Questions, Questions: Will WI Guv Sign Raw Milk Legislation? What Does FDA Want With PA Dairy Farmer? Stanford Studies Lactose Intolerance

Wisconsin Gov. Jim DoyleWisconsin legislation that would allow Grade A dairy farmers to sell raw milk directly from the farm has now passed both houses of the legislature by significant margins.

The legislation has all kinds of weaknesses from the viewpoint of Wisconsin dairy producers. By being limited to Grade A dairy farmers, it leaves out many small dairy producers that aren’t necessarily suppliers to processors. Moreover, it is time limited–would expire after next year. That means opponents will be pushing to find “problems” even before it gets fully implemented. And it will be implemented by the state’s notorious Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection (DATCP), which despises raw milk and raw milk producers.

Still and all, it is a start, and it is a start in a huge dairy state. It would enable a number of Grade A dairies that have been struggling under the iron fist of the DATCP to legally sell raw milk. Oftentimes. getting a legal foot in the door leads to bigger and better things down the road.

Gov. Jim Doyle will no doubt be pressured by dairy processors and public health types, not to mention his own DATCP, to veto the legislation. That’s what happened to SB 201 in California, which would have rescinded a stringent bacterial-count standard, and had passed the legislature by even larger margins than the Wisconsin legislation; Gov. Schwarzenegger gave in to the pressure and vetoed the legislation in late 2008.

But a lot has happened since 2008. Raw milk is ever more popular, and proponents more politically active. The key will be to convince the governor that the legislation is important to key segments of voters. At least one newspaper report suggests he’s hearing the growing cacophany. If you’re for the legislation, give his office a call, 608-266-1212, and say it’s about SB434, the raw milk legislation.
A Pennsylvania dairy appears to be the target of an investigation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration into interstate shipments of raw milk.

Dan Allgyer, an Amish dairy farmer, had a visit Tuesday morning from two FDA agents, as well as federal marshalls and a state trooper. According to an account by Allgyer, the FDA agents presented a search warrant and said they had “credible evidence” Allgyer is involved in interstate commerce involving raw milk, which is a violation of federal law.

The farmer’s account of the events of Tuesday morning are presented on the web site of the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA).

It’s no secret that raw milk is pouring out of states that allow its sales–Pennsylvania, New York, South Carolina–into East Coast cities like Washington, New York, and Boston, where it can’t be sold via retail outlets. It may well be that, following its typical modus operandi, as in the Max Kane case, the FDA is targeting a single producer for enforcement…hoping to use that example to scare off other producers and thereby reduce the supply.

Afraid not, guys. This trend is too far along. There are too many consumers desperate for their raw milk to let the FDA enforcers stop the supply. Maybe the enforcers will slow things down for a while. But I guarantee, it will pick right up. Strong demand always creates its supply. Economics 101.


We may receive actual “scientific’ evidence before long about the influence of raw milk on lactose intolerance. Stanford is conducting a presumably double-blind study to determine whether raw milk eases lactose intolerance, which is a problem for between 30 million and 50 million Americans.

If you live in the Palo Alto area, and have lactose intolerance, you may want to consider participating–you’ll earn an easy $250. The Stanford researchers seem not to be concerned about the explanation offered by the new semi-official web site, realrawmilkfacts, that “it would not be ethical to intentionally expose research participants to a high-risk product such as raw milk” as part of a scientific study.

A small study out of Michigan in 2007 showed as many as 80% of individuals suffering from lactose intolerance gained relief from raw milk.

Leave a Reply

46 Comments on "Questions, Questions: Will WI Guv Sign Raw Milk Legislation? What Does FDA Want With PA Dairy Farmer? Stanford Studies Lactose Intolerance"

Notify of

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Mark McAfee
April 24, 2010 2:02 am


Nice piece…

I made my call early this morning. We need everyone to call and jam the phone lines.

When you call take 15 seconds to say why raw milk is important to you. Mention lactose intolerance or asthma or what ever raw milk has done for you.

After 20 months the Wisconsin regulators could become supporters of raw milk. This means doing it right and working with them and demanding good safety standards and testing. It is time to reach out and become collaborators. Be the first to reach out and work together. Put your pride aside… is… Read more »

Bob "BubbaBozo" Hayles
April 24, 2010 2:56 am

David, I want to take a minute to say how much your site is appreciated for its openess. All sides are heard here, and I am glad that is so…be it total raw milk proponents denying any chance of illness, total raw milk detractors who consider it the drink of choice for Satan, and all in between. Even lykke and cp, while frustrating, are appreciated, at least by me.

