The vultures are circling in force with news that an Australian three-year-old may have died from drinking raw milk.
This is news raw milk opponents have lusted after for many years, and now they mean to use it for full effect, tying it to a new study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control that suggests illnesses from raw milk are rising. Even though raw milk is already highly restricted in Australia, there are calls for a complete ban now that raw milk has been proven by this death to be unacceptably risky.
But the news reports are confusing. Some are saying that the boy’s death, together with four illnesses from complications of E.coli O157:H7, are from different brands of raw milk.
Most intriguing, the farmer accused of producing the milk that led to the three-year-old boys death says he has been told the child was seriously ill before drinking raw milk. The childs parents may have been providing raw milk in hopes of improving the childs health.
On the Facebook page of the Australia Alliance for Raw Milk, a statement from Mountain View Organics owner, (identified elsewhere as Vicki Jones) says, I do want to tell you that the little child that passed away was seriously ill, and as I understand, his mother was advised by an alternative therapist, to give him the milk to help his condition. There was no evidence to suggest that the milk caused him to pass away.
She adds, Apparently the paper quoted me as saying that parents are irresponsible, giving their children raw milk. I did not say this.
Its tricky to try to report on serious illnesses close at hand, let alone those half way around the globe. But its not uncommon for parents unable to get help from the established medical system to seek out healthy food. I have had any number of farmers and parents tell me stories about how they have sought out raw milk to help their children recover from everything from eczema to asthma to cancer. Some of these stories have happy endings. Some dont.
This is an unfolding story. There will be all kinds of media efforts to link it to that new CDC study I linked to above that argues illnesses from raw milk have increased in recent years. The study actually has some potentially useful information for farmers and consumers seriously seeking ways to reduce the risks of unsafe raw milk. Unfortunately, the study is presented by the CDC as a political tool, seeking primarily to encourage states to make raw milk more difficult, or even impossible, to obtain. The idea seems to be to push raw milk further underground than it is in many places, and make it ever less regulated. The Australian dairy in question was selling raw milk as “bath milk,” to get around prohibitions.
The subject of raw milk stirs deep emotions in many people, especially when children are sickened. As we know well from other cases involving illness and raw milk, the powers that be love to exploit those emotions, even if it means taking us way off track from the real challenges associated with ensuring safe milk supplies.
I should add to what I posted that, if the child was previously sick, it doesn’t make it “okay” to produce tainted milk. If the milk was bad, that is a problem in its own right. If the child was seriously ill with another condition, though, it provides a context for what occurred that is different than what is being presented by the media–that raw milk is a scourge, inherently dangerous to one and all, and should be banned.
If I understand Matthias Rath, M.D. correctly, his approach to cancer very effectively cuts into cancer as a profit-center for orthodox cancer treatment approaches. And that in Germany there was a young boy whose parents adopted Raths basic recommendations re. cancer, wiping out the cancer. But there were other problems rooted in standard orthodox medical malpractice, leading to the boys passing. And the orthodox medical quacks attempted to take this whole case and attacked Rath for somehow, with HIS ideas, being responsible for the death. Rath won.
As R.M.M. has pointed out many, many times, the manage-your-never-ending-conditions-for-your-every-penny-of-assets-with-an-assist-from-the-sword-of-government orthodox medical quacks and shysters and politicians and insurers and journalists and ad agencies with their anecdotal tales of being interested in your good health are in this game for nearly unimaginable amounts of your money. Do you think they want this to stop?
Joel Wallach showed in the late 1970s that Cystic Fibrosis has its roots in a selenium deficient diet. Is God thanked for such an important discovery and does the medical world then act on this information? There are children, for Gods sake, that need help. Paying attention to the selenium component of our diet will head-off Cystic Fibrosis at the pass, wont it? For the discovery Wallach was fired because too many reputations, careers were based on a different theory re. Cystic Fibrosis.
Heres a question: how many cases in the U.S. of Cystic Fibrosis since, lets say, 1985? The children, it turns out, are convenient pawns, efficient political chess pieces, nothing more. The exceptions are that.
