The Laws on Raw Milk Are Vague for a Reason…So They Can Be Used to Harass and Intimidate–Why the Private Option Is Looking Ever More Attractive; Morningland Case Salvo

Where vague food laws are stored for safe keeping. There was an article in the Washington Post a few days ago saying that the new food safety legislation passed by Congress last month and just signed into law could well not be funded enough to allow the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to enforce its provisions. The implication was that the legislation could well be irrelevant.

I found myself wondering: Why would Congress go through all the fancy footwork of votes and re-votes, and legislative deals (we still don’t know what kind of benefits the legislation’s key Senate opponent, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, received in return for changing his mind at the last minute to support the legislation) if Congress wasn’t going to fund the legislation. Seems strange.

But then it occurred to me that, even if the FDA can’t hire all the new inspectors it wants right away, it will have the legislation on the books–in the vault, so to speak–ready and waiting to be enforced as the agency wishes. Regardless of funding, the FDA now has the authority to go searching around any food producer at its discretion, to order food recalls whenever it desires. It has the authority to quarantine large areas of the country and to establish agricultural guidelines. It has the authority to collect the names and key data about all small food producers, in the name of a study it is supposed to do on food safety.

Now consider the situation in Colorado. Even though government agencies really have no business in herdshare arrangements (they are private arrangements between farmers and investors who buy shares of animals in return for milk) Colorado public health officials gained regulatory authority over Colorado cowshares five years ago.

The law was kept vague in key respects, notably in terms of exactly which dairy products can be produced. Lola Granola can say she knows what the law says, but she only knows how she inteprets the law. Different people, including judges, interpret the same law differently. We’re getting a good illustration of that in Missouri, in the case of Armand Bechard, where the state has come down on the Bechards for allegedly selling raw milk in a parking lot in 2009, and now a local judge has overturned a municipal judge and is suggesting, in dismissing the case, that what the Bechards did wasn’t illegal.

The more vague the law, the more interpretations you’ll have.

Moreover, the more vague the law, the more arbitrarily it can be enforced. So Colorado public health officials were all lovey-dovey the first four years the cowshare law was in force. Everyone thought they were such open-minded public health people.

But maybe they weren’t so open-minded. Maybe they were just biding their time, waiting for the excuse of a few illnesses attributed to raw milk. Or maybe they need financial support from the FDA. Or maybe it’s suddenly become in their interests to support the Health People 2020 goal of reducing the number of states that allow raw milk.

It almost doesn’t matter what their goal is. The reality is that by having a vague law at hand, they can just decide from one day to the next to make life miserable for producers.  We’ve seen the same routine in any number of other states. Wisconsin and Minnesota allow “occasional” sales of raw milk, whatever that means. Not surprisingly, the definition of “occasional” changes over the years, according to the state and federal political agendas, and the people running various public health and agriculture agencies at particular times. Now there’s talk of passing a law in Wisconsin that allows raw milk sales…so long as it  “protects” the established dairy industry. How the heck do you do that? Easy, by keeping things vague and arbitrary.

Massachusetts doesn’t even have official prohibitions against herdshares and buying clubs, yet state agriculture officials have decided on a lark that they have authority over such private matters, and threatened to shut people down.

Increasingly, I am being asked by farmers and food club managers how I think they should handle these arbitrary enforcement actions like in Colorado. I used to hedge, but no longer. Situations like those in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Colorado, and other places all contain a single message. Public health authorities are intent on disrupting access to raw dairy, local meats, and other nutrient-dense foods. By harassing farmers and buyers clubs, the officials increase the cost of doing business. By intimidating consumers, the officials confuse and sometimes scare off customers.

Armand Bechard was quoted in the article I linked to above as saying, “They took me to court and tied up my life for over a year and a half.” And he’s not done. A farmer in Oregon some months ago who abandoned the conventional dairy route for a private arrangement expalined it well in this article.

It’s great that the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund is fighting these encroachments (including the Bechard case), because surely the legal challenges are slowing the official pace of harassment and intimidation. And maybe eventually FTCLDF will win some some cases (and I’m not saying that sarcastically, merely as an indication of what huge forces it is fighting). But while its efforts are moving forward, I have begun advising farmers and consumers to look toward private arrangements, leasing and buying club and investment arrangements.

Yes, these arrangements will make it tougher to access food. But maybe we were deluded for too long in thinking access to quality food would just keep becoming more convenient, and ever cheaper. Whether we are producers or consumers, we need to understand that real-food food production and distribution is hard work. Moreover, it’s not cheap. It’s going to get tougher, until the new private system establishes ever firmer roots. But it will. It has to, if we are going to maintain access to good food.

