If you wanna complain .Im not the complaint department.
From song, “Complaint Department” by Likki Li
Maybe I am the complaint department, since I run this blog. Certainly the complaints keep coming.
There was Mark McAfees comment, that, During our weekly RAWMI conference call
the subject of this blog came up. It was shared by one of our board members that productive dialogue is not possible when toxic personalities cannibalize the conversation.
Then there were complaints growing out of his comment, as to whom he was referring to about toxic personalities.
There have been several comments made privately to me, in just the last few days, from people who felt insulted by the caustic nature of the debate that sometimes evolves here.
This isnt a new phenomenon. It rears its head from time to time, sometimes with negative consequences. I have lost friends over the tenor of my posts and the discussion here. I have seen people I highly respect become so frustrated with this blog that they have left in a huff. I have seen public health professionals participate for a time, and then throw up their hands in disbelief at the tone of the back-and-forth.
Whats going on? Certainly I have responsibility,, since I provoke. I poke fun at the authorities. I was guilty early on of personalizing some of my attacks at people in positions of power. I found that some of those created more negativity than positive results, and gradually, I have avoided personalizing my criticism. Even that little speaking skit I did recently, I intentionally avoided assuming the name of a real bureaucrat.
But beyond that, I think that raw milk and food rights are by their nature highly volatile political issues, which generate volatile reactions in people. Thats not just here. Its difficult to have any kind of rational discussion about raw milk, even among supporters. Ive seen the phenomenon on other web sites, when they publish an article of some kind about raw milk, and then there are 200 comments lambasting the author and each other.
Part of what makes raw milk so emotional, in my view, is that milk is our first food, and remains an important food through much of childhood. We have primal feelings about milk.
Another part has to do with the fact that our government has long tried to prevent access to raw milk, and continues to do so, even as it has become ever more popular and desired. If you look even casually at world history, you quickly realize that food riots and food shortages have been the sparks for huge political upheaval. Politically, its almost never a good idea to be messing with peoples food.
Before I go on, I want to say (again) that none of the controversy about raw milk and food rights is an excuse for personal attacks. It is possible to debate the issues, without questioning the personal motives or sincerity of others.
Back to complaints . I guess it wasnt a big surprise when the matter of this blogs tone came up in that podcast interview I finally did last week (Jan. 29) with the two professors I discussed a few weeks back, Don Schaffner of Rutgers University and Ben Chapman of North Carolina State. They, too, told me they dont like the blogs tone. They told me they thought my previous post about them was insensitive, and inaccurately represented some of their views. They thought that a number of comments from readers as well represented a negative tone and hyperbole.
Why bring all this business about debate and tone up now? Because it seems as if we may be at an important new phase in the long war over raw milk: We may well be in early negotiations about raw milk safety standardsin effect, official acceptance of raw milk and a raw milk marketplace. All the state proposals to broaden raw milk availability, the growing public support for those proposals, together with the assemblage of university and regulatory people at the Raw Milk Institute (RAWMI) that Mark McAfee describes, are part of an important sorting out. More on that later .
There are most certainly huge obstacles to overcomethe corporate dairy producers, together with their puppets at the FDA, havent given up by a long shot. Nor has much of the regulatory and health community had a change of heart. But in terms of the debate, there has actually been progress over the last few years, and the coming together of various constituencies at RAWMI is the clearest indication.
All this has taken a long time to jell for good reason. I got more of a sense of the chasm that exists between the pro and anti-raw-milk camps during that podcast last week with the two representatives of the academic community. I felt at times like I was in the Twilight Zone, in a land of double talk, where we were literally speaking different languages. And believe me, we were all trying very hard to be polite (and I believe for the most part, we were polite).
First, I tried to pin the two professors down on what they think about legalizing raw milk availability, and I just couldnt do it. They talked like academics, about “a continuum,” “risk management. I believe Schaffner even said he was a libertarian on raw milk, presumably in favor on some theoretical level.
I pursued the matter: Were there any state situations allowing raw milk that they liked, that might serve as a model for states like their own, New Jersey and North Carolina, that prohibit its sale? Nope. Nothing doing. No way they were going to be caught endorsing raw milk in any kind of specific substantive way.
I only lost it once, when they spoke about that recent CDC-sponsored Minnesota study being good science. (They challenged me on whether the study was truly CDC-sponsored, as I have repeatedly referred to it; it turns out the language at the end of the study says the study was financed “in part through cooperative agreements” with the CDC–it doesn’t say where any other “part” of the financing came from, and the study is posted on the CDC web site. Dont think I was inaccurate on that one.)
I think they were insulted when I started laughing hysterically at their suggestion that the Minnesota study was started as a serious scientific endeavor designed to learn more about raw milk, and not to slam it. Really? Just important new knowledge for knowledges sake. Uh-huh.
They did kind of get me when I protested that I had been to Minnesota a number of times, met many dozens of raw milk drinkers, and never met anyone who spoke about getting sick, or knew anyone who became ill. Ah, but I couldnt possibly know all the many thousands of raw milk drinkers, they argued. Correct, I couldnt.
From there, we moved on to the question of whether the feds really have it in for raw milk. They said, quite sincerely, that they didnt think so. As if food club members and farmers who have been hit by raids are all paranoid.
I dont want to suggest the discussion was nonproductive. Simply viewing the chasm so starkly was informative, at least for me. There was even an important point of agreement, I’d say: that pushing the U.S. toward more of a black-market system is not desirable. That producing the safest possible raw milk is desirable.
All of which brings me back to the matter of negotiations toward broader acceptance of raw milk, as illustrated by the activity at RAWMI. Mark McAfee, the founder of RAWMI (and owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Co.), said RAWMI has been approached by the best researchers, the best universities, and a consortium of regulators to navigate a better future for raw milk.
Miguel astutely pointed out that producers and consumers will have to produce and consume a product that is designed by universities, government agencies, researchers and regulators, giving those groups tremendous power What he was suggesting is that the legitimization of raw milk could well have important repercussions, beginning with involvement by extension services that Shawna Barr referred to.
As I said, we are at the early stages of this negotiation process. The simple fact that negotiations seem to have begun is a huge development. Its just important to appreciate that the chasm between the public health professionals and those of us who feel we should make the decisions about the foods we ingest is quite wide. That begins to explain why so much frustration bubbles up here on this blog, and why the complaints keep coming.
If raw milk was legalized in all regards, it would become a free-market item and all of these pesky details would work themselves out. Raw milk, for all the scientific barking, is a very safe product without any intervention. Much safer than a lot of other food items on the market today.
Do I expect it to be legalized? Never. That would mean rolling over on their own data and the FDA, USDA, CDC yada yada are never going to stand for that. The FDA is having a heyday watching producers on the RAWMI type programs turn themselves into veritable pretzels trying to please them – and then they change something and the whole mess has to start all over again. Don’t think they aren’t enjoying all of this. We will never see freedom in raw milk if we keep bowing and scraping and trying to please an entity who has no intention of cooperating.
I know I’ll catch flack for this, but it’s how I feel.
the milking process and experience the hard work and care it takes to make this sacred food available to our members. So, when I was learning how to do this so that I could relieve my farmer a couple times a week, I couldnt help remembering a couple of videos I saw on u-tube regarding this very chore. Both were not in the U.S., but both were obviously not concerned with the clean process like we are here. One was an old man fetching a milk goat from what looked like a junk yard for a mother and young boy. Not a blade of green grass in sight. It was for medicinal reasons that the mother brought her boy to get milk straight from the teat! Another video was in an Asian country (China?) and a man was distributing fresh milk to city dwellers from his van that he just drove in from the country! Now, I know we dont know the results of these videos like the professors said you didnt know how everyone faired on the raw milk in Minnesota, but I do think if thousands started getting sick and dying from these distributions/practices news of it would spread around the world! In fact, our whole world population wouldnt be what it is today if this sacred food was as dangerous as the authorities say it is but having had that thought I also realize that there has never been a more dangerous time to produce any kind of food organically because of the toxic load of pollution that we are experience in this day and age! Yes, it is hard to produce milk, veggies, meat, eggs, ect., because we face such hazardous toxic environmental conditions like never before in human recorded history. So, if we are on the cusp of negotiation acceptable production and distribution then we had better acknowledge the necessity of doing it in as healthy environment as possible, not just the sanitized milk parlor! Water, soil, land use adjacent to production, ect., and much, much more will have to be taken into consideration. We definitely must stop agricultural pollutions of CAFOs so that our water and land can become cleaner and the use of pesticides, herbicides, ect. To me, this isnt rocket science, we do KNOW how to do this but we cant force these clean practices in our politically environment of today just look at the newest farm bill that was passed. I pray the USA consumer will soon demand cleaner food and ban these horrible practices that are slowly but surely killing our collective health not to mention our environmental health.
JM “non-scientific” HO. Marietta Pellicano
RAWMI thinks these conversations are unproductive when they don’t go their way.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole
…
Which is the black-market system Pasteurized milk that breaks many laws or raw milk which breaks none?
