There have been many newspaper articles about raw milk over the last few years, and they nearly all use the same presentation formula. They begin with an example of a farmer producing raw milk for many happy customers. Then the narrative switches to all the warnings about raw milks dangers from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control. They conclude with favorable quotes from raw milk drinkers and unfavorable quotes from public health officials.
With that in mind, the article in the Minneapolis StarTribune on Sunday is curious. It contrasts the case of a young child allegedly sickened by raw milk from dairy farmer Michael Hartmann two years ago with the claims by a customer that not only is raw milk highly nutritious, but she has the right to privately obtain milk from Hartmann’s dairy
In the process, the article reports on a separate suit brought against Hartmann by the Caldwells, the parents of the child who became sick, and the issue of responsibility. The article reports that the judge in the trial agreed that the childs parents potentially bore some responsibility because they should have known of raw milk’s risks. A jury may be called on to make the final determination as to a division of responsibility between Hartmann and the parents, presumably if no settlement is reached beforehand.
The notion of the parents bearing at least some responsibility for serving their children raw milk is a new idea, at least in my experience reporting on raw milk and food rights. Unfortunately, well likely hear little from the parties that most often discuss and debate raw milk.
We’ll almost certainly not read anything about the intriguing legalities from lawyers who make the most noise about raw milk, like Bill Marler and Fred Pritzker (who are quoted in the Minneapolis papers article); there’s not been a peep from them since the case launched the middle of last year. Thats because they are focused primarily on marketing their legal services. The family in the lawsuit is being represented by a diversified Minneapolis firm that doesnt specialize in product liability the way Marler and Pritzker do, so there’s no marketing opportunity, since the case has already been taken off the market. At least I think thats the reason, unless there is some kind of professional courtesy among lawyers that prohibits them from commenting about another lawyers case in public.
In the same vein, I doubt well be hearing much about this article from food rights advocates. Ive sent it to a number I know, without a peep in response. My guess is that the article’s depiction of a young childs illness and the suggestion that Hartmanns milk was likely responsible is too uncomfortable to deal with.
Hartmann, for his part, declined to be interviewed for the article, sticking to his vow of silence and privacy in the face of what he has long felt to be uninformed and unfair reporting about him.
Ive criticized in the past the failure of the Food Rights movement to speak up about illnesses, or to speak appropriately and accurately. I expressed my concerns last summer about Hartmann supporters making a show of support at the trial involving the Caldwell family. On the matter of inaccurate and inconsistent statements, witness Mary Martins devastating list of quotations from Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures Dairy Co. concerning the outbreak of illnesses linked to OPDC back in 2006 (following my previous post). Yes, the Internet keeps very much alive the quotations of public figures like McAfeeand the inconsistencies are much more damaging over time, in my estimation, than a frank acknowledgment as to the real situation.
This article in the Minneapolis StarTribune thus helps us appreciate both the business considerations at work (for the lawyers and OPDC), as well as the ideological ones that divide.
So, in the face of the silence, Ill just congratulate the Minneapolis Star reporter, Michael Hughlette, for making a valiant effort at fairness on a story where fairness is little appreciated. Its nearly impossible to probe the many nuances of the arguments on both sides of the issue in the course of 1,200 to 1,500 words or so. What I liked was that he took seriously the food rights side of the argument as espoused by Melinda Olson and Alvin Schlangen, rather than immediately trashing it and accepting the usual efforts at ridicule by the opponents of raw milk. And by appropriately reporting on the Caldwell child’s illness, and filling us in with some new developments on the legal side, he filled in the picture in an informative way.
All involved tend to see the raw milk issue as completely black-and-white , but until each side can accept the shades of gray inherent in the dispute, any sort of mutual acceptance will remain just a distant vision.
“A recent study by the Centers for Disease Control, echoing the public health consensus, says credible scientific evidence for such health claims is lacking. That study also noted that illnesses associated with raw milk tend to make people sicker than those linked to pasteurized dairy products.
“The incidence of illness linked to any milk products is quite low, said Fred Pritzker, a Minneapolis attorney who has represented about 20 victims of raw milk-related food poisoning. But if disease strikes with raw milk, he likened the experience to driving without a seat belt. ‘When you get hit, you’re really going to get hurt.'”
“Hennepin County District Judge Susan Burke has ruled that Hartmann was negligent, but she also accepted his argument that Owen Caldwell’s parents potentially bore some responsibility because they should have known of raw milk’s risks.
“The Caldwells’ attorney rejected Hartmann’s assertion, and noted the “irony” of the farmer’s new tack — ‘after spending much time championing the benefits of raw milk and its safety.'”
I couldn’t get David’s link to the original article to work. Here it is again:
http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=152166215
Reminds me of the Mcdonalds obesity lawsuit. “caused by misleading advertisements which led them to believe that fast food could be consumed daily without any adverse health effects.”
If these teens fall for such gullible adds, then our school system is in more need of revamping than imagined. And where were the parents? Didn’t they teach their kids what nutritious food is? Apparently they ‘allowed’ their kids to consume this phood. Maybe their own parents didn’t teach them, after all, our govt/media has been shoving unhealthy lifestyles down our throats for over 100 yrs (more so in the last 50 yrs). I applaud that all parties should take responsibility for actions taken.
