Positions seem to be hardening in Maine’s effort to challenge food sovereignty ordinances passed by at least half a dozen towns.
That became clear during demonstrations yesterday by several dozen supporters of Dan Brown, a farmer in one of the towns, who has been sued by the state for privately selling the milk of a single cow.
Brown and his supporters were denied entrance to the Maine Department of Agriculture in Augusta, when they sought to present documents opposing the suit and questioning a beef recall conducted by a major supermarket chain in the state. Then, at the state house two miles away, they were met outside the building by an aide to Gov. Paul LePage, and again denied entrance to the building, when they sought to present a petition that had been signed by more than 5,000 people asking the governor to withdraw the suit. Brown and a food producer who’s a supporter of the state’s position were then interviewed by a local television station covering the demonstration.
Brown says he has no doubts the governor and the agriculture officials will press ahead with the protracted case, which was filed last November. The discovery process, whereby lawyers cross examine those involved in the case, began in the last few weeks and could last through the summer. The earliest a trial could begin would be the end of this year, and that is optimistic.
The reason for the state’s hard line is simple: It desperately wants to challenge a spate of food sovereignty ordinances that have taken root around Maine–at least six, and possibly more towns have passed the ordinances since the first one was passed just a year ago. One of the towns is Blue Hill, where Brown’s farm is located. Moreover, towns in Vermont and Massachusetts, and as far away as California, have passed similar measures. They allow farmers and other food producers an exemption from state and federal regulations to sell products directly to consumers.
State officials have said the suit against Brown has nothing to do with the food sovereignty measures, but rather is about Brown operating without a state permit to sell raw milk, which can legally be sold in Maine, both directly from the farm and at retail. But Brown supporters have obtained emails from state officials about the case, including one in which an ag official stated last summer, about Brown, “We have our test case.” Moreover, the town of Blue Hill has sent written protests to state officials arguing that Brown is protected by the local ordinance, and state officials have warned Blue Hill and other tows with ordinances that their farmers must have permits.
And what kind of a food rights case would it be if there weren’t allegations about safety? The suit says agriculture inspectors “informed the Defendant of the health risks” of raw dairy sales. The suit also contains an accusation that upset Brown, claiming that milk and cottage cheese obtained from his farm by an agriculture investigator last July “had bacteria counts ten to fifteen times greater than allowable limits.” The suit didn’t provide any more detail about what kind of bacterial counts had been measured or what the readings were.
Brown says he has obtained part of the investigative record associated with the milk testing, and that the temperature of the milk that was eventually tested was allowed to go over the maximum 40 degrees, which could have hiked bacterial counts. He is also trying to obtain information on how the milk was stored overnight between the time the milk was obtained from him, and taken to a lab.
He says he’s not had any complaints of illness. “I run a very clean operation and I produce safe milk,” Brown told me.
The state’s effort to play the safety card via incomplete or questionable information relates to the discussion here regarding other illnesses. It undermines trust, and helps explain why raw milk consumers may be initially skeptical of public health linkages or evidence regarding illnesses associated with raw milk. Yes, truth is usually in the middle, but the messengers must have credibility before truth can be accepted.
It means the doctors need to search out the cause. Did they do that? I doubt it.
Wow, are you saying the doctors waited 3 days to make a move.
Only a food would treat something blindly.
Sylvia you seem to always seem to have all the answers. Im giving you the scenario that took place. If you think you could have done a better job if you had been there, then tell me what their next move was when they were unable to find any type of bacteria in the cultures. What decisions did they make on the 4th day in the hospital with a 7 year old that was medically plummeting?
I didn’t answer because I felt you weren’t listening and saw no point in wasting my time. I’ve made my statements in regards to what you have posted in the past regarding your son’s ordeal. To reiterate, from what you posted on this blog in the past, it sounded as if your son had some really poor care while in the hospital. That is for you to investigate. And should you do so, perhaps you can question your lawyer on why he didn’t go after the substandard care the kid received from the medical community. The conclusions are from the words you posted on this blog, and I am not the only one who came to those conclusions.
It is well presented, unbiased and seeks out pro and con arguments.
Nobody tries to defend the lack of government action in other, bigger cases of food contamination. Their logic only seems to apply as they fit.
Speaking of “strawman arguments for the purpose of not engaging in the real argument,” I still haven’t seen anyone try to explain why raw milk is targeted while much more serious and widespread are ignored. Want to have a go at it Lola, since Mary has dodged the question multiple times? Be careful about turning the tables on others, you may not like what comes crawling out from under there.
