James Stewart, manager of Rawsome Foods in Los Angeles’ Venice district, has been having a nightmare–“that they’ll come and bulldoze this property.”
“This property” consists of one forty-foot and two twenty-foot shipping containers that have been refurbished into a funky food distribution center used by the 1,500 members of Rawesome, which is a private food club.
He’s been studying the August 18 “Substandard Order” received from the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety, and for the life of him, can’t figure out what the exact appeal process is, or the date by which he needs to file an appeal. Nor can he get a straight answer from the department.
“Today could be the day–we could be shut even though we’ve done nothing wrong,” and even though there hadn’t been a peep from any city agency in the two years that the structures have been on the vacant lot. Stewart says he was led to believe that, because the containers are temporary, they aren’t subject to the same building regulations as a permanent structure.
In the meantime, Rawesome has continued to serve its members, opening yesterday as scheduled.
Now, Stewart appreciates that the “Substandard Order” isn’t about building codes or safety, It’s about politics, and The State made a strong political statement with its guns-drawn raids June 30 (on Rawesome and nearby Rawesome herdshare farmer Sharon Palmer) that included practically a batallion of food and health regulatory agencies at the city, state, and federal levels. “I’m under full attack,” he told me.
In addition, he’s been trying to provide advice to Morningland Dairy (discussed in my previous post), which has been forced into a recall of all its cheese for supposed listeria–but really being penalized for supplying Rawesome. Stewart and others point out that the agents who confiscated the cheese placed it into coolers without ice, and then nearly two months later came out with a finding of listeria. The cheese seems not to have been refrigerated after leaving the Rawesome premises, and who knows how it was kept in the intervening weeks.
But, of course, all that is beside the point. The point is that what’s going on here is, as I said in my comment following my previous post, amounts to a political gangbang. It was launched with a Los Angeles public health closure order. Followed up by the harassment recall of Morningland Dairy, a supplier to Rawesome. Followed up by the Los Angeles Building and Safety “Substandard Order”.
You’ll notice that in all this harassment, there’s nothing that has anything to do with the substance of the real issue here: Can consumers and farmers arrange private contracts covering food? There’s a reason The State doesn’t want to deal with that issue: Private contracts are a bedrock of everyday commerce in the U.S., so judges are likely to support such arrangements. The State doesn’t like to lose. ?
No, what would be much preferable would be for the State control freaks to bulldoze Rawesome as a form of “collective punishment.” It’s been a common tactic of the Israelis against the Palestinians–you inflict a harsh penalty on a few people, and hope everyone else gets the message. In the Middle East, the Palestinians have continually fought back against this tactic with whatever weapons they could muster. Would Americans do likewise?
There’s some interesting debate about conspiracy theories following my previous post. It’s easy to see conspiracies galore in what’s happening with Rawesome. I guess the question that comes to mind is this: Is James Stewart being paranoid when they really are coming after him?
That is obviously part of the government's strategy here: make an example out of Rawsome and others.
But I don't think anyone needs to get paranoid, this effort on their part will go down in flames the same way prohibition did.
No, probably faster because they don't have the budget to keep this up on a large scale. Fly under the radar, or walk, even. Just don't let them make you scared enough to give up – that's what they're hoping will happen.
The people can be pushed to a point, but food sovereignty and bodily self-ownership are rights the public perceive that they have – no matter whether our laws actually spell that out or not.
As a consumer, and particularly as a nutrient-dense conscious food shopper, I am deeply concerned with the trend of the various government departments and agencies to preempt our options to purchase and consume foods of our choice. It is not so much the legislation passed, but the power of regulation resulting from so many laws enacted at all levels. All laws are subject to interpretation, political agendas, and abuse. Otherwise we would have little need for courts. In the spirit of Glenn Becks Restoring Honor campaign, the emphasis on truth and character is amazingly lacking in so many aspects of our lives, and nowhere more so than within the halls of government. Yes, there are some entrepreneurial producers who may lack some character in this sense, and certainly many large corporations have objectives obscured by undesirable motives, but not nearly to the extent that the practices, motives and actions of government have adversely affected our lives. There are indeed two sides to the issue to all of our food policies and regulatory endeavors, and they seem to boil down to this dichotomy- (1) sterilization of our food supply is the answer to food born illnesses and much of chronic human disease, and (2) the challenge of developing the safest delivery system practicable of nutrient dense, natural, locally produced food.
Government espouses several views that are just wrong- or unconstitutional or against Natural Law that is the foundation of our republic, for instance:.
that raw milk is inherently dangerous.
That there is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food.
That there is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds.
That an FDA policy does not require labeling of genetically engineered foods.
That there is no fundamental right to freedom of contract.
that an individual may not transport certain food purchase across state lines.