David, Raw milk is already a low risk food.
Raw milk myths and evidence by Nadine Ijaz pdf
http://www.bccdc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/00E8757C-99E4-4414-8C54-2C92BB776567/0/RevisedPresentationJuly8RawmilkmythsandevidenceNadineIjaz_PROTECTED.pdf
David, who speaks for the raw milk consumer?
Miguel astutely pointed out that producers and consumers will have to produce and consume a product that is designed by universities, government agencies, researchers and regulators In other words let them eat cake.
Anyway I no longer post here because, in my view, the center of gravity in this forum is just way way to far from Reality. For example, David, Mark and a lot of others advocate “testing” of milk, yet do they test any of the other foods they consume? This double standard is very harmful to the raw milk community, it reinforces government propaganda about alledged risk of consuming the healthiest food their is, and makes it easier for the bad guys to target small farmers… (If people want to test there food, I have no problem with that, if they are consistent across the board. Of course, as soil scientist miguel has repeatedly stated in this forum, if you are going to test milk, first you need to figure out what you are going to test if for.)
I also was very offended by the treatment raw milk advocate Aajonus got, by David. David called him a liar, saying something to the effect, “repeating your false ideas isn’t somehow going to make them true…”
I never saw David present any evidence that Aajonus was making any false claims, and Aajonus had evidence to back up his statements, such as testimony from former employees claiming food was indeed being sold as organic that wasn’t…
A lot of David’s reporting was good (and I like him), that’s why I used to post here, but when someone who got it right about raw milk, Aajonus, is dismissed as an “eccentric”, and “new leaders” have emerged (with a very watered down understanding of raw milk), well it’s not my scene. Since I have you all on the line though, thought I would just summarize my own research findings about the raw milk situation:
Raw dairy is an ancient superfood, used by some of the healthiest, longest lived peoples. The research of Weston Price and also Sir Robert McCarrison is a good place to acquaint yourself with these basic facts. And no their kids didn’t develop HUS, no their noses didn’t fall off, no their bodies weren’t ravaged by listeria… raw milk societies were super healthy.
Once dairy is pasteurized, it becomes a totally different substance. My own research from first hand experience and talking to drinkers and reading testimonies, convinces me that you no longer absorb the calcium when milk is pasteurized. This is the real reason that there is epidemic levels of calcium deficiency in this country, when so much dairy is consumed.
And this is the real reason that pasteurization is forced on us. I posted plenty of evidence to help people who are in denial about the fact that the government, major media, etc., are controlled by organized crime. If you can’t grasp this basic fact, you are missing the whole point of why there is a “debate” about raw milk. It is precisely because of its health benefits that raw milk is systematically slandered, in microbiology textbooks, by govt agencies, by the media cartel, etc. The biggest business today is SICKNESS aka “Healthcare”. Bigger than oil, autos, chemicals…
We have epidemic levels of disease in this country, due to severe mineral deficiency (along with of course other establishment created problems). Over 95 percent of Americans suffer from tooth decay, which dentist Weston Price’s research shows, is due to severe calcium deficiency. Coming from a different directions, modern scientist Robert Barefoot says 95 percent of Americans have SEVERE calcium deficiency, which sets the stage for all kinds of illness, cancers, diabetes, ms, …
Endlessly “treating” disease generates mega billions for the pharmaceutical cartel, and other facets of the medical industry… This is the real reason raw dairy is demonized.
There is no reason for thinking people to take seriously any claims made by the government, the major media, establishment academia… re raw milk. The establishment has many tools in their disinformation toolbox, from using actor agents, faking data, drawing false conclusions, suppresssing real evidence, etc. etc. I tried to help the cause by repeatedly posting info on this in this blog, it looks like it was mainly ignored (and now erased). In this very blog, professors have testified they risk being fired or having grant money cut off if they publically present pro raw milk evidence. In this very blog farmers have told how they were fined 8000 dollars for posting customer testimonies of asthma healing from raw milk… yet most people in this blog repeatedly talk about the government as if it is some kind of legitimate entity that we should engage in debate and dialogue???
Thankfully, there are a few people in here who basically understand the truth about raw milk, such as raw milk MIke, Ken, D Smith and some others, that raw milk doesn’t create disease, it prevents disease. So I hope you guys stick to your guns and don’t fall for the false science, fake disease outbreaks, govt agents, etc.
Myself, I’ve been directing my energies toward more pleasing subjects, namely the recovery of ancient musical tunings and all the health benefits you get from playing music in tune with Nature (as opposed to “modern” “equal temperament” tuning, which is a type of mathematical hoax). I’m also pushing on with growing my own food…
My message to all seekers who come here sincerely trying to understand the “debate”. Go out in the real world and talk directly to lifelong raw milk drinkers, and check out the earlier evidence I cited of cultures that used it. The picture should come into focus for you. Good luck. Tom
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5154269-small-scale-grain-raising
However….these laws came change, if people show up, stand up, and speak up!!
Corpotations show-up better than any one person that I know. If we intend on winning back America and our food…then we had better start becoming part of the conversation and showing up standing up and speaking up. If that means as a group that is just fine…if that means by dollar voting that works fine also. One thing that is empty and powerless is bitching and moaning in complete madness and with wild conspiracies swimming in our heads…from afar. This change happens up close and personal with smart engaged people.
Engagement works. PhD’s, researchers and the regulators are paid to engage and that is why they get a seat at the table. As producers and consumers we can also chose to engage. RAWMI created its own opportunity and now sits at a table that it helped build!!!
When sitting at the big raw milk table it is required that you speak the language. If you speak “raw-milk-weirdness or conspiracy jiberish”…the others at the table of raw milk peace and progress will not serve you any dinner and look at your very funny if they regard you as present at all !!!
This is a political and educational process. This process undoes 100 years of industrial investment…and pushes perhaps one of the most profound admissions that we are forcing to be made by huge establishments…pasteurized milk is not settled science…. it has been demonstrated to be a failed science and is a nutritional mismatch for the human biome.
As we all speak our minds, be aware that others are reading and making notes about our intellect or madness. Lets be unified and somewhat in-synch.
Tom,
First, there was no intentional deleting of your comments (or anyone else’s). It’s possible there was some kind of technical glitch that occurred, and if that is the case, I’d like to know about it. If you can pinpoint where your comments disappeared, let me know and I’ll have our technical adviser look into it.
Second, I never dismissed Aajonus Vonderplanitz as “an eccentric.” We disagreed strenuously about his tactics toward Sharon Palmer and James Stewart. But I always respected his philosophies and ideas about food, especially raw milk, even if I didn’t always agree with him. You will see that he has a prominent role in my book, “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Food Rights”–in particular, his organization of private food clubs around the country.
“It is required that you speak “the” language”. Are you talking about the language of the natural world?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akluoEByGTw
David, please do not allow yourself to think that you are somehow responsible for the “sometimes negative tone.” Regarding complaints, if didn’t have any you’d be complaining and turning soft we don’t want that.
“prevent access to”
Those should be the key words to any regulatory food discussion, requiring proof. Huge Developments, I saw them back up the Frustration Bubbles way back never
…
A lot of David’s reporting is good (and I like him), that’s why I post here. I hope David can repair that technical glitch.
…
Sharon Palmer was a criminal by David’s own description and Mark got caught on youtube turning in James Stewart.
…
If you are going to test milk, first you need to figure out what you are going to test if for.
…
The treatment raw milk advocate Aajonus got, by David was strange to say the least.
…
Homogenization is up to 14,000 psi now.
…
The pharmaceutical cartel absorbs $4 trillion a year in the US alone.
…
Using actor agents like at Sandy Hook Elementary.
…
Your raw milk summery was perfect.
ancient musical tunings, I can’t find much on you tube, do you have stuff maybe even your own that you’d care to share?
Raw milk myths and evidence by Nadine Ijaz pdf
http://www.bccdc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/00E8757C-99E4-4414-8C54-2C92BB776567/0/RevisedPresentationJuly8RawmilkmythsandevidenceNadineIjaz_PROTECTED.pdf
You lost me on that video. The indian in the video would probably do well on a very slow reservation in a mud hut…or tee pee. His language is slow, confusing and his understanding of modern food safety progress was mediated by way to much Peyote peace pipe. If he sat at the table….it would be a joke and you know it. No others would sit at the able! That is the problem arround here. Serious science and modern engagement is nearly a waste of time. Staring at stars and eating raw meat is not the way to any meaningful raw milk access or market change in America.
Clear concise intellegent conversation with real data and raw milk markets that show real growth and a real story of no sick people and a whole lot of happy healthy people is the theme of progress.
That is not the language I am referring too.
We know what these two gentlemen want. They, and the rest of their profession want what their colleagues got implemented up in British Columbia: Raw milk is defined as a health hazard. You are eligible for a $3,000,000 fine or 3 years in jail for “causing a health hazard.”
