Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures may have thought his Monday Sacramento meeting designed to overturn AB 1735 went well, but two days later, the most important legislative target in his campaign remains unconvinced.
In an email to individuals who wrote her protesting the legislation, the chairperson of the California Assembly Agriculture Committee, Nicole Parra (pictured at right) today defends the 10-coliform-per-milliliter maximum for raw milk, describing it in terms that only bureaucrats could love—a fulfillment of the legislature’s duty to “protect” the public health. Here’s the heart of her note:
“Unfortunately, recent information falsely asserts that AB 1735 will ban raw milk sales in the State of California. You will be pleased to learn that, contrary to misconceptions, AB 1735 does not ban the sale of raw milk in California.
“AB 1735 requires a coliform count of less than 10 per milliliter for raw fluid milk intended for direct human consumption. This standard has been implemented in a number of other states, and as their experience suggests, the standard set by AB 1735 will not affect the availability of raw milk in California. The State of Washington, which has had this standard in place for several years, has approximately 20 producers who continue to provide raw milk to consumers.
“Passing AB 1735 was a way for the Legislature to fulfill our responsibility to help protect the public health, while acknowledging the needs of those who produce and drink raw milk.”
I have a sneaking suspicion that not many California raw milk drinkers "will be pleased to learn" of this legislator’s reassurance about the availability of raw milk. Nor will they welcome her refrain about "our responsibility to help protect the public health." (You can email the Assembly member at Assemblymember.Parra@assembly.ca.gov.)
They know that anywhere from 25% (the California Department of Food and Agriculture’s estimate) to 80% (Organic Pastures’ estimate) of California raw milk won’t meet the standard. With raw milk already in high demand, it’s reasonable to assume that many current customers will be shut out. Moreover, at least some dairy farmers in Washington are getting their milk to market without meeting the coliform standard, because of lax enforcement. With all the publicity, CDFA can be expected to strictly enforce the new standard next year.
Ironically, Assemblywoman Parra’s territory includes Organic Pastures’ base, Fresno County. Probably more significant, when a committee chairperson decides to go one way on a piece of legislation, other committee members tend to follow along.
Clearly, the decibel level of protests isn’t yet loud enough for the legislators to hear.
One person trying to raise it is Aajonus Vonderplanitz, a raw-food advocate who successfully fought a ban of raw milk by Los Angeles County in 1999.
He promises to file for a court injunction against enforcement of AB1735, and, “Then, we need to establish a class action suit against CA Agriculture Committee members, Governor, Surgeon General and many John Does in the CDHS who were responsible for submitting the discriminatory, unscientifically unwarranted dairy changes to CA law. Also notice that they made the new laws punishable by criminal action rather than infractions. I will need everyone who is willing to join the class action suit. It would be very effective if 10,000 California residents were plaintiffs.”
If you are interested in joining the class action suit, email Theo Copley at tcopley@ziplink.net. Request a class action form, along with information on donating to a legal fund.
Aajonus also provides suggested alternative legislation that is more flexible in required bacteria counts. (You can request the text as well.)
Given the assemblywoman’s email, I’m wondering how “stealth” the CDFA was in getting the new standard passed. Either she’s covering her rear end in not wanting to admit she wasn’t minding the store as chairperson of the agriculture committee in appreciating the importance of AB 1735, or else she really believes in it.
Either way, this situation is shaping up as a major test of wills in the battle over raw milk, with huge long-term consequences.
I tried email that woman, since I do not live in that area,it would not accept my email. I also tried emailing my representative and I got an error page.
Will they be making laws/bills to clean up the feed-lot dairies? The beef feed-lots? The hatcheries? Will they outlaw raw fish? Will they investigate the nutritional value of the "feed" that goes into the stock for our consumption? The conditions that these animals are kept? What’s next on the agenda to take away or dictate? If you do not want raw milk, raw fish, etc, then don’t buy it. I don’t want feed lot milk, and I don’t buy it.
http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/finally-some-hard-data-on-illnesses-from-raw-milkthe-governm.html"
Only @59 illnesses per year for a tad over 30 years? That does say a whole lot! And how many illnesses from pasteurized milk products in that same time frame? In 1985 alone, there was well over 150 illnesses.
Yes indeed, raw milk is being picked on.
Dear Ms. Parra,
Thank you for your response. I understand the bill, and I understand the coliform requirement. I believe the coliform requirement is unnecessarily low, and will prevent the sale of a lot of healthy milk. I don’t believe this bill protects our safety at all; in fact, I believe it actually impinges on our freedom to buy raw milk, punishes small dairy farms, and protects industrial-scale dairy farmers in our state from competition. E. Coli 0157:H7 is only one of many coliform bacteria; many are beneficial to our health. Your bill does nothing to isolate the dangerous strain. Has your committee even considered setting the same standard for coliform in pasteurized milk? I don’t imagine it has. Yet my sources tell me that most pasteurized milk tests higher for coliform than most raw milk.
