Fun and games, beating up on a piñata.
One big positive to emerge from the Joyce Brown situation I described in my last post was her report that the Ohio Department of Agriculture appears to have washed its hands of the raw milk political piñata that other regulators can’t get enough of.
In one of her emails last fall to a herdshare member of Highland Haven dairy, she declared, “It was pretty clear to me in my conversation with the ODA Dairy Chief that their stance is ‘herdshare people know the risks they are taking, so we’ll leave ’em alone and let ’em take those risks.’ The other thing that was clear to me is that the ODA NEVER wants to have to regulate raw milk.”
I gather Brown was able to get the ODA official to speak candidly because she was waving around her DVM (veterinarian) credential.
It’s not often we get candid assessments from raw milk regulators about enforcement in their states. These enforcers usually avoid speaking publicly about their approach to raw milk—I presume because they continue to view it as ongoing us-against-them political warfare and so don’t want to tip their hands.
That bit of clarity from ODA turns out to be relevant, and timely, to two emerging enforcement situations developing over the last few weeks, in Illinois and California.
There was a report on a Facebook raw milk page a few days ago, and then in Chicago media, that Illinois, after years of intense debate, has adopted rules put forth in 2014 that limit the distribution of raw milk to the farms where it is produced; the intent is to eliminate deliveries to consumers in cities like Chicago. This comes after years in which Illinois has taken a hands-off approach not unlike Ohio’s, allowing herdshares to flourish. Now, shocked farmers and consumers are expressing fear of government raids on raw dairies.
The weird thing about the Illinois situation is that there is nothing posted online about the supposed new rules—what they are, what approvals must still occur. On the Facebook Illinois raw milk page, I linked to an article I wrote in 2014, in which Illinois public health officials complained that local prosecutors wouldn’t cooperate in filing criminal charges against raw dairies. I also expressed the view on the Facebook page that Illinois raw dairy farmers should go about their business and ignore all the ruckus about some rules being made somewhere, one farmer objected:
“David, if a swat team shows up to my one cow dairy and hauls me off, who will be left to care for my animals? No one. I have no back up milker. And since this is to be enforced at the county health department level, at no expense to the mismanaged state, you can be sure it will happen. Why do you say there is a reluctance to prosecute, since until now, or rather on July 1, there haven’t been any rules by which to prosecute.”
To which I responded: “Sorry to sound crass, but if you are going to run your dairy in fear of swat teams, you are behaving exactly the way the public health people want you to behave. They are continually engaged in fear mongering–to consumers that they will get sick, and to farmers that they will get raided.”
But we know, because Illinois regulators said so in another of those rare moments of honesty, that local prosecutors have previously refused to carry out the wishes of Illinois pubic health officials and go after raw dairy farmers.
A similar situation came up in California recently. A web page, dated November 2015, suddenly appeared on the site of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, entitled, “Regulatory Requirement for Distribution of Milk for Raw Consumption in California”.
Its intent was clear. It was directed at the dozens and dozens of herdshares that have sprung up in the state over the past half dozen years, when it said, “It is unlawful for any person to sell, give away, deliver, or knowingly purchase or receive any milk or product of milk that does not conform to the standards established by Division 15 of the Food and Agricultural Code (FAC § 32901). Such milk and milk products include raw milk and raw milk products that are sold for cash, given away for free, or offered to consumers in the form of shares, exchange, trade or other distribution.”
The new web material makes mention of $10,000 fines and up to one-year jail sentences for violators. But it doesn’t say if those penalties have been enacted by the legislature; last I heard, regulators don’t have the authority to sentence farmers, or anyone, to jail.
Nor is there any mention on this mysterious web posting about the ‘working group” of dairy owners and CDFA officials that convened for several years between 2010 and 2013, to supposedly work out approaches for state oversight of the California dairy herdshares. As Mark McAfee commented: “in the past, CDFA has considered cow shares to be a grey area that was outside of its regulatory standards. Well…not any longer.”
As in Illiinois, we know that California prosecutors don’t want to go after small dairy farms. They have told CDFA officials to find more serious criminals than raw milk producers to prosecute.
Yet the regulators in these states seem unable to let go of raw milk as a political pinata. They might want to re-learn their history, and examine the situation in Ohio, where a few raw dairy farmers refused to roll over back in 2005 and 2006, and forced pro-raw-milk legal rulings that caused the governor to order the regulators to stop beating up on raw milk. Or in Michigan, where farmer Richard Hebron similarly refused to roll over in 2006 and 2007, causing the state to finally sanction herdshares. Or in Wisconsin, where regulators are still stinging from the rebuke they received from jurors in the Vernon Hershberger criminal case in 2013, and practically gag when you mention raw milk to them.
The regulators in Illinois and California seem to be angling for a last few hits at the raw milk pinata. I hope there are farmers willing to take up the challenge, and raw milk consumers ready to back them via demonstrations, funding, and moral support.
It seems clear that some regulators can’t resist the draw of the raw milk political pinata, even as illnesses from raw milk continue to decline, and the popularity of raw milk explodes. I’m afraid it’s going to take some brave raw dairy farmers in Illinois and California to perhaps start a new game, maybe one where the regulators’ heads serve as the piñata.
**
There will be one of those rare candid discussions between supporters and opponents of raw milk at the winter conference of the NOFA-NJ (Northeast Organic Farming Association) January 30-31. I’ll team up with Joseph Heckman, professor at Rutgers University, to discuss with Don Schaffner, also a Rutgers professor, and an associate, “Should NJ Farmers be Permitted to Distribute Local Fresh Unpasteurized Milk?” Our session is at 1 p.m. on Sunday January 31.
I can’t believe the struggle occurring in the name of raw milk… Real agriculture is a main pillar to the economy of a country. It has been ransacked! The system has lost touch with our need for clean food, clean milk, clean seeds, clean meat…, and though, the ones living in sinc with Nature are engaged into a war with the corporate influenced system organs in order to protect our basic needs. Mass produced food is like a rampant plague which purpose is to asphyxiate the genuine producer. Mass producers are thinking about making money, instead of gently taming the planet in order to keep it and its inhabitants healthy, as well as us…I am glad and I admire those fighting for those rights. We are a minority, still, but we are on the rise. Let’s keep holding hands while we fight for our rights!
very insight-ful, your line “Mass produced food is like a rampant plague which purpose is to asphyxiate the genuine producer.” That’s the mechanism of the cancer cell … which survives on less oxygen, depriving healthy cells. In the business world – usury parasite-izes an economy. on the raw milk front : “regulatory capture” is seen as CAFOs – beholden to the Banksters – cannot stand actual competition for consumer dollars, so they resort to bribing legislators, to have REAL MILK outlawed. Honest profits are the life=blood of free enterprise. So all the noise and confusion about raw milk being a “risk of harm to public health”, is a canard. Cowshares can live with govt. oversight, as long as it’s honest.
Gord
When you say, “as long as it’s honest\”, are you referring to the “govt. oversight” or the relationship between both the cowshare owners and the government?
Either or, do you truly trust the government to act in good faith when engaging in that oversight and/or relationship?
Ken and Helene : a purist, to start with, I do agree that the govt. has no place in the kitchens of the nation. But having been through “the school of hard knocks” in this milk thing for 16 years … I can live with officials meddling in the milking parlour, as long as a govt. body is honestly concerned with something of real substance. In the case of the quality of milk intended for commerce, OK … rather than bring it to an armed standoff, I can live with govt. intruding on to a privately-run farm as long as they don’t use some excuse of a power as pretext for regulating us right out of the game. Washington State being one of the better examples of how to do it right.
… when one gets to my age, you pick your battles more carefully. As long as the REAL MILK is flowing, I’m content. Try as he may, the Tyrant cannot suppress the life energy, such as is found in fresh pure whole raw milk from humanely-treated animals. Genuinely organic farming and dairying is a labor of love >>>> in which endeavour, the workman is worthy of his hire
I don’t understand the ”body of real substance”. This is a very vague term…
Gord, I am not too sure I understood what you wrote; maybe I am consuming too many raw milk products!!! But from reading the next comment from Ken, I’d say that THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO BUSINESS IN THE TRANSACTION BETWEEN A FARMER AND A CONSUMER. When I buy alcohol, I am informed and I know how dangerous it is… And God knows how detrimental alcohol is to my health and to those who drive around me! But the difference here is that alcohol is not necessary (it is a luxury, far more dangerous than milk, yes…) where as Food IS necessary. And I will go as far as saying that real/raw/unprocessed food should be particularly respected AND EVEN PROTECTED, if the government decides to stick its nose in there! There is already not much money in growing and distributing that quality food. Because it costs us so much in growing it, we have that wave of so called organic foods where the labels are full of lies, I am afraid. So they make money for a while, until the consumer reads more critically the label. They get busted everyday for still trying to foul us with those equivocal labels, ”cage free chicken eggs”, ”pasture raised beef”… There is no money in real organic food. If there is, it is because there is mass production; then, it’s all gone down the slippery slope!!