Here are the laws:
The following are prescribed as health hazards: (a) milk for human consumption that has not been pasteurized at a licensed dairy plant in accordance with the Milk Industry Act (Health Hazards Regulation (B.C. Reg. 216/2011), Section 2a)
A person must not willingly cause a health hazard, or act in a manner that the person knows, or ought to know, will cause a health hazard. (Public Health Act, Section 15)
A person who contravenes either of the following commits an offence: (a) section 15 [causes a health hazard]; (Public Health Act, Section 99(3a))
(1) In addition to a penalty imposed under section 107 [alternative penalties], a person who commits an offence listed in (c) section 99(3) is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $3,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 36 months, or to both. (Public Health Act, Section 108(1c)]” (from http://rawmilkconsumer.ca/how-raw-milk-is-criminalized-in-b-c)
People, wake up. This is your future.
…
Things we can agree to on a hand shake:
…
1. I will never drink it without boiling it first.
2. If I were to drink it, it would only be for the taste.
3. I will never give it to my children or anyone else.
4. I will never recommend it to anyone.
5. I am buying it for bathing.
6. I am buying it for cat-food.
7. I am buying it to reduce my carbon foot print.
8. I want to buy local.
9. I like driving out to the country every Saturday.
10. The farmers are so friendly.
11. My kids love the cows.
…
Things we can agree to in writing:
…
1. If I were to drink it, it would only be for the taste.
2. I am buying it to reduce my carbon foot print.
3. I want to buy local.
4. I like driving out to the country every Saturday.
5. The farmers are so friendly.
6. My kids love the cows.
…
Things we can never say or agree to if we want to buy raw milk:
…
1. That it could contain harmful pathogens.
2. That it could cause illness.
3. That it could cause HUS.
4. That it could cause death.
5. That it has health benefits.
6. That it cured or will cure illness.
…
Any other suggestions?
Here’s a post I did about Russell Means on my forum a few years ago. Maybe this will help clear up a few things. He had his share of trouble, no doubt about it. Because he was an out-of-the-box sort of guy. But he understood life. Much more than most people do today. Sad that he’s dismissed as a “slow Indian”. He was no such thing. I knew him because he was a good friend of a man I used to work for so I saw him often. The man I worked for is no weenie, either. And, believe it or not, he was Jewish and understood Means’ ideals and messages. A very unlikely pair – an Indian rebel and a State Senator.
http://thepolkadotapron.freeforums.org/post546.html#p546
One of the things Don Schaffner and Ben Chapman said to me, by way of explanation for the conflict over raw milk, is that public health professionals are taught as part of their training that raw milk is inherently dangerous, and that pasteurized milk is the only solution. It is difficult to un-do that kind of thinking when it has been drummed into you during your formative years.
Mark, it is important to think about the “process” you describe as a two-way street. We, including those regulators, PhD’s and researchers, have become distant from traditional food production. The main national policy goal over the last 50 years has been cheap food, not nutritious or sustainably produced food. Those who have been opposed to raw milk and those pushing for wider availability each have much to learn from the other….that’s how wide the chasm has become.
Of course dairy was raw then too. Interestingly, these people didn’t have any problem with “pathogens” finding their way into the milk. The real world raw milk drinkers I’ve interviewed don’t have a problem with this either. As pointed out by miguel, Aajonus and other evidence, these “pathogens’ typically already live in our bodies, and they proliferate when the person has a sick system, due to toxins such as pesticides, antibiotics, mineral deficiency causing acidic digestive tracts, lack of microbe diversity in the digestive tract, etc.
So as usual, the establishment makes people sick, then blames it on the wrong thing. I personally welcome “pathogens” in my milk, exposure to the microbes that live in our environment keeps our immune systems strong, and leads to robust diversity of microbiota. Wild animals don’t follow govt disinformation guidelines to hide from microbes. Everyone is touching and licking everyone, leading to strong immune systems and good health.
I do employ my own milk “testing” system though, it’s called sipping the milk first to see how it tastes. If milk or other food tasted rancid to me, I wouldn’t eat it. That’s never happened with the raw milk I drink though. I don’t use a refrigerator, so older milk turns sour and into curds and whey, still very edible, and yet more evidence that there is a real science to the Universe. Milk is quite an amazing technology, cultured “from the factory” to keep it edible. So I guess I’ll keep taking my chances with the approach of the Hunzas and Georgians… that lived into their hundreds in good health. As I’ve said before, it is truthful to say there is no risk to raw milk, because the risk is less than zero. In other words, if a large segment of the population were to begin drinking raw milk right now, there would be a huge DECREASE in disease among them, much less cancer, diabetes, ms, asthma, osteoporosis, arthritis, etc.
But of course, this is the real reason the establishment demonizes raw milk. Btw I feel sorry for random event theorists like Mark, where everything is an amazing coincidence, gee all the major “news” stations and papers all forget to tell the real news in the same way, lie in the same way, day after day, year after year… hey have they found those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet, that they used to start yet another war to tighten their grip on global oil? Not yet? Don’t worry Mark, they’ll turn up sooner or later, the govt would never lie. Why that would be conspiracy. Organized evil behind the scenes. Preposterous!
Raw Milk MIke, you obviously understand the truth about raw milk, so hang in there.
Speaking of that author that wrote Holy Shit, Managing Manure … , I wanted to build a simple cabin on my land using wood from a home they are demolishing nearby, but the county wouldn’t let me, had to be 750 sq ft minimum… plus they wouldn’t go for me using a simple composting toilet system, would force me to use septic (6 grand), where all the nutrients go into a vat in the ground instead of recycling back into the soil… so that house went into a landfill, and I’m renting in town at the moment, with the humaure getting flushed to who knows where.
Hey David , hope all is well.
Ora, I opened a youtube account under Tom M Culhane to make that corn harvest video for this forum last year, and then have used that account to post some music videos. The problem is, while I have recovered the ancient musical tunings, using simple math, I am not really a musician, so I have to learn how to play to get this out there. So check out my youtube account in like 3 months and I might have some nice music on there. I just got this free music program called Audacity, that lets you layer tracks very easily, so you can play a guitar piece, then sing, then sing an second voice, then put in some drumming… perfect for the one man band. (“it’s tough not having friends”, as a guy I knew used to say)
The videos I have posted there so far are borderline comedy because I can barely play, plus most of them I’m using a guitar I designed that plays 18 notes per octave, and would be hard even for a real musician to play… but I recently designed a six string fretless baritone guitar that I’m learning to play, and hope to get a keyboard soon… so like a say maybe 3 months from now look at that youtube channel.
And Mama, the Milk song is safe though it may not be your cup of tea pardon the pun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkorn_wheat
Another btw, Mama that post of mine you were offended by was not pigs, it was pygmies which are human. But speaking of pigs, another update:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwWScKG0d20&feature=youtu.be
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/02/05-2
My personal view is that in our overly regulated society, it is inevitable that if the sale of raw milk is to be legalized it will have to come under regulation. If we are forced to have regulations, my preference is that they should be tiered with more stringent regulations applying to the largest dairies, less stringent regulations to medium sized dairies, and little or no regulation of very small dairies. Where to draw the line on dairy size? Maybe over 100 cows – large, 11 to 100 – medium, and 10 or less – small. Any regulations should be designed to optimize milk safety at reasonable cost (easier said than done I realize). Any testing of raw milk should in all fairness be required at the same level for pasteurized milk (which has sickened many more people than raw milk). As a consumer, I would personally be quite happy with allowing direct sale of raw milk from farm to consumer at farmers markets or drop locations with little regulation. If people want regulated milk, they can buy it in grocery stores.
This is OT, but you may be interested in the Leatherstocking series, if you haven’t already read them as a child. I ordered one LARGE book (bigger than both of my medical dictionaries and assorted other surgical word books, etc.) with all five of James Fenimore Cooper’s major stories in one volume, but I did a search and couldn’t find the same book anywhere. This link is close, but you’ll get the idea. http://www.amazon.com/The-Leatherstocking-Tales-Library-America/dp/1598531549/ref=pd_sim_sbs_b_2
You can also order the books individually, of course. My favorite was The Pioneer, but The Deerslayer was good, too, and of course The Last of the Mohicans is a grand story by itself. I often wonder what these people would have had to say about pasteurized milk products. 🙂
You may also enjoy the book called Trails Plowed Under by Charles M. Russell. It is fantastic reading as well as it has several pen & ink drawings of some of his most famous works, which were later done in oil. Can’t say enough good things about the common sense of the good ol’ cowboys. http://www.amazon.com/Trails-Plowed-Under-Stories-West/dp/0803289618/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391891477&sr=1-1&keywords=trails+plowed+under+charlie+russell
So would anyone trying to bridge that gap go for half and half? As in, raw milk mixed with pasteurized in equal pooportions, not that the purist amongst us would ever go for that but scientifically and politically speaking could it be possible to have a product that is semi safe or semi dangerous? Just wondering
I agree though that if folks want regulated milk we can buy it at a supermarket.
