Fresh milk

I'm sure there is a way.
Follow these steps:

1.  Who do you know who speaks both English and Vietnamese?
2.  Ask them how you can get milk delivered to your door every day at ___a.m.?
3. When they look at you like you have two heads,  tell them,  you understand that you'll probably pay double for the milk, but you don't care,  "it's only a dollar more!"
4. They should say at this point,  "ok, no problem "
5. If they say anything else,  you need a new friend/translator.

Let us know what happened.

Two Caveats:

1. If you already have a Vietnamese significant other,  then #3 above won't work. She'll just get up 10 minutes earlier and bring it to you every morning.
2. If you already have a Vietnamese significant other and she accepts that you pay an extra dollar for everything,  she's not as significant as you think.

If you've been here more than a few days, you would've known that you can have literally everything delivered to your door.  However, the milk would be from the shelves of your supermarket, not directly from the farm if that's what you imagined of when you said "fresh milk".

SuprStu wrote:

I'm from the US and we absolutely love fresh milk and go through it like crazy. Is there anyway to get fresh milk delivered to your front door?

(We like Da Lat milk the best)

Moving to Đà Lạt might work, if you are udderly desperate... 🥛😎🍼

A few years ago, you can get raw milk (sữa thô in Vietnamese) from Real Food but I'm not certain it's still in practice, and I can't vouch for the milk extracting method either.

Wxx3 wrote:

Two Caveats:

1. If you already have a Vietnamese significant other,  then #3 above won't work. She'll just get up 10 minutes earlier and bring it to you every morning.
2. If you already have a Vietnamese significant other and she accepts that you pay an extra dollar for everything,  she's not as significant as you think.

I can't stop laughing, so true!   

In reality, what does one consider fresh milk?  Sorry, store bought pasturized milk is garbage and have not had it in our home for a long long long time.  Not sure if you can get organic in VN, but getting it straight from the cow or goat is far better.  The only  problem I see is that how does one know the extraction process in VN unless you are standing there as the milk is being extracted from the animal?

Ok this was a legit question that did not deserve a stupid answer.

Sometimes ppl talk too much

Fresh milk would have to be refrigerated. I did not mean fresh as in right from the utter.

Geez nevermind. Doofus's here

We do know you had a legit question, and none of our answers above was stupid.  No one said anything about the milk being delivered to you straight from a cow's udder without being refrigerated.

Among the quickest ways to get a thread closed is insulting the people who responded to you.

Ciambella wrote:

If you've been here more than a few days, you would've known that you can have literally everything delivered to your door.  However, the milk would be from the shelves of your supermarket, not directly from the farm if that's what you imagined of when you said "fresh milk".

That's what I thought he meant.

When I was growing up, we had a milkman deliver direct to our door.

He picked up the milk at the dairy and brought it to us.

I was thinking that a person living in a city with a dairy in Vietnam might be able to arrange a similar service.

OceanBeach92107 wrote:

I was thinking that a person living in a city with a dairy in Vietnam might be able to arrange a similar service.

I seriously doubt that daily door to door delivery exists from Dalat Milk to Saigon where the OP is living, either as a part of the farm's commercial truck or a private courier.  The cost would've been exorbitant.  In addition, I've seen many times medicine and soy bean milk that were supposed to be refrigerated at all time being transported on the back of a motorbike, in a non-refrigerated bag or container, under the relentless sun. 

Thus, your suggestion to move to Dalat (a great city if one doesn't need to be near an international airport) is a better option, although the easier one is having a supermarket in Saigon deliver daily from their (not daily) stock.

Ciambella wrote:

We do know you had a legit question, and none of our answers above was stupid.  No one said anything about the milk being delivered to you straight from a cow's udder without being refrigerated.

Among the quickest ways to get a thread closed is insulting the people who responded to you.

No worries.  People who are questioned about conventional wisdom sometimes respond in such a manner because some don't want to educate themselves or know the truth about milk products.  If somebody wants to provide milk to their family that is full of hormones, urine, blood and other toxic chemicals, that is their choice.  Making it cold does not change the ingredients.

BTW - not all milk has to be refrigerated.  Thus, just because it is not, it does not make it not fresh, based on someones definition of fresh.

https://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes … ated-milk/

If you are a stickler for a certain type of milk, you are probably living in the wrong country.  Until recently Vietnam, like most of the tropics, was not a milk drinking culture.  Anthropologists will tell you that milk is a feature of cultures in northern climates.  Think of Genghis Khan and his yaks.  It is only the last thirty or so years that milk has been widely available with the government development of modern dairies.  One of my aides attributed the increased heights of our middle school students to milk (several boys were taller than all of the male teachers.)  However if you want organic, or unpasteurized milk you may have to really search.  There is a dairy in Thu Duc that may sell unpasteurized  milk that was discussed in another thread a year or so ago.  (I will let you do the searching.)

All the replies above are very good and address each point of the OP's perceived question.
One of the biggest frustrations on this forum are people new to the country and culture, who ask questions and then complain about the answers.
If you come to any foreign land and can't think outside the little box you are accustomed to, then you are in the wrong place.
And that applies to Rome as much as Sai Gon.