“The parents should have known…” Is this like, parents should know ALL the side effects of medications/vaccinations? Sure, they are safe until you or your loved one has a bad reaction. Then what? Did you know Cipro/levaquin can cause spontaneous rupture of your Achilles tendon? Most aren’t instructed on what to watch for while taking these drugs. Are people taught that those bags of ‘prewashed’ greens have a higher potential of being contaminated than loose fresh picked unwashed greens? (less processing)
Should people be responsible for knowing where their food comes from and how it is processed? For this to be achieved, I would guess that foods would need, for the most part, local and small. People are so far removed from their foods today.
The Antiseptic Baby and the Prophylactic Pup
Were playing in the garden when the Bunny gamboled up;
They looked upon the Creature with a loathing undisguised;
It wasnt Disinfected and it wasnt Sterilized.
They said it was a Microbe and a Hotbed of Disease;
They steamed it in a vapor of a thousand-odd degrees;
They froze it in a freezer that was cold as Banished Hope
And washed it in permanganate with carbolated soap.
In sulphurated hydrogen they steeped it wiggly ears;
They trimmed its frisky whiskers with a pair of hard-boiled shears;
They donned their rubber mittens and they took it by the hand
And elected it a member of the Fumigated Band.
Theres not a Micrococcus in the garden where they play;
They bathe in pure iodoform a dozen times a day;
And each imbibes his rations from a Hygienic Cup-
The Bunny and the Baby and the Prophylactic Pub. Arthur Guiterman. 1871
Some persons may argue that the above theme in the poem is the only answer to our “food safety” for the “masses.” They argue that we live in such a polluted world that the principles of organic, perma-culture,
sustainable food production just can’t be relied upon to produce “safe” food or to produce enough quantity for “the masses.” Now that may be, in fact, an arguable issue. However, no one ever talks about collectively “cleaning this mess up!” Respecting Mother Nature can still be accomplished through food production if we actually wanted to follow Her principles. Again, though, it’s the game of “follow the money. So, when individuals refuse to just accept the status quo and produce for themselves and their community organically based food they are treated just like the Bunny in Guiterman’s
poem. I wonder if Arthur Guiterman knew just how much his poem would reflect reality over 100 years
after he wrote it. As for me and my house, we not only will follow the Lord, but respect the organic farmers that grow the food for our dinner plates. I’m beginning to think David is right…there won’t be “any sort of mutual acceptance,” because one either sees the glass as half full or half empty.
IMHO, there is in fact no black and white in this subject or any other. No matter how black it seems or how white it appears, there’s always a darker or brighter shade just waiting for your conciousness of it to appear.
All we can do on an individual basis is to live and learn, and share that with our family friends and neighbors. Mistakes and accidents will inevitably happen, but don’t let that cloud your judgement.
One of our dogs was hit by a car a few years ago but that doesn’t mean we will be putting on shock collars or chain link fences, we would rather take our chances. Again, YMMV.
EAT WELL, and harbor no anymosity. My fave (defunct, look up rubber rodeo) country/rock band always closed their show by pointing out that “if you had half as much fun as us, well we had twice as much fun as you did!”
I try to live by that…
Thought provoking post. I think parents who don’t read this blog but just listen to other raw milk promoting blogs or groups need to realize that they are actively being marketed to by the likes of WAPF and raw milk producers and need not feel guilty when their children are sickened. They were doing the best with the information they had at the time.
I’d also like to return to the last OPDC ecoli outbreak when McAfee promised the mom whose children were sickened with HUS that he would do some consumer education? What exactly were those promises? Has he made good on those promises?
I just visited RAWMI web site and found nothing regarding education for the consumer nor the dairy person. Perhaps they require one to join to obtain information, if that is the case, it is a poor requirement. No one should join anything without full knowledge what they are joining. So far, Amanda’s list of questions and what to look for has been the best I’ve seen towards educating the public.
I wonder how they got their results since everyone views things so differently. Certain foods I will only eat organic, apples are one. If I saw oatmeal, I’d be thinking of cookies, I don’t care for rice and as for volunteering, it would depend on what the job was. I’ve headed committees where people said they’d volunteer and not show up. As for moral transgressions; 2nd cousins is too close for me, as for the lawyers in the ED….someone on here called them ‘bottom feeders’.
My beliefs have been challenged for wanting organic and the least amount of processing by those who consume mainstream foods. Guess it goes both ways.
I worked closely with the mom with the Two Sickest Ecoli children ( that had consumed Home Made Kefir made with OPDC raw milk and store bought cultures ) which occured late last summer. She and I traded emails for a month, had several long conversations and we finally came up with some FAQ that we both agreed would help moms make good informed decisions about raw milk.
Yes…we did make changes and yes we did publish these changes on our website. http://www.organicpastures.com/faq.html
Also…it is my solemn belief that there are those that will follow the FDA into dead food oblivion ( and suffer the predictable and fatal immune depression “Life in a BUBBLE of TROUBLE”consequencies ) and there are those that will make up their own minds and build an immune system in their families and avoid: Asthma, IBS, Crohns, Osteoporosis, weak teeth, excema, Autism, infertility, cancer etc….
Both are free to do what they wish. The one thing that we are not free to do in America is Bully the other side. It is a free country….free to be scared…free to be smart….free to be stupid.
The only thing that is devastating is FDA corruption and the ignorance of consumers to recognize the true origin of immune failure.
I find it fascinating to observe perfectly normal human beings that believe that immune correction is more dangerous than death. In other words….a GUT correction to build immunity ( a case of diarrhea which is the outward sign of Immune development and a reset of immunity ) verses a funeral.