Helene, the government may have no business (in the U.S. – Canada has different laws) — up until the point that someone gets sick. And then the government – fellow citizens – have to lay-out in-whole-or-in-part for health care costs. And once a child gets sick, then it’s the collective responsibility of society to do something about it.
Yes, you can buy alcohol, but alcohol is dangerous for children and there are laws restricting a child’s access to it. Do we want governments to pass similar laws saying that no child can be given raw milk? Believe me, it’s been talked about by food safety “experts.” One alarmist article published a few years ago recommended that any consumption of raw milk be made illegal.
So, do we want complete prohibition … or prudent regulation that involves testing standards?
Maybe even mandatory training. Here’s a real-life dairy industry example: In 9 provinces in Canada out of 10 (Saskatchewan being the sole exception), ALL licensed dairy farmers must take the “Canadian Quality Milk” (CQM) food safety training course to learn how to produce low-coliform, clean milk – and this is for milk that is going to be pasteurized. So, is there a problem with asking farmers to be trained in how to produce milk which won’t sicken anyone?
The government should train the mass producers how to change their operations to avoid high risks of contamination caused by sanitary procedures. Risks of food contamination are due to mass production. Nobody has gotten hurt from raw milk lately and it is on the rise. I won’t go ahead discussing all this because I am tired of doing it. I fought for 8 months with our Board of Health and they now allow us to sell raw milk. The consumption of raw milk is on the rise. More and more permits are issued with nearby towns in the State of MA. I had to quit commercial milk because it made me sick. to the point I had to be admitted to the hospital three times. I am now happy with my dairy goats, and believe me, many others are too and I am far from killing someone. For more information, I recommend that you read The Raw Milk Revolution written by David Gumpert. It will address all your concerns, including the role that the big corporations have in disseminating information and fears to their favor…
“The government should train the mass producers how to change their operations to avoid high risks of contamination caused by sanitary procedures.”
Agreed. But government staffers have NO idea how to do this . It comes down to the raw milk community developing its own training programs — e.g., Tim Wightman, RAWMI, and Charlotte Smith’s “Raw Milk Pro” website and promoting them.
“Nobody has gotten hurt from raw milk lately….”
Not so — 12 people got sick in October in Idaho, with 2 ending up in hospital – see https://foodpoisoningbulletin.com/2015/campylobacter-e-coli-raw-milk-outbreak-ends-with-12-sick-in-idaho . Did this farm know about RAWMI training? Did they reject it because of some bias against RAWMI? I’d like to know. Yes, outbreaks are rare, but are still happening, and when they do, it gives us all a bad name.
Outbreaks make the news, but so far, RAWMI-listed farmers are the only ones consistently posting their test results online so that everyone can see evidence that raw milk is being produced safely. Why not everyone else? This would dispel the myth that raw milk is “Inherently contaminated” as one official called it.
Helene, do you test your milk? If so, how often? And, would you be willing to post your test results as proof to help turn the tide of public opinion?
I am sorry but I give 0 credibility to the CDC data. There was no scientific report stating they found E.coli in the milk that was actually consumed. It could have been from spinach, from cantaloupe, from meat, apples… They rule out, they assume…done deal! I can’t buy that! The CDC has already admitted in the past to have messed up with the statistics and they have publicly appologized. We have experienced scientists working 24/7 to protect the interests of the big milk producers. My approach is: know your farmer and its animals, but there will always be a risk anyway, like anything else you consume. Regarding, testing, when you buy produce at the store, it doesn’t come with test results. The consumers still trust the distributors (although that is slowly changing now) and don’t question why meat is so tender, so red, why apples are so shiny, why the GMO products are not identified, why potatoes don’t grow roots, if the food has been irradiated… I boycott the supermarket
What you didn’t post is that the testing was negative and the dairy was allowed to continue selling their milk. The State is saying it may have been a one time incident. Other food items were not tested, milk was suspected and only item tested.
When I sold raw milk in Idaho under the Small Herd Exemption (3 cows &/or 7 goats &/or 7 sheep), I had one unannounced inspection a month from the State. Due to being on DHI (Dairy Herd Improvement), my goats milk was inspected again for butterfat, protein and somatic cells. At that time, I would send a sample to a lab for bacteria testing. The results from ISDA and the commercial lab were placed on the refrigerator for all my customers to see.
I have never had to post monthly my negative results since I never sold raw milk directly; that would have been illegal. Yes, all my tests came out negative… I realize I don’t have to do that every month…
What a Great Idea! Thanks for sharing!
happy new year quotes
A big high five to Highhaven Dairy….they have submitted a full application to RAWMI. This included some historical test data!! Congrats to them !
As far as the Small Herd Working Group moderated by CDFA and CA DPH, that process literally died because the pure freedom fighters could not recognize progress and a peace pipe when it was handed to them. In fact, I was told to not show up to help support them.
The state was open to a program and in fact the standards and elements of the Small herd raw milk program were all worked out. Instead of embracing this colaborative group work effort and offer, the freedom wing of the working group, ran off with the ball and initiated a new Bill in our legislature. That bill could not even get out of its first committee. It was mostly a freedom bill that would create an exemption for small herds based on freedom.
That did not fly. As a result of inaction after the bill died, the state acted to regulate some totally out if control not so small herds. In 2014 and 2015 it became apparent that 25 and 30 cow herds were operating with impunity across th state. They were making, butter, cream, raw milk, yogurts….all sorts of processed things. They were selling at farmers markets and all over the place. In other words…”CA was out of control” and the regulators felt as if they needed to do something. That’s what they did. They included cow shares in their definitions.
The next question is this….will they act on their new definitions?
In the past, our regulators have generally acted by exception. They went after those that had complaints…no complaints meant….no actions.
The cow shares that I feel badly for are our Listed producers. There are three. They all operate under the rules as suggested and recommendd by the Small Herd Working Group. We will see what happens. They are all scared. I have told each of them no take that fear and stand up proud….ask fir meetings with state regulators and ask to be recogized as true Cow Shares. The state has said to me and others…that they will not go after a family that owns their own cow…
That’s what a “true cow share” is. CA is the land of legal raw milk,….but is also the land of high stanards, with intense regulation and enforcement. Beware.
Mark,
What’s the difference between a family that owns their own cow and 2 or 10 families that own their own cow or cows?
No difference, I’d say. But there IS a difference between true cow-sharing and “cow-leasing.”
In the argument between food freedom and food safety, food freedom is always going to lose. A cold, hard fact of life. Michael Schmidt argued “food freedom” in his 2011 and 2014 trials in Ontario. The government argued food safety. In R. v. Schmidt (2014), the judges observed that Michael had brought forward NO evidence about raw milk safety, to argue against the government stand that raw milk was unsafe for consumption, and the government had presented ample evidence that it was not. Michael’s argument was all about food rights and the Charter of Rights, and the judges ruled that food rights are not protected by the charter. Food rights vs. food safety. It didn’t need to end this way. That’s why if we want laws changed, we need to address the issue of food safety head-on. RAWMI training and the test results of RAWMI-listed farmers is how we can do it. And if you don’t like RAWMI, then by all means go ahead create another training program just as good.
GGraham,
Programs such as the CQM (Canadian Quality Milk program) follow on the heals of larger dairy farms with resulting increase stress, drug and chemical use on those same farms. The only people who have anything to gain from such programs are those responsible for its so-called reason to exist, such as government employees, veterinarians, the chemical and drug industry and the milk marking board bureaucracy.
Apart from the 2.5 hours of training, self-evaluation, planning, record keeping, added costs and extra time and labor, many small producers generally recognize the CQM program as a pain in the ass and a waste of time and money.
Fiscally irresponsible bureaucrats are quite adept and seem to have this never ending resolve at creating programs at the taxpayers expense that producers/farmers are mandated to take part in and to pay for out of their own pockets with next to no recourse for the extra time, labor and financial burden incurred.
https://www.milk.org/Corporate/pdf/CQM-10StepsToCQMRegistration.pdf
Despite the above program no meaningful change has occurred in the dairy industry. It’s business as usual chemical and drug use is on the rise, and dairy farms continue to get larger and fewer in number, with young individuals wanting to start a farm, finding it financially increasingly difficult to do so.
The program seems to be more about accommodating bad habits and a flawed methodology in the dairy industry rather then a genuine concern for consumer health and wellbeing. Indeed the same can be said about the honeybee industry where apiarists are required to jump through innumerable hoops in order to accommodate it’s and the agricultural industry’s many flawed protocols.
GGraham
In the real world including Ontario there appears to be numerous contradictions to your described, cold, hard fact of life.
There are numerous hazards associated to solicited sexual behavior and… regulations governing such, yet adults are more or less “free” to engage in the activity.