The orthodox medical quackery worlds roots have settled into corrupting soil and the tree has grown very big indeed. Axes and adzes are for that. Nice furniture anyone?
Have a nice wood-chopping day everyone!
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard
As a side note, the federal court and fda ban on interstate sale of raw milk could not stand if the trial was held today. For some highly concerning reason, salmonella was determined to be rampant in Ca alta dena raw milk prior to 1987 when the FDA ban was passed. Since 1987, not one single incident of salmonella has been found in Ca that is related to any raw milk!!!! Even in Alta Dena raw milk after 1987.
If this is not a case of lab corruption or some other collusion of science and politics….nothing is. None of us can trust the FDA or other branches of food enforcement. They have a long history of deep corruption. Take the approval of antibiotic Ketec. The company lied to the FDA and reported that Ketec had been well studied. When concerned FDA PhDs smelled a rat, they found that the company had never performed the studies and instead just made them up. The FDA approved Ketec anyway!!!!
This is deep corruption….no question at all.
I am wasting my breathe on this argument. Back to teaching consumers about the immune system and EU studies.
So….there are good researchers down under…I just hope that Dr. Hull and others like him can bring rational thought to this event.
“If I had heard of anything like this happening to anyone I wouldn’t have brought into my home – I wouldn’t have consumed it myself,” she said.
“It was a wake-up call to make sure I’m no longer blinded by the latest trends. It was a wake-up call to make sure I’m making informed decisions for my family.”
I wonder if anyone has checked what went into the smoothie as another possible source?
The comments following the articles in the Auzzie media, are laughable for ignorance. this is what the lynch mob mentality looks like, loosed in the land.
When you get a purported “anonymous quote” embedded in a story in the lame-stream media, it’s more likely a fabrication, than true. Calculated dis-information = playing into a societal bias … works perfectly for the dairy cartel. Qui bono?
Beyond this, I’m saddened that these children became ill; no matter the cause.
John
You are so right. A key part of RAWMI ramp plans concerns the separation of calves from milking operations. Calves are huge carriers of salmonella, ecoli pathogens and crypto. It is hard to convince some dairymen of this threat. But it is well researched and a real threat.
For the health of all involved, including the consumer the calves should be kept close to the mother. Separating them from the mother and feeding them milk or milk replacer from a bottle or pail is stressful and increases the likelihood that that microbes such as crypto and salmonella will multiply and become virulent.
Ken
Do you have any links or info about the court case you mention?
Yes, this will cut into ones overall milk production, however if we are truly concerned about producing a healthful probiotic product we have to focus beyond economics and do our best to complement natural process.
Ken
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1751-0147-49-16.pdf
Weight gain and health in a dairy herd performing natural suckling up to 68 weeks of age revealed an mean weight gain of 1.2 kg/d for calves up to 13 weeks of age, and absence of illness in calves, young stock and growing bulls. The production system allows natural behaviour as suckling and play, and may satisfy the public concern regarding immediate separation of cow and calf in commercial milk production. Furthermore, the farmer found it easy to manage and preferable to conventional production.
Ken
All boundaries are arbitrary. We invent them, and then ironically, we find ourselves trapped within them. Peter Senge
http://www.biodynamics.com/pdf/w08bd/w08bd-raisingcalves.pdf
The author of the above article Steffen Schneider states, For many years, visitors to Hawthorne Valley Farm have seen our bull and herd of sixty cows peacefully grazing or ruminating on one of the many pastures. Last summer, though, they also saw a number of little calves nursing and playing among the cows. The image was certainly idyllic, as visitors, residents, and customers acknowledged with their remarks and questions. But it belied a dramatic shift in our calf-rearing practices. For the first time in twenty years, we had decided to raise our calves on their mothers.
I’d like to tell you why.
It is with a certain sense of trepidation that I record these thoughts and experiences. It is, well, a bit unpleasant to admit that we now regarded our calf-raising techniques of the past twenty-plus years as fundamentally flawed. And, honestly, it is a bit embarrassing that the new system we chose to adopt is as old as Nature herself. However, Ill let my pride take a back seat to the truth and to the enhanced quality of life for our animals this new practice has brought.