Dalat pasteurized milk is quite easy to find these days. As far as fresh milk goes, you will need to ask locals to help you.

There are services such as this one operating in Saigon  https://tuoitrenews.vn/business/11647/r … me-in-hcmc

colinoscapee wrote:

There are services such as this one operating in Saigon  https://tuoitrenews.vn/business/11647/r … me-in-hcmc

There's the definitive answer to your question, SuprStu.  Thanks to Colinoscapee, you can back off on the huffy attitude.     Of course be sure to read the tan colored box in the article.  "You pays your money and  you takes your chances."

I come from a milk and cheese country and can say that the fresh (unsweetened) Dalat milk in no way inferior to the milk from my home country.

1 litre costs 44k and it is available at many places, e.g. in some BigC or Aeon Citimart.

colinoscapee wrote:

There are services such as this one operating in Saigon  https://tuoitrenews.vn/business/11647/r … me-in-hcmc

There are several similar sites, but the latest one I've seen (Real Food) was dated 2013, same as that article.  The Catholic service was the most recent, Aug 2016.

I still think buying Dalat milk from the supermarket is easy, inexpensive, and safer than raw milk delivery.  I also like Andy's sentiment that Dalat milk is as good as Swiss milk.

This just in:

Another infection traced to raw milk...

Second-New-Yorker-contracts-penicillin-resistant-infection-trendy-raw-milk

It seems fitting that the dairy in the article had the affectatious name of Miller's Biodiversity Farm.  Their biodiversity included Brucella RB51.  You pay for the milk; the bugs are free.   

THIGV wrote:

You pay for the milk; the bugs are free.   

And they say there's no free lunch?

OceanBeach92107 wrote:

This just in:

Another infection traced to raw milk...

Second-New-Yorker-contracts-penicillin-resistant-infection-trendy-raw-milk

We should not go off topic, but isolated incidents can give the wrong impression about what is safe or not.   For the other side, take note:

"The interesting thing about all the raw milk hubbub is the fact that pasteurized milk has a far worse track record of contamination and outbreaks than raw milk, despite propaganda claiming otherwise. A few examples include:

1983 - 49 Massachusetts residents contracted listeriosis from pasteurized milk and 14 of them died. The New England Journal of Medicine concluded in 1985 that since there was no evidence that improper pasteurization caused the outbreak, the legitimacy of pasteurization as an effective eradicator of harmful pathogens was in question.

1985 - Nearly 200,000 people were estimated to have been infected with salmonella from a single dairy's 2 percent pasteurized milk. Investigation into this case revealed that the same strain of salmonella had repeatedly been contaminating milk after it was pasteurized for at least ten months prior to the outbreak. Up until that time, it was the largest outbreak of salmonella ever identified in the United States.

1994 - 224,000 people contracted salmonella infection from Schwan's ice cream according to a report in the New England Journal of Medicine. The pasteurized ice cream premix had been contaminated during transport, leading to an even larger outbreak of salmonella than the one in 1985.

2006 - More than 1,600 prisoners in eleven California prison facilities contracted campylobacter (C. jejuni) from tainted pasteurized milk.

2007 - Three elderly individuals and an unborn child died in Massachusetts from pasteurized milk that was contaminated with listeriosis. Investigators eventually traced the pathogen to some artificial flavorings that had been added to the milk following its pasteurization.

In addition to cases such as these, the Center for Science in the Public Interest has recorded 155 outbreaks from pasteurized dairy products between 1990 and 2006, all of which are published in the group's 2008 annual report."

What's wrong with Massachusetts?     Of course anecdotal data can be misleading.  Lets assume a few numbers since strangely I can't find actual ones.  Let's say 1% of US milk sold is unpasteurized (probably a high estimate) while conversely 99% is pasteurized.  If there are 100 diseases nationwide with pasteurized milk, but only 40 people are affected by unpasteurized milk, we can't say unpasteurized is safer when in fact it has four times the rate of outbreaks.

Just as a doubly off topic aside, I find it amusing we are discussing this with respect to a country that has more than one Pasteur Avenue.   It is one of the very few streets named for a Western person as opposed to heroes of the recent revolution or ancient kings.

THIGV wrote:

What's wrong with Massachusetts?   

For starters?   Taxachusetts and Massholes?  Yes, I spent 4 years in Boston getting educated and would have it no other way.

back on topic - people can do their own research, it is out there.  Maybe they might accept Forbes:

https://www.forbes.com/2009/07/07/healt … 13983ffeef

vndreamer wrote:

OceanBeach92107 wrote:

This just in:

Another infection traced to raw milk...

Second-New-Yorker-contracts-penicillin-resistant-infection-trendy-raw-milk

We should not go off topic, but isolated incidents can give the wrong impression about what is safe or not.   For the other side, take note:

"The interesting thing about all the raw milk hubbub is the fact that pasteurized milk has a far worse track record of contamination and outbreaks than raw milk, despite propaganda claiming otherwise. A few examples include:

1983 - 49 Massachusetts residents contracted listeriosis from pasteurized milk and 14 of them died. The New England Journal of Medicine concluded in 1985 that since there was no evidence that improper pasteurization caused the outbreak, the legitimacy of pasteurization as an effective eradicator of harmful pathogens was in question.