There are direct and indirect well-documented hazards/dangers associated with smoking cigarettes and again regulations governing such, yet adults are “free” to purchase it. Indeed adults/parents are not even forbidden to smoke it in the privacy of their own home even if there are children present.
In comparison to raw milk the above practices are destructive and an affront to human health and human dignity and are likewise of no value to our overall well-being. Raw milk on the other hand, which has proven itself to be an age-old life giving food throughout the world has an outright ban on it in Canada.
The freedom to purchase and consume raw milk is first and foremost, after that if consumers in conjunction with milk producers,(shares, leasing or coops), wish to implement quality standards and those standards don’t interfere with raw milk’s natural probiotic integrity then as far as I am concerned the world will be a better place to live.
a perfect example of the ill-logic of the so-called “health authorities” is seen in the National Post today in Brian Hutchinson’s article about wine being retailed in BC food stores. By way of comparison, he notes that “One Vancouver business offers regular no-holes-barred-sex parties with VCH representatives on hand to dispense condoms and pamphlets”… yeah, well, that activity is proven to be VERY high risk to participants and to the public health. One thing for sure … such pamphlets WON’T be the ones I used to hand out on the street, entitled “The medical consequences of what homosexuals do”… oh no. That’s on the list of publications banned at the border, as hate literature.
…But “whatsoever a man sows, thus shall he reap” = in the cold light of the morningafter, when attendees show up at hospital, the British columbians pay the healthcare costs for managing the fallout from STDs circulating in those Dionsyian revels.
…. my point being : for purposes of mitigating risk to the public health – especially, costs of treatment to the participants – how is a privately-operated dairy, qualitatively different from a pay-at-the-door whorehouse?
GGraham, Sorry to disagree, but in R. v Schmidt the issue was failure to establish legal sharer-ownership of the cows. Everything else, largely a distraction IMHO. Nevertheless, change is possible:
We recently elected a Federal Government who campaigned, at least in part, on legalizing (decriminalizing) marijuana. The impact of this political shift in attitude on the cultivation and distribution of this crop is already somewhat astonishing (to me at least). Legislation has yet to be proposed, yet all manner of, perhaps still ‘illegal’, activities seem to be springing up almost overnight. Interesting times here in the ‘high’ North.
Agreed that ownership was indeed the major issue. Michael was found to be selling raw milk in a “cow-leasing” arrangement and calling it a “cowshare.” As the decision reads
[7] The cow-share agreements were oral in nature. Members were given a card but the cards did not contain the name of a cow and there was no other evidence that the name of the cow in which the member had a share was ever communicated. Nor was there any evidence that the agreements formally transferred ownership in a cow from the appellant to the member. The members were not involved in the purchase, care, sale, or replacement of any cow nor were they involved in the management of the herd. The appellant provided cow-share members with a handbook outlining the scheme. It states: “As a cow-share member, you are a part owner of the milk production. In effect, you are paying [the appellant and his wife] to look after the cows and produce the milk…”
“[25] I do not accept the submission that the cow-share agreements amount to an arrangement that takes the appellant’s activities outside the reach of the HPPA and the Milk Act. The oral cow-share agreement does not transfer an ownership interest in a particular cow or in the herd as a whole. The member does not acquire or exercise the rights that ordinarily attach to ownership. The member is not involved in the acquisition, disposition or care of any cow or of the herd. The cow-share member acquires a right of access to the milk produced by the appellant’s dairy farm, a right that is not derived from an ownership interest in any cow or cows. As the appeal judge put it, at para. 51, ‘the cow-share arrangement approximates membership in a ‘big box’ store that requires a fee to be paid in order to gain access to the products located therein.’ ” – http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2014/2014onca188/2014onca188.html ,
But Schmidt also brought this forth as a constitutional challenge regarding food freedom (paras. 32 through 47) – this failed. The government “proved its case” regarding risk and no new “evidence of safety” was introduced by the other side to counter their position – see paragraphs 20, 21, 30, and 31 of this same decision.
you can have as many judgesb as you want,they rule one or the other way. To take the above judgement as the key is misleading. Take the ruling of Kowarsky. He acquitted me of all charges based on very basic facts.
Any argument that if that ,or that, or that would have been done the judge would have, could have or should have ruled different.
There are so many absurd rulings baring any logistic and following not even case law.
Bottom line is “they dont want raw milk available” and they gonna find fault at every sentence to make it impossible.
Having said that, we all have a choice to either stand up or run.
The argument of raw milk safety is in the facts and not speculation.
The prosecution had tested hundreds of samples of milk but refused to enter them as evidence. Why?????? it would have contradicted their entire argument.
This time it will be interesting to see ,what their strategy will be.
Like Gordon always says the reality is that the milk keeps flowing here and in BC and that is the ultimate success.
Time is on our side and time will tell.
If i go by the saying it has to get a lot worse before it will get better, than I could speculate that we getting close to the tipping point of change.
Mark will be coming to Ontario to certify 5 Ontario farms under the RAWMI program.
Hunderts have signed the Food Rights Declaration and we gonna have a great Raw Milk symposium at the University of Guelph with the title
Building Bridges for a Canadian Raw milk Policyhttps://www.facebook.com/events/211630229179496/
Also this is a link to the Bovine ,worthwhile to check out for an update:
https://thebovine.wordpress.com/2016/01/20/interview-with-michael-schmidt/
Regards
Michael
I have yet to see a scientific. Explanation , from any state health department, as to why raw milk can not be delivered. The cold chin worries are just a ploy, as we see plenty of low temp milk in ice chests at local farmers marketz . I am confronting our authorities on a scientific data and evidence, as I am a degreed scientist and have worked dairy on a global level in several countries. The argument of pasteurization is merely a financial expenditure they wish to push down. Pasteurized milk in our state has recently proven to be the big danger. When we kill all the bad bacteria, we Also kill the good bacteria. UHT milk, no matter how they pitch it is not organic by any means.
Every bit of this fight is corporate milk trying to squash wholesome good food producers. Chipolte is probably A corporate trying to close them or make them use GMO foods. Please read UN agenda 21.
By the way, milk kept at low temperature gets sour but won’t hurt you, unless pathogens have entered in the process, which in turn indicates deficient sanitary conditions… Again, we are entering the mass production business…
Small dairies can have contamination problems as well — they’re not restricted to big dairies and mass production.
I’m in!!! I am back in Illinois (poor schmucks in Springfield) and I’ve got the money to resume my personal visits down there – just GIVE me an excuse, lol! In the meantime, I’ve got a bit of time for writing again, and research. Will definitely be looking at this –
I am referencing this at the “old groups” sites… Just the title and a link to your post.
I just knew this January was going to give me a new political project…. Too bad its an old new project. (No creativity down there I guess)
Happy New Year!
A.
Well, apropos of nothing really, there are among us those that might enjoy Dave Burge’s brand of humor. I certainly do and missed this 4 years ago when it came out.
“You Didn’t Build That, Readings from the Book of Barack” by Dave Burge at iowahawkcalm
“…9 Then Govt said, “Let the regulations and the guidlines under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the Bureaus appear”; and it was so. 10 And Govt called the Bureaus demigovts, and the gathering together of them He called AFSCME. And Govt saw that it was good. …”
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2012/07/you-didnt-build-that.html
B.
Apropos of reality, what is the annual need for fluid milk for human consumption in the United States?
Can that need be met by small operations using, for the sake of discussion, the RAWMI model?
C.
In answer to “get big or get out,” the two best answers are 1. Produce actual food or get out., and, 2., “Give me liberty or give me death.” –Patrick Henry. (Worth reading every word of this short speech from March 23, 1775.)(Brainwashing a la Edward Bernays et al does not count.)(Absent the misuse of law &c (G. below) the free market will show you the door if you are not producing actual food, eh?)
D.
The dairy trade’s analytical capability: the increasing range and ruggedness and reliability and speed and portability, and declining cost, (as I read here in Mark’s comments) are heartening.
E.
Philip Hamburger’s 2014 book “Is Administrative Law Unlawful” (648 pp) is relevant to much of what is under discussion at TCP (cf. Scott Johnson’s posts at powerlineblogcalm).
(The Federalist No. 62 is worth reading, especially the portion toward the end regarding the length of and mutability of statutes and the invitation to cronyism. It is both immensely encouraging (the foresight) and discouraging (it has happened and is happening).)
F.
Is it not true that the regulators’ raison d’etre, acted upon, pushes the public health in a negative direction because it gives preeminence to the lowest common denominator in the public health vis-à-vis those with the weakest immune systems, denying the opportunity to the others to gain strength in their immune systems by exposure to _________? The RAWMI model tends to this same disadvantage does it not? Can RAWMI avoid this or work around it?
G.
Is it also not true that the courts and legislators and regulators have made themselves into commercial bludgeons to be used against any perceived threat at the behest of entrenched commercial interests? (A corrupt and corrupting and illegal use of law.)
H.
Thanks again Gordon, for mentioning the Mark Manhart, D.D.S. interview at moneychanger. Many positive results for multiple people from that one mention. Hurray!