I dont see how we are going to change the current situation through debates about enzymes, pathogens vs. toxins or through resistance to strong-arm government agencies supported and influenced by Big Pharma-Med-Agriculture-(fill in the blank). Not that such efforts should be abandoned, but unelected regulators are the product of misquided legislation passed by elected Congesspersons and state assembles and senates. We have choices coming up this fall- lets put our feet to work and support candidates who respect our constitution, believe in limited government and, as Beck says, will help Restore Honor.
I am a resident of Connecticut, one of the ten states where the retail sale of raw milk is legal. In spite of an unfortunate incident a few years ago where raw milk was the source of a serious illness outbreak, a legislative committee listened and responded to citizens who attended a hearing and decided not to pursue much more stringent restraints on our handful of small dairies. It shows that government and industry can work together for the best interest of safety, nutrition, and individual liberty. Thank you Connecticut.
Dan
Chemtrails or contrails interesting theory or another nightmare???
Which ever it is one wonders what affect it may have on raw milk as the cows graze in pastures that have this stuff contaminating the soil.
This is a video clip that has been arround for a while. The scientists presented are a classic brain washed group. They will believe anything that they are told as long as it was conspiracy.
The pictures they use are of commercial airlines.
Trust me on this….commercial airlines would not ever and can not ever afford to do any spraying. They can not afford the spray systems, they can not afford the weight.
What may be described in some scientific research literature as a potential weather chnage technology has been morphed into a conspiracy theory. Aircraft making a contrail is an aircraft in a massive government program.
Our government is bankrupt and so are most airlines. The aircrews and FAA line workers at airports would be reporting information about this….no one is….
That is because it is not happening…
When the video speaks of finding aluminum in a glass jar left outside catching the fallout from Chem-trail spraying…this is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard.
Anything sprayed at 40,000 feet does not fall straight down. It blows in the airstream for a thousand miles and most certainly does not land in a glass jar right under the aircraft.
Mark
What Aajonus and James are doing in LA is leading edge activism and I support it 100%. But it is not a way forward politically. In fact it is a dead end street.
Big dairy, the FDA, CDFA and the public all believe that pathogens kill people. This is a concept that is not going away any time soon.
Aajonus recommends eating foods ladened with pathogens, while I agree that consumption of pathogens ( by a healthy person ) will probably confer immunity from those pathogens, it will not confer any political points in the mainstream medical profession, the liability arena or the legislative efforts. Big Dairy will use this food pathogen issue as fodder for beating up any raw milk and the labels that will be associated with pathogen filled foods. If you support pathogen filled foods you will be labeled as " baby killers".
In fact, this pro-pathogen position makes Rawesome appear to be " Out to a Road Kill Lunch". In order to make progress, we must all look and be beyond reproach and far cleaner and pathogen free than the CAFO highly processed junk being sold to Americans.
Mark
I sure do hope RAWSOME gets a lot of publicity, strong consumer and legislator support, and powerful legal counsel.
Miguel I liked your analogy too – best description of the situation thus far. When you define the problem accurately, it points to the solution. The herd could get organized, but they'll need to know what to do about those cattle prods.
Miguel wrote, in part:
"…I am sure there are people who are organized and have well thought out plans ,based on many generations of experience,to manage other people for profit. Do they see their role as evil? Or do they see their roll as essential to the welfare of all people?Does it matter what they think? From my point of view or the cow's point of view,when someone tries to run my life for their personal profit it's a conspiracy.
Is it human nature to be greedy?I think it is human nature to love your children and love and care for other members of your community.You have to be taught to be greedy.That is how we are controlled by those who want to profit by managing us. "
-Blair
What would people be like if they were all born at home,educated by daily life,doing things like growing food, building shelter,making their own music all uninfluenced by peer pressure and media.I think they would be very intelligent,strong,talented and self confident and highly respected and valued by other members of their community.In a word ,DANGEROUS to those who want to profit from their energy.An independent cow that won't stay within the fences,hides her calf,and resists when we try to milk her has a short life on a dairy farm.In our society,independent people meet the same fate for the same reasons.The manager of the herd knows that these individuals will make trouble for them whether they are cows or people.They set a bad example for the rest of the herd.
This fun to watch every now and then,We should be so fearless when it comes to protecting our children.
Some many life lessons come to mind…..
1. Hang together or get eaten one by one.
2. Groups are stronger as they get bigger regardless of the talent of the opposing forces or their historical preimminent position in the food change.
3. Mother lions can only be beaten if they are taken out one by one.
Do not mess with a Pissed off Bull Waterbuffalo. Mammals beat Alligators.
Mark
I enjoyed your comment and its insights. There's almost a positive (or at least problem solving) tone to it, which is refreshing on this blog. Regarding this…
" (2) the challenge of developing the safest delivery system practicable of nutrient dense, natural, locally produced food."