– Don
You know what I want? I want people to stop telling me what I want when you have never spoken to me or discussed my thoughts on the issue under consideration.
– Don
http://reason.com/archives/2014/02/05/your-foods-reputation-vs-government-regu
When did we unravel about food rights and food safety? We still get together with several couples a few times a year and eat, slosh around some booze and have a great time. How long before THAT will be illegal? Can I invite my kids and their families for dinner without a food inspector? We used to have “triangle dinners” through our church (3 couples get together at someone’s home once a month, until all 3 have been the host). I don’t know that it’s been “outlawed” but our Pastor has discontinued them out of fear. This is just all getting way too nutzo.
Go to it their Mikie boy, go to it with all you’ve got!
Now, I’d like to make this very personal at this point………why?
Because I’m sitting here in southern New Jersey without legal access to Raw milk. That’s why………it’s personal!
Frankly rawmilkmike, YOU are not helping! YOU are hindering. YOU, are a f—–g moron!!!
After a nights sleep, I think that I need to apologize. The language spoken by the indian in your video…is not foreign and it is not slow or unwelcomed. I can certainly appreciate a language that is connected to the earth and grounded in acknowledgement of nature and its great powers. Please excuse me and forgive me. Just because this man has an appreciation for nature does not mean that his language is not part of the whole and perhaps a vision for a better future. Wisdom of the ages is tragically lost in todays world.
…
You then say: For many pathogens like _Salmonella_ and pathogenic _E. coli_ we believe that. What is that belief based on?
PSEUDOSCIENCE displays a remarkable and characteristic indifference to fact. Writers tend simply to make up bogus facts what Norman Mailer calls factoids where needed, instead of going to the trouble of consulting reliable reference works, much less investigating directly. Yet these fictitious facts are often central to the pseudoscientists argument and conclusions!
https://webspace.utexas.edu/cokerwr/www/index.html/distinguish.htm
This is epidemiology. This is how an illness and a bacteria are associated with raw milk or any food for that matter. This is the nonsense behind, what our government calls, food safety and their quest for the elusive pathogen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCK2mflwESM
Raw milk has always been a low risk food.
Raw milk myths and evidence by Nadine Ijaz pdf
http://www.bccdc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/00E8757C-99E4-4414-8C54-2C92BB776567/0/RevisedPresentationJuly8RawmilkmythsandevidenceNadineIjaz_PROTECTED.pdf
– A farmer is put in jail and tortured for 8 days: “NaturalNews can now report that 65-year-old senior citizen James Stewart, a raw milk farmer with no criminal history, was nearly tortured to death in the LA County jail this past week. He survived a ‘week of torturous Hell’ at the hands of LA County jail keepers who subjected him to starvation, sleep deprivation, hypothermia, loss of blood circulation to extremities, verbal intimidation, involuntary medical testing and even subjected him to over 30 hours of raw biological sewage filth containing dangerous pathogens.” (California)
– A farm-worker is abducted, held against his will, and threatened: “[He} was thrown into a van and forced to tell them where [the farmer] was at the time. Then they drove to that house, set up infrared cameras and listening devices, and stayed for half an hour. After this, the cousin was pushed out of the van and told not to tell anyone about the incident or ‘he would be sorry.’ …. Local farmers … had been asked if they would house surveillance teams. For a period of several months, vehicles were parked on the road close to the farm both day and night. Whenever farm personnel approached these cars, they took off. License plate numbers were recorded and passed on to the police who said they were unable to trace them.” (Ontario)
– “Raw Milk Moms” have been threatened with “criminal or administrative penalties”: “A few weeks after the initial outbreaks, [her] problems began. Investigators from the MDA, accompanied by local police, showed up at her home one morning, presented her husband with a criminal search warrant, and spent two hours going through the family’s refrigerator and questioning her about whether she was reselling milk, meat,and other food. She was “terrified, horrified, traumatized”by the home search, breaking down in tears in front of the seven investigators and police rummaging through her kitchen. ”
– A peaceful Amish farmer is threatened with 3 yrs in jail or $10,000 in fines (Wisconsin).
These are just a few examples – some of us know many more, personally.
———————
“From there, we moved on to the question of whether the feds really have it in for raw milk. They said, quite sincerely, that they didnt think so. As if food club members and farmers who have been hit by raids are all paranoid. ”
A timeline of some of these raids is at http://www.naturalnews.com/033280_FDA_raids_timeline.html .
Don, you and your loved ones have never been arrested, jailed, fined, threatened with loss of land and livelihood, or had your marriage break up because of the stress of ongoing harassment and threats, by government officials, because of raw milk. You haven’t had a child protection worker call on you because someone reported to them that you gave raw milk to your child. You are in the enviable position of being able to lecture about it from an ivory tower, secure in the fact that your job and life are under no threat what-so-ever. We are not in this position of safety, privilege, and power-over that you are in. Instead, we know systemic oppression, government-sponsored vilification, and legal threats first-hand. Can you blame anyone if emotions on our side “run high”? You are not violating a law and at risk up to 3 yrs in jail or a $3M fine for bringing your preferred beverage home in a cooler (“causing a Health Hazard”). I am, every week, thanks to you and your colleagues. Will I stop doing it? No, because the improvements in my children’s health due to raw milk are worth the risk, and as a mother I will do anything for my children. If you want our trust, if you want to dialogue, then how about talking about legalization and speak out publicly against the persecution, raids, and arrests if you disagree with them, because there is no middle ground.
What would help?
Do you have a lot of denialists in New Jersey?
Ken
You do realize we are fighting a $4 trillion a year industry. Could there be a bigger opponent?
The belief is based on research published in the peer reviewed literature. Here is a fairly comprehensive review: http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4666e/y4666e00.htm
Please listen to the previous podcast, and tell me where I said I wanted people to stop drinking raw milk.
“in conversation with Dr. Gumpert, there are no circumstances you would agree to which it would be legal”
Again, please tell me where I said this.
“and you have never spoken up in public against what is being done to raw milk supporters by your colleagues.”
Have you been present every time I’ve spoken about raw milk in public?
4.1 HUMAN STUDIES
4.1.1 Outbreak investigations
“When there is a common-source outbreak of foodborne or waterborne disease of sufficient magnitude, an EPIDEMIOLOGICAL investigation is generally undertaken to identify the cause of the problem, to limit its further spread, and to provide recommendations on how the problem can be prevented in the future.”
Limitations
“The primary limitation is that the purpose and focus of outbreak investigations is to identify the source of the infection in order to prevent additional cases, rather than to collect a wide range of information. The case definitions and methods of the investigation are chosen for efficiency, and often do not include data that would be most useful in a hazard characterization, and may vary widely among different investigations. The primary goal of the investigation is to quickly identify the specific source(s) of infection, rather than to precisely quantify the magnitude of that risk. Key information that would allow data collected in an investigation to be useful for risk assessments is therefore often missing or incomplete. Estimates of dose or exposure in outbreaks may be inaccurate…”
“In such instances, use of outbreak data to develop dose-response models generally requires assumptions concerning the missing information.”
I’m not an expert, but it looks like quite a bit of room for bias to intervene in outbreak investigations, which appear to be a significant component of quantitative microbial risk assessment.
Such sensibility! I’m ready to talk about making that a reality! Anyone else?
Although I think I would swap the words “less stringent” for “scaleable regulations” Quality standards should be the same across the board. However, how those standards are acheived should be adaptable based on the size and particular needs of each raw milk producer.
As the document says, dose response data can come from human studies, animal studies, in vitro studies and expert elicitation. Within human studies there are outbreak investigations, surveillance and annual health statistics, volunteer feeding studies, biomarkers and intervention studies. Each of these data sources has strengths and limitations.
Every thing we do as scientists is subject to bias. A lot of science is running the right controls to make sure we don’t fool ourselves into believing that something is “true” when it’s not. That’s why we have peer-review, and why one study seldom proves anything. It takes many studies over time before we are mostly sure of something.
Outbreak investigations are one source of data used to construct dose-response models. Dose-response models are one component of quantitative microbial risk assessment.
You know, come to think of it, commercializing air might not be such a bad idea really. It could be a big improvement over the current wild-west, everybody-breath-whatever-they-darn-well-please system. Think of the potential for advancement in health and well-being! What if we were, at long last, prevented from breathing air that doesn’t meet a legal quality standard? And the economic possibilities! Endless! New jobs and new money channels would spring up like mushrooms–production, storage, distribution, financing, research, regulation…
Sure, there will be doubters. Some people will develop a little cough or some shortness of breath, and suspect that the system is better at producing money than good air. The doubters will clamor loudly for new and better regulation. In the midst of the clamor new businesses will arise–organic air purveyors! These will be small businesses at first, and they won’t have an easy time of it, what with all the global-air business/government collusion. But the organic air market will surely grow, and its businesses with it, maybe enough that regulators are forced to allow organic airmen to sit at the big table and share ideas, or even help write new regulations, so organic air can be as financially viable as standard air.
Yes indeedy, now THAT will be progress!