All the best,
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
Here is the sequence of events: first comes safety…then comes freedom. Not the other way arround.
Next week Blaine and I will be visiting Toronto as a guest of Michael Schmidt and at least six other raw milk farmers that wish to become formally Listed by RAWMI. I have visited and audited Michaels farm in the past, his record of testing is beyond reproach. His results are excellent. What is missing is the international certification and recognition with written evidence in a forum that speaks 3rd party and unbiased. Across North America RAWMI has created a growing community of Listed dairy farmers that are dedicated to the proposition that safe low risk raw milk is possible and they are out to prove it through long term collection of data….and the public publication of individual audited RAMP food safety plans. It seems to be working. In fact damn well. Time, perseverance and hard work has a way of paying off big time.
When you take safety issues off the table….there is very little that is negative to discuss about RAWMILK. If it is safe….it is all upside!!
By the way….conventional pasteurized milk prices ( the prices paid to farmers ) are dropping like the price of oil. Are they connected? It is tragic to see the suffering of so many hard working dairy farmers. 2016 will be another huge year of dairy exodus. It is simply the math. When a farmer gets less than it costs for a crop…you rip it out and plant something else. Dairies are exactly the same.
Mark,
The desire for freedom is an innate human quality motivated by our God given freewill and the courage to overcome fear. The desire to be safe although it to is an innate human quality, is on the other hand, largely motivated by our capitulation to fear and has unequivocally throughout the course of history been used to enslave mankind rather then protect. And
no more is this evident then in our misguided attitude and focus on microorganisms.History has clearly shown that the desire for freedom is first and foremost which means setting aside ones fears and the desire to be safe.
The reason people cater to safety these days is because we are, as you point out Ken, enslaved to the gubmint for our freedoms, if that makes any sense to anyone at all. If we have to ask for freedoms, then we don’t really have freedom, do we?
I’m glad to see the American-Canadian raw milk RAWMI cooperation. You are putting to rest the safety concerns by repeatedly demonstrating that raw milk can be produced safely on a consistent basis.
Unfortunately, “when you take safety issues off the table,” as you say, there remains a huge political-economic issue. Many politicians and regulators remain who are bought and paid for by the dairy cartel, and they refuse to budge, no matter what the safety and research data show. Illinois and California are two cases in point.
Illinois hasn’t had an illness from raw milk in the last 30 years that anyone can point to (you know the opponents would point to it if it existed). There were endless hearings and comment periods on imposing regulations, and in the end, the state winds up reducing availability of raw milk. The goal was clearly to serve the dairy cartel by reducing the supply (i.e. the competition) from raw milk. Nothing else.
In California, the only illnesses from raw milk I am aware of in the last five years have come from the licensed dairies–Claravale and OPDC. Yet the new regulation I described in my post is intended to limit herdshares, which appear to be operating safely. Once again, one can only conclude that it’s a matter of limiting competition to the benefit of the dairy cartel (and the licensed raw dairies?). You complain about 25-cow herdshares, but I have yet to see such dairies identified as real.
We have seen in other states, also without serious safety issues, that when the raw milk problem is confronted as a political issue, things change. I referred in my post to Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, where brave raw dairy farmers refused to abide by arbitrary restrictions, and succeeded in changing the rules. The same thing happened in Pennsylvania, when farmer Mark Nolt stood up to authorities who wanted to limit availability of raw milk. And in New York, when Barb and Steve Smith similarly refused to roll over. And in Maine, where Dan Brown pushed the legal envelope all the way to the state’s Supreme Court. Since those cases, PA, NY, and ME authorities have changed their tunes on raw milk. Regulators in those states concluded that publicly abusing raw dairy farmers to serve the interests of the dairy cartel and its supporters at the FDA was a losing proposition politically, and they backed off.
Michael Schmidt has been taking the same approach in Canada, but Canadian regulators seem to be much slower learners than their American counterparts.
My point is that it’s going to take more than winning the safety argument to get some of these regulators and politicians to back off, especially in California and Illinois. RAWMI and the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund need to be gearing up now to stand behind farmers who may be isolated for prosecution in those states to try to intimidate the bulk of farmers in those places. CA and IL regulators seems to be slow learners, like in Canada, but they are all intelligent people, and they can be taught about the necessity of allowing the people access to the foods of their choice.
“Michael Schmidt has been taking the same approach in Canada, but Canadian regulators seem to be much slower learners than their American counterparts. ”
David, the system is different in Canada. In Canada, courts interpret the law and set legal case-law precedents with their rulings. They are not a “3rd branch of government” – they are part of government. Judges are not elected – they are appointed by government. Same with prosecutors, known as Crown Attorneys, who work for Ministries of Attorney General of each provincial government. The federal Parliament and the provincial Legislatures pass the laws – with the Government’s laws being passed automatically except when there is a minority government, because the party which wins the majority of seats takes power and forms Government and hence in a majority government has enough votes to pass, repeal, or amend any Act they want to. Individual Cabinet Ministers in the Government Caucus oversee their respective portfolios, the various Ministries. It is all one single operation. There is no difference between “legislators and regulators” because Cabinet Ministers administer the Acts (laws) passed by Government under which Regulations (more laws) are approved, usually by Orders-in-Council signed off by a Minister.
The government in power can choose to pass a Bill to change an Act (legislation). But civil servants working for that government do NOT have the option to ignore the law (legislation or regulation). It’s not a “decision of the regulators.”
Here’s an example: Specific provincial (and federal) laws out-right ban the sale of raw milk. Michael Schmidt was found guilty of selling raw milk in violation of the provincial law in Ontario, because his customers didn’t own the animals. Given the evidence presented in the form of cowshare agreements, Justice Tetley had no choice but to convict him of selling, as it is the role of the court to interpret the law.
Canadian civil servants aren’t “slow to learn.” They are bound by the laws passed by the governments which employ them. The health inspectors didn’t have the option of ignoring the law or turning a blind eye – by law (section 10 of the HPPA), they must inspect. If Canadians don’t like a law the way it is, then it’s time to lobby government to get it changed.
Violating the law in Canada will not change the law, especially when Canada was supposedly found upon the principles of “Peace, Order, and Good Government” (Constitution Act, 1867). Lobbying to convince government to change the law is the tried-and-true method. Occasionally, constitutional challenges work, but not often enough to be reliable.
GGraham, I don’t think the Canadian system is that different from the American system. American judges are often appointed, and are part of the governmental hierarchy (one of three branches–executive, legislative, judicial). In two of the three cases I referred to in my comment (New York and Maine), the farmer defendants lost their cases in court, even on appeal. In Pennsylvania, the legal process wasn’t followed through to its conclusion. Yet the regulators in all three of these states chose to pull back and not enforce the laws as vigorously, or even at all. In other words, they realized that arresting and harassing owners of small farms, with the attendant publicity, was just bad business for them. They were getting angry calls and emails from the public. They lost important political support.
You see, regulations are nearly always open to interpretation, no matter what the country.
Michael Schmidt’s legal situation hasn’t been as clearcut negative as you suggest. One judge ruled on his behalf, and the ruling would have stood if the regulators and prosecutors hadn’t decided to appeal. The regulators have gone years without enforcing dairy laws against him, so clearly they had more leeway than you suggest.
Now, there are many more American states than Canadian provinces, so you have many more sets of dairy laws, many more sets of regulators in the U.S. And despite the power of our corporations over the regulators and politicians, I suspect America’s local politicians and regulators are sometimes more sensitive to local confrontations than are Canada’s. Michael Schmidt has received much more media attention in Canada than pretty much any American raw milk producer, yet the regulators have, of late, pushed on. I suspect Canada’s dairy cartel wields an iron fist, even at the local level in Canada.
one of the avenues of defence which Michael Schmidt’s lawyer, and I, argued in our 2013 case in New Westminster BC, was : “bureaucratic indifference” also known as “officially-induced error”. IE = that the health Authority knew what we were doing, for years, yet didn’t lower the boom. That line had prevailed in other cases [ not raw milk ] where someone operated contrary to a statute /regulation, for years, while govt. officials were well-aware, yet did nothing.
… it “didn’t fly” for us, because : a charge of contempt of court is a charade in which the Tyrant is a cat just toying with a mouse.
…. are the laws being enforced in Ontario, tonight? dozens of cowshares are delivering the good stuff there. . Here in BC.when Michael Schmidt’s appeal was denied, in early 2015, the Our Cows herdshare foundered. Some of its members convened a provincial Society for Ethical Agriculture. Without doubt, the BC Health Authority lawyers are well aware that the REAL MILK is flowing here, but have done nothing to stop it.
…My guess, is : that’s because the Society is doing it according to Mister Justice Tetley’s explanation in the Schmidt case in Ontario = what it takes to qualify as a genuine assertion of the right to use and enjoy one’s private property . Members of the Society go out out to the farm to get the usufruct of their jointly-owned asset. A key doctrine being : the entire production must be divvied-up according to the precise fraction of shares.