Pasteurized milk has caused so many funerals…yet it is still sacred. Until Mary and her minion can aknowledge that funerals are worse than immune correcting GUT events…there is not much I can say.
The Earthis a Sphere….round like a ball. The earth is totally filled with bacteria…so are we! To make enemies of bacteria is suicidal.
No one doubts that immune health is paramount, but isn’t it misleading to assert that raw milk is the ONLY way to do this?
Wow, she quoted you and your words don’t make you look honest. And you have no concern for it? That sounds just like all the other cafos. They don’t care either. if all those “HIPPA laws were broken and the doctors let you look at the medical records” then there is some big money lawsuits to be pursued.
If there is no credibility, then there is nothing.
Mark,
I think the problem is that you have misstated the facts and contradicted yourself on a number of occasions in denying any Organic Pastures involvement with the 2006 illnesses associated with raw milk. As some others have said here, that creates a credibility problem, which makes fending off attacks from the knee-jerk opponents of raw milk that much more difficult.
As I’ve said here before, it also creates ongoing, and unnecessary, conflict with the victims of those illnesses, who find it difficult to gain closure on the trauma of the illnesses, as Mary McGonigle Martin has made clear over the years. I agree with you in substantial measure about the FDA’s corruption and about the problem of immune suppression, but those are issues apart from the credibility problems. And they are arguments that are more difficult to make if there are other credibility problems.
I do hope you understand though, when you state anything like “I tend to go towards the extreme of banning,” there will be some of us that find that offensive. Ban whatever you want for yourself but don’t encroach on other’s choice please. That’s all we (speaking for myself only, but seems I have some company here) are asking – not claiming any food is better than another, or safer or healthier. My choice may be a bad one in many people’s eyes, but I reserve the right to be the one making it and will never surrender that to anyone no matter how strong their argument or experience.
Regardless, thanks for participating in the discourse, seriously. We need all the varying viewpoints, it wouldn’t be worth our time if we were just a bunch of head nodding parrots.
When quoting a man at one point in time….rememeber that at that point in time….he spoke truth as given his level of information at that time, but at least he spoke and did not hide. It is so easy to shoot at a person that stands and gets counted for what he believes. It is difficult to shoot at the hiders and the silent.
I also own the tremendous number of blessed consumers that credit raw milk for their absence of asthma, IBS, Crohns, excema, HP Ulcers, and other immune recovery in their lives. For this I am blessed and forever empowered to produce the most delicious, nutritious and safest raw milk on earth.
When being critical of raw milk….spend the proportionate amount of time praising its wonderful GUT and immune healing qualities.
How about “finding closure” with death…how about the numbers of people that have died from allergies to pasteurized milk and just straight up death from pasateurized milk. Those that did not die…but were sickened by any food should think about two things:
1.How blessed they are
2. Their immune strength.
Where is the responsibility for lifestyle choices that people make that create the conditions that allow food borne illness to take hold. What about the responsibility that doctors should take for giving out broad spectrum antibiotics like candy only to see their patients die!!!! What about that. C-Diff kills 14,000 per year!!!! Now that is death, but the best treatment is a fecal transplant!!! ( 92% effective )
I am so sick and tired of being riticuled for producing raw milk when I am being courted by the leading doctors and researchers in the world….as they tell me that raw milk and its bacteria hold the secret to life and immune integrity and even Killer T-Cell differentiation that is directly responsible for raw milk anticancer effects. When they ask me to come speak to their medical students…that is the truth that is suppressed at all costs. That is the tragedy of the Smoke Screen of the FDA, Mary Martin and Bill Marler.
Go ahead…your world is flat and it is sterile and bacteria do not matter. Enjoy your days in the germ free medical paradigm and remember these words when the doctor suggests surgery, antibiotics, radiation and or chemo. Condemnation of biodiversity is Bacteriosapien suicide. Go back and watch Bassler again. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVfmUfr8VPA
A friend of the family, a 55 year old man I have known for years was just diagnosed with stage 3 or possibly 4 prostate cancer. One look back into his life says it all, he is a doctor obeying pill popper and just came off several rounds of broad spectrum antibiotics in the last three years…all for a missdiagnosed cancer.
We all choose up….be careful. Killing off your bacteria has dire consequences. Feeding the bad actors in your GUT also has dire consequences. Eat well be well…eat bad or eat sterile and pay big time.
To quote Dr. Jewett, the Director of Cancer research at UCLA , “pharmacudical drugs are the most inflammatory agents that can be consumed, inflammation is the start of all disease”…. she drinks raw milk!!
You sound no different that the politicians, big ag, corporations who think they are better than others, yet are nothing but liers and cheaters. No Mark, not for producing raw milk. It’s your twisting the truth, not admitting to the truth,belittling of others, blaming anyone but yourself;ie, not taking responsibility. You’re always right and as long as everyone agrees with you, life is good, yet heaven forbid should anyone question you or disagree. Then they become the ‘aggressor’ and are out to get you and all you stand for. When you can’t argue your point or facts, you resort to name calling and character assignation. You aren’t even focusing on what has been said.
It is disingenuous to assert that the choice is EITHER sterile foods OR raw milk. Health is conveyed by a variety of foods, and raw milk may be one factor in creating health, but it is definitely not the only one, and it may be a potentially dangerous one, especially in light of safer alternatives. The constant focus and fall back on this black-and-white thinking (if you don’t support raw milk then you must support sterile phoods!) is a huge turn off, and the reason people like me are seeing this whole movement and it’s de-facto head as nothing more than a bunch of (organic, grass-fed, pasture raised) baloney.