I just went and explored the WAPF website and I see that the raw milk issue is just one of many that they try to educate people about, so to claim they have a milk specific agenda and are misinforming the public about raw milk in particular is disingenuous.
This will probably be seen as a bad metaphor, but it seems to me that if your son fell off a pear tree and got hurt badly, is not a good reason to go around preaching for the rest of your life that pear trees are very dangerous while leaving other, taller and more treacherous trees standing.
Ooooh, is that a threat, Ora? Here’s the deal: I know why raw milk is targeted while other foods are not, but you and everyone else here wouldn’t believe the answer anyway. If you’ve followed what I’ve been writing over the last several years, you’d already know the answer and wouldn’t have to ask. Hint: it has to do with the raw milk movement/WAPF/FTCLDF being FALSE GRASSROOTS MOVEMENTS, one you’ve been all conned into believing is real. Disinformation is 80-90% truth, 10-20% misinformation. Beware of the direction the “leaders” of the movement want you to go in, ’cause there’s a sink hole at the end of the path.
“I just went and explored the WAPF website and I see that the raw milk issue is just one of many that they try to educate people about, so to claim they have a milk specific agenda and are misinforming the public about raw milk in particular is disingenuous.”
Weston Price Foundation owns:
http://www.realmilk.com – a website dedicated to disseminating info on raw milk;
and they founded:
http://www.ftcldf.org – please note the first bullet point under their mission statement:
PROTECTING
Access to Raw Milk
Consumer Choice
Sustainable Family Farms
On-farm Processing
Direct-to-Consumer Distribution
Most of their legal cases involve raw milk, no? Their raw milk agenda seems a little top-heavy.
Oregon says it all very loudly. Mike Schmidt said this years ago….
It appears to take a crisis to get people to listen and appreciate long term vision and prevention.
Yes I would love to hear the rest of the story. And no that was not a threat at all, just a request that you or somebody answer our question which you still haven’t quite answered in a way that I can understand. I haven’t been following the blog for years, so I honestly did not know your answer and had to ask.
But before I go on, I’d like to sincerely thank for at least attempting to answer and continuing the dialogue, so please don’t stop now. I’m having a hard time understanding some of this info and need your help.
Let’s say you are correct and WAPF and FTCLDF are in fact false grassroots and just a con game. Why would the government agents be going after the people being conned, meaning the farmers and drinkers, instead of the people doing the conning? Doesn’t make sense to me, can you please explain it?
Since you are on the anti-raw milk side… what are you promoting instead or suggesting people should be eating, sterile manufactured factory foods? And how would you know this supposed “reason as to why raw milk is the chosen target while other foods are not,” are you a government agent? (Don’t answer that, but understand that some of us are skeptical.)
And finally the most important unanswered question is: Why is there an inordinate amount of manpower and financial resources being used in this milk targeting, when other contaminated foods exponentially affect so many more people that should be protected by these same agencies? Are you campaigning for banning raw oysters or hamburger or even just to have those sources shut down until proven safe?
Again, thanks for taking the time to at least try to enlighten us deceived fools. Happy eating!
Suffice it to say….it was a love fest of “consumers seeking nutrition meets farmer”.
God I love my job!! Teaching raw milk will change this world!! Safe raw milk is critical….in fact I got a veiled threat. One consumer said…Mark do not ever screw-up your raw milk….we need it too badly.
“One consumer said…Mark do not ever screw-up your raw milk….we need it too badly”
By some news accounts you’ve already screwed up your milk… by sending how many kids to the hospital from drinking your raw milk? How many kids got infected with e.coli 0157:H7 and developed HUS?
I wonder if you shared that little secret in your presentation? Instead of “got raw milk” I’d say “got e.coli 0157:H7 milk?” would be a great new t-shirt design.
My ideas stem from 5+ years of research into the “conspiracy world”, and I feel I have a pretty good handle on how the government manipulates us into what is called the New World Order (global fascist government/one world currency). A common tactic the government uses to influence people’s actions is called Problem-Reaction-Solution. Create the problem, anticipate an expected reaction, and then propose the solution – a solution that the people would have never gone for if not for the “problem” covertly created. 9/11, the Oklahoma City bombing, London 7/7, etc. are common examples of this (yes, I am suggesting that these were staged “events”).
The “raw milk movement” in it’s current inception did not exist until about 10 years ago, when Sally Fallon created the Weston Price Foundation and Mark McAfee founded (with his venture-capitalist brothers) OPDC. Sally and Mark both have ties to the Intelligence community. Mark admits he wants OPDC milk in stores throughout the country and that has had discussions with Cullen Agritech (the New Zealand company that owns the proprietary rights to grass-fed raw milk and the A1/A2 test).