… as powerful as they are, the dairy cartel does not care about REAL MILK. Since they got what they wanted in the Trans-Pacific Trade Pact – Soviet-style marketing Boards still rule – they’ve gone back to sleep.
This entire subject makes my head hurt. Chickens and eggs….or eggs then chickens. freedom first & safety second or vice versa????
Disregard for true safety has huge implications. If you sell to the public under the laws of America, if your products do not comply with established standards: your insurance will be cancelled, Bill Marler will sue you, Bill Marler will win, you will not get your insurance renewed, consumers will stop trusting your brand, you will be shut down….you will lose everything or be forced to do something else for a living.
There are true consequences to non compliance. If we lived in some other country we may or may not have raw milk access.
Instead of insisting that safety proceeds freedom, let me say this….those are my priorities and they seem to work just fine. They also seem to work for others that follow the established raw milk laws and sell to the public.
I do agree that in areas that have no raw milk laws and have instead strict oppression….freedom fighting is probably the first line of offense. I’d be pretty pissed off also.
So each of us has our place in this evolution, based on your states laws and degree of oppression. In a state that has legal raw milk….we have found that safety matters greatly. Even in states that have legal raw milk, there are several “layers of regulation”. State laws are just one layer. Liability and litigation after illness is another layer. Loss of insurance is another layer. Loss of consumer sales and trust due to illness is perhaps the last.
So….safety is the one element that controls all of these “bad outcome” variables. For me…..and many other rational farmers…safety is good business, good for consumers and very good for flavor!!
You guys rejoice in your freedom and I will support you 100%… I will stick with safety first and we will see how things work out in 10 years. Mainstream consumers know little of freedom fighting ….all they want is safe good raw milk for their kids and families. No drama….no fighting, just food please. Our Internet social net work polls are clear. No drama….just clean safe raw milk. That’s what the broader markets want.
I guess,….there are levels of market maturity. Fighting to have just a little access and start anything takes one hell of a lot of freedom fighting. Once that battle is won….freedom fades away. Safety then becomes critical.
In a more mature market….safety is everything. Peace to all you freedom fighters. Fighting is so much easier when you can ” know and show you are safe” it makes the fight that much easier ! It gives the enemy one less argument to use against you! It is smarter fighting!
Well Mark
it is a repititous, reoccuring debate and keeps clouding the issue.
as soon I am talking in Canada about the need to establish standards for the production of save raw milk in order to built credibility not only for the public ,but also for the regulators, freedom, freedom, freedom becomes the objection. The accusation of prostituting the raw milk farmers to the Government is a hot button discussion.
Wow, the intellectual milkshake of raw milk and cry for freedom has a bitter taste and would not pass my tastebuds.
The often viciousnes opposition for any kind of standards here in Canada is asctually supporting the anti raw milk lobby. Its great for the anti raw milk lobby to depict the raw milk farmers as nut cases and irresponsible.
I have always maintained my position that raw milk needs to meet proper standards before it can be in any form provided to the consumer.
Freedom, I say yes, to have access without hassle, producing with reasonable standards and testing procedures is a must.
I think after 22 years arguing about freedom and responsibility I should agree with Mark lets take away the issue about safety and make it a condition before you scream freedom.
How about objecting to pilot license because everybody should have the freedom to fly, even without knowing how to fly. That would shut down quickly a lot of people becaus all those who fly without knowing how to fly will crash and burn.
The raw milk issue is not much different.
Cheers
Michael
the example of pilots just flying wherever they like, Un-regulated, is not just hypothetical. Enshrined in law of this suffering country, is, that = anyone and everyone who sets foot on Canadian soil, is instantaneously entitled to every benefit they can wring out of some bleeding-heart social-worker. Take the real-life example of the threat to the public health, caused by UN-licensed cab / truck drivers. They = literally ! = get off the plane and go to work the next day, driving in modern traffic, without so much as ever having sat behind the wheel of a car in their native village. You think I’m making it up, but this was verified by a formal report, done a few years ago, about the cab business in Victoria BC.
… how happy are we, knowing those uber-libertarians have the FREEDOM to come at me at a closing velocity of + 120 mph, with no training nor thought for the consequences … because, in BC’s wonderful NO-fault socialist utopia … the taxpayer ultimately picks up the tab for drivers who get in wrecks, with no insurance. The capper, is, some of those “new Canadians” had 5 and 6 BOGUS licences in different names.
… in this morning’s Times-Colonist newspaper, we see that the provincial highways minister has all-of-a-sudden come out in favour of the taxi ride-share app. UBER. Which is strictly IL-legal in British Columbia ….yet it’s underway. UBER drivers are completely UNregulated,and UN-insured for commerce. But that’s OK with the Minister!! Meanwhile = Providing raw milk for oneself and family outside the quota regulations, will get you send you to gaol,
Would you rather have some fresh clean salad from the store? That one is probably safer than raw milk!! http://abcnews.go.com/Health/dead-11-hospitalized-listeria-outbreak-linked-packaged-salad/story?id=36455042
Mark, you state,
“Disregard for true safety has huge implications. If you sell to the public under the laws of America, if your products do not comply with established standards your insurance will be cancelled, Bill Marler will sue you, Bill Marler will win, you will not get your insurance renewed, consumers will stop trusting your brand, you will be shut down….you will lose everything or be forced to do something else for a living. There are true consequences to non compliance.”
Are you suggesting that the laws of America and its established standards for raw milk translate into “true safety”?
If you are then I have to disagree strongly with you on that point. If anything the laws and standards in America including Canada are confounding to say the least and they certainly do not epitomize “true safety”.
There are indeed consequences for those who choose to assert their freedom in spite of state authority and you Michael Schmidt and others are victims of those consequences; that however, is not to suggest that the milk produced was unsafe.
True safety especially when it comes to raw milk consumption is a relative perception to say the least and I will not align myself with state run institutions that are hell-bent on coercing the public based on an interpretation of safety that I consider flawed, misleading and skewed by bias.
Remember to stay pissed off. http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2015/01/1-death-two-hospitalized-in-wa-state-listeria-outbreak-linked-to-soft-cheeses/#.VqHWZey9KSM
Read the label on this pasteurized cheese and then read the advice given by the authors….how to avoid illness from listeria? Avoid un pasteurized cheeses….
What caused the deaths and illness??? Pasteurized cheese. The advice….avoid un pasteurized cheese.
Do they think we are idiots!!!! The ultimate in hypocracy! Yellow journalism and just plain lies!!! Not one case of listeria illness from raw milk cheeses can be found in the last 40 years worldwide….but yet pasteurized milk and cheeses have sickened thousands and killed many from listeria.
Pissed off for sure. Keeps me motivated to teach and protest.
I am one of those who got sick from pasteurized milk and my doctors never bothered reporting my case. Here is some info worth reading, and see if the raw milk outbreaks can beat that! http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/PDFs/pasteurized-dairy-outbreak-table.pdf
Random thoughts
Where are we?
Happy cows.
Know each cow.
Know when not to use the milk.
Larger herd.
Can’t know them well enough to operate that way.
More pristine environment then?
Less pristine now?
Make use of technical tools.
If an essential mineral (EM) is not in the soil (S), then it is not in the vegetation (V), then it is not in the cow (C), then it is not in the milk (M), then it is not in me (Me). Anybody looking?
S to V to C to M to Me is the correct sequence, not M + EM to Me and certainly not PMO M + (faux) EM to Me.
Milk drinkers’ immune systems- “clean” raw milk caters to and helps those with weak immune systems.
“Clean” raw milk helps the weak, doesn’t bring anyone down.
But “clean” raw milk doesn’t move the needle of the less-weak towards stronger. Define this issue?
Administrative law: a known curse, shut out of America by the Constitution (1790 fully ratified).
Administrative law: nose-in-the-tent (plus) since 1790, and, 2016, we are “Three Felonies A Day” America.
Can’t fake the real cost of real food.
Can’t fake good health with fake food.
“You can’t cheat an honest man; never give a sucker an even break, or smarten up a chump.”
(The W.C. Fields movie “You Can’t Cheat an Honest Man.” 1939)
Thank you to all that are producing the real food.
To those producers that are trapped, I pray you escape the trap.
All the best to everyone,
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
How do you put in an “avatar” without “kissing…’s…” (Gravatar)?
The insane children’s scrawls are creepy.
The prior method was straightforward enough for me.
I’m too busy to get involved with another surveillance site (oops, sorry, I mean with Gravatar).
J. Ingvar,
If I remember correctly, when I was logged in, I went to “Edit My Profile”. My avatar is shown at the top right, and says, “Howdy, Dairy Duchess”, so if you are logged in, check there (if on a computer, just hover your cursor on your name, and the list should drop down). There are three selections listed (mine: Dairy Duchess, Edit My Profile, Log Out), and when I clicked on “Edit My Profile”, it took me to another page. At the very bottom, it has an ‘Avatar’ section. All I did was click on “Browse”, and found a personal photo I wanted to use. Maybe someone else has an easier way to do this, but it worked for me. I hope I explained this as straightforward as possible. Good luck with your image.