I'm curious if you have any knowledge of what might have gone wrong in the CT incident "where raw milk was the source of a serious illness outbreak." The state report clearly implicates the dairy, but doesn't include any details about practices (or lack thereof) that might have contributed to a contamination event. The regulatory standards were met according to the report, but that doesn't necessarily mean something was missed.
Thanks.
MW
"say that for years they tried to sound the alarm to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302455.html
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100903/BUSINESS01/9030360/-1/cyclone_insider/Egg-recall-Buyers-consider-own-rules-on-safety
The producers, the buyers, and the govt ignored many things for a long time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/health/policy/04salmon.html
More Frankinphood….
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gEaZonqV2R7YILYXQTNfjjuEuKkgD9I0PG400
"look at tougher regulations" Perhaps they SHOULD LOOK at how the food is processed/produced etc?
http://twincities.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2010/08/30/daily44.html
They must like being in the news….
Why would anyone think that MORE regulation will fix anything?
I also enjoyed your comments. You are correct that Connecticut consumers and politicians organized themselves to isolate the state's agriculture bureaucrats, who wanted to use the only illnesses from raw milk in recent memory to eliminate retail sales. Unfortunately, Connecticut is one of the few such success stories over the last couple years. The regulators have learned from the Connecticut upset and aligned themselves with industry in places like Wisconsin and Massachusetts to stymie consumer will.
I disagree that discussions and arguments about the nutritional benefits of nutrient-dense foods, and about pathogens, are a distraction. I believe there's an important education task that must be accomplished so increasing numbers of consumers appreciate that much of what they are being told by the regulators and public health professionals is itself tainted and amounts to fear mongering.
David
"An estimated 87 million cases of food-borne illness occur in the United States each year, including 371,000 hospitalizations and 5,700 deaths, according to an Associated Press calculation that uses a CDC formula and recent population estimates."
"But experts believe the bulk of food poisonings are unreported illnesses from food prepared at home. "
And what is the percentage of people who actually cook real food at home? That do not eat anything from outside the home? The recent egg, meat & spinach contamination reached far and wide; caused by producers/processors, and lets not leave out to stores/shippers who mishandle foods in route. It sounds like the egg producers should have been shut down years ago, yet the "regulators" were asleep on the job. Were they paid under the table? Crating hens and feeding un-natural feed to them only opens the door for contamination. Millions have eaten partially cooks eggs for years with no bad effects. Now suddenly there is a vast number ill and the huge number of recalled eggs were temporarily removed from the market (they'll be resold for use in processed phoods) this story along with many others implies blaming people for not fully cooking the food. They totally ignore the producers/processors/stores, etc.
When I am in my office for lunch, I cringe when I see my coworkers eating the frozen dinners. They really believe they are eating healthy. Low cal, low carbs, HFCS, fake sweeteners…. When I read the ingredients I shudder. I'm not a chemist and would need to research many of the words. No one can tell me the content of nutrients in what they are consuming, only the cal,carbs,fats,sugar. Those are not nutrients.
Education is a major key for people to wake up and have an educated say in what they consume and what is going on with our govt. Education is also key for people to stand up to those who oppress them. In this fast paced world, people don't want long drawn out answers (some do want detailed answers),factual bullet statements, short and to the point. Elaborate when needed or asked. Keep it simple.
I don't know if a tendency to self interest must be taught, but it is plainly true that human history is essentially a story of near perpetual manipulation of population groups to singular benefit. The few moments of relative human brotherhood popping up here and there in history stand only as exceptions to prove the rule. The many ifs invariably sprinkled through discussions of utopian idealism is evidence enough of our own doubts of their validity. (This gets to, by the way, the essential nugget of Christian and Jewish truth. If we are to be honest we must admit that we are not able to reach personal perfection, not able to build our own ladder to heaven, and thus require a savior.)
Now any of you who have been reading my words here for any time will have noticed that I prefer and support life and community in decentralized form. Very decentralized form in fact. In that way perhaps I am as much the Utopian as anyone. But the thing is that decentralization to me is not so much a tool to improve our hearts as our behavior. I don't expect inter-neighbor dependence to make us perfect, but rather to encourage the notion that one-hand-washing-the-other is both necessary and pleasant. Also, and not incidentally, decentralization limits each man's power to act on self interest—it prevents as much as possible one man from gaining the power of an agency, or corporation, or army, or government. That is where I find the value in our Constitution, for it codifies the rights of individuals as supreme over groups. The Constitution is essentially designed to protect a decentralized society (its dreadful misuse by self-interest notwithstanding).
________________________________________________
As a side note, I am continually taken aback by the endless labeling of people into thought-groups. I had no idea, for example, that I might be working toward establishing a US Libertarianism, as opposed to egalitarian libertarianism, or for that matter, any group ism. I thought, quite to the contrary, that I was espousing an ideal of non-groupism.