One thing I really appreciate is your willingness for it to "all hang out"…little to no censorship, even when a post totally opposes your POV. I wish all… Read more »

Concerned Person
April 24, 2010 7:10 am
Concerned Person
April 24, 2010 7:11 am
Bill Anderson
April 24, 2010 7:44 am

More media coverage on DATCP’s grudge with Trautman Family Farm:

Sylvia Gibson
April 24, 2010 8:08 am

http://www.realrawmilkfacts, that "it would not be ethical to intentionally expose research participants to a high-risk product such as raw milk"

As said many times, if raw milk was so dangerous, why aren’t the many consumers dropping dead or ill from it? Ha, it’s not ethical to research with raw milk but it is with the drugs? What BS. Follow the money.

BH, didn’t the last sitting prez say that was "just a GD piece of paper"?

From cp’s link: "Though the Wisconsin company that purchases the farm’s regular milk (about 2,000 gallons a month) recently… Read more »

Gary Cox
April 24, 2010 9:20 pm

yes sylvia, follow the money.

which begs the question: who is funding the stanford study? the funding source will most likely dictate the results. i guarantee it.

as for a "personal decision or public danger," at what point do automobiles become a public danger? at what point do handguns become a public danger, or cigarettes, or alcohol, or processed foods that lead to diabetes and obesity? should we outlaw all vehicles, all weapons, all cigarettes and booze, and even processed foods because of the injuries and deaths they produce or the costs to society they impose?

if… Read more »

April 25, 2010 12:15 am


I haven’t seen any reference to the James Orchard case on your blog. Campylobacter from raw milk consumption; Guillian Barre Syndrome and partial paralysis, hopefully temporary; hospitalized in Pittsburgh. Certainly one of the most serious raw-milk induced illness cases in recent years.

April 25, 2010 12:41 am

Prediction: If the Stanford study finds an association with raw milk consumption and lactose intolerance, it will result in a marketing blitz by raw milk fans. If they find no association, the raw milk movement will scream the study was nothing but a big ag, big pharma conspiracy against their product.

Do the lawyers know – if someone contracts a foodborne illness from raw milk during the study, could they sue Stanford (or does the release form exempt the university from liability)?

The Complete Patient
April 25, 2010 1:16 am

Hey Regulator,
Long time no hear from. We’ve missed you.

I haven’t made reference to the Pennsylvania illness you link to, but a few commentators have…and now you have as well. I don’t write about every illness ascribed to raw milk (or fast food, or ground beef), though I have encouraged proponents of raw milk to establish high sanitation and production standards; I’ve also encouraged regulators to establish education programs for raw milk producers as a more effective way to avoid illnesses than confrontation.

I did write in detail last year about a woman in California who developed Guillain-Barre… Read more »

Gary Cox
April 25, 2010 1:38 am

yes david, you did blog about the california case. and yes david, the raw milk proponets on this site do suggest improved sanitation and care and attention to husbandry practices on behalf of raw milk producers in order to ensure food safety.

however, the regulators and anti-raw milk advocates who blog on this site do not concomitantly question and challenge the existing industrial food complex on why that industrial food complex causes so many more illnesses and deaths than allegedly does the raw milk producer.

alas, the raw milk advocates appear to be reasonable and dedicated to food safety while… Read more »

April 25, 2010 2:05 am

"…while the anti-raw milk advocates seem to be dedicated to vilify a particular food product while defending the unsafe industrial-food-complex-illness-causing system as a whole. "

Gary, do you actually read our posts? cp has discussed natural, unprocessed food alternatives to raw milk many times here. I cannot recall he/she ever condoning the "industrial food complex." This is a raw milk blog for the most part, which is why I discuss raw milk-related issues that David writes about (there are other venues where I discuss other food products). It is obvious from Bill Marler’s blog that most… Read more »

milk farmer
April 25, 2010 2:10 am


The fact that you take one isolated case a try and make a big deal of it speaks volumes. Yes Raw milk isn’t perfect and there are some risk involved with drinking it….but you could say that about much that the scum at the FDA allow the citizens of this country have access to. Nobody says raw milk is perfect….but if you add up all those who have increased their health via consumption, to those who ‘don’t’, you’ll find that the chances for benefit far out weigh the risk. If you apply the attitude of people like yourself (who… Read more »

April 25, 2010 2:23 am

David –

While you and I almost certainly disagree over the Wisconsin legislation and FDA enforcement actions, I agree with you that the Stanford study represents a great opportunity. If raw milk does in fact help relieve lactose intolerance, then by all means we ought to do the research and figure out how and why that would be. As someone who has cited that same quote about raw milk milk research being "ethically questionable," I’ll swallow my words in this case. I supppose that if the research proposoal is good enough for the IRB at Stanford Medical School, its good… Read more »

Bob "BubbaBozo" Hayles
April 25, 2010 5:04 am

Its off topic, and Lord knows I’m not a defender of republicans OR democrats, Obama OR Bush, but in the interest of accuracy, since Sylvia brought it up, I would like to clarify something.