Dairy Duchess, Thank you. I’ll try that. Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
J. Ingvar, It looks like it worked? I noticed you don’t have one of those ‘insane children’s scrawls’ anymore. I hope my instructions were clear enough. 🙂
Dear Michael,
I hear you! You have never had a safety issue at your farm in Canada. You have always had your act together. In fact, you mentored me about safety years ago. So, it is totally natural for you to have bitter taste buds with being denied “freedom to produce safe raw milk”.
In Canada, raw milk freedom is oppressed because of economic structures that were intentionally placed against raw milk in order to protect dairy farmers from competition. As we all know, in Canada, the right to produce milk comes with a costly quota entry ticket….$47,000 dollars per cow!!! That’s why Canadian raw milk is oppressed ! According to a study of Canadian dairy farmers….88% drink their own raw milk directly from their bulk tanks! And many privately say that consumers should also have that right. It is all about control of Canadian milk money!!
So….I agree, in Canada, the fight is 90% about structurally missing freedoms, basic nutritional rights and public access to an incredibly wonderful food! But…..in the Canadian fight for freedom, some of the oppressors use an argument based on safety ( a distraction ) to derail the cause of freedom. To win….we will need to put to rest all safety issues and expose this distraction to let freedom ring.
There is a bright side to the safety distraction element. Deep investigation of milk safety ( QMRA ) will bring forward the true facts. The facts will cut the oppressors own throats. A deep study of milk safety exposes the fact that pasteurized milk can be damn dangerous! In fact a high risk food. It will expose listeria as a killer in pasteurized milk but not in raw milk….( Coleman Scientic WAP presentation in Anaheim 2015, Peg Coleman worked for the FDA on QMRA’S and exposes the data bias, power point presentations available at WAP )
I just love true unbiased data and solid honest science. The truth will set us free!!! It is pretty hard to deny the existsnce of dead and or sick bodies. That’s what lays at the feet of pasteuration.
Health, strong immunity, no asthma, no excema, no allergies, strong bones, ethical farming, happy farmers connected to happy consumers is what lays at the feet of safe raw milk!
Freedom & safety go together…..with either missing, humanity suffers. A “just society” only exists when both of these elements prevail together! If government denies its citizens freedom because it has used its police powers to “protect corporate money and keep power in the hands of a few” at the expense of its own people …I am sorry, that is the definition of ” fascism” ( look it up ). Harsh words for Canada, an otherwise gorgeous, respected, and peaceful country loved my nearly everyone.
See you on Monday. Look forward to teaching in Toronto as we all build bridges of trust and educate about raw milk safety and normalized raw milk markets. It can be done….it will be done!! I know,…we have done it here in California and other places in the USA.. Years ago you helped us do it! Thank you Michael for helping us when we needed it. Time to return the favor.
Mark,
Welcome to Ontario, Canada. Just as FYI, quota here is fixed at $24,000 for shipment of 1 kg butterfat/day. Or, a cow that produces an average of 25 kg milk/day at 4% fat. I think that’s a bit low for our commercial cows and would suggest $30,000 per cow as a better estimate of our current quota investment on a ‘per cow’ basis (not $47,000….a figure more appropriate for British Columbia, I think). With our ~70 cent dollar, this is a ‘steal’ at US$21,000 per cow.
John
One last thing: pasteurized milk is a defective product.
it is known as illness causing, non digestible and an allergenic food. Even the FDA puts milk at the top of its list of Most allergenic foods in the USA!! All food labels by law must include milk on its labels if it contains milk because of pasteurized milk allergies that can and have been fatal and triggers allergies and asthma !
When a country forces only one choice….an allergenic, non digestible and illness causing sometimes fatal choice upon its people that is not very nice.
here’s an URL to an important study of commercial yoghurts
http://www.cornucopia.org/yogurt/?utm_source=eNews&utm_medium=email&utm_content=1.23.16&utm_campaign=Yogurt
about the 1950s, yoghurt was unheard-of, around here … an “ethnic” foodstuff to be found only in mom-and-pop health food stores. Well do I recall the summer of ’69, when Dairyland rolled-out yoghurt as a snack … sweetened and flavoured, us adolescents ate it up like the baby-food it was.
the Cornucopia study explains how the Food Giants moved the yardsticks, so the stuff on the shelves is The Image of healthy food, meanwhile what’s in the package is far-removed from it.
For a raw milk dairy, producing yoghurt on the premises – then getting the right price – is the beginning of getting ahead
Mark,
Bypassing natural censoring mechanisms via the injection of fatty oils and foreign proteins such as peanut oil and adulterated dairy derivatives/proteins into a child’s bloodstream, such as lactose, bovine casein and lactalbumins etc. by way of vaccines are known to initiate/cause hypersensitivity. Some of the vaccines that use or contain the above ingredients include BCG, Hib, influenza, Meningococcal and MMR. When children are fed adulterated Dairy products and they experience a reaction, the reaction may vary depending on how seriously the child was initially affected. Indeed and in the most severe cases a reaction may even occur when that child drinks raw milk.
Dr. Ton Baars, a professor and senior scientist for milk quality and animal welfare at the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture in Germany and RAWMI board of director is quoted in the following article, “We are now not talking about asthma and allergies, but fever and infections in young children…It means there is additional new evidence that raw milk is a protective agent in infectious diseases in young children.”… Unlike in the U.S. where irrational superstition and paranoia have landed raw milk in the “dangerous” category, Europe is already widely accepting of raw milk, and increasingly so.”
http://www.realfarmacy.com/european-study-banned-food/
I agree abandon the irrational superstition and paranoia that governs man’s attitude towards microorganisms and let freedom of choice prevail.
FDA list of general vaccine ingredients (Note that Cow milk is a source of amino acids, and sugars such as galactose.) http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/QuestionsaboutVaccines/ucm143521.htm
“Microorganisms for vaccine manufacture are grown under controlled conditions in media which provide the nutrients necessary for growth. Cow components are often used simply because cows are very large animals, commonly used for food, and thus much material is available. Animal-derived products used in vaccine manufacture can include amino acids, glycerol, detergents, gelatin, enzymes and blood. Cow milk is a source of amino acids, and sugars such as galactose. Cow tallow derivatives used in vaccine manufacture include glycerol. Gelatin and some amino acids come from cow bones. Cow skeletal muscle is used to prepare broths used in certain complex media. Many difficult to grow microorganisms and the cells that are used to propagate viruses require the addition of serum from blood to the growth media.”
CDC list of just some of the vaccines that include dairy products as ingredients.
Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary
Excipients Included in U.S. Vaccines, by Vaccine
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf
DTaP (Infanrix) = formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, polysorbate 80, Fenton medium (containing bovine extract), modified Latham medium (derived from bovine casein), modified Stainer-Scholte liquid medium
DTaP-IPV (Kinrix) = formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, Vero (monkey kidney) cells, calf serum, lactalbumin hydrolysate, polysorbate 80, neomycin sulfate, polymyxin B, Fenton medium (containing bovine extract), modified Latham medium (derived from bovine casein), modified Stainer-Scholte liquid medium
DTaP-HepB-IPV (Pediarix) = formaldehyde, gluteraldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, lactalbumin hydrolysate, polysorbate 80, neomycin sulfate, polymyxin B, yeast protein, calf serum, Fenton medium (containing bovine extract), modified Latham medium (derived from bovine casein), modified Stainer-Scholte liquid medium, Vero (monkey kidney) cells
Hib (Hiberix) = formaldehyde, lactose, semi-synthetic medium
John,
I stand corrected. I was quoting BC Quota cost to purchase per cow equivalent as of 2014. When I spoke at University of Victoria, the farmers I spoke with said $47,000 Canadian dollars per cow was the cost ( if you could even buy some ) at that time.
In the USA there is no quota to buy….but we have all sorts of other supply related farm gate price issues as a result. World wide….conventional milk prices are in very bad shape.
http://www.realmilk.com/commentary/raw-milk-in-californias-humboldt-county/
Here is a very nice piece that chronicles and documents the deeply rooted, corrupt and illegal Board of Supervisors Raw Milk hearing process held in 2009 and 2010.
Now….an investigator can not find any of the documents that were officially submitted into the public record in support of a lifting of the raw milk ban. It appears that the official documents were sorted….the anti raw milk docs were included in the hearing archives and the inches thick package of documents that included all of the EU studies of raw milk medical benefits, state laws supporting raw milk and the data on raw milk safety were put into the round file….they were thrown away. I am speechless! What words can describe this egregious act of non democracy?
Who votes that we sue the fascists…. for breach of public hearing regulations and unconstitutional misconduct for using their powers to support corporate interests!!