What is happening is that they are intentionally creating a “movement”, “sabotaging” that movement with the arrest and persecution of raw milk farmers (Problem), in order to bring the “movement” to a hysteria, and in their “hysteria” the “movement” will “demand something be done!” (Reaction). The Solution proposed is a couple of things. 1. RAWMI – an NGO (non-governmental organization) that will be used to blackball “non-compliant” farmers and cause consolidation within the raw milk movement (push out the little guy, create barriers to entering the market – we are seeing this with OPDC vs. the farmshares in CA right now). 2. The advocating of farmshares/herdshares/cowshares, which by definition (as they are always corporations, LLCs, usually) are state-created entities and thus subject to state statute. The owners cannot claim Constitutional rights because under the corporate statutes, they’ve agreed to waive their rights in order to receive liability protection. If we presented ourselves as sovereign men and women who have the Natural Right to buy/sell/trade agricultural goods we’d have a better shot at winning in court (and which would set precedent for future generations), but this is not what FTCLDF advocates. Why not? To get us and keep us trapped in a cycle of government compliance (including registering for NAIS, licensing, fees, inspections, etc.), where once we’re in, they can add rules or change the rules on a whim. It’s about control and compliance, and we begged for it in our zeal for a “solution”.
Notice that the conventional dairy industry is teetering on its last legs. Farmers are getting up in years, are riddled by low prices and high debt loads, and their methods are considered inhumane, dangerous and outdated. Notice, too, how the Weston Price Foundation acts as a lobbying group for farmers, albeit grass-fed farmers, and once this method of farming has become the dominant methodology, it will be co-opted by Big Agri-Business just like the organic industry has been. Consolidation and control.
There are always several-fold reasons for the false grassroots movement (a.k.a. controlled opposition). Economic consolidation and control via licensing and statute are two, but there are other considerations, as well, including health and disease (for instance, research suggesting casein grows cancer cells and causes type 1 diabetes), as well as esoteric ones. The esoteric considerations are ultimately the biggest ones to the Control System (food as magic/the manipulation of Natural Law), but I won’t elaborate on these here.
This is how it should be.
You worded your post very well and it does make complete sense and there is visible truth to what you said.
It sure must gall you that the Campaign for REAL MILK is flourishing in the face of all the propganda. What does that say about those who choose to drink it ? … that they’re all fools? Or, rather, that the improvements we see in people’s health are more convincing than all the naysayers and over-educated idiots, put together?
Napoleon had a good grasp of human nature when he stated, Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
It is imperative that we stay on course and that charity and good will prevail during this time when our right to choose is being challenged, and not get drawn into this self righteous and idealistic do-gooders trap.
Ken Conrad
Do some reading on ‘controlled opposition’. It has a long and storied history and is commonly used by the US government. It is commonly used at the operational to undermine opposition movements but it has other uses at the strategic level; for instance, the US (or our banks) have funded both sides of several major wars. Given the importance of raw milk and of food in controlling to populous I’d be shocked if they weren’t up to their usual shenanigans.
I can’t vouch for anything Iola says wrt WAPF. But given Marks ties to the intelligence & investment community, his negative view of small independent farmers, his goals of opening up regulated interstate raw milk and his repeated calls for CA herd shares to come out of hiding and submit to government regulation; well that is quite likely. But one can be controlled by many methods and not even know it.
As to Bill, he was the first mouthpiece for RAWMI and has a philosophical agenda to see food production regulated and controlled. So his claims don’t hold much water.
I would like to thank Lola for actually taking the time to present her perspective, even though she probably knew she would get raked over… it seems these discussions on the subject have been held before here but I wasn’t around then.
I would also like to thank Bill, Pete, Mark, and others including even Gordon and Mary for helping me understand how simple it isn’t. I hope I have not been disrespectful to any of you in my moments of confusion while posting.
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose. That much I do understand.
Some of the comments shared with me at the WAP meeting were:
1.My husband was severely lactose intolerant until he started drinking your raw milk.
2.My childrens health has never been better.
3. One RN said that she lost 20 pounds drinking raw milk and has never been healthier.
4. Many people shared that GUT infections and GUT issues had been resolved!!
I still do not understand why you are so negative….I still remember the big fat juicy kiss you laid on my cheek last year. Why the change of feelings???