AB 1735 is, in my opinion, a poorly disguised below-the-belt hit at small raw milk producers, and has nothing to do with public health and safety. I urge you to work with lawmakers to remove the coliform requirement before the law goes into effect.
Thank you.
Don’t be lulled into this thinking. Big Dairy is quite wealthy and holds tremendous influence in our government. They also feel that THEY, through the PMO, have exclusive rights to the product. Their concern is that ‘incidences’ with raw milk will adversely affect the monopoly they work tirelessly to maintain. Their ONLY concern is the bottom line. These are the people, who in true Marxist fashion, strive to control the market, and profit at the expense of both farmers and retailers. Check out the line of lawsuits against them and it will open your eyes to their anti-free-market tactics.
This bill was passed low key, on purpose, with the sole intent on striking a blow to the high profile poster boy for raw milk. Those that send their kids to college by boiling milk called in some chips on this oneand this wont be the last time they do.
Its time for the people to take back their government. Serving big campaign donors has been twisted into protecting the public. Weve seen this time and time again. Every raw milk drinker in this country needs to contact their representativeswhether they live in Ca or not. For if we dont flex our muscle now, and let our lawmakers know our numbers, the financial strength of the dead milk dealers will prevail. Establishing relationships with legislators is our best protection of continued supply.
milkfarmer
PS it would be interesting to know the amount of money that Little Miss Protector has taken from Big Dairy. I’d bet it’s not insignificant.
Also, I can’t even find an e-mail address for Nicole Parra. So much for contacting her.
http://www.fpa-food.org/content/about/staff.asp
Cal Dooley was named President and Chief Executive Officer of the Food Products Association (FPA) in 2005 and is now the President and Chief Executive Officer of GMA/FPA (Grocery Manufacturers of America/ Food Products association). Dooley served as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1991 to 2004, representing the 20th District of California. He served on the House Agriculture Committee, and was Ranking Minority Member of the Agriculture Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry. He also served on the House Resources Committee. Dooley is a fourth-generation farmer and partner in Dooley Farms, growing cotton, alfalfa and walnuts in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Dooley earned a Bachelors degree in Agricultural Economics from the University of California, Davis and, as a Sloan Fellow, earned a Masters degree in Management from Stanford University. He and his wife, Linda, have two daughters, Brooke and Emily.
Is it possible that MS. Parra has been influenced a bit by her work experience with this former CongressionalRepresentative?
Please try to send your e-mails again to Nicole Parra. I was able to send her a few choice words of my own at the following e-mail address:
Assemblymember.Parra@assembly.ca.gov
You can use this same e-mail address pattern above when e-mailing your own California representative just by substituting his or her last name in place of Parra.
In addition, if you want to speak your mind to any and all members of the California Senate Agriculture committee too, you can use this e-mail address pattern:
senator.name@sen.ca.gov
Example: senator.ducheny@sen.ca.gov
Thank you very much to everyone who has gotten into the ring to fight the good fight so far for reminding our publicly elected representatives of the California legislature that democracy is a participation sport–whether they like it or not!
Looks like Cal Dooley hates Real Milk just as much as he hates Real Chocolate!
According to the Seattle Times, it was the Grocery Manufacturers Association who ordered the FDA to carry the ball for them in making the new FDA plan to allow chocolate’s main ingredient, cacao, to be replaced with all sorts of substitutes, including VEGETABLE OIL! The FDA could have required fake chocolate to be labeled "chocolate-ish," "chocolate-flavored," or "pseudo-chocolate" or something similar, but then that would have been too much like that truth-in-labeling thing for the FDA (we wouldn’t want all these ignorant consumers to become confused now, would we? Heh, heh!)
Last time I checked, groceries were grown, not built.
A BIT EXTREME DONT YOU THINK?
Diane, I will write her!!
My other question though: what does a class action suit entail? Sorry, a tad bit ignorant here.
Cancer and heart disease, rare a hundred years ago, now claim millions of lives, despite uncalculated billions spent on medical research and care. One third of the population suffers from allergies. One in ten will have ulcers. Every year, one quarter of a million infants are born with a birth defect. Arthritis, digestive disorders, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, osteoporosis, dementia, epilepsy, and chronic fatigue afflict a significant majority of us.
All these diseases were extremely rare before food became an industrial commodity! That, to me, is extreme!
Our food production and medical care is all about MONEY. That is extreme. We no longer even know what health is. that is terribly extreme.
Here’s a quick example: This morning I heard a sound-bite advertisement for Planned Parenthood. They proclaim that they are all about "prevention." Their example: Planned Parenthood promotes mammograms! Need we be reminded that mammograms are all about detecting existing disease?!
The average Joe in America has been trained to believe the bold lie that business and government are interested in his welfare. Manufactured food is the most pervasive and destructive emblems of that lie.