1985 - Nearly 200,000 people were estimated to have been infected with salmonella from a single dairy's 2 percent pasteurized milk. Investigation into this case revealed that the same strain of salmonella had repeatedly been contaminating milk after it was pasteurized for at least ten months prior to the outbreak. Up until that time, it was the largest outbreak of salmonella ever identified in the United States.

1994 - 224,000 people contracted salmonella infection from Schwan's ice cream according to a report in the New England Journal of Medicine. The pasteurized ice cream premix had been contaminated during transport, leading to an even larger outbreak of salmonella than the one in 1985.

2006 - More than 1,600 prisoners in eleven California prison facilities contracted campylobacter (C. jejuni) from tainted pasteurized milk.

2007 - Three elderly individuals and an unborn child died in Massachusetts from pasteurized milk that was contaminated with listeriosis. Investigators eventually traced the pathogen to some artificial flavorings that had been added to the milk following its pasteurization.

In addition to cases such as these, the Center for Science in the Public Interest has recorded 155 outbreaks from pasteurized dairy products between 1990 and 2006, all of which are published in the group's 2008 annual report."

It really is a requirement of the forum that you provide a source attribution when copying and pasting.

Your post came from an article which appears on at least two different websites:

raw-milk-continually-targeted-despite-true-dangers-of-pasteurized-product

and

naturalnews dot com

To balance the picture, here is a link from the Centers for Disease Control:

CDC.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-questions-and-answers

@oceanbeach, not going to get into a discussion over which source is more reliable.  The CDC is a political organization and not credible when it comes to facts.  We can agree to disagree.

vndreamer wrote:

@oceanbeach, not going to get into a discussion over which source is more reliable.  The CDC is a political organization and not credible when it comes to facts.  We can agree to disagree.

The lawyer in you is quite adroit at sidestepping and obfuscating.

The point was your lack of attribution, which would reveal the source to the light of day (which kills many pathogens).

As for your follow-up post, I personally trust the CDC more than Forbes.

Cheers!

OceanBeach92107 wrote:

It really is a requirement of the forum that you provide a source attribution when copying and pasting.

You must be kidding about that one.  There are no real requirements for veracity here, only opinion.  As long as you understand that you will be fine.   

vndreamer wrote:

We can agree to disagree.

And you can feel free to continue drinking raw milk. 

THIGV wrote:

OceanBeach92107 wrote:

It really is a requirement of the forum that you provide a source attribution when copying and pasting.

You must be kidding about that one.  There are no real requirements for veracity here, only opinion.  As long as you understand that you will be fine.

Nope. Not kidding. Repeating what an admin posted in a visa thread.

Of course, if we label something as opinion, just about anything goes.

However, he used quotation marks in his post...

You guys are killing me!  Like I said, people can do their own research, there are plenty of sources.  You can decide what you accept or reject and we can respectively disagree.  At the end of the day, hopefully all of us are more enlightened/educated on the subject matter. 

Hey guys and gals, remember, we are pregnant so I am very emotional!   

BTW - baby will only get raw milk.  Our choice.

vndreamer wrote:

BTW - baby will only get raw milk.  Our choice.

Hopefully the baby will get breast milk.  Cow's milk is biologically incorrect for human infants.  "Babies can't digest cow's milk as completely or easily as breast milk or formula. Cow's milk contains high concentrations of protein and minerals, which can tax your baby's immature kidneys."  Citation (as these seem to be required now  ):  https://www.babycenter.com/0_cows-milk- … 1334703.bc 

In fact there is no biological requirement at all for humans to drink milk from cows (or other mammals for that matter.)  It is simply a cultural preference.  As I noted before, the cultural divide is not East-West but North-South.  (Do I need a citation for that one too?)   

THIGV - was trying to be polite and funny, read between the lines, baby is getting raw organic breast milk only. 

THIGV wrote:

vndreamer wrote:

BTW - baby will only get raw milk.  Our choice.

Hopefully the baby will get breast milk.  Cow's milk is biologically incorrect for human infants.  "Babies can't digest cow's milk as completely or easily as breast milk or formula. Cow's milk contains high concentrations of protein and minerals, which can tax your baby's immature kidneys."  Citation (as these seem to be required now  ):  https://www.babycenter.com/0_cows-milk- … 1334703.bc 

In fact there is no biological requirement at all for humans to drink milk from cows (or other mammals for that matter.)  It is simply a cultural preference.  As I noted before, the cultural divide is not East-West but North-South.  (Do I need a citation for that one too?)   

LOL! 

Yer killin' me.

To clarify, the requirement is not for unsubstantiated opinions or even statements of  purported facts.

It is specifically for the copying and pasting of information from another source, claimed as authoritative.

Just guessing, but this site is actually very careful about avoiding copyright infringement (the photos policy being one example) and I think they want to avoid having material under copyright protection being republished here without proper credit.