The public health issue is a scare tactic for those seeking market control and has been for quite some time now. You said a mouthful!
Such an agenda however may be less hidden in Canada where we have a marriage of convenience between marketing boards (the only legally recognized buyer of raw milk) and the federal and provincial ministries of health where indeed the efforts of one serve the efforts of the other.
If the court of public opinion desires regulation and standards then that is what the public will get including all of its biased idiosyncrasies. Indeed if people want regulated milk, they can buy it in grocery stores. For the family and myself we have been and will continue to drink our raw milk untested and unregulated.
Ken
Could you elaborate on how scalable regulation could be used to achieve the same quality standards across the board? The two ideas appear to be mutually exclusive and I would think that if your regulation were scalable or variable that you would have a difficult time achieving the same quality standards across the board.
As I stated in agreement with Miguel, getting past this absurdity about “pathogens is critical if we wish to live constructive, healthy lives.
Ken
The government is already in the air business. Its called hot air.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xieof3_was-not-was-knocked-down-made-small-treated-like-a-rubber-ball_music
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4666e/y4666e00.htm
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4666e/y4666e06.htm#bm06.4
Risk assessment for microbiological hazards in foods is defined by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) as a scientifically based process consisting of four components (Figure 1): hazard identification, exposure assessment, hazard characterization, and risk characterization.
Hazard characterization provides a description of the adverse health effects that may result from ingestion of a microorganism. When data are available, the hazard characterization should present quantitative information in terms of a ( dose-response relationship ) and the probability of adverse outcomes.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4666e/y4666e09.htm#bm09.1.3
4. DATA COLLECTION AND EVALUATION
4.1 Human studies
4.1.3 Volunteer feeding studies
The most obvious means for acquiring information on ( dose-response relations ) for foodborne and waterborne pathogenic microorganisms is to expose humans to the disease agent under controlled conditions. There have been a limited number of pathogens for which feeding studies using volunteers have been carried out. Most have been in conjunction with vaccine trials.
Strengths
Using human volunteers is the most direct means of acquiring data that relates an exposure to a microbial hazard with an adverse response in human populations. If planned effectively, such studies can be conducted in conjunction with other clinical trials, such as the testing of vaccines. The results of the trials provide a direct means of observing the effects of the challenge dose on the integrated host defence response. The delivery matrix and the pathogen strain can be varied to evaluate food matrix and pathogen virulence effects.
Limitations
None that apply to raw milk.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4666e/y4666e0b.htm#bm11
6. DOSE-RESPONSE MODELLING
Concurrently with the descriptive analysis of clinical or ( epidemiological ) information or data, mathematical modelling has been advocated to provide assistance in developing a ( dose-response relationship ), in particular when extrapolation to low doses is necessary. Mathematical models have been used for several decades in the field of toxicology.
Every thing we do as scientists is subject to bias., That’s why we have peer-review, and why one study seldom proves anything. and we are mostly sure
…
peer-review is great between peers but what good is it to the consumer looking into alternative medicine? Anyone consuming 3 cups of raw milk per day for more than 6 months ( knows ) it’s safer and healthier than anything they’ve consumed before. So who is best equipped to decide what to feed their children? Who is the real expert when it comes to raw milk’s microbial risk assessment?
…
Raw milk has already been proven a low risk food.
Raw milk myths and evidence by Nadine Ijaz pdf
http://www.bccdc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/00E8757C-99E4-4414-8C54-2C92BB776567/0/RevisedPresentationJuly8RawmilkmythsandevidenceNadineIjaz_PROTECTED.pdf
If we are forced to have regulations, my preference is that they should be tiered with more stringent regulations applying to the largest dairies, less stringent regulations to medium sized dairies, and little or no regulation of very small dairies.
…
That sounds great but it assumes that regulations aren’t intended to put small and medium sized dairies out of business.
A Peer Reviewed Study is any study which has been reviewed by another member of the same profession. It can be likened to My friend, Jim, says my study is great! However, an independently verified study is any study which has been duplicated by an independent third party. This means that someone else did the same study using the same procedure outlined in the original study and achieved statistically similar results. Of course, they must also report differing results, and that can be a disadvantage, at which point *peer reviewed* loses its shine. 😉
The article at the link below deals with medicine rather than raw milk, but it holds peer review under the microscope. Looking for truth without bias is difficult these days no matter what subject you are discussing.
http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/is-90-of-the-peer-reviewed-clinical-research-for-modern-medicine-false/
Here’s an example. Lets say the standard we are trying to achieve is “Milking equipment should be kept clean and free of biofilm build up.” If I am milking 500 cows, my milking equipment probably consists of some kind of automatic pipeline system. The system is rather large, and requires an automated wash system using lots of water, specific cleaners, check points, etc. Every inch of the system cannot be cleaned by hand. The waste water used to clean the system will have to be properly managed, etc.
Contrast that with a farmer milking 5 cows. Her milking equipment may consist of a bucket milker. The system has 3 feet of milk line and can be thorougly washed by hand in a sink using abou 6 gallons of clean hot water, basic household cleansers and some vinegar to control milkstone buildup.
A farmer hand-milking one cow into a bucket has an even more simple task of equipment cleaning.
The final outcome is that the “stringent” standard of maintaining clean equipment is achieved for all three operations. The methods used to achieve those standards are adaptable to the scale and specific needs of the farm. This seems like common sense, but its not. Take a look at dairy regulations and they tend to be one-size-fits all…and that size is big.
If you do then, my point is,
You didnt give any examples of research published in the peer reviewed literature., you didn’t show that quantitative microbial risk assessment wasn’t completely based on epidemiology, and The term “minimum infectious dose” is not in line with modern quantitative microbial risk assessment thinking. only because they use the term dose-response relation
If you believe raw milk already contains certain pathogens and raw milk has already been proven to be a low risk food, then there is no reason not to do human testing and no reason not to determine the minimum infectious dose for most if not all of your so called pathogens. Like it says in your review epidemiological information or data, and mathematical modelling has only been advocated to provide assistance in developing a dose-response relationship, in particular when extrapolation to low doses is necessary.
Regulations are based on standards that are backed up by rules or directives made and maintained by an authority whose purpose is to achieve a consistent and required, or agreed level of quality.
I have no problem with educating farmers as to potential protocols for achieving certain reasonable common sense standards. If you choose however to introduce a nitpicking complex array of scalable or variable regulations in order to achieve such an objective then you are merely playing into the hands of the regulator and opening up Pandoras box.
As I stated above in my comment to Bryan, If the court of public opinion desires regulation and standards then that is what the public will get including all of its biased idiosyncrasies.
Ken
Are you asking if I have an opinion on whether raw milk is a “low risk” food?
I think that is the wrong question. It first requires a definition of the word “low”. It also depends if we are interested in risk of illness per serving, or population risk.
I’m much more interested in understanding what factors control risk of foodborne illness (from raw milk, or any food for that matter) and then how we can design systems to manage and reduce that risk.
If you chose to define “the only issue here, is whether or not our government is blocking access to healthy food”, then I’ll decline to continue the conversation. I’m a scientist, and you want to have a political discussion, and I’m not interested.
I do believe that some raw milk, may on occasion contain some level of some foodborne pathogens. Just as I believe that many foods may on occasion contain some level of some foodborne pathogens.
See my other comment on why I think “low risk” is not a question that interests me.
Published and generally accepted dose-response relationships already exist for most if not all foodborne pathogens linked to raw milk.
Don, I have linked to the podcast in the post above, the first time I make mention of it. Thanks for forwarding.
http://westcoastnativenews.com/the-toxic-cost-of-the-sochi-games/
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20131217/news/712179863/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-jails-environmentalist-igor-kharchenko-in-sochi-as-apparent-crackdown-on-activists-continues/
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Global/Issues/2013/12/02/Olympics/Sochi-pollution.aspx
50 years ago, Andy Warhol said ‘in the future, there will be no privacy’… and here we are. No doubt the govt. knows what’s going on at grassroots level, or else they’re fools. Or is that redundant? Im guessing that we have not seen RCMP jackboots stomping in to a farmyard of any of the cowshares here because BC Supreme Court Justice Wong gave “the authorities” what they wanted gaol-time for us Contemnors. That, plus, a dry judgment for $100,000 court costs!, was enough of a triumph for Prosecutrixie Susan Beach to sit back, do nothing and gloat at least until judges in a higher Court, decide whether Canadians have the right to use and enjoy our private property, in Michael Schmidts appeal, in Ontario.
In our hearing a year ago, I made the govt.’s expert witness admit that theres no evidence of anyone getting sick from drinking raw milk over the last 33 years*. That, plus the fact that one of the top guys in the BC Centre For Disease Control, is on our side, set the over-educated dunces back on their heels.