My guess is that most everyone is like me in that regard. We simply want the freedom to go about our lives untethered by petty or powerful rules and rulers, and are happy to live within the boundaries of fairness, to be supportive of the Golden Rule, and to expect that when swinging our fists our freedom ends where another's nose begins. To find oneself suddenly aligned with this or that group is curious indeed!
________________________________________________
And one more aside… Why would a big farming state like, say, Kansas, allow raw milk sales from un-licensed and un-inspected farms directly to consumers in any amounts? Is it because Kansas officials have discovered that raw milk makes Kansans healthier? I'd guess probably not. It likely has more to do with the fact that Kansas is not a significant dairy industry state, so has no significant corporate self-interest at work in that particular arena.
This is emphatically not to suggest that discussions of health and pathogenesis are not important, but that they are important only among citizens, to help those citizens direct their governments, and not among government officials so THEY can decide what's best for everyone.
A quick internet search found three (presumably accurate) interview transcripts or other quotes from the man himself:
http://www.soilandhealth.org/06clipfile/Interview.with.Aajonus.Vonderplanitz.htm
http://www.whale.to/a/aajonus-interview-apr-2009.pdf
http://www.meatalovestory.com/excerpt.html
If we believe in the accuracy of the pieces, then we learn that Aajonus Vonderplanitz:
has craved orgasms since age three.
has overcome dyslexia, autism, juvenile diabetes, peritonitis, blood and bone cancer and eating the death cap mushroom.
began his raw food mission when (close to death in the desert) eleven coyotes fed him raw jackrabbits at a Native American burial ground.
has found value in a cleansing consisting of fasting, daily enemas and drinking his own urine for 41 days.
believes that AIDS was created at UCLA in 1961-62 and that AIDS, polio and swine flu are government conspiracies.
believes that you cant get viruses (say rabies, herpes) from an animal or another person.
has passed a 45-foot tapeworm.
has sex for between one and six hours every day.
and has a diet which will cure 90% of cancer cases.
To say the least, he is a colorful character.
cp
The egg contamination has been a long standing problem with these producers, yet the govt ignored it. Why aren't they shut down?
If one consumes raw meat, the chances of encountering a tapeworm increases, your guts are approx 25-30 ft long. Do you really care about another's sex life? Is that pertinent to something?
The govt entities are "presumably accurate", yet have been found to mislead, out right lie and promote big business….. NOT look out for the people, which is what they are paid to do.
Over the next 15 months, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigators will team up with state and local partners to visit about 600 egg producersthose with 50,000 or more laying hensto determine if their facilities are in compliance with an egg safety rule that went into effect in July as part of an effort to prevent future outbreaks of Salmonella Enteritidis.
http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm224979.htm
I can only wish them good hunting.
First, I should point out that the outbreaks were associated with raw milk from the Simsbury Town Farm Dairy. David made a point of this in his entry on 7/27/08. It was reported that As part of the investigation of the outbreak, CDA conducted an environmental inspection of the Simsbury Town Farm Dairy. CDA found a number of troubling practices at the dairy, with numerous findings listed. The dairy was somewhat unique as illustrated in another report, Town Farm Dairy was originally shut down by its owner in 2003, but was reopened recently by a group known as Friends of Town Farm Dairy. The farm is also the only one in the state of Connecticut that is a certified organic dairy farm that has retail and wholesale distribution. The group running the dairy had hired farmers to run daily operations, but the farmers left July 1, (2008) leaving the groups board members and volunteers to operate the farm. I think such a situation, where a dairy farm not operated by a independent owner, and particularly when there is a change of management, should have raised a red flag at the regulating agency. To me it brings into question the effectiveness and efficiency and purpose of regulatory bodies in general. If safety was the primary concern, there was a flaw in the regulatory system. If there was a flaw, the ongong emphasis should have been on correcting the flaw. The reactions prompted blame throwing, lawsuits, and proposed legislation to crack down on and effectively eliminate raw milk producers. A regulatory body is not there just to find violations and impose penalties; it should help guide legal businesses to meet appropriate standards of quality and safety which best serve the interests and rights of the members of the community.
Dan
At last something you and I can mostly agree upon…."colorful" is perhaps an understatement….
Perhaps… self professed medical guru that is "lost in space" is closer….when stories reach this far a stray…you must consider the rational mental stability of the his followers as well.
While some of his ideas may be nutritionally worthwhile….they are lost when they are made part of the greater…. sex-all-day, fed-by-coyotes, pathogen consumption, cult-like-ideologies. When I speak with his followers, many have little ability to question or rationally deliverate over concepts and eat cult dogma verbatum with out questioning….