The Morningland Dairy case is due to open in a Missouri court next Tuesday. When it does, Morningland, a tiny raw milk cheese producer caught up in the multi-agency raid against Rawesome Food Club last June, will be seeking about $85,000 in damages from the state, in connection with cheese that has spoiled and refunds made to customers. The state is seeking to force Morningland to destroy its entire
$250,000 worth of inventory.

Morningland, which is being represented by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, will also be seeking a ruling from the judge on a new motion arguing that the state must make a conclusive case that the company’s cheese is unsafe via listeria contamination.

“It is not (Morningland’s) burden to prove that its cheese products ARE safe or fit for human consumption. In essence, (Morningland) seeks a ruling that the State cannot merely present evidence ‘suggesting’ that Defendant’s cheese IS NOT safe, thereby requiring Defendant to prove its cheese IS safe.”

Morningland is also seeking a jury trial. This promises to be a complex, and possibly precedent-setting case.

Leave a Reply

69 Comments on "The Laws on Raw Milk Are Vague for a Reason…So They Can Be Used to Harass and Intimidate–Why the Private Option Is Looking Ever More Attractive; Morningland Case Salvo"

Notify of

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Mark McAfee
January 8, 2011 1:03 pm

It is very interesting that many of the citations provided in the Humboldt report come from Bill Marler and his anti-raw milk website…. realrawmilkfacts.

Blatant obvious cold commercial bias anyone…Corporate interests and Government policy have joined.

Fascism is upon us.


January 8, 2011 1:39 pm


Sounds like Humboldt County doesn't like raw milk sales, and they have support.

Mark McAfee
January 8, 2011 2:44 pm


What support? Do you call Marler, the FDA and Mike Payne at Wiffs support? That is a serious joke. If people show support or lack thereof, that is what support means.

This is bias and an agenda that is well coordinated, their reputation is on the line, it is the people in OPDC territory verses the FDA. This is a show down.

This may end up at the ballot. In the end they will lose when the true suport is counted.

When Marlers website is used as a government citation that is the… Read more »

January 8, 2011 2:58 pm


You're less delicate than Violet, so I can say Who Cares?! A county in California wants to ban raw milk, who cares? Is that a big market for you?

Bill Anderson
January 8, 2011 3:55 pm

Response to Violet from last thread:

If you intend to make a cheddar, I assume you are intending to make a cheese that will age for a long time. No?

I agree with most of what you say in your analysis of the milk, BUT for cheddar, I would not look for a milk with a high fat content. I would look for a milk with a higher protein content (in relation to the fat).

Fat is hyrdo-phobic. It repells water, thus forcing it into the protein phase of the cheese.

Cheddar being around pH 5.1, the casein tends to… Read more »

Blair McMorran
January 8, 2011 6:59 pm

Consumers made this market and they will continue to define this market. Follow the money.
Vote with your wallet.
Time will tell.

Smy Opin
January 8, 2011 9:01 pm

Sorry – kind of OT but I need to pick Bill's brain on this cheddar thing –

Bill, if the some or all the cream is removed from jersey milk before making the cheese, would that make a difference in it's ability to age?

Ken Conrad
January 8, 2011 10:51 pm


I certainly dont have your knowledge in cheese making however, Ive eaten excellent jersey milk cheddar cheese. With cows milk the rule of thumb is, the higher the butterfat the higher the protein.

Ken Conrad

January 8, 2011 10:52 pm

Maybe the people of Humboldt county just want to keep their raw milk local and small scale.Maybe they like the economic benefits that this part of the unofficial economy produces ,a lot like marijuana was before it was made legal and taxed.It is not correct to call the unofficial economy "illegal" or" black market".Small scale raw milk producers are regulated by those who drink the milk.The money generated in this economy stays in the county and adds to the local economy.In California this is an issue between small scale local private food production and large (relatively) scale statewide monopoly… Read more »

Truly Concerned
January 9, 2011 12:17 am

"Sounds like Humboldt County doesn't like raw milk sales"

Yet another example of poor critical thinking by Lykke.

Humboldt county cannot like or dislike anything. It is a governmental entity.

Most likely some of the people in leadership of Humboldt county are opposed to raw milk. They may or may not speak for the people. Most likely they are regurgitating the FDA propaganda and dogma.

