I feel a little like the delivery guy who meant to leave off some plain Chinese food at the local luncheon club meeting, but inadvertently dropped off the super-spicy version, and then quickly departed, leaving the attendees to figure out how to cool off. I posted Scott Trautman’s personal account of how he’s creating a new raw milk brand, and inspection standards to go with it, and then I left town.
I spent the weekend in coastal Maine, speaking at the Common Ground Country Fair (some 59,000 attendees, though not all at my talk), among a few other activities. Being so far downeast, I had only spotty access to the Internet, and each time I got onto the blog, it was as if I could hear people gasping for cold water to cool off that spicy Chinese food.
I’ve given up trying to predict exactly how different posts might go over, but I guess I saw myself leaving some fairly mild food to chew on. I certainly didn’t think this post would be especially controversial. If there were a lot of opinions, I figured they’d be about the specifics of Trautman’s proposal–whether the three-pronged holistic inspection approach made sense or not.
One thing I want to make clear is that I asked Trautman to write the post after he described the approach during a recent conversation. I thought it was one of those situations where the person who developed the approach would do better than I would describing it, since there was a lot of personal experience behind the vision.
While the resulting blog discussion was, shall we say, animated, reading it over now I’d say it was a productive discussion in a number of ways, certainly not “very sad,” as Concerned Person characterized it. What’s sad is the failure of the public health and regulatory communities to publicly acknowledge that their current approach to dealing with raw milk isn’t working–in fact, is creating ever more demand, while creating huge amounts of public resentment by focusing obsessively on reducing supply…or to engage in any kind of meaningful public discussion about the issues, with the exception of such individuals who appear on-and-off on this blog, like Milky Way and Regulator.
The fact that the discussion of the Trautman post was so animated obviously suggests it aroused passionate feelings. Should raw milk producers establish their own safety standards? If yes, should such standards be voluntary or become part of the government regulatory agenda? Should tiny raw dairies adhere to the same standards as larger ones…or to any explicit standards? Does the absence of standards of the sort Trautman proposed leave a vacuum for more heavy-handed government regulation?
Actually, Trautman’s post didn’t explicitly raise such issues. He didn’t even indicate how the standards he came up with might be used. I interpreted the approach to be a kind of personal branding the entrepreneurial Trautman was experimenting with, in hopes that other farmers might join him in a formal or informal way, to provide competition to Wisconsin’s Grade A standards. If the approach caught on, the Wisconsin Fresh Milk standards could serve as a kind of alternative to Wisconsin Grade A standards–not in a regulatory sense, but for the purpose of reassuring consumers who want to know what kinds of safeguards are in place for their raw milk.
But I’m not sure the answers to these questions matter as much as what I perceived to be a number of simmering unstated issues. In my experience, in any emotional argument, there are always unstated issues that don’t get clearly articulated. Among the unstated issues here:
* Who speaks for raw dairy farmers? I sensed indignation by some that Scott Trautman would be so presumptuous as to think he could be the voice, or even a voice. That feeling comes across in accusations of him having too big an ego for his own good, and that he’s seeking somehow to build a giant commercial operation.
* Why can’t raw dairy farmers be more united? I sensed in Trautman’s arguments berating others for talking rather than acting possibly some residual resentment that the raw dairy community hasn’t stuck together better in the face of the crackdown in Wisconsin…which has had the effect of leaving him and a few other resisters out there more alone than they should be.
* Is the “rights” argument a diversion? Trautman several times expresses frustration that too many people are talking when they should be acting. They’re debating rights when they should be developing responsible standards and other approaches for satisfying consumer and public health worries. I would disagree here; I am convinced the rights issue is a huge issue, and based on my experience this past weekend in Maine, getting bigger every day. (More on that in upcoming posts.) Moreover, the rights issue isn’t a simple one to either articulate or to organize around, since standing up for certain rights against a government determined to deny you those rights risks confrontation…and most people are rightfully worried about confrontations with police, judges, and other authorities. Developing safety standards is definitely an easier task.
There are other unstated issues, I am sure. But just because there are strong feelings doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be discussed. I think some of the personal accusations and questioning of motives could be toned down. But the fact that Trautman’s post made some people uncomfortable isn’t a bad thing…in fact, it’s probably a good thing.
***
On the subject of rights, Canadian raw dairy farmer Michael Schmidt plans to defy British Columbia authorities by publicly serving raw milk in front of the provincial public health headquarters tomorrow.