Very "colorful" indeed….why does he spend most of his time in Thailand????
By the way….although he loves raw milk he is not the rational voice of the future of raw milk. Raw milk's future is based on supreme safety, very high standards, delicious flavor and the healing power this whole living and complete food.
I really do not mean to beat up on Aajonus….but I question his motivations and stories. James Stewart is the voice of Rawesome…not Aajonus. James is the rational businessman and the hard worker that has grown Rawesome….Aajonus is very much removed the business that James has run and nurtured for years and years.
James has his feet on the ground and is not a cult guy fed by coyotes or other spacy concepts.
Mark
By the same assumption, may we assume that being Christian is bad because Hitler was one? Or that having sex in bathrooms is okay because Big Ben did it? No. If you have a valid argument at least quote your sources. Or better yet, give us your own name to Google.
You are quite correct. Some of the discussion for public consumption gets pretty technical, however, and uncertainty can arise. Publicity of factual, positive, unsophisticated information is certainly an important aspect of the campaign. For instance, I continue to be impressed with the multitude of personal stories of health benefits that so many raw milk consumers experience, in spite of the attempt to discredit the accounts as anecdotal and not supported by scientific trials or studies. The weight of such evidence from people with no other agenda than to preserve and improve their health is very powerful, and perhaps that is why raw milk consumption is growing in spite of the scare tactics. My point was that I wonder if a confrontation with regulators over such issues such as harmful vs. beneficial bacteria will foster much progress. Its a political struggle. Unless there is a way to transform the antagonists, it will be a long(er) row to hoe.
Dan
Let's remember that Aajonus Vonderplanitz isn't running for political office, seeking a medical license, or trying to lead a church or synagogue. He's not being accused of a crime. In fact, he hasn't sought out any of the publicity currently occurring–it's been foisted on him by gun-wielding thugs representing the full force of The State. Pure intimidation.
None of the things you quote him on or allege as part of his personal life or views about food or sex have anything to do with the political witch hunt currently under way. The only actions he's taken that have any bearing on what's occurring is that he has arranged contractually sound agreements for farmers to make nutrient-dense food available to individual consumers who have, of their own free will, joined his organization to gain access to the food. There have been no allegations about the sanctity of those contracts, probably because The State has no case. There have been no illnesses associated with his food, and no suggestions about possible safety issues…until the exhaustive, I would say highly suspicious, laboratory analysis by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, of foods seized June 30 at Rawesome, turned up some listeria in properly labeled and aged cheese nearly two months after the seizure. Your comments amount to character assassination, and as such, are totally irrelevant and obnoxious to boot. The State loves such drivel since it provides a distraction from the reality that it has no case against Aajonus Vonderplanitz and his organization.
And Mark, I am surprised you would give such comments the least bit of relevance or credibility. In fact, I'd say Aajonus Vonderplanitz is of a similar mindset as you: He doesn't take well to being stomped on by spineless bureaucrats and thugs whose main goal is to send a message of intimidation to any farmer or other food supplier who would enter into contracts with Aajonus, or to consumers who would be so nervy as to seek out his brand of nutrient-dense food.
David
Our government has become lawless. We are living under a creeping tyranny that has moved slowly forward over the last one hundred years of our republic. Ignore the political labels and look at what the statists on both sides of the aisle have done. Raw milk and other "dangerous foods, incandescent light bulbs, firearms, "hate" speech and on and on.
Let a man or a woman make their own choices. We need to vote all the enablers of tyranny out of office, no matter what party they line up with.
?
Actually, Aajonus has been the one who undertsood this whole pathogen concept the best all along.The truth is that microbiologists have not and still do not know enough about microbes to be able to neatly put them in categories, each with a name attached to it.Clinical microbiologists need to be able to categorize microbes, so they do.BUT,there are several different ways of classifying them and these different ways do not agree with each other.
http://academy.asm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=213:reconciling-microbial-systematics-and-genomics-march-2007-&catid=42:genetics-genomics-a-molecular-microbiology&Itemid=84
"Genome sequence comparisons are ultimately the best reference for classification, but they have also revealed the limitations of the current concept of microbial species. Considering that microorganisms engage in intra-species genetic exchange, the significance of the microbial species concept is unclear."
"The individuals who deal with microorganisms on a day-to-day basis, including scientists, medical professionals, and forensic scientists need a rigorous framework through which they can understand and communicate about these microbes. Todays microbial classification system uses pragmatic, arbitrary, and artificial methods in a formalized polyphasic approach (one that incorporates multiple types of data) to assign species names to organisms. This system addresses some of the needs of the end users, but not all. The fixed rules and cut-offs in use today are quite useful but inadequate and inappropriate in some contexts."