Ken
I do agree, that it is idyllic, sweet and very nice to have calves and cows frolicking. Totally agree….never ever do this if you want to produce low risk raw milk. If any one wants the data, I will have Dr. Cat Berge provide the many links to this data.
Also, if any of your cows has Staph A and your heifers ( female calves ) suckle from them, you just transferred Staph A to your next generation of milking cows. All those cows must be sent to slaughter.
Producing raw milk in a low risk system is no longer an idyllic scene. It is no longer filled with the glory filled days of old concepts. Low risk means seriously looking at risk and doing something about it. It breaks my heart to break this to you all. This is one if the reasons why we continue to see illness in the idyllic raw milk community!!! We as humans no longer have idyllic immunity. The environment and pathogens are no longer idyllic either.
If you have those issues with your calves then you are teetering on the edge with your calf rearing methods. Just like beekeepers are teetering on the edge with their bee raising efforts when they remove all of the honey from the hive in order to have more for their customers, then turn around and feed their bees chemical and drug laden refined sugar concoctions which lack the necessary bio dynamics needed for adequate nutrition and balanced good health. Both approaches are unnatural and therefore problematic.
Ken
Have you ever tested calves that are less than 6 weeks old for pathogens in their manure?
Do you have any data to support your concept?
As much as I would have agreed with you ten years ago….I can not longer in good conscience agree today. Calves have shown themselves to be very serious carriers of human pathogens especially ecoli and salmonella. Organic, Biodynamic or conventional, all of them are carriers. That’s the data and that is the science that matters to me when measuring risk and doing something about it.
Remember when producing and selling raw milk to consumers that do have an immunity that is not of the farm environment….watch out… Be warned. I am actually not trapped at all. I am freed from entrapment of ignorance. I have the ability to reduce risk and feed large groups of people with raw milk that have questionable immune systems and do it with very low risk. Idyllic idealism is great but it must be founded in realism. I have been shut down and told that I have made kids sick. Never again. You learn from things like that. If you are smart you do not ever repeat errors and you learn from them. The future is all about making kids well.
Mark, your narrow focus on pathogens and meeting customer demand has prompted you to violate a fundamental natural process. Calves nursing on their mothers is not merely idyllic; it is an inherent foundational characteristic that both calf and mother rely on for good health.
By attempting to manipulate and control that process you have created your own sphere of ignorance.
Ken
I’ve never heard of weaning calves as early as 2 weeks after birth. Maybe you could add some details please? Because, If I were to guess, I’d tend to think of a very upset cow and a calf that dies of dehydration/starvation as the most likely outcomes. So, I’m quite interested in learning how you support the calf when you do this. Thank you.
John
Do any of you know the Staph A status of your herds? Several Rawmi applicants have applied for listing and then dropped Rawmi efforts when they tested their herd and found out that they had horrible Staph A mastitis throughout the herd. They had been selling Staph A filled raw milk to their share owners. More importantly, the calves they had suckling on their cows at night had given the next generation of heifers Staph A. Ignorance is not bliss. Staph A is contagious and will destroy your herd the only treatment is culling.
I am happy that you are happy with your happy cows and calves. I mean that, but I also know that what gets measured gets done. Calves are a hit zone. That’s a fact.
Most commercial dairy farm operations remove the calf from the cow immediately or within twenty-four hours following its birth, with bull calves being sold off for veal as soon as possible if there is a market for them. If not then they are dispatched immediately. Ive been there and done that. Managing calve in this way is much more labor intensive and the mortality rate is higher. The virulence of microbes increases under such conditions as well so when we began separating the calves from the herd and placing them into hutches, this was an improvement.
Having a beef herd along with a dairy herd was an advantage in my case because one cannot help but notice the difference in the vitality of the calves between the dairy herd where they are removed from the cows almost immediately and the beef herd where they are allowed to suckle at will.
Weaning a calf from its mother does not necessarily mean you stop feeding it cows milk. On dairy farms it usually means you are switching to a different method of feeding the calf, whether it be cows milk from the herd, milk replacer or using a designated nurse cow.