Not only that but here is yet another example of not informing the masses properly. Mammograms are highly debated by natural physisians because they damage cancer cells and potentially spread the cancer.Just one little article http://www.newstarget.com/021608.html
"The CDC data that Pete Kennedy obtained a few months back showed that raw milk has been responsible for an average 59 illnesses per year from 1973-2005.
http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/finally-some-hard-data-on-illnesses-from-raw-milkthe-governm.html"
Only @59 illnesses per year for a tad over 30 years? That does say a whole lot! And how many illnesses from pasteurized milk products in that same time frame? In 1985 alone, there was well over 150 illnesses.
Yes indeed, raw milk is being picked on.
***
59 people per year (compared to 150) is not very many in absolute terms, but in relative terms, it’s a hell of a lot. Let’s assume that raw milk is consumed by only 1% of the population. That means that, multiplied by 99 (the percent assumed of consumers drinking pasteurized milk), that’s 5,841! That would be how many people would be getting sick off of raw milk if the same number of people were drinking it as do pasteurized milk. It seems it’s a fact of life that raw milk is more risky than pasteurized milk – no one’s getting picked on by this information.
(If raw milk consumption is 5%, then the total is 1121, if 10%, it’s 531. Still way more than 150. I’m including these figures because I don’t know what the percent consumption of raw milk is, but I suspect that it’s between 1-5%)
This is just what we can conclude from the numbers you gave, I would rather check the original data myself before reaching a firm conclusion, but I think its safe to say that you’re ignoring the fact that the number of people that get sick off of raw milk per year is large considering how few people drink it.
This doesn’t mean that raw milk should be banned, but considering the number of outbreaks of E. coli in raw milk, particularly last year, I don’t think the producers know how to produce it safely.
The trouble I have with extrapolating the numbers is that it is very difficult for us to know what TYPE of raw milk those 59 people drank. Was it mass produced, confinement operation milk that was meant to be pasteurized or grass-fed, pastured cows from a family farm?
There ARE producers who produce raw milk safely. And yes, they may make a mistake that causes someone to get sick. But they are HUMAN, and we humans all make mistakes. There are also unscrupulous, money hungry jerks who don’t care about doing things the right way. I think it should be up to each individual to have the RIGHT to find out and decide for themselves if raw milk and the people who produce it can be trusted.
Everything comes down to education.
The example I gave in regards to the 150, was about only one of the incidents that I read that occured in 1985. There may have been more illnesses from pasturized milk that year. There have been so many. My example was to show that differece between the two. 59 compared to over 150 is a 3rd and that over 150 was in Illinois alone if I recall correctly. I wouldn’t want to be either of those who become ill. I think raw cheese was involved in some of the illnesses.
I don’t recall if that 59 was in ILL only or not.
As I said, I am picky of where my raw milk comes from. I don’t drink pasteurized milk as it comes from feed-lot dairies and I pass severalof them, numerous times each month all over this state.
Ya know, if you think about it; the breast is placed between the 2 plates and squished in two different directions. If there is a nodule there, it has the potential to be squished, like a zit. So it would make sense that the mammos can make a bad situation worse. It’s like a boil, if you squish it, you have the potential to shoot the pus in the wrong direction and causing a huge, tunneling infected wound.
Below is a victims story taken from S.T.O.Ps website; Safe Tables Our Priority.
If anyone would like to read our familys journey about E-coli 0157:H7, DG was kind enough to post it on April 1st and 2nd of 2007.
Chicago, IL
"God Danced the Day You Were Born"
Alexander Thomas Donley
January 28, 1987
These words are part of a colorful plaque that still hangs on my son’s bedroom wall. I felt truly blessed that cold day in January when my son entered this world. He was healthy. He was beautiful. He was perfect. Alexander Thomas Donley weighed over a whopping nine pounds at birth. I scrutinized every inch of him, memorizing every crease, every follicle, every tiny pore of his delicate, perfect pink skin. I marveled at his gorgeous red hair. Where did that come from? Buried deep in familial lineage somewhere. We’d figure it out somewhere along the line. After all, we had a whole long lifetime ahead of us, this wonderful child and me, this miracle from God, my son.
So why, why when my husband Tom went wearily home, when the nurses came and gently carried Alex off to the nursery, why was I so deeply, so thoroughly grief-stricken? It was too early for post-partum blues to set in. Besides, Alex was fine! I was fine! But I buried my head in my pillow and sobbed. From the depths of my very being, cries of pain and grief and agony came pouring out, with only the pillow to hear me. I sounded like a wolf howling at the moon. I felt empty, hollow, lost. My sense of happiness, of security, was stripped away from me and replaced with sheer terror. A crippling sense of dread overwhelmed me. A premonition of something unspeakably horrible was going to happen. I could feel it. It permeated every fiber of my being.