From Sylvia’s comment on this post (comment number 6):

"BH, didn’t the last sitting prez say that was "just a GD piece of paper"? " (referring to the constitution).

Sylvia, that allegation has been made, and, since I wasn’t there I cannot say definitively that Bush did or didn’t say it, but given the source of the allegation, I look at it with a great deal of… Read more »

Dave Milano
April 25, 2010 8:02 am

I think it’s time once again to review the greater ecology into which raw milk and humans fit.

That ecology begins with the most abundant and durable crop on earth—grass—which unsurprisingly is a tremendously effective solar collector, a perfect companion to the soil and its microbial colonies, a cleaner of water and air, and a marvelous carbon store. Virtually indigestible by humans, grass is a necessary food for cattle. Fortunately for cattle, eating grass is the best way to generate more of it, since grazing it, walking on it, and expelling wastes onto it, stimulates root growth and balances and… Read more »

The Complete Patient
April 25, 2010 8:14 am

You sound a tad nervous about that Stanford study, as well you should. But I’ll predict it’s your side that will have the ready-made "heads-I-win-tails-you-lose" approach to the study’s outcome. You see, if it’s like the studies out of Europe that demonstrate raw milk’s role in alleviating allergies and asthma, the researchers will say, to effect: "Yes, raw milk has a significant effect in relieving lactose intolerance…BUT because raw milk is dangerous, we can’t recommend it be used for those purposes." (That is, if they want the study published in an American scientific journal, they’ll say that.) And… Read more »

Kevin Burget
April 25, 2010 8:19 am

Dave Milano’s comment here…I’d humbly submit, is the among the most well articulated distillations on this to be found on this blog, or anywhere else.

April 25, 2010 9:20 am


I’m not against the study, per se, and am curious about the results if it can be conducted safely. And, the extremes of the two "sides" of the debate will likely "spin" the results to suit their needs. The people not at the extremes can judge for themselves.

Despite the majority opinion on your blog, I don’t do drug research, but based on the commercials and warning labels, I assume that anyone signing up to get $250 to participate are made aware of risks, like this one from raw milk:

The same could be said about… Read more »

Sylvia Gibson
April 25, 2010 9:59 am

"If they find no association, the raw milk movement will scream the study was nothing but a big ag, big pharma conspiracy against their product"

Or the raw milk people may ask why some can consume raw dairy without adverse effects, yet pasteurized dairy causes them to be miserable. Or as David’s response says, ".BUT because raw milk is dangerous, we can’t recommend it be used for those purposes."

BH, I didn’t bother to verify the supposed statement by bush. I’ve heard him say really stupid things while playing govn’r of TX. Something I wouldn’t put past him. I… Read more »

April 25, 2010 10:33 am

David M,

How much vitamin D is in raw milk compared with pasteurized milk?

Sylvia Gibson
April 25, 2010 11:47 am

Natural occuring Vit D in milk "roughly 35-70 International Units per quart as determined via biological assay (12) and approximately 50-80 International Units as determined by modern chemical mass spectrometric procedures"

The above link tells how man made Vit D is made. Just think, if people went in the sun, they’d get their Vit D. The fear mongers have people covered with clothes and slathered with toxic "sun screen" thus preventing adequate absorption of Vit D. As for skin cancer, using common sense would be wise.

April 25, 2010 11:55 am

Thanks, Sylvia. But how does vitamin D in raw milk compare with pasteurized milk?

Mark McAfee
April 25, 2010 2:16 pm

Hey are you all comatose…..?

Stanford is in the great state of CA..400 stores carry state inspected and safe raw milk.

Stanford is using inspected and regulated human consumption raw milk not raw milk that is intended for pasteurization.

Stanford has its eyes open and looking for the truth.


Bob "BubbaBozo" Hayles
April 25, 2010 6:36 pm

Sylvia, I’m with you on stupid things politicians say…and Bush had more than his share, though he doesn’t hold a candle to Joe Biden. Verifying stupid politicians’ quotes would be a full time job.

With that sadi, the quote in question, if it happened, would not fall in the stupid catagory, it would be positively un-American, and, in my opinion, cause for impeachment seeing as a president swears an oath to uphold and defend the constitution. For that reason, before I’d repeat ANY such damning quote I’d verify it 14 ways from Sunday.