As far as the calfs mother is concerned, because she is being milked with a machine she quickly adjust to the removal of her calf.
Currently I operate a black angus cow calf operation and have a half dozens jerseys on the side that are in various stages of lactation. When a calf is born to one of the jersey cows it is either allowed to nurse on the cow for up to sis months before I wean it completely from its mother or is placed on a designated nurse cow. If the calve remains with its mother cow is also milked with a machine. In this case as the calf gets older and consumes more milk we separate it from its mother overnight if necessary in order to have an adequate supply of milk for our own use. Placing calves onto a nurse cow works well also if you have a way of separating the nurse cow and adopted calves from their mothers.
During those first 2-4 weeks it is imperative that a calf be able to nurse on its mother at will (8-10 times a day) in order to get them off to a good start.
Ken
Calves are a hit zone because of the way in which they are fed and managed hence their predisposition to nurture virulent microbes. And that is a fact.
Ken
If that is a fact, then why is it that nurse fed calves ( organic or conventional ) are harbors of salmonella and ecoli for the first six to eight weeks of life? Manure that is tested shows this to be 100% true. Their moms are not the same harbors. By the way…bull calves are not sold to veal!! At least not currently in CA markets. They are extremely expensive and worth $450 at birth. The advent of sexed semen has created a huge market for beef replacement steers ( sexed semen creates 85% heifers and a huge loss of bull calve populations ) and they grow up to full size at 1200-1400 pounds before slaughter. Lets get this information straight.
Nature does not know about us humans and our problems with pathogens. Nature would just as soon let us stupid humans die off and only allow humans with non GMO, probiotic, smart natural whole diets and strong immune systems breed and thrive…. but…this is not a very excepted, humane or Judeo – Christian concept.
Precisely! Which brings us back to where we started….the need to separate everything to do with these calves from milk that is distributed without pasteurization to consumers.
Thanks for explaining your methods more carefully, I appreciate that.
Overall, though Mark is absolutely right because he addresses how the vast majority choose to raise their calves. In these parts I think the going rate for illegally distibuted milk is around $3.00 per litre. Allowing the calf to nurse her mother for say 3 months means somewhere around 400 litres of lost production. This opportunity cost of $1200 per calf-raised is a significant deterrent for most people. So (truly) separate calves early….bring on the milk replacer…… and the digestive upsets……and the proliferation of pathogens. A 21st Century First World problem, no question. Contaminated milk and poisened children, doesn’t need to happen.
John
There is a reason why bottle fed calves when separated from their mothers experience a substantial higher mortality rate then those that are allowed to nurse on their mothers.
It is very difficult to find research in North America comparing the two scenarios. Just like the Parsifal and Gabriela studies it appears that the Europeans are the ones taking an interest in actively pursuing such research. And they all come to the same conclusion. Calves are healthier and perform much better when allowed to nurse on their mothers.
Ken
The above Scandinavian report I referenced states with respect to calves separated from their mothers and bottle-fed that, Calf mortality has been reported to range between 220% [3,4]. In one study, 48.7 72.5% of three groups of 120 calves were treated with antibiotics [5], and about 50% of farmers in North America have reported to use milk replacers containing antibiotics when raising dairy calves [6].
I think the above facts need to factored into your calculations.
My experience parallels that of Steffen Schneider of Hawthorne Valley Farms in upstate New York,
Our farmers have noticed the calves that pasture with the milking herd are stronger, bigger, have a healthy coat, and seem generally healthier overall. The herd dynamics, with the calves running and jumping and laying down to rest near the mother cows, have had a positive change in which the herd, as a whole, seems calmer and more settled. While it is important not to anthropomorphize animals too much, honoring the natural life processes of the cow, an animal that has been domesticated for thousands of years, seems to benefit the calves, the herd, and the farm as a whole.
Ken
Try keeping several hundred calves with their moms and then trying to milk the moms. They get trampled to death, they get abandoned, they get eaten by coyotes.