IF this is the true and complete story, which I find doubtful due to your proven lack of credibility as it relates to the *retelling of conversations with mothers of ill children* as is currently being discussed on this thread…
Then great. I am glad you are making strides in consumer education. I’m not glad it took a mother of two very very ill children to force your hand and change your website. If I were that mother, I would not have let you get off so easy. I would have demanded that you include these types of sobering realities in your “share the secret” talk, a.k.a. your marketing talk for WAPF chapters and anyone else that will host you. I would demand a video of each one sent to me. Do you discuss the realities that people with compromised immunity, specifically pregnant mothers and young children, should probably not consume raw milk as they are more likely to become ill in your talks?
I would have also demanded that you acknowledge that your pathogen testing is fallible. Is this currently in your FAQ? This is what Mary Martin believed in when she went to your website in 2006…that you test your milk therefore it must be safe.
Thanks.
“?Here’s a handy rule for avoiding resentment: If you hate doing something, you absolutely must not do it.”
I hate reading mean, callous, and hateful comments here. I must not do it anymore, my good health depends upon it. I will not read the comments here, or post my own resentful comments here anymore. My eyes and voice are no longer useful here.
Good day! 🙂
It’s when everybody ignores you that voicing is no longer useful, and I see no signs of that (for you, and when Mary ignores me I don’t mind it’s probably fully deserved.) Ever noticed that the title of this blog is “Complete Patient?”
That you would make up a story about the doctors letting you see Chris Martin’s chart is simply helping others experience that same sort of devastation.
It is certainly your right to define devastation for yourself any way you choose. Personally I don’t find government corruption to be “devastating” largely because I have low expectations for the government.
Now, I’m not saying I believe absolutely everything from/on either of those two sites. What I AM saying, however, is those sites have various and multiple contributors. Most of them, such as Mary Enig and Tom Cowan, are veteran (30+ years) doctors and researchers and nutritionists. That doesn’t make them perfect, no. But I tend to believe, too, that since they all raised their families in this manner, you know – they practiced what they are preaching – it carries a significant amount of credibility, as far as I’m concerned. Maybe your standards of right and wrong are different than mine, and that’s fine. But don’t try to put everyone in a box because of your personal beliefs. If you don’t wish to believe them, that’s your opinion, but you should NOT bash them either. If you have real, crucial, proveable evidence against WAPF about some issue, take it to an attorney.
Thank heavens most people are discerning when they read up and research the benefits/non-benefits of raw milk in regard to their personal situation. Everyone has different ideas of what is healthy for them and their families but it is still a choice they must make based on intellectual *homework*. Seeing as how the gubment has done a fine job of bashing raw milk in the news lately, and making some false statements in the process, it’s not easy to find anything ONLINE about the benefits. Consequently, this becomes one of those issues where they use what’s at their disposal, and they rely heavily on anecdotal information – because it’s sometimes all they have. Nothing wrong with hearing both sides – but fairly discussed, not bashed and trashed – which is your MO from what I’ve seen around the ‘net.
Does that sound right?
I have not seen a direct statement with this information (but I can’t say I’ve read everything you’ve ever written either, because I don’t belong to FB and I know you post stuff there because you’ve mentioned it).
It just seems odd to me that all of these other people are claiming that your OPDC milk contains this or that “pathogen” which made them ill (by findings/testings from a local medical laboratory, I assume) and yet we never hear anything about your family becoming ill from the same milk. Can this be possible???
(Short of time to compose,) Here are some of the topics that went through my mind as I read those two paragraphs.
Slave or free?
Liberty or shackles?
Trust you – trust me.
I must trust you with freedom and liberty.
You must trust me with freedom and liberty.
Is the little bird to “prove” it can fly before it is allowed out of the nest without a helmet?
Cultural/demographic drift away from the food production environment.
Natural immunity.
Germ theory.
Antibiotic theory.
Pissed-off mamas (both directions).
Programmed obeisance to stethoscope-collared professionals’ anecdotal world (ask for proof).
Then prove the proof (see Uffe Ravnskov re. cholesterol or L. Pauling re. Vitamin C).
Accept uncertainty as part of life.
Members of the bars’ wild world of anecdotes.
Licensed physicians’ wild world of anecdotes.
Good lawyers.
Good doctors
Good businessmen.
Good scientists.
Destroyed foundations.
Who made government figures to be good? Are they?
Evil so outrageous we can’t even guess at it.
Trained in freedom?
Trained in liberty?
Trained to be morally blind.
Trained to be naive.
Trained to be foolish.
Forcing the strong to the regimen of the weak eliminates the strong. Then what?
Protect the weak. Strengthen the weak. But not by warring against the strong.
Demonstrate courtesy to others. Demonstrate native respect to others.
Live less by assumptions, ask more questions, listen to the responses.
Think.
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
This may be the reason they invaded his property. Heaven forbid any proof against monsanto be aired…
Can’t the farmers just refuse to buy the GM seeds?
http://www.rense.com/general95/fdaokays1.html
Soon we’ll have to grow all our own food to know what it is and even then, it’ll be questionable.
Couldn’t this be true then of medicine and processed foods? There are numerous studies/opinions by ‘educated’ medical people, scientists, etc, about the dangers/side effects of medicines,vaccines, processed foods.