When you consider that the classification system in use today was developed to classify the less than 1% of microbes that can be successfully grown and studied in a culture in a lab and that CONTEXT is really what determines whether any organism is a "pathogen" or not,how can we say anything about a particular microbe's behavior in the community of microbes in the wild?
Clinical microbiologist have to guess at what organism they are looking for before they can decide which tools to use to look for it.This puts their judgement in control of what they actually believe they have found.
This article is old ,but the "species problem" has everyone stumped so far.They don't seem to be making any progress towards a working system for classifying microbes.So,what does it matter if a "pathogen" is or is not found in food if we can't say what is or is not a pathogen?
Your comment reminded me that you never answered a question I posed awhile back….here's a re-phrasing:
Lets suppose your theory is correct and there are no pathogens. Although this couldn't be done for ethical reasons, how would you answser these questions:
1. If a strain of E. coli O157 cultured from the stool of a child with bloody diarrhea and hemolytic uremic syndrome was inoculated into your raw milk, would you drink the milk? Would you feed it to your children? Would you sell the milk to your neighbors or strangers?
2. If that same strain of E. coli O157 was found in cow feces from the farm and determined to be indistinguishable from the strain from the child's stool (by PFGE or DNA sequencing), same questions.
3. What is your opinion of toxins produced by bacteria? Do you think Clostridium botulinum is a real species? If someone made a bad batch of beans that contained botulinum toxin, would you eat the beans? And the other same questions as above.
MW
1.What is your definition of e.colio157:H7? Is it defined by it's genome?Is it defined by it's physical characteristics? Is it defined by the things it metabolizes? Is it defined by it's waste products? Is it defined by a PFGE profile?
2. see # 1
3. How do you define" real species"? What the hell is a species? It certainly doesn't mean that genetic material is not exchanged between different"species".How can you group bacteria into species when each one is unique and is changing as it's environment changes?
You did not answer my question. I asked, using the current definition of E. coli O157 (and C. botulinum), how would you respond? To be more explicit, a microbiologist has a plate of what they think is a pure colony of E. coli O157 based on all current technology (including whole genome sequencing). How would you answer the questions if that bacteria was put in the milk? If the colonies were scraped off the plate and placed in the milk, would you drink or sell it?
MW
I wouldnt hesitate to drink the milk, however based on the system reinforced, paranoid, litigation crazed society in which we live I certainly would not knowingly sell it.
Ken Conrad
So that's what the govt does when the bacteria is found ONLY in their samples and not the farmers samples! Thanks for the clarification.
Have you ever met Aajonus or heard him speak in person.
Do you know him?
I appreciate the lack of true knowledge and the assumptions being made in microbiology. The secrets to life on earth itself are buried in this variable, indefinite abyss. It is the origin of life on earth!
I feel for James Stewart and have reached out many times to him in recent months to extend any help that he might need to support Rawsome through these difficult times…including the offer of the delivery of free raw milk. James is a very good man doing good things for many people.
Mark
Many thanks to Dr. Joe and his work to bring together the edges of the raw milk issue and help attain some common ground.
Mark
I still need to work out some details.
This is a general link to the meeting in Long Beach:
https://www.acsmeetings.org/
Here is link to the symposium on local food systems where I will be speaking on Nov 1st. My presentation, as described in the abstract on the web, will in part discuss raw milk in the context of local food systems:
http://a-c-s.confex.com/crops/2010am/webprogram/Session7553.html
Anyone is welcome to attend but registration is required.
https://www.acsmeetings.org/registration
by E. Melanie DuPuis. Published in 2002, New York University Press.
The book, written from the perspective of a sociologist, should be of interest to many readers of this blog. It contains some interesting drawings taken from old newspapers depicting swill milk dairies.
A Colorado raw milk victim speaks out. Blair also makes a statement.
"It's funny how the Denver Post and Colorado health officials spend all this time on raw milk and none on Companies that recall a half billion eggs, millions of pounds of ground beef, etc, etc, etc."
Although I sincerely doubt that microbiologists identify bacteria using the current definition as a guide,it doesn't really matter what the micro organism is on the culture plate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
"This lack of any clear species concept in microbiology has led to some authors arguing that the term "species" is not useful when studying bacterial evolution. Instead they see genes as moving freely between even distantly related bacteria, with the entire bacterial domain being a single gene pool. Nevertheless, a kind of rule of thumb has been established, saying that species of Bacteria or Archaea with 16S rRNA gene sequences more similar than 97% to each other need to be checked by DNA-DNA Hybridization if they belong to the same species or not.[9] This concept has been updated recently, saying that the border of 97% was too low and can be raised to 98.7%.[10]"
What does matter is context.For example those micro organisms that take carbon dioxide out of the air and put oxygen into the air could be thought of as pathogens because they excrete a toxin.Pure oxygen is toxic to all life.Likewise organisms that take oxygen out of the air and return carbon dioxide are also pathogenic because they excrete a toxin that by itself is toxic to cells that need oxygen to live.Together these organisms create a balance that encourages the health of both groups.