The post on this forum, about a pastor advising people to quit fellowshipping at home dinner parties, because hes worried about a health authority inspecting private premises, makes me retch. You wonder why this nation is in such deplorable condition? Theres your answer, in a nutshell. A chickenshit pulpit parrot, who derives his salary out of the public trough via the iniquitous income tax racket, lacks the simple courage to stand his ground on a winnable issue. Summarized as : occupy til I come. If he cant run with the footmen, how shall he do in the swelling of the Jordan? Meaning,; if the guy lacks the very minimum testicular wherewithal, now, hows he going to fare when the heat REALLY comes down?! And you can tell him I said so : I can be reached at 604 526 5064 for my stock sermon on Romans 13
Go read a bit of the history of the Republic educate yrself as to what men and women were made of in those days ; a far, far cry from the jamtarts in charge of congregations, today = compromisers simpering and toadying to the local ministerial association, beholden to the God-damned World Council of Churches. Oh, I could go on
* the one single case proffered by the authorities – ostensibly a child who got sick from raw milk from a goatshare, in 2001, in Chemainus BC – is debatable. That family had been at a petting zoo, days before the incident. Not one person in the 18 other families who drank the same milk, got ill.
to gaol – is hanging back, not lowering the boom on anyone.
This next statement makes you sound more like a politician than a scientist.
Published and generally accepted dose-response relationships already exist for most if not all foodborne pathogens linked to raw milk.
http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/is-90-of-the-peer-reviewed-clinical-research-for-modern-medicine-false/
http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/is-90-of-the-peer-reviewed-clinical-research-for-modern-medicine-false/
Nutrition is the most significant factor controlling the risk of foodborne illness.
Have you seen this link? Raw milk consumers know how many sardines are in the can because they opened it. They don’t need a 20 page report.
…
They call us these people and they are clearly after small producers. They almost seem to be admitting they want them out of business.
If you’re not here to defend your science, what is it you want to discussion?
It’s either I’ll decline to continue the conversation. this or I’m not interested. that.
…
You asked me: What factors do you think control the risk of foodborne illness from raw milk?
I responded: Don, your question, like your science, starts with a conclusion. I, like many others, happen to know raw milk prevents foodborne illness it doesn’t cause it.
Nutrition is the most significant factor controlling the risk of foodborne illness.
But you chose not to respond. Is that because you agree?
You also never said why a 58 year old man who has been drinking nearly a quart of raw milk per day for the last 8 years would need to read your 20 page report on what you believe the risks are for raw milk consumption when he already KNOWS the only risk is in not consuming raw milk. If you know the incidence of foodborne illness in America then you know it only takes a few months to see a pattern emerge.
…
peer-review is great between peers but what good is it to the consumer looking into alternative medicine? Anyone consuming 3 cups of raw milk per day for more than 6 months ( knows ) it’s safer and healthier than anything they’ve consumed before. So who is best equipped to decide what to feed their children? Who is the real expert when it comes to raw milk’s microbial risk assessment?
Based on 10 years of higher education and 25 years of being food microbiology professor, I’d say that the statement that “Nutrition is the most significant factor controlling the risk of foodborne illness.” lacks scientific support.
I’m glad you’ve got foodborne illness in America figured out.
This has been real fun, and I’ve learned a lot, but I have to go and do some science now.
I’ll be back, but not in the comments on “The Negotiating on Raw Milk Standards Has Begun”.
– Don
http://www.cornucopia.org/2013/07/thats-not-natural-or-organic-how-big-food-misleads/
http://www.cornucopia.org/2013/05/breeding-the-nutrition-out-of-our-food/
The government is showing its desparation….they want so badly to know the numbers of raw milk consumers but they can not reach far enough underground to figuer out how many of us drink raw milk.
Well, I am not tellin!!
Mark
And I’m not tellin’ either. 😉
…
Discussion:
consideration of a question in open and usually informal debate
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discussion
Sorry Deb, I’m an electrician. So I talk and think like an electrician. Can you give me an example of what it is you don’t like about my attempted conversation with Don?
The answer to your rhetorical question is $4 trillion a year and people like Don.
Someone who has grown up on raw milk only sees one side of the equation and can only speculate what there life would have been like without raw milk. People like myself KNOW the deference. We KNOW raw milk prevents the very illness Don believes it causes? Do you?
Don is not a nutritionist so he can’t play the expert card.
…
Saying the idea, lacks scientific support. is not a true response. A true response would be: Nutrition is not the most significant factor controlling the risk of foodborne illness because…
…
Then he says: I’m glad you’ve got foodborne illness in America figured out. The truth is it’s not all the hard to spot a vacuum cleaner salesman.
…
Doesn’t this just prove what a major waste of time it is trying to have a conversation with these people.
Since pasteurization is the preferred method to ensure milk safety among food safety regulators (and others), it seems to me that the only necessary response among raw milk producers and consumers is to demonstrate/ensure that raw milk can consistently be produced to similar standards. While one might have rather different ideas about just about anything related to milk, I’d think that a common goal should be to address this rather simple target, by developing safety procedures that could be adopted by all raw milk suppliers (and that should be whole-heartedly and voluntarily enforced by all).
In my mind these would encompass, as a minimum, 1) the best possible hygiene to minimize contamination by environmental bacteria during the harvesting, bottling and processing of milk (and milk products) and 2) the best possible animal testing/culling to remove animals from raw milk herds that would otherwise shed potentially unsafe (v/v humans) bacteria into their milk.
The unified message, ‘our milk is as safe as we can possibly make it’.
I would hope that this would be tenable even to those who do not believe that these bacteria are important or that the benefits of raw milk can overcome their potential for negative impact, because of an argument that they are then irrelevant anyway…….ie it could be a compromise philosophy of ‘I don’t think these procedures are necessary/important, but if this is necessary for wider acceptance, then so be it’.
A formal poll might be interesting in this regard though.
If something like this were to become a consistent message available to existing and new raw milk farmers, I think everyone might benefit. TCP could have a valuable educating role here, but only if the contributors could be seen to agree more than they appear to at the moment.
I really like your overall input and agree with most of it and appreciate your links to good info. However, before you give yourself a heart attack please consider backing off just a bit on “the tone” as it’s been pegged and also the sheer volume of your replies although I am not a moderator and will defer that function to David. Aggressive defensive responses tend to generate more of the same and usually escalate to the point it’s futile to belabor. Honey not vinegar keeps the bees alive.
Vacuum cleaner salesman, do they still exist other than on the internet?
Thanks, Ora. I agree.
Here we have procedures to avoid fecal and environmental contamination and verify animal health that can be achieved at any farm of any size that is producing raw milk.
I would also add that access to appropriate ongoing training and information is also important. One of the most helpful things (to me anyway) that public health could do when a raw-milk related outbreak occurs is to figure out how that pathogenic bacteria got into the milk. What were the conditions and processes, and what can other producers learn? This important information has been largely missing from outbreak investigations, which tend to just conclude “it was raw milk, thats why there way illness, end of story.”
What I may need is a parent to limit my time on the computer.
I do realize a good interrogator has much better results when he befriends the subject. The idea is to keep them talking and eventually they will convict themselves. Sounds great in theory but it may take a certain personality type.
The posts you see are seldom my first drafts. I sometimes delete entire paragraphs in order to reduce the vinegar content.
I do admit it may be good for David to kind of straddle the fence but is that what you really want from rawmilkmike?
Mike, I think what Ora and several others are saying is what you are saying–that you need to set limits set on your posting. Your positions on pathogens, illness, raw milk safety, and related topics have been frequently stated. You don’t need to continually re-state them. Thanks.
Mark, thanks for that link. I posted some comments following that article pointing out how the CDC varies its estimates of the number of raw milk drinkers to maximize the fear index. One point from my comments: In its estimate that raw milk is 150 times more dangerous than pasteurized milk, CDC estimated that raw milk consumption comprised 1 percent of the market. (http://www.cdc.gov/media/relea…, 2nd paragraph). In that study, it wanted a lower consumption amount to show more illnesses per serving. In its more recent Minnesota study, it estimated that 3 per cent of consumers drinking raw milk, since it wanted a larger total gross number of illnesses (estimated more than 20,000). http://www.foodsafetynews.com/files/2013/12/MDH-rawmilk-final.pdf
That is what happens when an organization forgets it is about science and becomes obsessed with politics and propaganda.
…
The best approach may be to keep a low profile and use the law against them when ever possible. It’s highly unlikely raw milk will ever be available to the general public. Unless you believe in the power of prayer.
All raw milk farmers and consumers should know pasteurization has nothing to do with milk safety.
The unified message, ‘our milk is as safe as we can possibly make it’.? Have you said that out loud yet?
Isn’t this the approach farmer are currently using?
…
Does anyone listen to consumers?
Doesn’t your approach assume that food safety regulations are not by their very nature intended to eliminate raw milk and put small farmers out of business? Aren’t all regulations inherently dangerous?
Don’t you mean even to those who KNOW that these bacteria are NOT important?
…
What makes you believe that these bacteria are important?
How long have you been a raw milk consumer?