On his Facebook page, he states, “This is to publicly celebrate the change over from Alice Jongerden to Michael Schmidt. Today was a day of trying to track down those Government agents and directors who try to shut down our cow share operation. Nobody seems to want to take responsibility for their action.”
The Lone Ranger has defintely arrived in town.
In this vacuum those areas that have no standards struggle to find a way through.
The FDA revels in this lost in space effort.
The political reality is this….established standards with a solid track record will be embraced….new ideas will be shunned.
Scott…..I support you with all my heart. But I would love to see you connect solidly with your consumers and join them as the forefront of the Wisconsin battle for raw milk.
It will be a we battle not a me battle. One of the first things that happened in CA was that I realized that I was effective when I did not speak or appear to make the show all about OPDC or Mark McAfee.
This movement is a humble movement and it is led by chidren and moms. You need to work to educate them and lead them through kindness and a long term vision. There will be a time to kick of superhuman raw milk ass…but it is often not what you think.
The ass kicking comes from the devotion of the nutured and their stories not your voice screaming at the establishment. I would spend your anger and your eneergy educating your consumers and working to create apositive raw milk story for your legislature. The brand you want to create comes as a secondary result of humility after the fact.
Weston A Price said it all when he said…."You Teach You Teach You Teach!!!"
These are daily words that I live by. Your work needs to be focussed on teaching and what raw milk can do for the broken immune system in America.
If a farmer does not have the love of his consumer…he really has nothing. Kindness, love, knowledge, hardwork, research, delicious grass fed raw milk that is safe. Those are the elements of success.
Your partner….and behind you all the way!!!
Mark
There are many ways to produce a good product. Test the product, not the process.
Excellent job at sniffing out some of the root issues – I agree that you've sifted out the distractions and found the crux of the issue.
I would also include consumers in your first question, though. Who speaks for raw dairy?
I understand the feelings some farmers must have had regarding feeling left in the cold by the community when they were singled out.
I've often wished the raw community could adopt a sort of Amish style of "insurance" from within. While regulators run around singling out folks to be the example, we could, if organized, just keep moving the target. Success over prohibition keeps coming to mind.
Rights: Again, I think you're right. Going to the table for a compromise would sure be easier.
But some things should not be compromised away, and I think this issue is one those things.
Another major disconnect, and why the movement is so disjointed is because some of the farmers have grouped together at the expense of the other farmers. Barney Google, in David's last posting, noted that there is a group of farmers in Wisconsin who are trying to dictate things. This is very true. I was part of this group until I asked very straightforward questions that obviously weren't appreciated, and they kicked me out. This group introduced the WI raw milk bill last year, that benefited only grade A dairy farms – themselves – at the expense of all other farmers (grade B and unlicensed). They didn't ask and didn't want the opinions of others, only themselves. And why don't farmers like me support farmers like them? Another big disconnect.
Asking for some sort of regulation, even if it's 'self-regulation', seems to fly in the face of the get-to-know-your-farmer movement. 'Regulation' is a false guarantee for those who don't want to take responsibility for themselves. The inspector says the farm is up to snuff, instead of the consumer making that decision personally. This makes the anonymous transaction okay, and that's not okay with me. All you're doing is replacing one system you don't like for one you do, when in reality, they are the same thing.
Farming is not an "industry". Rather it is a vocation. Some would say it is an art, because each farm is different. If I don't want to use bleach every time to sterilize my equipment, but my cheese is good, should I be penalized? No. I am on my farm, and I can use my senses to tell when something is awry. I'll trust them against some protocol any day. I'm not a cog.
"But I didn't order extra spicy." -Funny!!!
I read all of those comments, each articulate and some inflammatory, and that's exactly how I felt – too much cayenne. I was hoping you'd post your insights and pour some milk on those hot tongues, and you did. Thanks – I'm still grinning!
I hope Scott succeeds, and he will if he takes Mark's advice. I don't know Wisconsin market, but it seems there are a lot of medium-sized dairies that could benefit. I know that small farms easily produce a quality product, but they don't make much money with just liquid milk.
You're wrong about one thing; it is *not* easy writing safety standards for raw milk. At least not in my experience. Nine months ago, we came to the same place Kirsten articulated above:
"There are many ways to produce a good product. Test the product, not the process. "
But now we're (RMAC) forced to consider requiring some process standards. Not that we will, but I expect to see the same spicy fare here in Colorado. But first I thought maybe you all could offer some advice. We're mostly small farms, more goat than cow.