This would also be interfering with ones belief system, no different than preventing someone from practicing their religion. Will they then prosecute parents when the kids have diabetes? Obesity? broken bones? It’s a wobbly fence to sit on.
Can’t the farmers just refuse to buy the GM seeds?
I wish it were that simple; unfortunately certain farmers are enamored by technological advancement and are easily manipulated by industry and agricultural officials who have for all intent and purpose thrown caution to the wind.
In order for tangible change to occur consumers need to educate themselves, demand appropriate labeling and have the freedom make their own choices. Right or wrong, people aught to have the right to choose those foods they deem appropriate for themselves and their children.
To paraphrase Dr. Benjamin Rush, “Unless we put (nutritional) freedom into the Constitution the time will come when (the food industry) will organize itself into an undercover dictatorship.
Ken
Personally, I consider taking your kids to McDonalds to be a lot more dangerous if you want to discuss parental responsibility, but I would never criminalize it. It’s their choice to go or eat whatever they want, why would a judge want to enforce any laws against stupidity? Oh I get it, we don’t have enough people in jail already, and we need to grow THAT industry.
When I taught law I always insisted that my students-when in litigation-had to understand the opposing side’s arguments far better than their opponent. And not be blinded by their own biases. You cannot win without being able to agrue the opposite side better than your opponent-you don’t have to believe the opposite side–you just have to be able to argue their perspective. My only point here is that if you look at raw milk illness cases from the perspective of the law-I do not see how parents cannot be held accountable. Reread the judge’s comments-what is she seeing that raw milk advocates do not see? And how does this community address what she sees with other than academic agruments and posturing?
And from my own experience-defending children-the amount of pain and suffering of a parent being prosecuted for abuse was also not relevant. The focus is on a child’s well being. In my opinion, these are serious and from this specific posting by David–may be far more immediate than hypothetical.
Judges enforce laws that many people from many factions of our society consider stupid. In my hypothetical the focus is on the well being of a child-living in the reality of our culture and society.
who: Ron Klein | when: Wed, 05/23/2012 – 05:28
Thanks Ron, for your comment. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the parents-children relationship is of general importance to society and therefore the basic issues found there are basic issues of society.
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
You have a great question….the answer is this: my family eats all of the foods we produce at OPDC and we get it from the same creamery source that everyone else eats from. No separte sources. The OPDC products at the stores are the same products consumed by all of our four generations of family members and that includes from 75 years old down to 29 months old. All employees at OPDC eat from these same sources. Everyone eats the same food that our consumers eat. We have no separate cows or chickens or etc.
When paratroopers select their parachutes they take them from a common stack…..that means the private and the general all take the same risk when they jump. Same at OPDC. None of my family has ever had any illness from consumption of any of our products….for that matter none of the us has had much of a cold or flu for the last 12 years….our health is fantastic.
As to whether a parent is abusing their child by selecting raw milk for their food, here is my opinion.
It is very relevant to consider what the FDA says about pasteurized milk.
IT IS LISTED AS THE MOST ALLERGENIC FOOD IN AMERICA!!! Seven kids have died after consuming pasteurized milk and reacting allergically. If this is true and the FDA is not lying about this as well….( I assume that this is correct ), then it would be abuse to feed pasteurized milk to a child with allergies or asthma.
What attorney would not consider this a relevant argument. It is critically on point. Showing the court the multiple peer reviewed published articles and studies showing raw milk to be MAST cell stabilizing and healing of allergies and asthma is also relevant and totally on point. How about the death certificate from the seven kids that died from pasteurized milk. That is public record and the medical examiner did not lie about the cause of death. That is relevant.
Courts become educated when evidence is presented, Courts can not make good judgements if they do not have good evidence.
This is all highly relevant and on point.
Raw milk is not perfect and that is a point to be made as well. But….neither is pasteurized milk. Any one who claims that feeding pasteurized milk is a guarantee of anything is missleading at best. There are zero deaths from raw milk and at least 77 deaths from pasteurized milk since 1973 if you include the Jalisco cheese incident in 1985. There have been 422,000 illnesses caused by pasteurized milk since 1973 and about 1100 caused by raw milk. Those are facts available at the CDC.
Evidence must be presented and if all the evidence is brought in and weighed…the judge or jury can make a good decision. In my experience….juries will side with the moms that have done their homework and have tried their best to do well for their kids. Juries will not side with corporations or the FDA that trip on their FOOD INC corruption.
These are political decisions and not decisions of child abuse.
A fat, diabetic, asthmatic, ADHD, Autistic, Crohns kid is an abused kid. Perhaps not abused by a parent…but by a medical industry and a society that feeds off of the money made by the immune torment of that suffering child. If that is not relevant….America is in serious trouble…..very serious trouble.
In doing some research last night, I came across this vid (only 12 minutes) and came away wondering “who is this guy”? The vid isn’t dated (one of my big complaints about YouTube – they give upload dates but not the date the vid was actually made) so I have no idea how relevant his statistics are today. Also, is the narrator just a narrator or is he the maker of the vid and also a credentialed scientist or a former milk producer himself – or what? Perusing the reader comments was interesting, and I only read the first page. If I was a newbie to raw milk and saw this vid it would probably not influence me right off, but it would certainly influence the totally uneducated newbies. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VbwYqV4Eog At any rate, it’s likely to be a favorite of the anti-raw milk groups. His information, IMPHO, is whacked out.
