent [11][12].
2. What lactoferrin is — the science in plain language
Lactoferrin (Lf) is an iron‑binding glycoprotein found in milk (especially high in colostrum), tears, saliva and neutrophils. Researchers describe it as multifunctional — it chelates iron, interferes with pathogen receptors, and modulates immune responses, giving it antimicrobial, antiviral, antioxidant and immunostimulatory properties [6][7][13].
3. Clinical and developmental importance — strongest evidence in infants
Clinical reviews and randomized trials link lactoferrin to protection for neonates and infants: it supports gut maturation, reduces risk or severity of gastrointestinal infections and neonatal sepsis in some trials, and contributes to immunologic maturation in preterm infants [8][7]. Medical literature therefore treats lactoferrin as a biologically important component of human milk, and it is sometimes recommended or supplemented for vulnerable newborns [8][14].
4. Pasteurization’s effect on lactoferrin — method and temperature matter
Multiple studies show heat treatments reduce lactoferrin content and activity; Holder pasteurization (62.5°C, 30 min) and higher temperatures produce significant losses. Reported decreases include ~61% reduction after Holder pasteurization in fortified donor milk [3], and mean lactoferrin falling from 2.5 mg/mL to 0.03 mg/mL in one study after pasteurization [5]. Systematic comparisons show retention depends strongly on pasteurizer design and exact temperature: lower pasteurization temperatures (around 57°C) preserved >90% of proteins while 62.5°C caused larger losses [15]. High‑temperature short‑time (HTST) and UHT also reduce certain bioactive proteins [16][17].
5. What this means practically — tradeoffs between safety and bioactivity
Pasteurization’s purpose is microbiological safety; parliamentary advocates like Rothschild pressed for it because raw milk historically transmitted diseases such as bovine tuberculosis [1]. Public‑health agencies note that mature bovine milk’s lactoferrin concentration is relatively low and that common commercial pasteurization regimes retain most antimicrobial activity in bovine milk (estimates of 97–99% retention at 72°C for 15s are cited) — though this depends on species (cow vs human milk) and protocol [18]. For donor human milk and colostrum, losses of lactoferrin and other bioactives are larger and clinically meaningful, which is why alternative processes (e.g., high‑pressure processing) are being studied to better preserve bioactivity while ensuring safety [19].
6. Competing narratives and what sources do and do not show
Conspiracy narratives claim the Rothschilds “ordered” pasteurization to remove beneficial milk components; available archival and parliamentary sources show Rothschild advocated pasteurization as a public‑health measure in a postwar context, not as evidence of a covert plot [1][10]. Scientific sources confirm pasteurization can reduce lactoferrin—especially in human milk and under certain heat regimes—so the technical claim that heat reduces lactoferrin is supported [3][4][5]. Available sources do not mention any evidence that Rothschild’s advocacy aimed to eliminate lactoferrin for other motives or that pasteurization was conceived to systematically deprive the public of lactoferrin [1][2].
7. Bottom line and further questions for readers
Lactoferrin is a biologically active milk protein with clear roles in immunity and iron handling, especially for infants [6][8]. Heat treatments used to make milk safe can and do reduce lactoferrin levels, with magnitude depending on temperature and method [3][15]. Rothschild’s role was as a public‑health advocate in a historical moment with real infectious‑disease threats; sources link his speeches to safety arguments rather than conspiratorial aims [1][2]. If you want to probe further, examine contemporary public‑health records on milk‑borne disease in the 1930s–1940s and technical studies comparing pasteurization regimes and alternative processing (available sources above include parliamentary Hansard and multiple scientific reviews) [1][16][19].