Here goes: – Is it possible for 70 farms to self-regulate via product testing with mandatory education and annual peer review?
Could you suggest a minimum level of education for the beginner farmer (cow and goat)? We already give every producer Tim's Raw MIlk Production Handbook, and Peggy's Safe Handling consumer guide (both good information). But since it doesn't have a picture of a goat on the cover, half of them aren't reading it.
Thanks for your help,
-Blair
Standards, co-ops, brands…these are all tools which are used to obscure the relationship that consumers have with their farmers. They are shortcuts, which weaken the farmer/consumer relationship. Touting a a faceless brand is easier for both the farmer and the purchaser…but as always in the natural world, when you get some kind of advantage, the cost for it must be paid somewhere.
Raw milk has an opportunity to change significantly the food delivery system in this country. It provides a chance to change attitudes toward farmers, and provide not only better health for consumers, but a better appreciation for the products they consume. It can foster an enhanced relationship for many who are far removed from the natural world, and give the urban dweller a piece of the country, and a better view of their place in Nature. Plopping down to the Piggly Wiggly, and looking for that fancy label with the barn on it, does little to change food delivery…it is a prime example of trying to fit raw milk into the conventional system. Sure some feel that this is the best way to get more milk to more people….but that attitude diminishes the potential that raw milk has. We must fight the temptation to view raw milk the way other foods are viewed…if we want to maximize its potential.
Sure, the previous entry was a good thing….if for no other reason that Scott has an opportunity to show others exactly what he is all about. I'll pass on his leadership, thank you.
More small farmers should be encouraged, and to strengthen this movement, step should be taken to encourage more NEW farmers to get into raw milk…..not establish a new beaucracy, where established dairies can just jump to a different ship and continue to sell their products blindly to some middleman.
Yes, freedom will result in variable output, the good, the bad and the ugly. But it is necessary, as pointed out, not every farm is the same and no one has perfect understanding or knowledge, standards assume otherwise.
I don't have a problem with voluntary standards by some, but in the absence of freedom, if they gain any acceptance they'll be used for ill.
How can this change? and is it prerequisite?
Kirsten…your words ring true. "Test the product not the process". There are many ways to reach the end point of safe delicious nutritious raw milk. Each ecosystem will nessecarily have its own risks, safety plan and production standards. What works in CA will be different than in Maine.
I say that the standards are very simple:
1. Pathogen free, with frequent testing
2. Low bacteria count of less than #15,000 SPC (coliforms are a questionable standard )
How a farmer arrives at this goal is an individual decision and the smart ones will follow an organic, green and clean model. OPDC uses pastures and organic USDA standards in production….but remember that Claravale in CA is not organic ( they are all natural ) and does not pasture their cows…..but they have never had a pathogen detected in 83 years of testing and have achieved very low bacteria results similiar to OPDC. So being all green and organic may be best ( my opinion because of CLA and Omega 3 FA ) but it is not a requirement. Think about that!! There are many ways to arrive at the endpoint of the basic safety standards. Scott can use his concepts to achieve this standard. It is up to him how he does it. This is not like trying to build a flying machine guys!!!
It is simple….yet the most difficult thing in the world for a CAFO to do. They will have the wrong bugs because they have the wrong ecosystem and serve the wrong master.
Serve the cows and nature and the consumer and your design and standards will change.
Mark
Will you clarify what you mean when you talk about being "green"?
We have a montra at OPDC:
Keep Hot Hot
Keep Cold Cold
Keep Clean Clean
and Keep Green Green
When the aforementioned concepts are always maintained your systems stay safe and the milk is delicious. If sometimes your hot is not as hot is it is supposed to be and you did not achieve your cleaning temps….your milk will start tasting like dirty socks. The same for not cold enough or not clean enough.
As for being and keeping things green. CLA and high Omega 3 FA comes from cows on green pastures not CAFO confinement. Green pastures create the right PH in the cows rumen to keep the right bugs dominant etc…Green pastures creates the right kind of external ecosystem that tends strongly to encourage good bacteria and discourage bad bacteria.
So being green is part food safety and part nutritional….it also looks really nice and the cows are so much cooler and happier when they lay down on green pastures not in CAFO manure dry lots. Green is also our committment to carbon foot print and global nuturing….it is the right thing to do at so many levels.