Alex grew to be a beautiful child in every sense of the word. His hair looked as if it had been kissed by strawberries. His grey eyes could be so lively and sparkly or soften with such kindness and love. His little button nose just couldn’t stand up to the task of holding up the eyeglasses he had to wear from about the age of four. He loved anything with wheels and would play with his cars for hours at a time. He loved to draw incredibly intricate designs and ride his bike and go to garage sales with his dad. Alex was a wonderfully fun-loving, healthy little six-year-old boy.
But Alex had an inner beauty unusual for such a young child. He was always more concerned about others’ feelings than about his own. At only the age of three, Alex befriended the little Downs syndrome child at his preschool and would patiently teach him to play, all the while peppering the little boy’s mother with hundreds of curious questions. At four, when no one else would play with Henry, Alex would. At five, Alex comforted his grandma’s friend with Parkinson’s disease. Putting his chubby little hands on her shaking ones, he told her he loved her, bringing tears to her eyes. And at six, when his kindergarten teacher returned to the class, crying after just learning her aunt had died, it was Alex who ran up to her, hugged her and said, "Don’t cry Miss Cody. She’s in heaven now."
Six short months after Alex’s kindergarten graduation, that dreadful premonition of the night of Alex’s birth became a reality. I entered every parent’s worse nightmare. I watched my child die a brutal death. The agonizing events, from his first abdominal cramp to his death, occurred over a 4-day period.
In an effort to escape the continuous, racking abdominal cramping, Alex curled up into a fetal position and begged me to hold him. I stroked his face, attempting to calm him, to soothe him. I watched in horror his life hemorrhaging away in the hospital bathroom; bowl after bowl of blood and mucus gushed from his little body. Later, I helped change blood-soaked diapers that he had to wear after he could no longer stand or walk. Alex’s screams were followed by silence as the evil toxins attacked his brain causing him to lose neurological control. His eyes crossed and he suffered tremors and delusions. He no longer knew who I was.
I sat with my only child as the monitors registered organ failure after organ failure. His body swelled uncontrollably as his kidneys shut down. I lost count of the units of blood and platelets being intravenously fed to him. His little body had a hole dug into his side where the doctors frantically shoved a hose to re-inflate his collapsed lung. Holes for brain shunts were drilled into his head to relieve the tremendous pressure. I screamed for the nurses as he suffered a massive seizure that left him on a respirator. I watched his brain waves flatten. My vibrant little boy, with his beautiful red hair and heartwarming smile, was reduced to a shell of a corpse as his father, his doctors and I all stood helplessly by.
Alex’s last words to me were, "Don’t worry Mommy" as I couldn’t stop the tears from silently flowing down my cheeks. His last act before slipping into a coma was to mouth a kiss to his father.
Tom and I asked to be alone with Alex after he was pronounced dead. Then, just as we did on the day he was born, we completely undressed him and memorized every detail of him. We forever etched in our memories the tiny freckles scattered across his button nose; the larger freckle buried in his hair above his right ear; his long fingers and surprisingly delicate ears; the little mole at his waist; his sturdy legs that had outgrown the baby creases, now covered with a soft, silky down. For the last time we stroked his perfect skin, burning the sensation into our senses. And we kissed him goodbye, our own hearts forever broken.
From the age of three, Alex wanted to be a paramedic so that he could help people. So when he died, we wanted to donate Alex’s organs, to fulfill his wish of helping others. We were told we couldn’t. The toxins produced by E. coli O157:H7 had destroyed all his internal organs. They had liquefied entire portions of his brain.
My son died, a victim of E. coli O157:H7 poisoning. When I learned that Alex died because contaminated cattle feces lurked in the hamburger he ate, I was shocked, horrified and incredibly angry. I felt betrayed by the meat industry, by the USDA seal of approval and by my God.
In response, I was determined to do whatever possible to ensure that others wouldn’t have to go through the brutal suffering and death that Alex went through, and that other parents wouldn’t have to live in constant grief and pain as Tom and I do. I learned that my goals were the same as S.T.O.P.’s–to prevent unnecessary illness and death from pathogens in food. We prevail on industry and government to put more preventive measures in place to keep harmful pathogens out of our food.
It took me awhile to come to terms with my sense of betrayal by God. I realized that God doesn’t cause E. coli O157:H7 to contaminate food. He allows free will in the world. It is ineffective governmental regulations and corporate greed that allows food to be contaminated.
"God Wept the Day You Died"
Alexander Thomas Donley
July 18, 1993
**************
A Mother No More
Most of the time I really don’t feel anything at all.
Numbness doesn’t describe it.
It’s more a feeling of lifelessness.
But every once in awhile,
The incredible horror seeps into my brain.
And all my feelings come crashing to the surface,
Engulfing me in wave after wave
Of grief
And pain
And breathtaking sadness.
My thoughts of you are so tortured that I beg to return to lifelessness.
For you see, when you died my son, I died too.
Only my mind and my body don’t know it.