When OPDC feeds 75,000 people per week…I do not deny that some people may get ill. But…have you every asked about how many people get healthy????
Please remeber this, according to the National Center for Allergies 7 kids had died since 1998 as a direct result of drinking perfectly pasteurized milk!!!!!!!!!! Pasteurized milk is so very allergenic that is causes death. I know as a paramedic that there are thousands of kids that were saved by EMS paramedics and did not die as a result of drinking pasteurized milk becuase of decisive and very quick EMS administered Epinephrine, steroids, benadryl and other heroics. I know because I have personally saved many childrens lives that were suddenly struck by acute Anaphylactic shock after contacting or consuming something.
Why is it that RAWMILK has never been associated with ANY DEATHS for allergic reaction.
Where is the love??? Lets make up. I like kisses better that rocks being thrown my direction. And yes I shared with the WAP group that raw milk is not perfect and can cause illness. I also said that a weakened immune system matched with a superbug is leathal. We live in the land of superbugs and weak immunity. We also live in the land of an emerging awareness that a biodiversity in the GUT from consumption of clean raw milk ( or properly fermented raw milk )is one of the greatest immune system builders.
Cataloupe killed 34 last year!!!!
Mark
Its really simple but humans insist on making it complicated because of a desire to control.
I would think that freedom is a fairly simple concept to understand.
Ken
Am I reading this right? This occurred in 2007 and they are just now charged?
Even after all the recent discussion and explanations, my biggest question remains… why do they go after milk so hard even, when there are no illnesses? This doesn’t seem to have involved raw milk.
Has anyone ever heard of any individuals having been prosecuted for being responsible for the much larger outbreaks that have occurred over the years, involving meats, eggs or vegetables? Do they hide behind corporate laws? I still just don’t get it.
The encompassing fundamental position taken by the current regulatory administration was clearly stated in the response to the FTLDF Interstate Ban lawsuit and clearly defines the core issue:
“There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food.”
There is no fundamental right to one’s “own bodily and physical health.”
People “do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.”
Yes Ora, that is a mystery. Probably something else got blamed for illnesses. Out govt entities are in bed/pockets of big corporates/big ag……. Our govt gives them a little slap on the hand when they get caught, lawyers like Marlar et al go after some of them, but they companies have insurance and they just keep doing what they’re doing. No changes. I haven’t heard of any govt prosecuting any of the big corps for killing or sickening people.
That was back in 2007. It didn’t state raw dairy was involved, so it probably was pasteurized cheese.
In 2007, pet food was recalled, and it probably overshadowed any outbreaks from human foods.
November 2007 Cargill Inc. recalled 1 million pounds of ground beef contaminated with E. coli bacteria, the second time in less than a month it has voluntarily recalled beef that may have been tainted.
October 2007 The Vermont Department of Health has expanded its warning for people to avoid eating frozen beef, chicken and turkey pot pies manufactured by ConAgra Foods, Inc. that may have been linked to two reported cases of salmonella in Vermont. The two cases in Vermont were contracted in July, and both people have made full recoveries.
ConAgra asked stores to pull the pot pies from their shelves after they were reportedly linked to a nationwide salmonella outbreak. Those brands are: Banquet, Albertson’s, Food Lion, Great Value, Hill Country Fare, Kirkwood, Kroger, Meijer and Western Family. ConAgra is offering refunds for the turkey, beef and chicken-filled meals that bear the number “P-9” printed on the side of the packages.
October 2007 White Chocolate Kraft Foods has issued a recall in the U.S. for Bakers Premium White Chocolate Baking Squares (6 oz.) with a UPC Code 0043000252200. This product may be contaminated with Salmonella, (a bacterium that causes foodborne illness).
September 2007 Ground Beef The Topps Meat Co. expanded its recall of frozen hamburger patties to include 21.7 million pounds of ground beef that may be contaminated with E. coli bacteria that sickened more than a dozen people in eight states. The USDA said three people are confirmed as getting E. Coli from Topps products, with 22 other cases under investigation. Cases were found in Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania. A full list of the recalled products is available at http://www.toppsmeat.com/.
September 2007 Salad Mix A package of Dole salad mix that tested positive for E. coli has triggered a recall in at least nine states, prompting new produce fears almost exactly a year after a nationwide spinach scare.
September 2007 Raw Cream from Organic Pastures. http://www.organicpastures.com/pdfs/cream_recall_info.pdf?ex=1344225600&en=aa19825de843ec28&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2007/default.htm
No, there is no end, unless and until we stand up in large enough numbers and say, This is the end.