I grew up drinking raw milk (so did my DH), raised all three of my kids on breastmilk, raw cow milk and raw goat milk. My kids were never vaccinated either. They are now 37, 35 and 25 and healthy all their lives. My first baby was born breech and sunny side up so we were “indoctrinated” by how the medical industry worked (even back in 1975) and let me just say it’s where we discovered just how little they knew and how little we needed them for our health.
Riddle me this, D. Smith: until the last generation, when Western influence encroached on China (McDonalds, etc.), the Chinese have not traditionally consumed dairy products, but yet were free from the diseases of affluence – asthma, allergies, heart disease, diabetes, etc. How could this be?
It is proven that dairy (raw or pasteurized) is not NECESSARY for health, yet many in this movement don’t seem to recognize that, and instead defend raw milk with such fervor (not necessarily you) it comes off as almost religious in nature.
Mark says, “Raw milk is not perfect and that is a point to be made as well. But….neither is pasteurized milk.” The argument he is making is that it’s EITHER raw milk OR pasteurized milk, and that is a false argument, because an option is NO milk, and there are plenty of healthy people who consume NO dairy. If one wants to consume raw milk, fine, but make sure you have no allusions about it (that it’ll cure anything from allergies to male pattern baldness, for example) and fully understand the risks, especially if you plan to feed it to children. Without trying to put words in their mouths, I believe it is the point Amanda, Kristen and Mary have been trying to make.
I used the words ‘wobbly fence’ because it appears to be (other than obvious abuse) some incidents are not abuse to some as they are to others. Punishing your kids today is a big issue. If you spank them CPS may come down on you. Everyone defines spanking differently. If you don’t discipline them, CPS may come down on you. If you don’t allow your kid to enjoy the ‘great’ things other kids enjoy, you are a bad parent, extremest, abusive, strict, etc.
It is my understanding in some states, if you aren’t part of a ‘recognized Religion’ and have proof that you belong, you cannot opt out of vaccinations. It doesn’t matter that your beliefs are against the vaccinations, you HAVE to belong to a ‘recognized Religion’. Where is the justice in that?
“recognized Religion” I do realize that my view of how things should be is not the same as others, including the law. I am part Native American, am I a card carrying Indian? No. I am comfortable in my own skin and have no need of a card signifying who I am or what I belong to. I have stood in line with my Grandma to collect the commodities the govt so ‘generously’ gave the Natives… I also don’t participate in most of their religious/tribal activities. Religion to many Native Americans is a very private thing. Does that make me have less Indian blood? No. So I am not considered, by law part of any “recognized” religion or tribe.
Sometimes I do understand the opposing side’s opinion, I just don’t agree with it,and many times feel they only see black and white. How would a common, just, ground be found? I don’t see it happening, there are too many individual beliefs.
What I still don’t understand is that regardless of parental-child or social-child rights issues anywhere in particular… We in this so-called “movement” do not seek to establish laws that everyone else to be forced to drink raw milk, yet the “other side” constantly fights and tries to curtail our rights to not be forced to jump through legal hoops to be able to drink it, unless we own the cow, and even then…
I have rarely read a more depressing analysis than yours in this thread, thus because it is true.
We are a grossly overconfident people, currently making a mistake in our understanding of human health so broad and fundamental that dissent from it is deemed irrelevant, or even reason for criminal prosecution. Tyranny with a smile.
Your analogy to prosecuting child abuse is interesting, given that the science of pediatric forensics is undergoing a revolution as we speak. What was considered good scientific evidence of child abuse just a few years ago (evidence that well-intentioned prosecutors, judges, and juries utilized to send people to jail) is now considered false and misleading (watch this video for a report on that: http://video.pbs.org/video/2030394458). No matter. A few poor schlubs ridiculed, vilified, jailed oopsy! No worries for us, because now we have REAL science.
But ALL science is questionable these days. Here’s a great, entertaining, funny, witty vid on that very subject – by a doctor. This is a wonderful Ted Talk video about “bad science”. It’s entertaining and educational at the same time – and the guy talks faster than anyone I’ve ever heard, but he’s making excellent points. Check it out: http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science.html
Best wishes,
Ron
Free choice involves consequences whether it’s milk or any other liberty you can think of – doesn’t have to involve food.
But no one that I know of buys raw milk or signs up for a cow-share accidentally. It’s a choice and presumably they know the risks.
I do not have a source for you to reference and will not spend my time finding one for you. Do some research on traditional diets in China and you will find the answer.
It’s true that no one signs up for a cow-share accidentally, but it’s naive to believe that everyone knows the risks. When Pete Kennedy and FTCLDF guided me on the writing of my farmshare contract they had me write into it that the farmshare ‘owners’ who were signing the contract agreed not to sue me or my farm if they got sick or died while drinking my milk. Did they really understand what they were agreeing to, or did they just agree to take on full responsibility (though I doubt this would hold up in court) because of naivety?
You make a great case in another way. Maybe it’s better if parents DON’T know or understand what they’re agreeing to by signing a contract to purchase/drink raw milk. They can plead ignorance either way – of the dangers and/or benefits. If they can muster a stupid enough look on their face a judge might buy naivety. I’ve learned never to try to second-guess what a judge might do. It’s folly because he might do something today and may have treated the same case totally differently the next day.
To put the Culture back into Agriculture and reconnect the passion and purpose of real food….so that we can all defend the right to protect our children from illness by building strong immunity.