Green is also now a requirement of the NOP and Newest USDA standards for organic dairies on July 2011. We had this standard from day one at OPDC and there will be no adjustment as other organic dairies scramble to make their O-CAFO into a Living Natural Green Pasture Based Sunlight Driven Operation.
Green is connected to Clean….Clean does not mean sterile…it means a healthy biodiversity of beneficial bacteria that is reflected in healthy raw milk. A green pasture ecosystem serves as the innoculum for the bacteria that do finally get into raw milk and serve as its culture.
You do not want CAFO cultures in your delicious raw milk!!
Mark
And, yes, there are many issues in the mix. There is none more important than political.
Did you ever wonder to whom regulatory agencies, as the FDA, are accountable? The House Government Reform Subcommittee on Drug Policy and Criminal Justice (congressional- what a title!), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Office of Inspector General (OIG)? Not to mention the unauthorized commercial interests. The regulators are ultimately, although indirectly, accountable to the voters. And no matter the good intent of the designers of legislation, the ultimate result is often a mass of laws to be interpreted by un-elected individuals with agendas or financial interests in what they are creating.
Another huge issue, therefore, is political. Without a transformation of attitude within the legislative bodies and their committees, the regulatory agencies and departments will remain adamantly and inflexibly opposed to all the goals of the natural food advocates. Legislative bodies oversee the agencies, executives approve legislation and appoint heads of agencies and department heads; so there needs to be a dramatic shake up of the political system. From the local to national, we must support constitutionalists, 10th amendment advocates, etc. in order to effect such a transformation. Tell your customers which candidates will support, and will work for, protection of our rights. Schwartzenegger vetoes the will of the people and the legislature; Soares and Doyle are under the influence of Big Dairy; and others wont even show to discuss the issues. Whether you milk one cow or run a commercial diary operation, the Revolution goes nowhere without new faces in the halls of government. There are choices: to beat heads against the existing system; to operate underground, to engage in civil disobedience, or to change the face of government. From Congress to your State House to your county or local officials, support people who support your ideals. All the rest will fall in line
You say that an SPC of under 15,000 is a good standard, but you question the value of a coliform standard. As a cheesemaker, I know that a large coliform population can produce rancid and fecal off-flavors in cheese, as well as gas holes in the body of the cheese. (Although, much of that will depend on how aggressive your starter cultures drops the pH, and the cook temps achieved during the make)
How would you respond to this concern about coliforms as a quality problem, rather than safety problem?
Also, wondering if you think that a low P.I. Count is a good indicator of safe raw milk?
Mark,
Trashing small producers isn't "surviving and serving'….it's arrogance and bass ackwards thinking (and rude too). While it might not be that way In CA or Wi, it's the small producer, the one who is milking just a few cows…the ones that are 'sharing' their own food supply with others, that has brought the raw milk movement where it is today. There is no place for the disregarding and disrespecting of the backbone of the movement….and talk like that needs to be quelched emphatically.
Whining that others aren't doing anything, or enough…isn't too productive either….especially on the tail of his other stellar comments. Sure all voices need to be heard…but evaluating the words, and exposing them for what they truly say (both positive and negative) is crucial.
Don't confuse the voice with the vocalist…if anyone else came on here and said what he did…the response would be identical. (Thankfully, after interpreting the content, it's just a single voice).
Perhaps we have a broken system where the consumer is disconnected from the farmer. This movement helps there. But, at the same time, the consumer cannot know everything. Is there something the consumer (or Mark's mom's) could have known before buying from Hartmann or Billy Goat farms?
I thought Scott provided a nice starting point for discussion of how to really bring the consumer and the farmer together in the context of food safety and quality. There are many opportunities to build on those thoughts. Bill Anderson brought up some excellent science questions.
The regulators might go along if raw milk was less represented in this table:
http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/PDFs/2010dairythroughAUG28REVISED.pdf
MW
As far as safety is concerned I am not convinced that less than 10 coliforms is any better than less than 50 coliforms when there are no pathogens present….that is what I meant by my coliform standards concern. In CA less than 10 coliforms in finished product is our standard. I just do not want to suggest it as a standard for others. Less than 10 coliforms is not a scientifically proven measure of safety. It comes from the 1930s as one of the first standards for effective pasteurization. It had nothing to do with an appropriate standard for a living whole raw milk. You can have pathogens and have less than 10 coliforms. The coliform standards nationally range from less than 50 to less than 10. What do you think??? Have any ideas? I would support a national standard of less than 20 coliforms in finished product for raw milk and raw cream. The cleaner the milk lines the lower the coliform counts…but less than 10 is rediculous. These are some of the most beneficial bacteria found in raw milk.