What do the people want? It's probably not what just a few individuals want.

Mark McAfee
January 9, 2011 1:26 am


The people of Humboldt came to OPDC for help. They want legal tested raw in their markets. Eureka Natural Foods came to OPDC because they had so many customers demanding organic raw milk.

This is a fight for consumers


lola granola
January 9, 2011 1:26 am

I beg to differ, David.

The Colorado statute governing cow shares is very clear in what product can be made available to shareholders.

(Please go back and read the statute in its entirety in the comments section on the last article.)

"25-5.5-117. Raw milk. (1) The acquisition of raw milk from cows or goats by a consumer for use or consumption by the consumer…"

The word used here is "milk". "Milk" has a legal definition and is defined in the statues (also in my comments from the last article), and this definition does not included milk products such as kefir and yogurt.… Read more »

Bill Anderson
January 9, 2011 2:07 am

As a general rule, yes the higher the fat in the milk, the higher the protein.

But for a cheese maker the question is not as much "how much fat & protein" as the RATIO of fat to protein.

Traditional Alpine cheese makers skim their milk. Most gruyeres and virtually all emmenthallers are made with partially skimmed milk. Parmesan is as well. The extra cream is churned into butter, and the resulting cheese has more shelf life and will ripen more slowly.

Removing cream from Jersey milk should improve its ability to age. If you don't skim it,… Read more »

Truly Concerned
January 9, 2011 3:39 am


Where does it say that corporations are not eligible for jury trials?

Wasn't a jury empaneled for suits against tobacco companies?,_Inc.

Can you cite your source for your statement?


lola granola
January 9, 2011 12:17 pm


I get the idea that you're asking, where does it say I can't do this? And I'm asking, where does it say you can?

It's not that the other products (kefir, yogurt) are prohibited by statute; it's that they are not allowed by statute. If they were allowed by statute, they would be specifically named as allowed (i.e. "milk" vs. "fluid milk products", with a definition as to what constitutes a "fluid milk product"). If they are not named, they are not allowed.

Smy Opin
January 9, 2011 11:10 pm

Bill Marler wrote: "Real Raw Milk Facts is not … an anti-raw milk site."

The bias, deception by omission, and sensationalism on that site scream otherwise.

Even IF I were the kind of person who could be swayed by that kind of fear mongering – I would STILL demand raw milk that I could bring home and pasteurize myself, in my own kitchen.
Conventional milk and dairy practices are SO atrocious and yet sanctioned by the powers that be –
vs grass-fed raw milk, not homogenized, and slowly pasteurized at home.

Do you still claim… Read more »

Mark McAfee
January 10, 2011 12:23 am

Bill Marler,

For some weird reason or perhaps a techincal glitch, my answer and extensive post last eveing did not post.

Let me respond to your comment.

I do not believe that you are a fascist. I apologize to you most sincerely if you thought my comment inferred I that I thought you were a fascist. But….I do believe most deeply that you are being used by a government that has evolved into and has begun to embrace a fascist culture.

When a government defends corporate profits, corporate markets and market positions and when that government does not… Read more »

Bill Marler
January 10, 2011 12:46 am

We are always open to suggestions to improve the website. To answer your question:

1. RRMF does not sanction or promote one type of dairy product over another. The website provides evidence-based information on benefits and risks of raw milk to allow readers to make their own informed decision.

2. To our knowledge, our website has the most comprehensive lists of both raw and pasteurized dairy-related outbreaks, and breaks them down by fluid milk vs. cheeses. In contrast, biased websites such as and the Michigan Fresh Unprocessed Milk… Read more »

January 10, 2011 12:59 am

"I would STILL demand raw milk that I could bring home and pasteurize myself, in my own kitchen. Conventional milk and dairy practices are SO atrocious and yet sanctioned by the powers that be – vs grass-fed raw milk, not homogenized, and slowly pasteurized at home."

I have a number of customers who buy my milk and then pasteurize it. Though it really bothers me that they ruin the milk this way, I let them do it rather than refuse to sell to them.

At least I give them a choice, which doesn't happen the other way around….. even pasteurized,… Read more »

Bill Marler
January 10, 2011 1:01 am

Here is a chart on raw and pasteurized outbreaks and recalls in 2010:

Mark, in response – What I said I said in 2009 – What I'd Recommend: Raw vs Pasteurized Milk

There has been an ongoing back-and-forth response from the Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF) to my literature review of the pros and cons of drinking raw (unpasteurized) milk and a more recent series comparing the food safety track record of pasteurized and raw milk products.