By Nancy Donley
In loving memory of Alexander Thomas Donley
January 28, 1987-July 18, 1993
Copyright 1999 by author Nancy Donley (Alex’s mother)
I cant even read that story about Alex. It hurts my heart…..
Just one anecdotal incidence: since we started eating better, which includes lots of raw products, we are hardly ever sick, and if we are it is just for a day or so. My kids play outside in cold weather in t-shirt and without shoes without getting as much as a runny nose. I wouldn’t want to test their immune system with e-coli of course, but I am convinced they would be able to handle it better than 4 years ago (not saying this little boy was not healthy enough!).
There is nothing wrong with pathogens in normal healthy food. It has always been there, it will always be there. Our immune systems are degrading.
What I was trying to communicate is that the numbers provided by Sylvia demonstrate the opposite – that raw milk is inherently more risky than pasteurized milk. What makes you think that if raw milk became popular, that money-hungry jerks won’t be making and/or selling it?
To my knowledge, the Fresno dairy hasn’t admitted to making any mistakes, yet people got sick. Just like the Salinas Valley produce growers were trying to deny that they did anything wrong during last year’s media-covered E. coli outbreak. And it doesn’t sound like they were a feedlot confinement operation either.
Looking at some of the other comments on other blog posts, people here seem to think that food safety is more of a political or social issue than a health-related one. You just argued for the "RIGHT" to put yourself and your kids (if you have them) at a higher risk of E. coli and other health threats, and I both agree and disagree. I don’t think raw milk should be outlawed, however, I don’t think raw milk producers have the right to produce something knowing that people can get more sick than if they followed certain safety precautions, that were invented in the 19th century.
Arguing that food safety is entirely a personal choice issue is a dangerous slippery slope. Should we just leave it up to everyone to ‘decide for themselves’ whether or not CAFO-raised beef is ok for them, and keep governmental regulators out of it? Forget fixing the Salinas Valley and its E. coli problems on produce – let people decide whether or not to trust it and if they get sick it was their personal choice. And if a pharmaceutical company makes a pill that ruins people’s livers, well, they trusted them so what are we going to do?
Personally, I find nothing wrong with raw milk in-and-of-itself. If you get it right out of the cow, refrigerate it and drink it quickly. But if you are going to milk the cow, bottle it, store it, ship it, you’re better served by pasteurizing it. Playing games with food safety over an issue of taste is not a good idea.
I just canned a batch of butternut squash, and tonight I’m going to do some sugar pumpkin as well – and our food safety experts recommend very specific guidelines on canning to prevent contamination with Clostridium botulinum (botulism), which involve pressure-canning for 90 minutes. Sure, it affects the flavor and the nutritional content, but as much as I care about how my food tastes I wouldn’t dream of ignoring the safety of my food for matters of preference. There’s no conspiracy brought on by the Libby canning company to keep me from making my own canned pumpkin – it’s a low-acid food with lots of carbohydrates for bacteria to feast on. Like milk.
(And ‘Inoculated’ is spelled with one n – just to let you know.)
"What makes you think that if raw milk became popular, that money-hungry jerks won’t be making and/or selling it?"
The money-hungry jerks are the ones "manufacturing" 1/2 percent milk. They pay a farmer between 1 and 2 dollars a gallon for 3.5 percent butterfat milk.At every transfer of that milk from milk pipeline to bulk tank to tanker truck to milk storage silo to processing plant enough water is added to rinse the container the milk is being transfered from.Before the "milk" is bottled either some fat is removed or powdered milk is added to standardize the milk.The milk is sold for around $3.00/gallon. Assuming the cost of the water is negligible they can "manufacture" roughly 7 gallons of "milk" from 1 gallon of milk as it comes from the cow. That gives them $21 from $1 to $2 worth of milk.A much easier way to make a living than selling an honest gallon of real milk actually made by a cow for $6 to $8.
"Should we just leave it up to everyone to ‘decide for themselves’ whether or not CAFO-raised beef is ok for them, and keep governmental regulators out of it?"
Isn’t that what is done now?
I disagree. If only 59 raw dairy consumers were ill as to over 150 pasteurized consumers in 1985, I would say the pasteurized dairy was more risky.
"Should we just leave it up to everyone to ‘decide for themselves’ whether or not CAFO-raised beef is ok for them, and keep governmental regulators out of it?"
Yes, people should decide for themselves what they wish to consume. As for keeping the government regulators out, are you inferring totally out of the picture? I doubt anyone or at least many have no problem with some safety regulations.There should be standards set and they should be the same for all. Clean up the factory farms.
"What makes you think that if raw milk became popular, that money-hungry jerks won’t be making and/or selling it?"
I don’t recall anyone saying that the unscrupulous wouldn’t be out for a fast buck with no thought to sanitation, etc. The factory farms appear to me, to be out for that fast buck, with no thought to sanitation….
Miguel, your words are an enlightment. I had no idea they did that!