Watch this…..there is hope for America. The parents of this child deserve an Educational and Parenting Medal of Honor.
http://wholefoodusa.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/5-min-video-11-yr-old-homeschooler-on-industrial-vs-natural-food-and-agriculture/
Mark
I was told by a French master cheese maker that raw milk can have an SPC of upto 25,000, and make pathogen-free soft-ripened artisan cheese (high moisture, aged only a few weeks).
In France, they actually produce starter cultures with non-pathogenic enterococcus for use in pasteurized cheese, to simulate the flavor of raw milk cheese. The FDA will not allow the importation of these cultures, however.
Mark — What do you think about the relevance of the P.I. Count?
That there is a system at all is the problem. Systems are, by definition, barriers between people. They are set up to apply controls (sometimes with good intentions, sometimes otherwise) and are therefore ALL broken, to whatever degree they interfere with the natural right of a man to behave peacefully in whatever way he chooses. There is the ultimate disconnect.
Of course sometimes we need systems, for those things that are just too big to do any other way. But we have gone way too far and made systematization a default position. Our tendency now is to assume that centralized control is necessary in all things. Its a very destructive attitude that has allowed systemization to become an entrenched industry, and system building to become a customary, even casual, means to gain power and money. My home state of Pennsylvania, for example, has decreed that in 2011 all new single-family homes must have fire-control sprinkler systems. The new law is, of course, all about safety, and to read the papers, the only questions to be discussed are about affordability, and how much safety the new law will provide. Nowhere have I read any suggestion that a mans right to determine his own level of risk may be squashed by this law. That is insane! (Undoubtedly we will be forced to pay not only for the sprinkler systems, but also a new bureaucracy to certify them, inspect them, and dictate upgrades and maintenance.) No surprise the National Fire Sprinkler Association cannot fathom how anyone could be so crass and stupid as to oppose such an important safety measure.
Local food production is, in my opinion, a very good place to start dismantling the insane systemization of America. It wont be easy since by now weve built local farming right out of the landscape, but it can be done, if we would only begin to discourage the central-controllers, and encourage regular people to stop thinking about food as commerce and more as personal economy.
I, for one, am not interested in a brand. I am interested in Erics milk, Calebs produce, and Bettys cakes and pies. Will I know everything when I obtain these products, as Milky Way suggests I ought to? Nope. But Ill know enough for me, and that ought to be enough for MW and everyone else.
(By the way, justifying systemic controls with science is largely an exercise in obfuscation. In medicine, for example, there is a general understanding that what you say today will likely change, sometimes dramatically, in ten years. While that maxim is well understood and accepted by most, it does nothing to diminish the earnestness with which current medical advice and counsel are delivered.)
I am more interested in total bacteria and total quality of raw milk….fresh and delicious with no pathogens.
What do you think…? Any thoughts on this. You are the cheese whiz. I know only one kind of raw cheese and I have only a limited cheese experience. One class at CAL POLY and one type of cheese being made for seven years makes me a cheese rookie.
Mark
Is your raw milk farmer there? Mine is… (not that that means anything to me, but I find it interesting that a farmer with 2 cows is so interested as to want to attend).
Preliminary Incubation Count (PI Count) is different than Lab Pastuerized Count (LPC).
The LPC is a measure of thermoduric organisms — those that can survive high temps.
P.I. is a measure of pyscrotrophic organisms — those that can grow in the cold, such as listeria & pseudomonas, among others
A P.I. Count is only useful in relation to an SPC. After plating for the SPC, you incubate the raw milk sample at 55F for 18 hours, and then plate it again. Any pyscrotrophs will tend to multiply in those 18 hours at 55F, while the normal desirable micro-flora of raw milk should not mulitply significantly.
I have read that P.I. counts are a good indicator of hygene in the milking parlor.
On the other hand, the LPC is supposed to be an indicator of proper cleaning of all equipment. If all bio-films were not removed from the pipelines, tanks, valves, etc…, they can harbor organisms that can adapt to survive the temperatures of the CIP system (and consequently, can survive the temperatures of pastuerization).
These types of organisms usually aren't pathogenic, but can often be problematic spoilage organisms.