The WAPF had their annual meeting last weekend in the Chicago area, and hopefully they are considering some of the points raised… Read more »

Mark McAfee
January 10, 2011 2:03 am

Bill, Your post does not address the question that was posed. It is as if we speak two different languages. The people that drink raw milk can not drink pasteurized milk. The nutritional statements on milk do not address any of the living elements found in raw milk.

I guess this hypothetic case before the Marler court will be appealed to the court of public opinion. This court has already spoken and proclaimed raw milk as a healing and preventative food. The market and safety data fully support this higher courts decision

I hope that… Read more »

Steve Bemis
January 10, 2011 2:21 am

Bill – in the reviewing-things department, I recall the following exchange which you and I had on this blog back on March 16 of 2010. The following exchange follows the format of my first listing my "11 Great Thoughts," and then citing Bill's six points, then my comment ("SB Comment") and then Bill's rejoinder ("WM Comment").

I thought this exchange was helpful, and offer it up again on the theory that it might push the ball a little bit further down the field.

The following is a cut-and-paste from TCP on March 16, 2010.

Steve, thanks for engaging. My comments… Read more »

January 10, 2011 2:51 am

Bill Marler,

You base all of your conclusions on false premises.All of the evidence you have presented that links illness to raw milk consumption is based on CDC and local health department investigations that are fundamentally flawed.I am not denying that any food can make someone ill,I am saying that the evidence presented is not credible by scientific standards of evidence.The conclusions were drawn before enough investigation was done to actually conclude that there was any link.Specifically,no one has explained how PFGE patterns that are indistinguishable can be evidence of anything more than that several more… Read more »

January 10, 2011 4:42 am

"Pregnant women, infants, children, the elderly and persons with lowered resistance to disease (immune compromised) have the highest risk of harm, which includes Diarrhea, Vomiting, Fever, Dehydration, Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Reactive Arthritis, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Miscarriage, or Death, from use of this product."

WM Comment: I have always been consistent of getting effective warnings on high-risk foods like hamburger.

Oh yes, I see the above warning on raw oysters, raw spinach, deli meats, etc. all the time now!!

But, Death on a label for raw milk??? When was the last time someone died of raw milk… Read more »

Smy Opin
January 10, 2011 5:27 am

@ Bill Marler,

The link to how to pasteurize at home does not work.
IN addition, if this were NOT a biased site, the fact that raw milk can be safely pasteuried at home would not be buried under "how to support local dairies.
It's a reasonable argument/comparison from your opposition showing how raw milk is being singled out from other raw foods.

The little blurb on how raw milk tastes is pretty blatantly biased, also. It states upfront that taste is subjective, but it goes on to suggest that any differences may be due to homogenization. … Read more »

January 10, 2011 5:33 am


The rest of the scientific world stands behind the use of DNA fingerprinting for source attribution in combination with epidemiological evidence during foodborne disease outbreak investigations (whether it be raw milk, pasteurized milk, spinach, cookie dough, eggs, ground beef, etc.).

January 10, 2011 6:13 am

"Pregnant women, infants, children, the elderly and persons with lowered resistance to disease (immune compromised) have the highest risk of harm, which includes Diarrhea, Vomiting, Fever, Dehydration, Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Reactive Arthritis, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Miscarriage, or Death, from use of this product."

Why isn't there a similar label warning people they could potentially die from pasteurized milk?

Because the dairy cartel would kill before they allowed it to happen…

January 10, 2011 6:51 am


Pulsenet is an invention of CDC.CDC runs the whole DNA fingerprint fraud.Scientists employed by CDC and it's network of State and County Health Departments do not bite the hand that feeds them.But still there are those who dare to question the way PFGE profiles are used.To refer to PFGE profiles as DNA fingerprints is an obvious indication that the speaker is trying to be deceptive.I never have seen an epidemiological study that compared the whole genome of one isolate to the whole genome of another isolate.Only a small sample of the genomes are being compared yet… Read more »

Smy Opin
January 10, 2011 7:08 am

"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. Anatole France

January 10, 2011 8:04 am


PulseNet is the foodborne disease outbreak application of the general principle of using genetic analyisis for source attribution. Check out this review:

In the Hartmann case, the judge ruled unequivocally that raw milk caused the outbreak in MN, and pointed to PFGE analysis as evidence. Maybe it was a conspiracy and the judge was bought off by big ag and big pharma (or Bill Marler). But, I'd bet even the microbiologists who study bacterial evolution would stand behind the use of DNA fingerprinting in the context of foodborne outbreak investigation so… Read more »

January 10, 2011 8:47 am

"I have a number of customers who buy my milk and then pasteurize it. Though it really bothers me that they ruin the milk this way, I let them do it rather than refuse to sell to them."