Since we now know that even culturable microbes sometimes exist in dormant forms in which they are not culturable and that 99% + of all microbes cannot be cultured successfully in the lab,it makes sense that the theory that for microscopic life that everything is everywhere all of the time is probably close to true.
http://culturingscience.wordpress.com/2010/06/18/microbe_biogeography/
"In 1934, the Dutch biologist Lourens Baas-Becking revived this idea, with the thought that the typical explanations of biogeography do not fit with the world of microorganisms. He saw the same species of microbe living in different places on the globe and in variable environments. Thus, he posited that historical factors such as isolation and environment could not be the forces determining microbial distribution, but rather that everything is everywhere; the environment selects. The small size and abundance of many microbe species allowed them to be easily dispersed in water, on wind, on the bodies of animals, spreading them all over the planet. Many microbes can also lie dormant for a long time until conditions improve, or until the environment selects them. This would, in effect, create whats been termed a seed bank of microbes, where all microbes are in all environments at the same time, lying in wait for environmental conditions to favor their proliferation"
Finally,to answer your question,I would not fear consuming any particular bacteria because I am sure I am breathing,drinking and eating some form of these "pathogens" every day without any problem.As to the other stuff on your culture plate(antibiotics,and culture medium) I wouldn't touch that crap.
The absurd set of circumstances MW has put together, with questions for Miguel to answer are not reality.
Last night I wrote a post, and my laptop's power died before it went through. After sleeping on it, I still want to say this:
The current approach to pathogens is not working in the medical field; in fact it has and is creating super bugs. The antiquated food regulations are not working either; they with the medical approach have and continue to create super bugs. As people try alternatives and ask questions, what happens is not more research or studying, but cracking down on lame regulations that have been proven to harm, not help.
My personal experience with sentinel events (fatal accidents) in the medical field is that they are met with unproven, unnecessary over regulation as an immediate reaction to have the public image that SOMETHING IS BEING DONE to keep this from ever happening again. The actions are taken and their effectiveness studied over time, long before they're ever proven. How effective are all the somethings that have built up over the years? Effective in keeping nurses from actually doing their job, in my opinion. 3/4 of the actions I have to take in a day are unnecessary. Most nurses are not going to hook oxygen up to nitrogen tanks. It only happened once, for godsakes. One time, ever. Granted, it killed someone in a nursing home, but now I must drop what I'm doing to run down the hall whenever a patient on oxygen leaves for a procedure because aids and transport people aren't permitted to touch the oxygen tubing. It doesn't take beyond a high school graduate (if that) to look and see a person is on 3 liters, turn the transport tank to 3 and take the tubing off the main wall supply and put it on the transport supply. What in gods name happened that made it a rule that they couldn't touch the oxygen? It isn't smoking – nobody in the hospital smokes any more, and we all had to watch the same video…how many years in a row???…where someone puts a cigarette down on a bed, and the room goes up in flames in minutes. Why then? Why must I run down the hall in the middle of my med pass, or dressing change, or admission assessment time after time after time to do this little task? Because someone once died.
And it goes back to the day I was written up for not checking an hourly rounding paper on a board where I work. I was helping another nurse keep her patient alive that particular morning. So…do I check off a paper, or do I help push meds, run for supplies and man the crash cart and keep her patient alive? When I questioned my boss about this, he said there was nothing he could do; that it came from the top. 2 years later, the hospital did away with the hourly rounding papers in every room and the nursing supervisor said they were ridiculous. But the write-up is still in my file. Oh, the patient is most likely still alive, by the way.
When it comes to raw milk, you know, the local community having food is really more important than a government petri dish. Honestly, MW. Who would put your petri dish bacteria in MY milk? Give me a break.
Tell me, MW. And I want you to answer this thoroughly and honestly. Why do some people become ill from listeria, and some animals, but most do not? I'd like that answer ASAP, please. And quote your sources.
Listeria thrives in modern ultra-sanitary dairy processing enviroments, where there is standing water everywhere, and natural diverse ambient microflora are routinely suppressed with chlorine and other sanitizers and chemical cleaners. Additionally, the very cold anaerobic conditions under which most modern dairy products are stored only mean that listeria will have no competition.
Traditional dairy products (mainly cheese) were stored and aged aerobically, in cool (not cold) humid (but no standing water) cellars, with a mulitiplicity of native micro-flora, and never saw chlorine or chemical sanitizers which supress the beneficial ripening organisms.
The best cheeses in the world are still made the traditional way, and with raw milk.