But then, that’s just me…your mileage… Read more »

Sylvia Gibson
April 25, 2010 9:03 pm


Are you wanting the comparison of natural Vit D to man made Vit D that is added in milk (made from cow,pig or sheep)?

If so, that would depend on what one believes is healthy, etc. There is no doubt that the majority of people have no clue how the food they consume is processed.

Many believe that irradiating, chemically spraying/inducing, subjecting to high temperatures, etc makes food safe, yet many believe the opposite. Mercury is a deadly poison(along with other additives), yet it is in vaccinations. No amount is safe. You break a thermometor in the mall… Read more »

Tim wightman
April 25, 2010 9:25 pm

To Lykke and All…

While I feel the the artilce was balanced and fair…
I personally do not support many of the practices or conditions of the animals or the facility represented in the Chicago Tribune video.
I would be more than happy to work with them on issues I feel need adressed but have not been asked to do so.
While most of the issues will be addressed in forth coming Videos, some of the issues would be addressed in Chore time.
I will petetion the Fund to send a complimentary copy to the farm in question.
Tim Wightman

Jeannette Schreiber
April 25, 2010 11:05 pm

According to Aajonus Vonderplanitz, Ph.D., and William Campbell Douglass, M.D. in their

"Among the fat-soluble vitamins, some are classed as unstable and therefore a loss is caused by heating above blood temperature. This loss of Vitamin A, D, E and F can run as high as 66%."

April 25, 2010 11:43 pm

Sylvia and Jeannette,

What I meant was, if you took raw milk and measured the vitamin D, then pasteurized (not ultra-pasteurized) the milk and measured the vitamin D, what is the difference? If it is low in raw milk to start with, it really doesn’t matter if it drops by 66%. But, I haven’t seen a side-by-side comparison anywhere and was interested in the numbers if someone has them.


Probably awkward to tell another farmere their practices could be better in some areas, but would be good to see improvements. It is striking that two raw dairy farms… Read more »

April 25, 2010 11:47 pm


You make a good point. If consesnting adults can read the warning label in California and purchase/consume raw milk, then it isn’t a big stretch to consent to a study (as long as children are not used).

Don Wittlinger
April 25, 2010 11:51 pm

2010 Orwellian doublethink.
Natural Wholesome Real food is against the law. [new slogan]
Where did this doublethink come from? Maybe the folks in this article should recieve some of the blame or credit depending on your view?

Sylvia Gibson
April 26, 2010 12:02 am

"(as long as children are not used). "

Children are used in drug studies often. Children are fed highly processed foods daily. Children are subjected to toxic products daily.

Ingredients in vaccines are questionable. Some children have adverse reactions to those ingredients and I’m not just referring to egg products. An example is the HPV vacc;

If it harms one person/child is it worth it? If it has a potential for harming your child…is it worth it? Swelling/redness (the least of the side affects) of the arm is NOT normal, it is the body… Read more »

April 26, 2010 12:09 am


You are evading my question. Why? All I am asking for is the quantity of vitamin D in raw milk before and after pasteurization. I am not making a case for or against adding vitamin D to milk. Put another way, if raw milk was your only source of vitamin D, how much would you have to drink to get the daily requirement?

Jeannette Schreiber
April 26, 2010 12:28 am


What is your fundamental question regarding vitamin D?

Vitamin D content, like all nutrients, depends on the conditions present while the milk is being produced. Specifically, vitamin D3 is manufactured by the body – both animal and human – in response to sunlight. Therefore summer milk will be higher in vitamin D than winter milk.

To repeat Sylvia’s earlier post, according to a professor at UC Riverside: "it has been determined that the concentration of vitamin D3 in milk provided by the cow is roughly 35-70 International Units per quart as determined via biological assay (12) and approximately 50-80 International Units… Read more »

Bill Anderson
April 26, 2010 1:39 am


The reason that Lykke is so concerned about Vit. D is because the large pastuerized fluid milk processors add synthetic Vit. D to the milk. And to top it all off, this synthetic Vit D. is actually added BEFORE pastuerization, so it undergoes the same nutrient de-naturization that the milk itself goes through.

Basically, Lykke is trying to set you up for an argument about why pastuerized milk has more nutrients than raw milk. Lykke is showing himself to be a shill for big industry.

Mark McAfee
April 26, 2010 1:42 am


You may find it interesting that the professor that is doing the Pasteurization Intolerance Study at Stanford was the same PhD that witnessed first hand the recovery of one of his Maasia students that was suffering horribly from Crohns disease.