Good for you "letting them do it," though the comment sounds very judgmental and arrogant. Would you also be offended if your customer wanted to cook their pastured chicken? What is wrong with getting your own animals (or buying locally to support small farmers) and pasteurizing at home. The pathogen risks are real and it is questionable whether it's… Read more »

January 10, 2011 9:42 am

Actually, I was being sarcastic about "letting" customers pasteurize their milk, Lykke… as in demonstrating that at least I give them an option, which is more than the State does! Although it does bothers me that they do it, I don't say anything about it to them, so there's no arrogance from me to them. What's your problem?? I give them a choice… THEY CAN PASTEURIZE!

Lykke, why do you assume they wouldn't clean the teats before milking? If you think those teats are bad, go to Horizon Farms dairy sometime…

January 10, 2011 11:06 am


Not sarcastic, inexperienced…how would you clean those teats (for raw milk) before milking?

Violet Willis
January 10, 2011 11:08 am


Jersey milk is great because you can remove the cream from the top and then use the milk to make cheese. The cream can then be used for butter and ice cream. It is a great breed for a small producer.

Great farmstead cheddars can be made from Jersey milk . . . . it just can't be super sharp.

Soft cheeses like Camembert are just ambrosial when made from Jersey milk though.

Brown Swiss is a breed that is super huge and takes a great deal of $ to feed. . . . not really practical on a… Read more »

Bill Anderson
January 10, 2011 12:31 pm


In a cultured product such as cheese, using raw milk actually enhances food safety.

Organisms such as listeria thrive in sterile monoculture enviroments (like PMO milk plants… I know becayse I have worked in a PMO milk plant) but when forced to compete with the plethora of beneficial organisms in raw milk cheese, listeria cannot compete.

Positive bacterial pressure is very important to food safety.

Bill Anderson
January 10, 2011 12:45 pm

I don't like the word "sharp" to describe cheese. What does this imply?

Bitterness? Rancidity? Whey taint? Unclean? Umami? Sulfides? Carmel? Alot of acid development? Calcium lactate or tyrosine crystals? Does it "itch" your tongue or the roof of your mouth?

Jerseys are a popular breed amongst small raw milk farmers, no doubt. I probably have worked with Jersey milk more than any other type. And yes… I've made some pretty incredible camembert and triple creme from Jersey milk.

But truth be told Jerseys are not the ideal breed for cheese making. They make delicious… Read more »

Bill Anderson
January 10, 2011 1:06 pm

Here is my challenge to the advocates of Jersey milk for making artisan raw milk cheese:

Find one British raw milk cheese maker who uses Jersey milk.

I bet you'll have a hard time. I can think of probably half a dozen offhand whose herd is Holstein-based.

January 10, 2011 6:38 pm

"The rest of the scientific world stands behind the use of DNA fingerprinting "

You could have said "the rest of the financial world stood behind the trading of financial derivatives" until it led to financial collapse of the housing market,now it is regarded as fraud.

Complex,top down,monopolies in any sector of our world use complicated fraudulent schemes to deceive not only the public but their own employees.Everyone involved in the deception is also benefiting financially from it so they do not question the decisions at the top.
The… Read more »

Bill Anderson
January 10, 2011 8:15 pm

re: the practice of skimming milk for use in cheddar.

This used to be a common practice by some unscrupulous American cheesemakers, who would skim their cheddar milk and turn the cream into butter to make some extra cash on the side. They'd often employ "fillers" such as vegetable oils or lard to make up for the lost fat. As a result, the cheese would turn rancid when it got too old.

To prevent that practice, the standard of identity for cheddar was established to require at least 50% butterfat on a dry basis (the fat content once all… Read more »

January 10, 2011 10:07 pm

Lykke, that cow isn't actually all that dirty, nothing that a good brushing wouldn't cure, particularly on the udder, hindquarters, belly and tail. You'd be surprised how much of even the muckiest "stuff" comes off with simply brushing.

I always brush before every milking: It only takes a couple of minutes, it removes loose hair that could fall into the bucket, it makes her clean and shiny, it makes her feel good and helps with milk letdown when part of the milking ritual, and it cements a bond between us.