I completetly agree that the body can be rebuilt without raw milk. No argument from me.
But I will say that after nearly 13 years of producing and selling raw milk….I am buried by testimonials of its healing properties. After years of alternative therapies and nutrition…people report that after just a few weeks on raw milk, their bodies respond like never before.
Raw milk has qualities not found in any other foods…name one that compares. There are none that compare….none.
Fermented wild caught fish comes close. Lets settle this debate…let the people make an informed choice:
The most Highly allergenic food in America, processed, dead, lactose intolerance causing food….or delicious living MAST cell stabilizing, allergy relieving, whole food of the ages.
As far as milk alternatives are concerned….soy is not an alternative.
Done.
Are you seriously incapable of doing a simple Google search to research this yourself?
In less than 5 minutes:
“The traditional Chinese diet features vegetables that have been lightly steamed or stir fried, accompanied by starches like rice, noodles or dumplings. Meat and fish are part of the traditional diet, but are served in much smaller amounts than is typical in the Western diet.”
http://www.livestrong.com/article/195292-traditional-chinese-diet/
“Dairy products are one noteworthy aspect of the Western diet worth particular attention as they are relatively absent from the Chinese diet. Indeed the Chinese commonly associate Westerners with the smell of sour milk which they often exude from their bodies.”
“In China children are generally breast fed until at least two years of age. Although organic, unpasteurised, whole milk is occasionally used to treat conditions such as constipation, its regular consumption is very rare in China.”
http://tcmdiscovery.com/2007/10-20/20071020101029.html
Human breast milk?
THAT’S the pot calling the kettle black considering your behavior the last few days!
The information I gave you is not from “internet articles”, it’s from researchers, anthropologists and medical doctors. Did you by any chance note in your search WHEN the Chinese started drinking milk? Was it recently, or historically?
By the way…animals have only been domesticated for approximately 10,000 years, starting with sheep and goats, then with cows being domesticated around 8,000 years ago. How on earth did Homo Sapiens crawl out of the mud without sucking on the teat of another species???
“I hear you Lola, but… are you grass fed?”
Last I knew I didn’t have a four chamber fermentation-type stomach.
Heh. (Oops – now THAT was snide, wasn’t it?) Sorry.
China, historically, was a huge country and Mongolia, Inner Mongolia, Canton and several other provinces were all included when they said “China” because those were, at one time, considered a part of China. I have no idea when they started using milk in the part of China to which you refer but parts of China have been using it since recorded history. They may not drink it by the cup like Americans do, but to some extent they used/drank milk for a long time.
When you come up with your theory on how Homo Sapiens crawled out of the mud without animal milk, post the link here.
Check out new legal ramifications regarding the health claims of some other food, that went to court and semi won. Any chance this scenario could play out in the raw milk world?
http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regulation/Attorney-POM-ruling-is-a-stunning-rejection-of-FTC-s-stance-on-gold-standard-clinical-trials-to-support-product-claims
In particular, the part that starts with “The FTC tried to create a new, stricter industry standard…”
Huh???
Homo Sapiens = Where Lived: Evolved in Africa, now worldwide
When Lived: About 200,000 years ago to present
Domestication of animals = 10,000 years ago to present
Obviously, there was a time when humans lived without animal milk.
They make icecream in London and one of the ingredients is human breast milk.
Howard Hughes and Randolphe Hearst drank raw breast milk. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12566827
The FDA does not regulate raw breast milk because it does not come from a hoofed animal.
On April 1st the FDA actually outlawed raw milk breast milk for human consumption. See this article. http://seattlelocalfood.com/2011/04/01/hot-mama/ Just joking…it was April 1st.
Homo sapiens had to learn about animals before they could do ANYTHING with them.
And as to your timelines above, I will not get started arguing the fine points of origin. Not the origins of man or beast. The argument about raw milk is enough.
=========
The Province newspaper, Vancouver British Columbia
B.C.’s Liberal government is poised to further choke off the flow of public information, this time with respect to disease outbreaks. The Animal Health Act, expected to be passed into law by month’s end, expressly over-rides B.C.’s Freedom of Information Act, duct-taping shut the mouths of any citizens – or journalists – who would publicly identify the location of an outbreak of agriculture-related disease such as the deadly bird flu.
“A person must refuse, despite the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, to disclose . . . information that would reveal that a notifiable or reportable disease is or may be present in a specific place or on or in a specific vehicle,” Section 16 of the Act reads.
It is quite conceivable that the provincial government, in the event of a disease outbreak at a farm, would delay releasing a warning in order to protect the farm in question or the industry it’s part of.
In that event, should you as a citizen hear about the outbreak, or if you were an employee at an affected farm, you would be breaking the law by speaking publicly about it or bringing concerns to the media.
Citizens or journalists breaking the Animal Health Act but not charged with an offence can be slapped with “administrative penalties,” which are fines. And the legislation contains an additional attack on rights of citizens: if you don’t pay your fine, a government representative simply files a paper in court that is the same, according to Sec. 80(2) of the Act, “as if it were a judgment of the court with which it is filed.”
Except for the absence of a judge or any semblance of due process.
Ultimately, this legislation aims to protect businesses from disclosure of information that may harm their financial interests.
As B.C. Freedom of Information commissioner Elizabeth Denham revealed in a letter to provincial Agriculture Minister Don McRae, his ministry has expressed concern that the province’s legal protection of “third-party business interests . . . does not adequately protect information related to farmers engaged in animal-health programs or subject to disease-management actions.”