****
Innoculated,
The example I gave in regards to the 150, was about only one of the incidents that I read that occured in 1985. There may have been more illnesses from pasturized milk that year. There have been so many. My example was to show that differece between the two. 59 compared to over 150 is a 3rd and that over 150 was in Illinois alone if I recall correctly. I wouldn’t want to be either of those who become ill. I think raw cheese was involved in some of the illnesses.
****
Sylvia, you’re still making the same error. Many more people consume pasteurized milk than raw milk, yet only three times as many people get sick. If only three times as many people drank pasteurized milk as raw milk, you would have equivalent levels of safety. But you don’t have three times more people drinking pasteurized milk, you have something more like 100 times more people drinking pasteurized milk.
To put another way, it’s like saying that snake bites are safer than pasteurized milk, because so few people get sick and die from snake bites per year. (this is an extreme analogy, BTW.) You’re looking at absolute numbers, not relative percentages, so the manner in which you compare the two is spurious.
I was hoping to make the comparison between this issue and CAFOs because that seems like it would be a point of agreement.
I grew up with a local dairy company, selling pasteurized milk produced in the same county and bottled in the same California town, and today I find myself in Wisconsin where dairies are everywhere. I shudder to think what choices people have elsewhere, but the idea that to have a quality milk supply necessitates going back to the early 19th century with regards to food safety just doesn’t make sense to me.
I found the above on wikipedia. My mistake, it was more than a tad over 150.
FYI, I don’t like numbers. I am quite aware that more people drink pasteurized milk than raw milk. Life is full of choices, I choose not to drink factory farmed milk. Just as I choose not to eat raw fish. I don’t find the milk products that come out of the factory farms as "quality", nor are the vaccinated/chemical induced/hormone injected/man-made feeds that are forced upon our food supply of any "quality" either.
Quality? Quality to me, is a chemical free animal that I am going to consume. An animal or animal product that doesn’t have antibiotics/hormones/vaccinations or any other chemical added to it. For example: hormones are in the feeds, injected into animals. When we eat the animals and/or drink the milk, our bodies are up-taking these chemicals and they do have residual affects. Could this be one of many factors affecting the young kids today, maturity is starting younger and younger, menses before the age of 10, boys and girls under 10 with pubescent hair, young boys with breasts. There are increases in diseases; diabetes, Alzheimers was basically upheard of 30 yrs ago, now it is common. Diet and environment are big factors in our health.
Bob Hayles
Thornberry Village Homestead, a raw goat dairy
Jasper, GA
706-692-7004
Thornberry Village Homestead…owned by God, managed by Bob and Tyler
Do you know why raw milk was restricted in the first place? It caused a whopping 25% of food-borne illness cases in 1938. 25%!
"Quality? Quality to me, is a chemical free animal that I am going to consume."
FYI – everything’s a chemical.
"An animal or animal product that doesn’t have antibiotics/hormones/vaccinations or any other chemical added to it. For example: hormones are in the feeds, injected into animals."
What I am trying to convey here is that you can have hormone and "chemical" free milk without going all the way back to the 1800s by leaving your milk unpasteurized and putting yourself at risk of food-borne illness.
The dairy I grew up with is called Clover Stornetta, and they don’t use hormones or antibiotics. That stuff has nothing to do with the issue of pasteurization! Feel free to look them up.
Here’s a couple good resources on raw milk safety:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5608a3.htm?s_cid=mm5608a3_e
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~ear/milksafe.html
I suspect that a lot of the raw milk following is due to the issue of taste, which is part of the dissatisfaction I mentioned above.
Salmonella Outbreak Is Tracked to Chicago
Published: May 4, 1985
A report investigating whether raw and pasteurized milk were inadvertently mixed at a suburban Chicago dairy through an illegal valve, causing a six-state salmonella outbreak, is expected in a few days, says Illinois’ public health chief.
”At this point, it doesn’t appear there’s any more likely cause than that,” Dr. Bernard Turnock, acting director of the State Public Health Department, said Thursday.
But he said medical detectives were still running tests and that other possibilities were being considered.
The cross-connection valve was one of 13 violations at the Hillfarm Dairy in Melrose Park cited in early April by Federal and state investigators. The task force investigating the outbreak initially rejected the violations as possible causes of the food poisoning , but it corrected the valve problem when it was found on April 3.
The violations were publicly disclosed Wednesday, at a Legislative hearing into the state’s handling of the salmonella outbreak. As of Thursday afternoon, 14,828 cases of salmonella food poisoning had been reported in the six states, 13,339 of them being confirmed.
The epidemic began in late March, and was traced to milk produced by the dairy and sold in Jewel Companies Inc. grocery stores in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Iowa.