I understand your confusion if you weren't following the back-and-forth with miguel. Of course, the comment wasn't meant to be a realistic challenge, but an attempt to better understand why he was posting quotes from the literature that didn't seem to relate to the question.
Regarding asking me to cite literature in response to miguel's ideas about bacterial species, etc. – that is not practical on a blog. Miguel finds papers on Google and cuts and pastes the parts that fit his point of view. I called that point of view "theories," with generosity. In reality, to understand this subject area one needs to read the entire body of the papers, the references in each of the papers. Much of this information is not available on the Internet (maybe some day). The snippets miguel posts are fine for some discussion, but not worthy of his broad conclusions and statements of "fact." All that said, we have fun debating it 🙂 No problem, so long as everyone recognizes this is blog chatter, not deep teachings.
Bottom line, I don't think raw milk consumers or farmers should use this kind of skewed analysis to decide anything from policy to day-to-day quality and safety practice for producing raw milk. Just my 2 cents.
MW
Actually what Miguel has been talking about is now being taught – in lesser detail – in basic college microbiology courses. I just took one this summer and the professor and I had a great dialogue about the species issue / debate. In fact at least a significant part of his doctoral work was specifically on how bacteria can change dramatically simply as a result of being put in different / specific environments. He was familiar with the work of Lynn Margulis, one of the main proponents of the one-species-of-bacteria theory.
There's nothing about Miguel's posts that require your generosity to be called theories. The information is already finding its way into modern mainstream textbooks.
Another variation on this theme that confirms the very maleable nature of DNA and identity of microbes… Did you know that certain bacteria (e.g. diptheria-causing Corynebacterium diptheriae) only cause disease when they themselves are infected by particular viruses? (Viruses work – in simple terms – by taking over the DNA of whatever cell they're infecting.)
Another example of what we're just beginning to learn in the world of microbes that I think will be appreciated by readers of this blog… termites eat wood, but don't digest it. Termites have a protozoan inside their digestive systems, which in turn has a bacteria in it's digestive system. It's the bacteria inside the protozoan inside the termite that is responsible for the breakdown of cellulose. (And if it weren't for a second type of bacteria coating the outside of the protozoan, the protozoan would be stuck in one place because it relies on the second type of bacteria to move it around.) Great, isn't it!
Western science is gradually learning to recognize the interdependency of all of life. Hopefully we all can too…
Jeannette
I agree. The disagreement with Miguel relates to using this information to defend bad practices in raw dairy production as seen at the Hartmann farm.
MW
I've heard uneducated people use the terms improperly often enough when making arguments that I generally have the first impression that people who use the terms improperly are uneducated, and have most likely done very little personal reading or research. In fact they might not even know what research is. Forget about "generous." It is more likely meant as an insult.
The interest of many, many people is piqued by such blog discussions. What makes you think that failing to quote any sources in response to Miguel somehow reduces this to chatter for me? I belong to political organizations who lobby for political change, and I have used the medical system and networks to instigate change in that too, even though I am one small person. I am rarely recognized as a cog in either system, but I know how they work, and I have successfully instigated change on occasion. It might do you well to convince people like me with a little more credible support of your arguments in the form or research that I can look up myself to verify. So far Miguel has a lot more ground than you do.
"Drinking raw milk is like playing russian roulette with your health"
David is being comical, but this is so much better.
Okay – this conjures an image in the mind of people – that is its purpose – of a gun and the game of Russian Roulette. Everyone but the Amish know the cultural reference. What gun is it in their head? One with 100,000 bullets, only one of which is going to go bang? That gun has 6 or 8 bullets. And a bullet to the head is death.
So, according to the professional – professional – John Sheehan, drinking raw milk could result in your death 1 out of 6 times you tried it.
We sure wouldn't be having this conversation now, would we?
Now getting people to buy into this – because they aren't thinking too much about it, now that is comical in its absurdity. And you expect what out of this guy? Goebbels was an idiot at propaganda compared to this guy.
Let's say in my business I told a whopper like that. Completely off the wall inaccurate. My milk will give you orgasms for up to 6 hours per day, for example.
If I were to claim that – well, now, it sure wouldn't take long to work through that and an opinion of me and anything else I might say, right? Yet, here we are, hanging on every John Sheehan word. Speak us wisdom, John! Give us the Final Solution——
How about a different approach–
http://www.localharvest.org/blog/15556/entry/rights_responsibilities
"Why not piss off everyone while I'm at it, somehow it's more fun that way"
Scott
I admire your coverage on government actions towards real food providers but please leave Middle East politics out of your posts. How can you compare the reaction of US agencies towards a bunch of non-violent citizens wanting to buy raw milk to the Israeli government trying to protect its citizens from suicide bombers, rockets being fired into civilian neighborhoods, and being neighbors with a people that don't even want to recognize Israel's rights to exist.