They should get jail time!!! The 2500 citizens ( that signed the petition in 2009 ) and the natural food stores that beg for raw milk have been denied the food that every other citizen of CA can easily buy in 700 stores!! A food protected by state law!!
Another push to lift the ban on raw milk sales in Humboldt will start again this year! This is going to become very juicy. This will be the fuel that exposes the unconstitutional misconduct and denial of nutritional rights!
Madame Justice Quiano ruled that “mis-feasance of public office” is a tort…going back to the 13th Century in British jurisprudence / common law
see the case of Blair Longley vs Minister of National Revenue, 1999 Victoria BC Registry Supreme Court of British Columbia
the best defence is a good offence = Sue the Bastards
Mark, I’m afraid the answer for Humboldt County is the same as it is for the rest of California, and for Illinois. To get raw milk into Humboldt County, you will need a farmer to be prosecuted for refusing to abide by the restrictions. It could be you, or it could be a local farmer with a herdshare. That court case will drag on for a few years, but in the process, supporters of raw milk and food freedom will be mobilized, and will educate Humboldt County regulators about the negatives associated with denying people their food.
It’s the same thing as with herdshares in the rest of California. Once a farmer who runs a herdshare is prosecuted, that individual will become the leader of a movement that will mobilize angry raw milk drinkers and others who believe in food rights, and in the process educate the CDFA about the pitfalls of arbitrarily denying people their food.
This isn’t an argument about safety. This isn’t an argument about compromising with the regulators. This isn’t an argument about insurance. This isn’t an argument about whether someone is going to be sued by fancy lawyers. This is an argument about the most fundamental of rights. In the end, the regulators need to experience the wrath of angry consumers pissed off that they can’t make a simple contractual arrangement with a local farmer to obtain their food. Much as the regulators experienced it in Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Massachusetts, and elsewhere.
Believe me, the regulators in California and Illinois are petrified of resistance. They have taken a roll of the dice, betting there’s no CA or IL farmer with the guts to stand up to them. If they are right, the regulators win, and their clients in the dairy industry win.
Michael J. Sandel of Harvard University, said it well when he wrote…
“First, individual rights cannot be sacrificed for the sake of the general good, and second, the principles of justice that specify these rights cannot be premised on any particular vision of the good life. What justifies the rights is not that they maximize the general welfare or otherwise promote the good, but rather that they comprise a fair framework within which individuals and groups can choose their own values and ends, consistent with a similar liberty for others.”
Ken,
Thanks for sharing Mr. Sandel’s thoughts. I wish they could be enshrined into law.
Bill Marler reveals 6 foods he refuses to eat. Unpasteurized milk and juices is on this list, as well as precut or prewashed fruits and vegetables, raw sprouts, uncooked eggs, less than medium-well cooked steaks, meats < 160 degrees, and raw oysters. http://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/restaurantsandnews/food-poisoning-expert-reveals-6-foods-he-refuses-to-eat/ar-BBoG67H?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=UP97DHP#page=1
I don't eat raw oysters or prewashed fruits and vegetables, but I do eat everything else on his danger list. I wonder which of us has the healthier gut microbiome.
Lynn,
You know, if I was going to sue a company over producing bad food that made me or someone I know very sick, I’d want Bill Marler as my guy. But for advice on the healthiest or least healthy foods? I’d say he’d be one of the last people I’d turn to. Marler may have a pretty healthy gut microbiome, though, because he did grow up drinking raw milk.
David
Interesting new information from the PASTURE cohort study just published….suggestion that the association of ‘farm milk’ with reduced asthma and allergies is substantially related to differences in omega 3 fatty acids and milk fat % in farm vs store milk.
John
Yes, it is interesting. It is at odds with GABRIELA study suggesting that a particular protein (one damaged by pasteurization) may be responsible for the protection afforded by raw milk.
Here is a link to a summary of the new study:
http://www.science20.com/news_articles/omega3_fatty_acids_in_raw_milk_reduces_asthma_and_allergies_says_study-164349
I know, from general knowledge that raw milk has its benefits, although I wouldn’t be able to enter a discussion to properly justify this… But as I consume raw milk (mostly making cheeses and yogurts), I am mostly, out of fear, running away from the human intrusion at processing to make it (so called) ”safer” for consumption. In other words, even if the good benefits of that clean product from Nature were non existent, I’d continue consuming it and still avoid that ”soiled” commercialized product…
Very interesting! I wonder what about the processing accounts for the reductions of Omega-3s? One aspect of processing that doesn’t seem to get a lot of attention is homogenization, which directly impacts fats. I wonder if the same reduction of Omega-3s is seen in non-homgenized pasteurized milk?
This quote from the article: “The authors of the new study argue for the development of milder methods of milk processing that will ensure the retention of beneficial components present in raw milk, while ensuring that potentially dangerous pathogens are effectively eliminated.”
Its a good idea if a source of safe raw milk is not available. But it doesn’t really address the major side- benefit of pasteurization, beyond just being a kill step for pathogens–its impact on shelf life. Low temp pasteurized milk, and non-homogenized pasteurized milk, at least in my experience, has a short shelf life and doesn’t distribute well. So unless milk production relocalizes supply-chains shorten, it doesn’t seem like we are likely to see these milder methods anytime soon.
Shawna
The farm milk was higher fat than the shop milk. So the farm milk effect and higher fat effect are, at least in part, the same. Much of the shop milk was UHT (better called ‘sterilized’ in my mind) as well as low fat. I think omega 3s can tolerate HTST pasteurization quite well.
Equally, though, I don’t think a heat-labile, non-fat mediator of the farm milk effect is excluded by these findings.
John
For God’s sake, it’s all in there.
It is all already in there.
Vitamins, A440, B52, C14, D8, K12, OmegaPoint, etc.
It’s there since whoever created the cows, the sun, the earth, the grasses, etc, created those things.
What is a better word than hubris? Presumption? Arrogance?
Was a component in milk NOT in the milk before it was isolated and named?
That’s some good medicine, right there, as in laughter is the best medicine.
Of course it was already there. There is a desperation to stave off reality, to instead find and isolate something, anything, name it, extract it, soil the remainder in the name of safety, add-in the extraction and sell, sell, sell. It. Won’t. Work., It. Isn’t. Working.
I’ll use the phrases from Helca: “the good benefits of that clean product from Nature” and “avoid that “soiled” commercialized product.” Those are phrases that go a long way to capturing the essence of a common-sense approach to milk and milk products that has completely eluded the deluded, “know it all” approach that most practitioners of the PMO, and CAFO worlds are taught, practice and are for the most part now, locked into.
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
Indeed Ingvar, we forfeit good sense and sound judgment in practical matters when we invoke our ego driven theoretical assumptions as fact.
If we left it at that it would be somewhat excusable…unfortunately however, history has demonstrated that the human preoccupation with absolute control requires and oftentimes demands that such assumptions be forcibly imposed on society as a whole.
No mistake, I agree with you Ken.
There are those that can’t get a good night’s rest until they’ve concocted some new mischief to bring to bear upon the innocent, upon the poor. That would be a principle that operates in their heart. I call that evil. It shows no respect towards others after all is said and done. We have to counter that as we can.
Leaving aside that conflict, we are taxed to deal with the present size and complexity of civilization. A challenge that should give us energy to engage every day. (Well, except Sunday if you are Chick-fil-A.) That’s why I like to quote Patrick Henry’s speech and to quote James Madison in the Federalist No. 62. They had it ‘wired.’ And neither of them was even 40 years old when they spoke and wrote.
There’s hope.
All the best,
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
n.b. Thanks again, Dairy Duchess. Now I’ve got a decent avatar -it’s the Milky Way.
Milky Way, that’s an excellent one to use! My three girls (Alison, Alina, and Charlotte) shown in my avatar agree 🙂
David,
I am not sure why my last comment did not appear. I will try posting it again without the link…
I was not able to open the link you provided David.
I tried doing a search in an attempt to locate information related to the article and I came upon the following article, “What do Ice Cream and Vaccines Have in Common”.
“If your store brand or parlor ice cream melts rapidly, that’s a good sign as it likely has a low overrun and little fat destabilization, which means a lower percentage of toxic emulsifiers and stabilizers. When made with wholesome and natural ingredients, homemade ice cream will always melt quickly. There is simply no healthy way to keep the fat from destabilizing naturally.” Indeed, homogenization heat = unnatural destabilization of milk fat.
This is why I only eat homemade ice cream.
Bill Marler might want to add, chemically adulterated ice creams to his silly list of foods he chooses not to eat.
Here is a sobering thought, polysorbate 80 (tween 80) one of the many chemical ingredients used in ice cream, is also one of the many chemical ingredients used in vaccines. In the later case however the method of injecting the chemical directly into a child’s blood stream of is considerably more invasive and disruptive.