You wrote "..1985? That’s over 20 years ago." But then you throw out numbers from 1938. A lot has changed since the 30s, like refrigeration and testing for pathogens. I don’t believe numbers from the CDC regarding raw milk because they include illnesses "linked" to raw milk. If you’re sick, and you drink raw milk, then they blame the milk. Or maybe you had some raw cheese on a trip to Europe. I looked up the website for Clover Sonetta dairy. It looks like a great place. I wish all dairies were like that one! If I were to drink pasturized milk, those are the kind of cows I would want to get it from. But it’s the pasturization that changes it into something we can’t drink. It’s like comparing apples to oranges.
P.S.- What does "inoculated mind" mean?
Yes 1985, as I believe I had stated that in the first post that I posted about it. I had used that 1985 incident as it was fairly fresh in my mind from recently reading about it.(I was living in Germany in the 80s so I missed a lot of what happened here).
I’ve read more about pasteurized contamination incidents than raw contamination. Of the incidents I’ve read with raw dairy, they have mostly been small and fairly contained. It appears that there has been more issues with contaminated pasteurized dairy products over the last 50 years than issues with raw milk. Yes indeed, there are those jerks that sell raw milk with no care about sanitation, hopefully they are few and far between. As there as the same money hungry jerks who skimp at the large factory dairies.
"Do you know why raw milk was restricted in the first place? It caused a whopping 25% of food-borne illness cases in 1938. 25%!"
1939? I am snickering here. Tell me, what were the environmental conditions of those dairy cows? What were they fed? How was the milk handled after milking? At the turn of the last century the feedlot dairies were springing up in the larger cities, feeding the cows sludge from breweries and whatever other trash they could feed them cheaply. Many people in 1939 did not have the old fridgidares (sp) many still didn’t have the real ice-boxes (you put blocks of ice in them). The depression was not a healthy time for many. Many were sick from and died from malnutrition. Improved sanitation (to include physical, environmental and food sources/preparations) and nutrition is what decreased the illnesses of last century.
Factory farms have to pasteurize thier milk. They are so contaminated that if they didn’t then all the microbes would flourish and sicken/kill many.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-4790729.html
http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~mow/chap1.html
"In 1985, a salmonellosis outbreak involving 16,000 confirmed cases in 6 states was caused by low fat and whole milk from one Chicago dairy. This was the largest outbreak of foodborne salmonellosis in the U.S. FDA inspectors discovered that the pasteurization equipment had been modified to facilitate the running off of raw milk, resulting in the pasteurized milk being contaminated with raw milk under certain conditions. "
If any dairy product is mishandled, it will harbor microbes. Pasteurization is not an absolute in the prevention of contamination. Apparently the 1985 incident was a good example of a factory farm "modifying"and that is why the pasteurized milk became contaminated. I’ve drank raw milk off and on for years. I’ve not been sick from it. I am also very picky about where I get it from.I would not drink it from just any dairy. I have been sick after drinking pasteurized milk. Salmonella is not fun to deal with.
I also don’t doubt that there are some good dairies that do pasteurize. I have no way of knowing who they are when I walk into the store. I do not know where that pasteurized milk came from, what the cows ate, what vaccs/hormones, etc they were given. When I walk into the stores, all I see are the huge giants that I am sure run the factory farms.
And yes, taste is important too. Some pasteurized milk tastes ok, the ultapasteurized milk and cream are awful.
I’m not sure if people understand here or not, that no matter how clean and careful you are with selecting healthy cows and handling them, there will be fecal contamination of the milk. The udders are at the bottom of the cow nearest to where the feces comes out and where it lands. Why not pasteurize the milk if you are going to store it? Freezing it seems like a decent idea, however. But in the time it goes from cow to freezer, there’s still time for growth, as well as in your fridge at the other end.
If you can’t find a decent milk producer who pasteurizes, how can you find a decent milk producer who doesn’t, and why can’t they pasteurize?
Thanks, Mary, for finding an article on the story. Here’s a detailed one that confirms the cross-connection as the likely cause of the contamination that led to the outbreak:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1370/is_v20/ai_4119044
For those that would use this incident as confirmation of the idea that the pasteurized milk is so dirty – remember that your cleanest pasture (yes, even my home-town’s Clover Stornetta) milk has bacterial contamination in it. By not pasteurizing it, you’re fighting a battle against time and mishandling. Yes, you can have mishandling of pasteurized milk – and asking for an absolute safety measure is unrealistic – but that doesn’t negate the larger risk of raw milk.
And lets think about some of the statements made here – that you can’t trust pasteurized milk in the store because the dairies are dirty – how do you know when almost all milk is pasteurized? Is that not a prejudice against milk that has undergone a basic safeguard process, and how would you know that the raw milk you are getting is trustworthy? Do you get their bacterial counts, do you know them personally, or is it taken on their word?
"But it’s the pasteurization that changes it into something we can’t drink. It’s like comparing apples to oranges."
Why can’t you drink pasteurized milk? Honestly, is taste so important as to override issues of safety? Of all the food issues people care about, why raw milk?