I believe that an LPC could still be useful in identifying problems in raw milk production. I don't have any direct experience with performing either tests, though. I have only read about them and been told about them by lab technicians.
What I do have more experience in, is a more primitive testing system — lacto-fermenting raw milk under its own native bacteria at room temperature, and using organoleptic sensory analysis to try and characterize the microbial community within the raw milk.
In the days before commercial freeze dried mono-culture cheese starters, this was the way that old-time cheesemakers created new mother cultures when their bulk starters succumbed to phage or contamination.
Even more useful, can be to lacto-ferment two samples of the same lot, one sample as-is, and the other coagulated with rennet. The renneted sample will display any gassy defects more readily, as the gas will be trapped within the curd. Protein degredation (proteolysis) should also be more apparent in the renneted sample.
As far as bacteria plate counts go, I'm not convinced that is neccessarily the best standard.
It is possible to have milk with an SPC of 5000, but which contains listeria, campylobacter, salmonella, Staph. Aureus, E. Coli, etc…
I think it is more important to characterize the community of bacteria within the raw milk.
I am told that some experts on Comte cheese (which is the most produced cheese in France — a raw milk, cooked-pressed Alpine cheese similair to Gruyere) say that the biggest threat to the future of Comte is sanitation. In other words, the raw milk is becoming TOO clean, and the lack of native micro-flora is detracting from the diversity & robustness of flavor in Comte.
Now there is an important disclaimer here — Comte is a low-moisture, long aged cheese. During the cheese make, the curd is cooked to between 125F and 130F to expell as much moisture as possible with little acid development. The milk cannot be cooled below 50F, and must have rennet added within 24 hours of milking.
This is the traditional way that the seasonal flush of milk is preserved in the Alps, most likely including the primitive Swiss mountaineers that Weston A. Price studied. (The June butter he described was likely from cream skimmed from the cheese making milk, because high-fat cheese does not age well)
Anyways, my point is this — when we talk about bacteria plate counts, it is all very relative. Unless we have a baseline of understanding for a particular farm or region, and the number and types of bacteria in their milk based on their dairying practices, how can we say what the allowable SPC is to produce safe raw dairy products?
It would niave of us to believe we can create a blanket standard. In Europe, they understand this intuitively, because of thousands of years of unique regional traditions.
Love your understanding of CIP biology and testing.
I agree that the low temp survivors and high temp survivors are both important when you start trying to track down problems. But if your system is tweeked and is working properly…we generally do not have those problems.
Our CIP and chemical use is pretty refined and we have a very clean line. We use a caustic ( lye compound ) on occasion to burn out anything that may be trying to live as a biofilm inside our lines. We also do a prewash with water to assure that the lines are clean prior to sending milk through them. This is done as a matter of routine to make sure that our milk is just coming in contact with stainless and nothing else.
I have a raw milk story that I hope makes John Sheehan think twice about who he works for at the FDA. The FDA should work for America and it clearly does not. The medical errors and medical drug mistakes that kill hundreds of thousands of Americans every year is becoming exposed and here is one little story that is adding to the internet raw milk uprising.
I just got a call from a mom whose son had TICS ( a muscle contraction and spasm problem for years ) and could not control them with medications. The meds had terrible side effects and he had terrible muscle pain with the ongoing spasms and muscle pain that resulted.
After a day on raw milk….the TICS are gone….and have not returned since. This mom is blown away…..Dr. RAW MILK fixed her kid when nothing else had ever come close!!!!!!!!
Answer that FDA…..why is it that you are attacking food as a remedy for illness??? the FDA is a criminal organization and your god damned drugs kill people. Sometime in the next few years when America is so sick and "alternative" becomes "the first choice" as a requirement because medical chemistry kills to many and it has become fully unsustainable….the FDA will be burned in the ash heap of history. A very sad 80 year greed based detour from health. A detour marked by the millions of graves of those killed by FDA approved drugs.
http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2010/09/29/pom-gets-spanked-by-the-ftc/
We must some how separate the medical claims on food from the medical claims on synthetic pharma drugs. Pharma has side effects and food does not.
The FDA must be separated from all of our food. The the FDA is toxic…..
" The raw milk dairymen we will take your sick and polluted bodies and heal them if modern medicine has not damaged you to far".
Mark
For the most part, artisan cheeses have not been a food safety problem. How wpuld you apply your knowledge to fresh raw milk, especially for those selling to an "unknown" population of consumers (via buyers clubs, retail)?
MW