Ministry employees, animal-health inspectors and laboratory employees are specifically barred from disclosing information about farm-disease outbreaks.
Denham noted that it’s extremely rare for a law to override freedom of information legislation. The Animal Health Act removes “the public’s right to access various records regarding animal testing, including actions and reports relating to animal-disease management,” Denham wrote.
The Animal Health Act would override another provincial law, the Offence Act. While the Offence Act caps punishment at a $2,000 fine and six months in jail for offences not drawing higher penalties in other legislation, the Animal Health Act says that section of the Offence Act doesn’t apply, and lays out a punishment regime with penalties reaching to $75,000 fines and two years in prison. The offence of failing to keep information confidential falls among the violations drawing the highest penalties.
by Ethan Baron
Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/information+farm+outbreaks/6657194/story.html#ixzz1vkPSTPep
I copied the following off the campaignforliberty.org website and there are their two links below. They are asking people to call their senators to vote YES on the Rand Paul amendment and NO on the Durbin amendment.
“Senator Rand Paul will introduce an amendment that is likely to receive a vote today.* It would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act “concerning claims about the effects of foods and dietary supplements on health-related conditions and disease, to prohibit employees of the Food and Drug Administration from carrying firearms and making arrests without warrants, and to adjust the mens rea of certain prohibited acts under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to knowing and willful.”
*Thursday May 24
http://www.campaignforliberty.org/profile/7786/blog/2012/05/23/senator-paul-discusses-health-freedom-amendment-senate-floor
http://www.campaignforliberty.org/profile/7786/blog/2012/05/23/health-freedom-amendment-likely-receive-vote-today
http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.6466
http://www.healthychild.org/issues/chemical-pop/polybrominated_diphenyl_ethers/
Until recently, brominated flame retardants were considered safe. However, in 1999, Swedish researchers discovered much greater amounts in human breast milk than had been detected twenty-five years earlier. Levels in breast milk of American women are about 10 times higher than in European women. This has raised concern among many scientists and environmental health advocates But in the U.S., there are no federal regulations restricting use of PBDEs, even though body burdens here appear to be the highest in the world and are still rising. A number of states have enacted or are considering legislation to regulate or ban PBDEs.
There are more than 200,000 metric tons of bromine-containing products produced every year. In 2001, Asia consumed 56% of those products.
Raw milk and its bacteria are not the problem we perceive them to be. The problem rests with chemicals such as PBDEs that disrupt our environment and immune systems.
Ken
Rand Paul introduces Amendment 2143 (S.3187 FDA User Free Reauthorization Bill) to DISARM – yes, disarm – the FDA gun-toting fools, AND to try to stop raids on Amish farms and others selling raw milk. He also delves into the subjects of supplements, prune juice and other things he thinks are federally over regulated.
I sure hope he makes some inroads.
“A Senator may stop debate on an amendment by being recognized and then moving to lay it on the table. If the Senate agrees to this non-debatable motion, the amendment is considered to be rejected, or tabled. (The Senate may vote to table a first degree amendment while a second degree amendment to it is pending.) If the tabling motion is defeated, debate on the amendment may resume. However, the vote on a motion to table an amendment often is considered to be a decisive test vote on the amendment; if the tabling motion is defeated on a roll call vote, the amendmentitselfmaybeagreedtobyvoicevoteshortlythereafter. Movingtotable an amendment is essentially a negative action, and there is no other motion available in the Senate to bring the body to an immediate vote to dispose of a pending amendment.”
Some places require a special diet for the Mom (not exactly what I would call healthy eating but nevertheless their rules must be followed) and some places, in fact most of them, require the breastmilk to be pasteurized.
Still, many folks were hopeful that it might go places, because I saw several postings about it all over the ‘net this morning. It’s apparent to everyone but our lawmakers that something needs to and has to be done about this travesty/sham called the FDUh, but no one in power is going to actually come out in support of doing anything.
There are probably more tabled motions, bills and amendments than there are laws in this country. John Stossel – check into this please! He had a utube thingy recently about all the ridiculous laws still on the books in this crazy country – now he needs to tackle some of the un-laws. I’ll bet there’s more good stuff in the tabled paperwork than some of the junk which actually made it into law.
At least they only tabled it (heh, as if it matters, right?) – most of the others were out and out rejected. Just a matter of time before this one is, too. I’ve also been following the money trail on S. 3187 (overall, not just Paul’s amendment proposition). Scott Brown – biggest taker with five hundred and some odd thousand so far. No wonder everyone wants to “work” for the gubment . . .
“Scared of a little melamine”, the FDA chants? “Ah heck, the stuff was found in minute amounts in the baby formula – so what? Collateral damage, don’t worry about it right now. Later we’ll make up more lies to cover past lies, which covered past lies” . . . and so forth. But the FDA claims they’re toothless against the gubment. Uh-huh.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/breast-milk-fda-weighs-risks-human-milk-banks/story?id=12327503#.T76rTMWwWNU
I see you can make some pocket change from selling it. Beware the regulators will be stepping in….. Wonder how they “process” it?
http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/24/rand-paul-calls-for-an-end-to-the-fdas-i must watch this.
Disarming the FDA ( no more FDA armed agents on our farms and decriminalizing the making of medical claims on food! Hallaluya!!
We are tipping the balance…
Mark