Yes….I have tried to keep calves with their moms for many different reasons. It does not work unless you enjoy collecting pieces of dead calves half eaten by coyotes or trampled by cows even…out on pasture.
Question…do you run a business of nourishing people with low risk raw milk or do you run a cow-calve entertainment facility. If you have five cows and each of them are great moms, that is one thing. I have seen plenty of cows that simply abandon their calves and the coyotes enjoy that very much.
No one has answered the question of Staph A and heifer calves becoming infected by nursing on their moms? This is a real threat. I guess it does not matter if you never test for Staph A. Ignorance is bliss until you lose your whole damn herd to Staph A and wonder what happened???
Not too long ago a 40-cow farm was a very viable entity. This was before the money economy took hold of farming of course, before eaters were transformed into a market to be satisfied, before we worried about dropping dead from consuming plain milk. We’ve come a long way in a very short time indeed.
Our continual need to manage nature in this money-driven economy ought to give us pause, ought to at least hint at the trouble we’ve made for ourselves, no?
McAffee’s dairy is demonstrating the compromises that must be made in order so that REAL MILK is normalized within the commercial system.
Every day – not just business days – Organic Pastures Dairy delivers some of the best food in the world, to thousands of Californians. Mark McAffee has said it every way he possibly can … they do it their way, and it works for them AT THAT SCALE. “profit” is not a dirty word : BIG is not necessarily BAD
we’re told there are “a thousand” cowshares in the Golden State … if so, then those who prefer to purchase REAL MILK from a much smaller operation than OPD, can take their business elsewhere.
it’s so easy to criticize, from the sidelines. What’s your alternative, Dave Milano? = A bunch of hippies entranced with “Pittance farming” ? grinding out a living with negligible capital … barely paying the overhead ( read : usury) so that dairy only lasts a few years, ’til the goodwill runs out?
Being right is not as important as being open to understanding the bigger idea of all sides of right. A calf being nursed by and with her mom is right. No question. Managing calves so that raw milk risks are reduced so that tens of thousands of children can drink very low risk raw milk….that is also right. Keeping ecoli 0157h7 out if raw milk….totally right, at least fir me.
The way I see it though, regulations and such have made it real difficult for small/smaller farms to survive, so it’s not just ‘business as usual’. 150-200 cow dairies are nothing anymore, and considered small fry. All one needs to do is look at the average size of dairy farms out west (I’m not referring to average size over all farms in the U.S.). I saw a state by state list of farms fairly recently, and the average herd size was listed as well, so that’s where my info comes from.
As for the “to leave, or not to leave a calf with its dam”, well, I have my own reasons for not doing so. I can totally relate to the coyote thing, since there a quite a few in the area, and they have even spooked the cattle who were only about 30 feet from the barn. There were three coyotes chasing each other in the snow. Whether or not they have tried to actually harm the stock remains to be seen, but that might be due to my removal of the calves as soon as possible after birth. There are other reasons as well. I only have electric fencing, plus live on a highway, and can see the signs of three fast food restaurants from my front yard (doesn’t stop the coyotes though). There is also a ditch that runs through the property, and once upon a time, had to fish one of my Swiss cows out of it. She was up past her shoulders in water. I tried to get into the water with her, but sunk up to my hips, being that this is muck ground. We had to resort to pulling her out with the tractor.
The farm I help at will often times leave calves with their mothers, and this can go on for months depending on the year, or what milk prices are doing. When they finally get separated, I can hear them all crying for several days, and I’m a little over a mile away. The neighbors are way too close here, and don’t need anyone getting mad from listening to that noise.
My milk didn’t have anywhere to go for almost eight months this year, and my calves got a lot of extra, or whatever they would drink. I have a steer that got milk for around five months, and he is way bigger than the heifers I weaned at three months (would have kept them on milk too, but thought I had things figured out, which ended up not being so for quite a while). They did just fine with me feeding them, and are a lot more friendly. I agree that calves would do best with their dams, provided the dam will take care of them, but not everybody runs a cow/calf operation, and let’s face it, calves DO drink a bunch. Idyllic or not, it’s whatever works for each farm. We already know that no two farms are alike, and what works for one, won’t necessarily work for another–microbes or not (whatever one chooses to use for their argument).