The student had been in the US for seven years and had come down with a seriuos case of Crohns and had become highly lactose intolerant. After arriving in the US the student started drinking soy milk becuase he could no longer drink store bought pasteurized milk. The student had been raised until he came to the US… Read more »

Steve Bemis
April 26, 2010 1:58 am

Lykke your question on Vitamin D is fair, although I do think you’re being a bit cute in your approach to this topic. As others have said, I’m not sure what difference it makes, but I’m willing to colloquy since it may elucidate the point you appear to be wanting to make.

If Sylvia’s quotation of the good professor’s estimate of Vitamin D in milk is correct (35-80 IU per quart, depending on method), then whether or not the milk is pasteurized makes little difference. In other words, if no vitamin D is lost in pasteurization, assuming… Read more »

April 26, 2010 2:53 am

Thanks, Steve. Your last sentence is what I’m looking for:

" I don’t drink raw (or pasteurized) milk for its vitamin D content, since neither appears to offer enough."

I’d still like to see the numbers (if it’s higher during some seasons, the data can be expressed as a range or an average)…I checked the MI website, but they don’t compare the "two milks."

"Lykke….Is it the safety of raw milk that bothers you or is it the medical claims that bothers you."

Mark’s question is what I’m getting at…there are repeated broad claims about safety, medical benefits,… Read more »

Don Neeper
April 26, 2010 4:32 am

I’m not entirely certain of vitamin D, but both vitamins A and D are fat-soluble, only present in the cream and in regards to vitamin A the amount present is directly dependent on the cow’s diet. The butter that I make from the cream of strictly pasture-fed Jersey-blend cows is a deep yellow color, which indicates high amounts of beta-carotene and also correspondingly high amounts of true Retinol. Commercial butter made from milk intended for pasteurization from cows in confinement dairies is a very pale yellow, or white in most cases. This butter contains almost no Retinol and is… Read more »

Mark McAfee
April 26, 2010 4:52 am

Broad medical claims and raw milk…

When 80% of the human immune system is comprized of the biodoversity of colonized beneificial bacteria in the GUT and the American GUT has become a denuded and baren wasteland. Guess what…that is exactly why Raw Milk has such broad medical applications.

Everyone has become so accustomed to narrow drug thinking and narrow medical claims that when a medical food comes along that fixes the immune system it shocks the paradigm.

It is not so hard to think of a broad range of medical illnesses that raw milk fixes if you just rethink… Read more »

Concerned Person
April 26, 2010 5:13 am

Sorry to change the conversation, but I found this article posted on The Bovine.

It describes some of Michael Schmidts raw milk practices at Glencolton Farms. You were all quick to make fun of me when I suggested that when entering the milk house different clothes should be put on, along with some sort of lab jacket, as well as something to cover the hair.

Guess what? Michael Schmidt actually does all of this.

[Usually after barn and breakfast I head down to the cheese house. The cheese house is located right next to the milking… Read more »

Dave Milano
April 26, 2010 5:56 am


Is it impossible to move the conversation into a context? Into a perspective that considers milk and man holistically? You are looking at the world through a paper towel tube. You really must broaden your vision.

You say, "I just happen to be focused on the vitamin D claims right now." Well, you and so many other western-trained ideologues are CONTINUALLY focused on one tiny nib or another. You seem incapable (although I know you are merely unwilling) to see the big picture.

I hope that someday you will back up from the trees and take a good long look… Read more »

kirsten weiblen
April 26, 2010 6:34 am

Dave Milano’s post was pure poetry.

It’s so nice when one can take such a global view while others are jockeying just to justify their rather questionable existence.

April 26, 2010 7:35 am

Dave M.,

Fair enough. But, so you know, I got on this path while hiking through the forest trying to make sense of the endless minutia in the WAPF educational materials. If their approach is "holistic," would be curious to see how they define looking through a paper towel tube. I think we should call it a toilet paper tube from now on – both "sides" – lol.

Bob "BubbaBozo" Hayles
April 26, 2010 7:09 pm

cp, you try to justify your ridiculous suggestions concerning clothing by trying to compare apples to oranges and call them the same thing.

Schmidt is talking about the cheesehouse, a food production facility that simply happens to be on the same land as a farm, which is a totally different type of operation. The comparison is as silly as comparing a pig farm to an abbitore.

Zale Ias
April 28, 2010 10:49 pm

While obviously this legislation has many downfalls and really doesnt do enough, it is encouraging to see steps in the right direction. I wish that the general direction of our food legislation in this country was going more towards enabling small farms of whatever sort to make it rather than creating another way for big farms to make more money, but I am trying in life, and particularly in politics, to learn to take what I can get and then fight for more. As a resident of Minnesota, I hope that positive change in the surrounding states… Read more »