Illinois-DrChavetteOrgain.jpg

Dr. Chavette Orgain, chairperson of the Illinois Board of Health (and board member of the American Academy of Family Physicians)As the Illinois raw milk turmoil has dragged on through endless discussions and hearings and recriminations, my big question has been this: Why doesn’t the state just end the misery and ban raw milk?  That’s clearly what Big Dairy wants, what the regulators want, and what their funders and handlers at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control want. 

 

Then I began combing through the transcript of a hearing held last March—the quarterly meeting of the Illinois Board of Health, attended by state public health officials. This is the one at which the family practice physician, Dr. Rashmi Chugh, first appeared on the scene in her (thus far) ill-fated campaign to get the American Academy of Family Physicians to endorse a ban of raw milk, described in my Nov. 15 post. (I also discovered that the Illinois Board of Health is chaired by a woman who just happens to be on the board of the American Academy of Family Physicians, Dr. Javette Orgain, pictured above; gee, these regulators and medical people are almost family.)

 

The transcript makes for tedious reading as the members of the Illinois Department of Public Health and key department officials go round and round on the technicalities of various laws and regulations. But in the 142 pages of testimony, they always return to the question I have been wondering about: Why not just ban raw milk?  Indeed, in their estimation, and the estimation of assorted county and town public health officials from around Illinois who testified, there already is a ban, and the dairy farmers who produce raw milk have been violating the ban for at least the last 30 years. (For the record, I consulted with Pete Kennedy and Gary Cox of the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, who dispute that assessment, but the technicalities of the argument are the stuff of another post.) 

 

To me, that March meeting crystallizes the dilemma regulators are experiencing, not only in Illinois, but in many other parts of the country. as raw milk continues to explode in popularity. That is, the public health people detest raw milk, want to be rid of it. But huge numbers of their state’s residents are consuming it. Frustrating the regulators to no end, the state’s prosecutors and law enforcement want nothing to do with the ban obsessions. 

 

In Illinois, the regulators have sought to put forth regulations, supposedly in response to the problem that raw milk is being sold illegally in the state.  (The key problems the raw milk community in Illinois has with the proposed regulations were described in a post by Rosanne Lindsay Nov. 9.) Round and round the debate goes, as you’ll see from the discussion. 

 

First, there’s the issue of raw milk’s growing popularity. Molly Lamb, head of the Illinois Department of Public Health’s Division of Food, Drugs and Dairies, describes what she learned from a year-long process with a  Dairy Work Group—stakeholders from all areas of the raw milk debate. “We learned a lot through this process. We really opened our eyes and were quite naive going into this process. We didn’t understand the amount of raw milk farms that are in Illinois that aren’t permitted, aren’t regulated, aren’t inspected, no quality counts, no—no oversight. Probably 60 is what they would tell us number-wise, but I can tell you there’s probably more than that. And the volume that’s being sold is—way exceeded our expectations. When we spoke of a volume limit for sales and we tried to say 40, we were laughed out. I mean, some have 20 to 25 cows, could milk upwards of 50 gallons a day.”

 

She adds: “Right now there’s massive amounts of herd shares…If we….turned our blind eye to the massive amount of herd shares that are occurring, it wouldn’t coincide with what we’re trying to accomplish with the raw milk.” 

 

On top of that, raw milk pours in to the Chicago area from neighboring Wisconsin, Michigan, and Indiana, she explains: “The out-of-state raw milk that’s coming in northern Illinois and Chicagoland area is massive and due to—under herd-share type of operations.” 

 

Well, why not prosecute the bastards, asks one Illinois Board of Health member, Beth Fiorini: “I would like to see local public health and DPH work together to figure out a way to ban it completely and then to set up ways to prosecute instead of going the other direction.” (The “other direction” being workable regulations.)

 

Believe me, we’ve tried, explains one of the department officials, David Carvalho: “It’s illegal now….and it is widespread. Now, it’s not widespread like, you know, Jewel, Dominick’s, and all that, but it is widespread. So the reality is right now it is illegal, and the law’s not being enforced, and the only enforcement mechanism for something that is just flat illegal is to work with the local state’s attorneys and the attorney general, and… that has not had any impact on this because there’s not this prosecutorial imperative.” 

 

The board members seem not to be listening too well. Dr. Peter Orris, a board member, inquires: “If we think this stuff is a problem, why is this—and the problem is the state has been unwilling to enforce, why is this not something that the attorney general’s office should be handling?”

 

You guys just aren’t listening, suggests Justin DeWitt, engineering chief for the department’s Office of Health Protection,  and he tries again to explain the difficulty associated with enforcement: “The priority for the attorney general’s office—and I would never speak for her but would guess that prosecuting or trying to track down purchasers of raw milk who are doing that illegally is not a high priority for that office…So I would just caution that, if we think local law enforcement, state law enforcement, or the attorney general’s office will take up raw milk sales prosecution, that’s probably misplaced.” 

 

When department officials explain the value of all the testing data they will gain from proposed regulations, another board member, Dr. June Lee, expresses horror: “It’s quite harmful—unpasteurized milk—and it sounds to me like we are planning on doing a prospective study on our Illinois residents on a product that is known to be harmful, and I have—I have reservations about that, for certain.”

 

Another department official, Dave Culp, then makes an amazing admission, to the effect that the perceived risks of raw milk can be significantly lowered via smart regulation: “If it is regulated—I’m not ever going to say it’s safe, but if it’s regulated and processes that match Grade A are followed, the risk of disease goes extremely low down because, as I said, we test with a regular basis on raw milk samples.”  The CDC and FDA would not appreciate that professional assessment– that “the risk of disease goes extremely low down.” In their view, the risk is always unacceptably high.

 

One of the most perceptive observations comes from state department official David Carvalho: “Weighing of public health issue versus, you know, personal choice issue, we’re very much on one side. When that conversation extends beyond this room, we may find there are other views on how that’s weighed—just as, you know, sushi is legal and cigarettes are legal and alcohol is legal and all that—even though we, as public health, might well say those should be…mustn’ts as opposed to shoudn’ts. But, you know, that’s what the General Assembly and the process is for.” 

 

They’re certainly a frustrated bunch, those public health regulators. They’re frustrated because events are overtaking them. Many are stuck on banning raw milk, while the public is out clamoring for it and chugging it down by the gallon. The prosecutors? They know it’s a no-win situation. Wisconsin ag officials couldn’t find a local prosecutor to go after Vernon Hershberger, so they pushed a state prosecutor to do the dirty deed. That may explain why prosecutions of raw dairy farmers, all the rage in 2009 and 2010, have tailed off to practically nothing. 

 

What the Illinois public health regulators were trying to tell their bosses on the board was that they (the regulators) are trying to make the best of a bad situation (from their perspective): Regulation will give us a shot at getting back some semblance of control. Even that isn’t guaranteed. 


Raw milk advocates are clearly in a stronger position than they have ever appreciated. Kind of jibes with my sense from the beginning of all this: the best thing people who want raw milk can do is to go out and buy it. Buy as much of it as possible. Even if you have to travel a long ways to find it. And while you are at it, buy good meat and eggs and cheese. And don’t buy the Big Ag stuff. It’s all having an effect. In the end, it will mark the path to a more enlightened food system.