"P.S.- What does "inoculated mind" mean?"
Glad you asked 🙂
http://www.inoculatedmind.com/about-the-mind/
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(pllqtv550jzsyt45aaiycajj))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objec
" MANUFACTURING MILK LAW OF 2001 (EXCERPT)
Act 267 of 2001
288.570 Definitions; A.
Sec. 10.
As used in this act:
(a) Adulterated means food or milk products to which any of the following apply
(xi) A valuable constituent has been in whole or in part omitted or abstracted from the food; a substance has been substituted wholly or in part for the food; damage or inferiority has been concealed in any manner; or a substance has been added to the food or mixed or packed with the food so as to increase its bulk or weight, reduce its quality or strength, or make it appear better or of greater value than it is."
The butterfat has been "abstracted" from the milk.Powdered milk has been substituted for the milk solids in the milk.Water has been added to "reduce its quality or strength".It has been damaged by heat.
Even whole milk that has been through the manufacturing process would fit the definition of an adulterated product under the dairy industry’s own law.
This quote is taken from OPDCs website:
In summary, it has been theorized that the combination of grass feeding, no antibiotics used, no hormones, and low levels of grain used in diet cause a change in the cows immune system and rumen. This change in physiology directly inhibits pathogen development in the milk (actually a transfer from environmental contamination that does not seem to occur; there are no bad bugs in the manure that transfer into the milk and the clean raw milk is highly pathogen resistant).
Most pro raw milk drinkers believe, based on the above logic, drinking raw milk is worth taking a risk. Based on personal experience, I can guarantee everyone would have a quick change of heart if they watched their child suffer from Ecoli infection and HUS. No matter how small the risk, its not worth this type of suffering and possible death.
This quote is taken from Ron Schmids book, The Untold Story of Raw Milk . He is discussing the Salmonella outbreak involving Alta Dena Dairy in the early 1980s that ended the dairys sale of raw milk in the State of California.
But to expect or demand perfection from any dairy would be ludicrous, and any raw food may on occasion carry pathogenic organisms that may precipitate illness in susceptible individuals. The point is that people need and have a right to choose carefully produced raw dairy products despite the fact that contamination may occasionally occur. The proper role of the public health authorities is to help producers make the best possible products and ensure that any contamination is minimal, and then to take proper steps to protect the public when and if contamination occurs. For proponents of raw milk to claim that problems never occur is to avoid reality and play into the hands of bureaucrats who would seize upon rare and isolated problems as an excuse to condemn all raw milk.
Im not trying to convince anyone from drinking raw milk. It is definitely a personal choice. I would encourage everyone to do a little homework. Kombucha fermented teas and fermented vegetables are excellent probiotic choices, as well as powered probiotics. Everyone can live without raw milk and still be quite healthy. Gut health can be enhanced in other ways.
Since the only place I know where to get pasteurized milk; is at the store, I have no way of knowing which farm or farms it comes from. It could be the nasty ones south of Sacramento, or the ones on I-99 or I-5, those cows are confined to small areas, they lay in their excrement , their udders sometimes are dripping, (dripping what, I dont know). I dont have a way to know where the pasteurized milk is from. If there is a way of knowing, then please enlighten me.
I am sure that many on this board realize that there are contaminants in everything. I think many would be grossed out if they knew what the human body excretes on a daily basis. As Mary pointed out, many are willing to take the risk. When I buy raw milk, it is used within 3-4 days. I drink it, I cook with it and on occasion I make ice-cream. I also have an ice chest in my trunk at all times. (a habit I got into while living in TX, I know that food can spoil fast at slightly elevated temps). I’ve washed a few udders in my youth, so I do know how dirty they can get. I’ve also been involved in some cow chip fights with my cousins… Those were the days, you swung from the rope and dropped into the river, not a care in the world. Are there any absolutes in this world?
Mark has a "big" dairy in relative terms when compared to most other raw milk producers. From what I understand, it’s clean and neat and he takes care to minimize the risks. I have met Mark, and I admire what he does for the raw milk movement. I do think raw milk, just like every other food item should be done on a small local scale. That way, people can really know where their food comes from, and know the people who produce it on a more intimate basis.
We all make our choices, and each one comes with consequences. We choose raw, knowing the risks. Other people chose cigarettes and alcohol, knowing the risks. What most of us are asking for is for our choice to not be taken away.
We don’t want the entire world to drink raw. Some people may not be affected by the difference the pasteurization process makes in the milk, or they may not mind drinking "milk" that is pooled from 1000’s of different cows. Most of us just want to know where our food comes from.
It might also be worthwhile to look for ways to cope with this legislation. For example, in parts of Mexico, they use ozone/peroxide to control the bacteria levels in milk. This milk can be stored without refrigeration. Does anyone know if this is a viable solution? The goal is to reduce the bacteria levels, and from what I have read, ozone may be the answer…..