In the mid 70s to late 80s I was milking up to 100 head of jerseys in a double six, herringbone parlor in an area where the average dairy herd was 35-40 cows. Today thanks to government regulation, cheap food policies and a bigger is better mentality there are three dairy farms left. They have moved out of the area, mostly south and are much larger.
The big picture I understand very well, I dont like it, and I dont intend to embrace it. I may be a glutton for punishment but there is a limit as to how far I will go when it comes to satisfying that gluttony and compromising what is natural.
Ken
Gordon, you seem unable to imagine anything but a farming economy organized around money. That sort of thinking can be easily forgiven in this age when the memory of community-scale farming is gone with the generations, and so few have been exposed to any other measure of success but high profits and endless growth. But I am telling you that there are alternatives, and I have standing to say so because I am living one. My community is alive and well, taking care of each other, eating properly, and experiencing the benefits of doing so–enjoying the feeling of contentment one receives from being cared for, enjoying relatively strong immune systems, and enjoying watching nature working her routine miracles. (And, notably, we look nothing like the description in your pejorative tirade.)
I have made the case here repeatedly that embracing the get big or get out farming mentality has cost us in ways that cannot be recouped with modern methods, and haven’t seen any reason yet to change my mind. On the other hand, I see my community functioning reasonably well, living in the big world and yet still personally and economically intertwined with each other and with nature.
I dearly wish more folks would take love and nature seriously enough to attempt to work at least partially outside the money-is-business model. As DD points out below, that certainly seems to be happening to some degree, and may be accelerating, even in the face of our bulldozer-big money and regulatory systems. I hope so.
Personally I don’t know if, all things considered, it would be easier to embrace the system, but I’m confident it would not be an improvement over what I have. And like Ken, I do not intend to embrace it. I intend rather to continue to preach small and natural, and of course practice what I preach.
how many human beings actually get some REAL MILK, via your model dairy? Is your position : “pull up the ladder Jack, I’m alright” ? Would you prefer that a few thousand people, maybe a couple of 100 thousand at most in Ham-merica, can enjoy REAL MILK, but the rest of the nation ought to do without?
what his critics seem UN-able to grasp is that Mark McAffee’s main activity is = sharing the wealth, ie. his expertise gained from boots-in-the-mud on the farm as well as face-to-face with real people at farmers’ markets, who want the good stuff AND ARE WILLING TO PAY WHAT THEY FEEL IT’S WORTH. you got a problem with that? Is it your position that, since he doesn’t operate at your scale, McAffee ought to just sell the family farm to a condo-developer, then go sit poolside with a cold bevy. in hand for the rest of his life?!
makes me worry that guys in your frame of mind are too young to have ever heard the term “Protestant work ethic” … other than as a pejorative
I figured out the big picture only a couple of years into dairying (or farming in general). That was over twenty years ago, and a lot of the things I said back then are starting to play out now. There was no conspiracy theory involved, just an astute observation. It’s too bad I didn’t log any of it back then. I know I’m not exactly on the same page as most of those who comment here, but think there definitely is common ground. The key difference is, I don’t force my way of doing things on anyone else, I merely state why I do what I do. I could probably find a little from each person’s comment, and agree with them. For example, I happen to be someone who doesn’t look at ‘profit’ as being evil. I’ve been so far in the negatives for such a long time, profit in the positive would help me get things the way I would like them to be. I don’t even own any farm machinery, as in a tractor, etc. Try doing EVERYTHING manually, especially when feeding hay. I actually prefer round bales over square, and can feed them way quicker. Large squares work too, but they can’t be moved once they hit the ground, and have to stay put until they get fed.
I’m not asking to be wealthy, but would just like to have expenses paid for, with a little left over. If I can’t afford something, I do without. Try that one out in today’s world. Now the mentality is, if they can’t pay for it, they either want the price lowered, want someone else to subsidize it, or they want it for free. I don’t mind trying to help someone out, even if I don’t have much myself, but I don’t believe in communism, socialism, living in a commune, sharing/spreading the wealth, or whatever. I’ll share it if I WANT to, not because somebody says I should, regardless of whether or not I have more than someone else.