Shawna, the kind of public-supported training you are talking about is Agriculture Extension–courses in the basics of farming on a local or state-wide basis. As far as I know, there haven’t been extension courses in any state covering the production of safe raw milk in decades, perhaps 100 years. That would complement what RAWMI is trying to do, be probably more basic, but it could reach more farmers more quickly than RAWMI is currently able to do.
The other part of what you are asking for–backtracking to pinpoint the cause of outbreaks–would similarly be very helpful to farmers. I’m not sure if this is part of extension, but it could happen as part of a partnership between extension and public health.
All this requires a huge paradigm shift, from regarding raw milk as inherently unsafe to treating it as another food.
If factors can control risk, then perhaps we are moving past the “inherently dangerous” paradigm, or at least questioning it. I appreciate that.
… there, no one showed up to speak up for REAL MILK. Instead, the resident snake-in-the-grass from this forum slithered-on in to a legislative hearing to tell her copyrighted tale of woe … all-expenses-paid by the dairy cartel, no doubt! Her song and dance, there, coming off 180 degrees at variance from the pretence of reasonable-ness she makes here, ie. ‘ she’d condone REAL MILK for human consumption if it were to be done right’. (Remainder, comprising personal attack, deleted.)
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2014/02/10/dont-let-generational-amnesia-lead-to-raw-milk-sales-mom-urges-legislators/article
“generational amnesia” is a great term (is that your own original saying or were you coached?) I’m pretty sure that’s what you and most other sheeples are suffering from. We have been drinking raw milk for THOUSANDS of years but now it’s dangerous? How soon we forget how soon is.
Look up the differences between allow, prevent, marginalize and criminalize. Look, I’m not trying to convince you or going to court to force you to drink coconut juice or raw milk. I’m a hands-off guy, why can’t you be? What’s in it for you? Please explain so we can understand and be convinced by your anti argument and maybe even switch camps.
“loving the cow will somehow magically prevent cow feces from getting into the milk
ah, did you ever kill and process a chicken, a pig, or beef? there’s shit inside, and outside. How did we ever survive? It’s hard enough dealing with those plastic wrap styro foam packages with the chemical pads in them to last longer.
.
“McGonigle-Martin was brought to Iowa by public-health groups and commercial dairy interests.”
How noble of you to do it out-of-pocket and strictly due to your strong beliefs in doing the right thing..
Pardon the rant and tone, but there’s other things going on that influence the perspective such as my keyboard acting up.
OK back to my cave… where did I put my jaccuzi?
Understanding the factors that lead to food born illness, or all illness for that matter, is important. Unfortunately it will not be possible to acquire a comprehensive understanding of such illnesses by focusing our attention on pathogens alone, while virtually ignoring and failing to address all the other factors that contribute to those illnesses. This leads to my question for Mr. John. What happens when the best you can do is not good enough? Because that is, where we are heading if we continue to focus solely on perceived harmful microbes and fail to address the root of the problem, namely the relentless drug and chemical assault and adulteration of food, water, soil bacteria, gut bacteria, and the immune systems of all mammals and pollinating insects etc.
The pathogens that you and others keep harping on are merely responding and trying to clean up this toxic mess. Its what they are hardwired to do, they are not about to stop, and they will continue to adapt at our expense.
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein
I sense a growing frustration on this blog with all the repetition. Unfortunately this is what happens when dealing with entrenched, contradictory core beliefs.
I am trying to approach this issue from a natural, all-inclusive perspective rather then from an unnatural, narrow focus on segregation and manipulation of specific microbes. My persistent response is prompted by your persistent focus.
Many including myself have voiced the need for education in order inform the public, however education based on whose knowledge? The process of acquired knowledge is clearly relative. Who on this blog can claim that their knowledge is sufficiently developed and accurate enough to use it as a benchmark for truth and therefore impose it on others and sue the pants off of farmers?
Ken
Thankyou for replying. Since I think Shawna and I are close to being on the same page, I’ll reply just to Ken.
I think you are suggesting 2 forms of the current human condition. I’ll call these ‘modern mainstream’ and ‘natural’. The way I see it, a conversion to raw milk is a tiny bridge between these, in that it permits passage of microbes from perhaps a more ‘natural’ condition into the mainsteam (where these microbes are normally absent). And yes, understanding and containing these bugs likely is the best anyone can hope to do. All bugs aside, however, I think all I argued for was impeccable on-farm hygiene and disease-free cows.
The cornerstone of this blog is ‘choice’. I suspect that only when the mainstream chooses a more natural way will your ideal be approachable.
Also. I’m not certain I agree with you. Despite the error of our ways, ‘mainstream’ lives in NA can be very long and healthy (and these lives continue to lengthen, largely since the control of most infectious disease…..lifestyle issues are now the bigger problem, I think). Historic (more natural) lifespans were often quite short, often ending because of simple infections. Modern agriculture has been around for at least 6 decades and productivity continues to increase (so we are doing something right, I think). It’s not perfect, but all these hard-working farm families are likely doing their best (for the rest).
The pathogens that I keep ‘harping on about’ just happen to find some of their best living conditions on and around cows (especially milk-fed calves actually)…..but, most humans work for them too, and sometimes the pathogen’s toxic messes can be a problem in human bodies.
John
The bad news is they are adding an anti-biotic instead.
http://www.drugs.com/cdi/natamycin.html
http://thecelebritycafe.com/feature/2014/02/kraft-remove-artificial-preservatives-individual-cheese-slices
People this ain’t right!!
A look at modern health will also show that lives are not healthier but to the contrary much sicker. Quality is life matters. Stanford did a study some years ago that said, life expectancy was about 77-78 years, but quality of life span was only about 47 years. That means that most people live very expensive and not so happy 30 years with the support of medicines, surgeries and etc. Not a good thing. Not a good thing for our country and the expense of this low quality of life.
During the first World War. It was discovered that people in the Balkans lived to be very old with very good health. The area was called the Centuriun Area…because of all the 100 year olds. The work done by Dr. Price found the same nutrition based long lived lives all over the world.
I do agree that losses to birth and infection shortened lives….that is no question.
What we fail to appreciate is this. If we were to join the wisdom of nutrition and strong immune systems with modern miracles of medicine into a complimentary alliance and stopped allianating both from each other: health care would be cheaper, disease would be prevented, quality of life would dramatically improve, our brains would function better, autism rates would drop, farms would be saved ( they would be a high priority !!! ) teenage boy shootings would drop etc….nutrition is the missing part of America.
Food is the basis of prevention and solid health…not how frequently you go the doctor!!
There is a serious problem. The legislature is seduced by sexy lobbyist short skirts and payola and the medical rules follow the money. The people of our great land suffer as a result.
A much grander plan for the future must emerge. One where peoples health matters and whole unprocessed gut friendly immune system supporting food is at the basis of this vision.
There were many factors that decreased the mortality rate and yes improved hygiene indeed played a substantial role.
In the early part of the Industrial Revolution living conditions in factory cities were crowded and dirty. Homes were unheated, and poorly constructed with many people living in basement apartments with dirt floors that were often wet and muddy. Food supplies were unreliable, impure, and limited to such a degree that nutrition was an ongoing problem. Some of the treatments used in medicine were barbaric to say the least and no doubt attributed to many deaths. Antimony compounds were frequently used in the 19th century according to the preparations mentioned in the 11th United States Dispensatory of 1858 and the respected Remingtons Practice of Pharmacy (1885). http://academic.depauw.edu/hanson_web/Hutchings/HutchingsAntimony.pdf
Antimony became popular as a medicine in the 1700s, especially as a laxative, able to blast through the most compacted bowels. It was so good the chronically constipated would root through their excrement to retrieve the pill and reuse it later. Some lucky families passed down antimony laxatives from generation to generation. http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/elements/features/2010/blogging_the_periodic_table/antimonyit_might_have_killed_mozart.html
By the early 1900s, a wide range of improvements began to drive the mortality rate down. Central heating meant that people especially infants were no longer exposed to icy drafts for hours. Clean drinking water eliminated a common path of infection. More and a greater variety of food meant improved nutrition. Sewers were being installed in the cities and refrigeration was becoming more widely available.
Considering living conditions at the time and the widespread changes that were occurring, milk pasteurization and vaccinations were given much more publicity then they deserved in my opinion.
The effect of cleanliness and balanced living on mortality rates throughout the course of history has had its ups and downs.
http://www.sphtc.org/timeline/timeline.html
Hippocrates (460 BC-380 BC) the founder of Western medicine states, Whoever wishes to investigate medicine properly, should proceed thus: in the first place to consider the seasons of the year, and what effects each of them produces. We must also consider the qualities of the waters and the mode in which the inhabitants live, and what are their pursuits, whether they are fond of drinking and eating to excess, and given to indolence, or are fond of exercise and labor, and not given to excess in eating and drinking.
Greeks engaged in community sanitation. Romans improved upon it by building aqueducts to protect water supplies and sewer systems to improve overall hygiene.