Afterwards, hang her tail to the side to stop her from… Read more »

Joelie Hicks
January 10, 2011 10:26 pm

Goatmaid you are 100% correct. I drink a lot of milk, but if I could not get raw I would probably not drink any milk at all.
Many years ago I bought milk from someone and pasturized it, but eventually stopped doing that when I saw how healthy they and their kids were. Nearly every family that drinks raw milk has one thing in common, seldom is there a broken bone, in one case there was a bad accident and the doctor could not believe how quickly his bone healed.
Nothing beats raw milk from pastured cows, I love visiting my… Read more »

Ken Conrad
January 10, 2011 10:30 pm

You may find these articles interesting.

Having milked jerseys for over forty years I am partial to and have a clear bias for their milk.

Jersey milk has a rich, smooth flavor because it naturally contains higher percentages of protein, calcium, and other important nutrients than milk from other dairy breeds. The extra protein is the reason Jersey milk yields the greatest amount of cheddar cheese: 12.35 pounds of cheese from 100 pounds of milk. This compares to the yield of average milk produced in the United States of 10.04 pounds of cheese.

Simonsberg… Read more »

January 10, 2011 10:36 pm

"Jersey milk is not bad milk, its just not meant for cheese making."

Goat breeds are the same. Nubians have the best tasting milk (I think, lol) because it's sweet and rich… they're the Jerseys of the goat world with as much or more butterfat than Jerseys; and like Jerseys they don't produce as much as other breeds.

A lot of my customers prefer Nubian milk to Jersey milk because goatmilk doesn't separate, being naturally homogenized; Jersey milk separates very quickly into a very thick buttery layer on top.

At the other extreme, generally speaking, Toggenburgs have the strongest-tasting milk because they've… Read more »

January 10, 2011 10:50 pm

"I drink a lot of milk, but if I could not get raw I would probably not drink any milk at all."

When I lived in Colorado, I bought raw goatmilk for years before I bought my farm. The woman I bought from (and who sold me my first goats) had been raising goats for 40 years. Her husband and children all drank the milk raw, and then their grandchildren.

One year, she didn't breed early enough and there was a dry period of several months where the grandchildren were presented with grocery store milk. They refused to touch… Read more »

January 11, 2011 12:44 am

Children aren't stupid and they don't have the bias that lawyers, regulators and industry-men do. I've heard many stories of children young and old who previously refused to drink store milk but when Mom started bringing home raw milk they eagerly drank every bit of it.

Taste is not nothing. It is a great conscience and subconscious test of quality, nutrition, healthfulness, and safety.

January 11, 2011 12:47 am


What would be your order of preference for cattle breeds (available in this country) for using for cheese making, keeping in mind that the milk will also be consumed as fresh milk (so Holstein is out).

Any accompanying explanations would be welcomed and please state which you have made milk from.


January 11, 2011 4:22 am

Why do the CDC and state and local Health Departments always look for a point source of bacterial contamination when there is an "outbreak" of illness.Is it to distract us from the very real non point sources of chemical toxins that we are showered with every day? The air we breath and the water we drink as well as the food we eat are full of toxins that our bodies need to eliminate.Is it any surprise that people are suffering ever more frequent bouts of acute illness.Our… Read more »

Ken Conrad
January 11, 2011 5:02 am


As Dr. Ilya Sandra Perlingieri states, Its all about greed its not about our wellbeing and safety.

So it is with the FDA assault on raw milk.

Ken Conrad

January 11, 2011 10:15 am

When his bogus health claims and bogus use of data to try and make it look like more people get sick from pasteurized dairy don't work, Mark calls people fascists. The irony of that, when he's clearly trying to expand "his" "territory," is so thick. Mark is clearly the one dedicated to increasing profits.

This enzyme and probiotic craze is falling flat. Research is showing that no one has a handle on it, and it doesn't appear to work. Mark, it's time to come up with another scheme to overcharge folks because you're too cheap to pasteurize.

Violet Willis
January 11, 2011 10:47 am


Waiting to hear Pete's questions answered . . . . But in the meantime Ever hear of this dairy in California:

All from Jersey Milk.

I really want to try some of their "Award Winning" cheeses:) They sound wonderful.

Your comment . . . ."Jersey Milk is not made for cheesemaking"

Utter hogwash . . . .

What type of milk have you really and truly worked with (other than Holstein). I am beginning to think that you are cutting and pasting from a "Cheese Manual" to try to make yourself look "Smart". Prove us wrong Bill… Read more »