This morning 7 raw milk dairymen are meeting at Glencolten farm in Ontario Canada to submit final RAWMI documents and to Apply for Listing. All of these dairies have been visited by rawmi inspectors.
Things are changing fast in Canada. Yesterday I met with the Food Safety Science Phd at University of Guelph for deep discussions about the role of food safety, raw milk benefits and EU studies, dairy politics and dairy market economics. His greatest interest was why and how raw milk economics worked. He wanted to know why consumers would pay so much for raw milk. We answered that question.
Today TVO producers film a documentary about Canadian raw milk and complete their interview with me about RAWMI standards.
There are thousands of consumers that now get raw milk from dozens of cow shares around Ontario. It is my hope that Canadian raw milk industry representatives recognize that pasteurized milk is failing in Canada just like the USA and make space for low risk raw milk. Just like in the USA. To answer the professors questions about raw milk… He and others will be attending the Raw Milk Synpodium on Saturday. .
Thursday, January 28, 2016 2:36 AM
\”Durham area raw milk producer Michael Schmidt has received two injunction notices from York Region and the Attorney General on behalf of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural affairs.\” http://www.bayshorebroadcasting.ca/news_item.php?NewsID=81619
It is no coincidence that this is happening just prior to the UG Raw Milk Symposium and while Mark is being interviewed for the TVO documentary about raw milk.
This seems like either a sign of desperation (based on the growing popularity of raw milk), or a sign they feel emboldened to take a broad harsh official action. I don’t know enough about Canadian provincial law to assess what kind of authority and staying power this action suggests. Clearly they have been thinking very hard about a “final solution” to the raw milk problem.
I would think it’s a combination of both David. Up until this point raw milk consumption has been more or less ignored and not viewed as an overall threat to the legislated supply management system. Indeed, a quota managed system that relies heavily on misleading, oppressive government health policies and mandates for its survival.
Most of us have an idea, a gut feeling, or whatever, as to what is going on in our countries. Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkison certainly places our concerns into perspective with her book, “Stonewalled”.
in 2009 the National Farmers’ Union endorsed legalization of raw milk being distributed for human consumption, AS LONG AS such fell under the existing Canadian dairy supply quota scheme. That was just a PR exercise ; anyone who investigates the topic, soon realizes that REAL MILK, cannot be produced – safely – in conditions in CAFOs as they are now. Raw milk for human consumption is a specialty / gourmet foodstuff, which MUST command a much higher price, in order for suppliers to be motivated to do it properly.
… Dairymen who hold quota, are quite happy as coddled serfs in the present Stalin-ist cartel. But when the veneer of complacency is scratched, out come the fangs ; we who educate consumers about how bad homo milk/ faux “milk”, is, insult their self-image as nice liddle law-abiding Christians, in whose mouths butter wouldn’t melt. So they demand we be put in gaol for not only telling the Truth, but doing it. “Practicing the Law of God in modern times?! … whatever would happen if everyone did that!!!” Simple = the franchise would be taken away from those who sit in Moses’ seat. Which is why the Pharisees had Jesus Christ nailed-up
… I go back so far I remember Nikita Kruschev bellowing “we will bury you” … by which he meant – the Soviet Union would out-produce the West. Oh yeah? Well how did that all work out, Comrade-ski?! Same with REAL MILK : one of the classic symptoms of the end of Communism, is : it produces ‘way too much of what consumers don’t want = in Canada, “the Berlin Wall of Protectionism” will come down all of a sudden.
Nanny State Ninny Award for January, and it’s all in the name of safety.
http://www.therebel.media/nanny_state_ninny_award_for_january_edmonton_s_state
Yesterday, 120 raw milk producers, cow share owners, raw milk consumers, several media and tv producers along with Art Hill, the premier food safety PHD from Guelph university all gathered to convene a Raw Milk Symposium. It was held on campus at Guelph during the Ontario CA Organic Food conference.
It was a huge success. The title of the Symposium was ” from Conflict to Collsboration”. I was honored to speak first and make my case for RAWMI food safety systems. My strong message was received by the mostly anti- raw milk Professor Art Hill who also made his case against raw milk during the panel discussion. However… He was very supportive of RAWMI and our work to reduce risk. On that point there was collaboration and support. Dr Hill spent his speaking time literally reciting every raw milk illness suffered in the last 16 years. The list seemed long… But in actuality very short. He was able to list them in about 1 minute. He made a special effort to mention emphasize Foundation Farms with its 23 ecoli sicknesses. I then responding saying….Foundation Farms was the tragedy that gave birth to RAWMI. I described Foundation Farms as being a result of no hot water, filthy muddy milking conditions, unhealthy cows, no testing etc. it violated every tenet of rawmi RAMP . Dr Hill made my case for rawmi. I thanked him. The event was video taped and will stream online soon.
What a day. Nadine Ijaz also spoke along with Blaine, Karen Selick and Alicia Schmidt.
Michael and I learned something at the Raw Milk Sympodium. Food safety is the one issue that crossed the bridge between ” raw milk producers and rather tough Rawmilk Phd critics”. A respectful common ground was created around raw milk risk control and safety.
When building collaboration between sides in the raw milk debate: Rawmi type food safety standards, producer training, and testing really brings both sides together. We saw this in Ontario. Great progress was made. Many raw milk producers were audited, five of which are very close to being listed. I was very impressed with the thoughtful preparation that each producer had made for listing.
Good job Ontario!!! Yes it is true that Michael and any and all persons known and unknown were served for a March 2016 hearing….however, I got the feeling that hundreds if not thousands of producers, consumers, cow owners will submit official sworn Affidavits to the court in support of Canadian raw milk. This will not be a little hearing. This will be an internationally supported …March to Birmingham!! With raw milk safety being removed from the discussion… This is now a proud civil rights movement that will rival MLK and north Americas greatest struggle of the last 100 years. There is no greater quest than the right to access a whole food that a mother knows is essential or maybe even critical to her child’s health. Nothing greater!!!
“Rather than wipe out entire populations of bacteria, yeasts and fungi, scientists are now searching for ways to bring them into better balance, allowing them to live among us, and within us, harmoniously.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/toronto-scientists-new-book-explores-how-to-live-with-bacteria/article28461291/
This sounds like a good idea… However, is this not exactly what bacteria, yeasts and fungi have been trying to do all along… “live among us, and within us”, in harmony?
Unfortunately, The predicament we find ourselves in today is the predicable result of a flawed application of the germ theory and corresponding indoctrination of that application. This, “better balance” referred to in the article will continue to evade us and will not be achievable if we continue down our current path. And this is indeed, no more evident then in the government’s persistent attempts to force highly toxic vaccines on every man woman and child, or to limit via mandate consumer access to wholesome natural unprocessed foods such as raw milk.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/dr-emma-allen-vercoe-on-how-stool-samples-can-help-treat-infection/article28461040/
Man….I wish I had known that Dr. Emma Vercoe phd at the Univerity of Guelph was this deep into the study of human feces and their medical and probiotic application. Dr. Art Hill the chief food scientist at Guelph was pretty tough against raw milk at the recent conference held this last weekend. I could have really made a point by quoting one of his contemporary colleges…..probably located just done the hall from his office at Guelph. She is doing remarkable things with human feces and has had a very hard time getting donor participants that have stellar health and great feces!!! Well,….I know about a whole bunch of them. They are called raw milk drinkers! And belong to a bunch of local Ontario cow shares.
I think Dr. Hill would have truly blushed at the notion of Guelph researchers wanting to connect to raw milk drinkers because of stellar health and their boop!!!
Why didn’t I see this article last week….darn it!!
No _ _ _ _ !
How did the NOFA session go?
The NOFA-NJ panel discussion on raw milk went very well. Joseph Heckman of Rutgers Univ (soil science) and I debated with Don Schaffner and Jennifer Todd of Rutgers (in food safety). A few days before our session, NJ legislators introduced legislation (again) to allow raw milk sales from farms (NJ currently is one of nine states that ban raw milk). When I polled the audience, it turned out that nearly everyone consumes raw milk, and buys it in neighboring PA. I pointed out that other northeast states that allow raw milk sales from the farm (NY, MA, NH, VT, ME) have had almost no problems with illness.
Schaffner kept reminding the audience to explore the risk of allowing raw milk in NJ. He advocated more research, more discussion. It was difficult for him to respond when I reminded him that America’s public health and university communities essentially have a ban on research, and that federal public health regulators refuse to discuss the matter.
I’d say the big accomplishment of the discussion was to energize NOFA-NJ leadership to get behind the new legislation in NJ. It’s been proposed several times in the past, but has died in committee because of heavy pressure from the public health and dairy lobbies, and insufficient enthusiasm from raw milk drinkers. Hopefully, that will now change.
since the Centre for Disease Control is one of the main opponents of the Campaign for REAL MILK, here is the URL to an article by Jon Rappoport which is required reading for getting the measure of the Enemy :
he explains how “They invent medical reality out of thin air.”