With the fall of the Roman Empire and Roman ideology the value of cleanliness and fresh drinking water were again to be ignored. The Black plague also known as the bubonic plague reappeared in Europe in 1348 after nearly a 1000 year absence.
Welcome to my brief biased understanding of the history of disease.
Ken
Par for the course.
Bankrupt nutrition.
And this supposed to be an improvement!!!
What a bunch of shitheads.
With respect to raw milk movement the article states, As can be expected, this informal sector is treated with disdain by the elites, who call it unhygienic or of poor quality. Bankers and large-scale processors call the system inefficient. The truth is that this unorganized sector has been successful in getting large quantities of healthful dairy products to market as long as they are not undercut by dumped surplus milk from elsewhere or persecuted by unfair regulations.
Unfortunately, the movement for peoples milk runs head first into the ambitions of corporations that seek to control the global dairy industry. With dairy markets in the northern hemisphere already saturatedeven decliningBig Dairy is targeting for its growth the very markets served by peoples milk. As these dairy corporations invade the developing world, they are flanked by a number of other companies and wealthy elites who, together, are trying to reorganize the entire supply chain, from farms to markets.
Fortunately, the influx of industrial milk has met popular resistance. In Colombia in 2006, a government decree prohibiting the consumption, sale and transport of unpasteurized milk triggered huge protests across the country, forcing the government to postpone adoption of the regulation. Popular opposition did not die down and two years later, with over fifteen thousand people marching in the streets of Bogota, the government was yet again forced to push things back another two years. The people also mobilized to protest trade agreements that would have left the peoples milk sector vulnerable to imports of cheap powdered milk. Finally, in 2011, Decree 1880 was passed, which recognizes leche popular as both legal and essential. The battles are not over, but the dairy sector is now at the heart of the popular resistance to these deals.
Ken
http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/news_wp/?p=14251
We might have lost the battle but we could still win the war.
BUT – – I was shocked to find this article at Grains.org web site yesterday. Here’s Grain.org’s mission statement: “GRAIN is a small international non-profit organisation that works to support small farmers and social movements in their struggles for community-controlled and biodiversity-based food systems.”
Does this article really sound like it supports small farmers or community based food systems?? This is all about money and nothing more.
http://www.grain.org/bulletin_board/entries/4883-india-s-new-milky-way
It doesn’t sound to me as though they understand UHT either. They seem to think it’s simply the “packing” (or packaging?). They don’t seem to equate it with “processing the milk at very high degree temperatures”. They also don’t seem to have been educated on the idea that heating milk (especially to ultra high temperatures) is harmful to the milk itself, not to mention what it does to the people who are drinking it “for their health”. Good grief. What are they thinking by printing this??
That article (at the above link) sounds specifically egregious when compared with this article at their site just a few days prior: http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4873-defending-people-s-milk-in-india
Well, Chick-fil-a announced it will transition to antibiotic-free chicken over the next five years. These places are desperately seeking some kind of marketplace differentiation in a marketplace that is moving in the opposite direction of factory/fast food.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/chick-fil-a-to-serve-antibiotic-free-chicken-244919051.html
I agree that modern agriculture has increased productivity ,but according to USDA research on mineral content of food ,the result of increased productivity has been a very significant decline in nutrients in the food. This is the reason many of us are seeking out nutrient dense food. For farmers who sell food by the lb. all of the incentive has been to produce more lbs/acre which they have done. For consumers ,however, it makes much more sense to buy and eat smaller amounts of more nutrient dense food.
Those microbes that you call “pathogens” are toxic waste cleanup specialists. They thrive in environments that are so toxic that the microbes which are the usual janitors in our bodies can not function. The toxins are not created by the microbes they are in the food because they contaminate the soil the food is grown in or because they contaminate the food as a result of processing the food. Some microbes which are involved in the first stages of decontamination do break the original toxin down into smaller but still toxic pieces. You could say that these microbes are producing toxins but they are performing a necessary task in the chain of decomposition and elimination of toxic substances.
http://www.realmilk.com/commentary/great-milk-robbery/
But, I believe there is a good example of a bacterium that is a pathogen and doesn’t fit well with your ideas above. E coli 0157 produces a rather specific toxin, the Shiga toxin. Cows are a suitable host for many E coli species, but a somewhat marginal host for 0157 because the pH of the cow’s GI tract is a bit high for them. Cows aren’t susceptible to the Shiga toxin (so for them, it is not particularly toxic and E coli 0157 is not considered a pathogen for cows). The normal acid digestion in the stomach of humans, however, suits the growth conditions required by 0157 and sometimes if ingested it can proliferate rapidly (no dietary toxins involved, just a lower, more optimum pH environment plus substrates from the digesta). Humans are quite sensitive to the Shiga toxin, occasionally with disastrous outcomes (renal damage etc). Now, 0157 is most definitely a human pathogen.
Since this organism is one of the keys to the human safety debate v/v unpasteurized milk, I think it’s potential for pathogenicity in humans should not be discounted.
On a lighter note. Given the tendency for many North Americans to overeat, having nutient-diluted food might actually be a good thing. I hate to imagine the outcome if there was a wholesale substitution of whole Jersey milk (5+% fat) for partly skimmed (1% or 2%) milk in the NA diet.
But seriously, what you eat should still be about personal choice, yes ( because I do like to indulge myself with a small packet of cheese puffs and a pasteurized Coors Light on occasion)? You just have to warn your liver……….. 🙂
Yeah, I guess you could say you don’t understand nutrition!
How do you explain that according to the Human microbiome project so called pathogens including ecoli o157:H7 are a common part of many human’s microbiomes without causing any symptoms of disease?
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v486/n7402/full/nature11234.html
Where exactly in that nature article did you find a reference to E. coli O157:H7? I couldn’t find it.
(Sorry folks to interrupt the “debate” here on whether it’s ok to eat natural foods and if the government and media cartel are trustworthy. )
“the tendency for many North Americans to overeat, having nutient-diluted food might actually be a good thing. I hate to imagine the outcome if there was a wholesale substitution of whole Jersey milk (5+% fat) for partly skimmed (1% or 2%) milk in the NA diet,”
and your credibility suffers. Coors light? Go for the full mother-nature yeasty version beer, and out-of-the-cow fat milk it’s way much healthier than the 2% versions are not real beer same as milk.
The reality is that people would eat way less and NOT be fat because there’s real nutrition in that food so they don’t need as much. And then there’s idle idol TV pushing it advertising etc.
#1 – People overeat because the formulation of modern foods is intended to make you crave more even when you’re full. HFCS, artificial sweeteners, (sposedly lo-fat foods) Look it up.
#2 – Obesity was historically never a problem in previous generations when people actually ate and drank the real thing instead of “cheese puffs,” or any “light” beverage, nor did they have liver problems.
#3 – Most important of all, is that it is indeed about personal choice as long as you educate yourself and know the personal consequences lest you go blaming someone else. You want to be fat and sick? Your choice.
Repeat after me: Pathogens are good, bacteria is good, perfect dead clean is not. Got it?
Touché!
“Nutrient diluted” “food” has resulted in an epidemic of malnutrition which in turn encourages North Americans to consume even more of their highly addictive processed crap.
Here again we have them blaming nutrient dense living foods for what ails society in subconscious or conscious attempt to detract attention from the true cause of obesity and disease; namely their unnatural toxic meddling with food and microbes alike.
Ken
Mr John, do you eat a diet of nutrient-dense foods? I do. The fact is that when you eat them, you eat far less, because your brain signals “satiety” sooner. Your body does not need to eat lots of nutrient-deficient, empty-carbohydrate-filled foods in order to obtain what you need in the way of proteins, vitamins, minerals, fats, etc. We see the results of eating too much sugar and starch): an obesity, heart disease, and diabetes epidemic. Yes, the body needs some carbohydrates, but not as many as in the Standard American Diet (SAD). I do not restrict healthy fats; I eat pastured meats, dairy, and eggs; I avoid processed foods, grains, sugars, and pasteurized dairy, etc. — and at an age that’s closer to 100 than 0, my doctor says that my blood sugar, cholesterol, blood pressure, weight, cardiovascular health, etc. are “outstanding.”
Nutrient-deficient food causes people to over-eat, because the food does not provide what they need and their bodies try to fill them with more of it to get the same nutrition. Nutrient-deficient foods lead to larger “inputs” of energy, land, and chemicals (and hence pollution) to produce the same amount of nutrition as a nutrient-dense product. I think that this is an issue worth looking at, as a possible solution to our obesity epidemic..
…
What I did say was “They almost seem to be admitting they want them out of business.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMDcfL6XnJk&feature=youtu.be
(see my 3 month disclaimer above)
I play chords and notes here in all the 12 ancient keys of music. This has all been lost with “modern tuning”, where all the keys have the same sound and are blurry. It’s similar to how people today don’t know what curds and whey are, since raw milk has been written out of the story for most people who rely on book learning.
So there it is, the biggest musical discovery in “recorded history” (although it is part of unrecorded history I am sure). ok, back to the debate on if it’s ok to eat real food…