On another note, I don’t feed milk replacer. I did so a number of years ago, but the only reason was, their dams were at the farm I work at (I had no way to milk them here, and needed a little extra income), or they were calves that had been given to me (from the same farm). My facilities weren’t even built yet, and wasn’t remotely in the plans at the time either. I forgot about it before, but past experience with Johne’s at different farms leaves me apprehensive on keeping calves with their dams.
In the U.S. it is estimated that 8% of the beef herds and 68% of the dairy herds contain at least one animal infected with MAP.
http://www.johnes.org/general/faqs.html
Of all the livestock susceptible to Johnes disease Dairy herds are the most manipulated in terms of diet, housing and environment, etc. The cows are fed dairy rations sweetened with molasses and all manner of processed waste ingredients such as candies to cookies to you name it. Rather then allow newborn calves to nurse on their mothers 8-10 times per day, they are separated from the dam and nursed according to the farmers schedule.
When separated from their mothers the calves are fed a highly processed chemical and drug concoction called milk replacer or milk other then that of their mothers that often times has milk replacer mixed with it or may include antibiotic waste milk. In fact the Oklahoma extension service for example in its recommendation for feeding waste milk to calves suggests, pasteurizing it before feeding it in order to reduce the microbial load. Talk about living in a fools paradise!
http://pods.dasnr.okstate.edu/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-2025/ANSI-4019.pdf
Attempting to avoid microbes such as paratuberculosis, failing to address the root cause of the problem is fruitless. As I stated earlier, those who separate their newborn calves from their mothers at birth and subject them to the stress of artificial feeding are teetering on the edge.
Ken
My very first encounter was a Holstein cow that had been bought from a nearby neighbor. We were still newbies at the time, and the vet tried to tell us it was winter dysentery. We didn’t find out until later on that she was Johne’s positive, and since I can’t remember all of the details except that she went down in the tie stall barn, I don’t recall how or when we found out.
The second cow (Jersey x Guernsey) came from another nearby neighbor friend (by then, we had moved back to our home state). She was bought as a calf at around six months of age or so (I have a photo of her long before we got her). The friend had gotten her from his dad, who had a small herd of pastured cattle. As far as I know, the guy didn’t have a problem with the disease, but the farm the first cow came from did, but didn’t find this info out until some years later. I’ve read that it can be transferred via saliva, and the only connection I had between the two cases is, the photo I have showed she was together with an older Holstein calf that came from the farm with that had the Johne’s problem. It didn’t stop with those two cows.
I bought a first calf heifer with her heifer calf from a friend. He had bought her from the auction (feed lot beef herd). I got her bred back, and not long after her second calf was born, she showed the same symptoms, so I had her tested, but before I got the results back, I sent her to the sale. She was positive too, so she shed the bacteria on my farm. I also got a heifer calf from the farm I work at. She was already a few months old by the time I found out her dam tested positive (high titers too), and figured she was infected in utero so she left her as well, but had already been with my own calves.
The next case was a cow I got from the farm I work at (he had bought a bunch of yearlings, and bred heifers). The only reason I got her was because he had just gotten his organic certification (he’s back to conventional now), and she couldn’t be part of the herd, so she came here. So, more shedding of the bacteria. From what I’ve read, and heard from vets, the bacteria can live in the soil for seven years, and I’m simply not going to take any chances of spreading to my calves, especially when their dams can *find* a pile of manure, or a muddy spot to calve in. I usually read anything I can find on the disease.
So, long story short, you’re not talking to someone who is ignorant on the disease. My cattle are not confined, nor have they ever been. You prefer to leave moms and babies together, and I don’t. If the system works for you, great! I’m not trying to convince you to do what I do, and at the same time, I don’t need anyone to try and guilt trip me into changing my ways. It’s not going to work anyhow.
I am not trying to guilt trip you. I make my observations and call it as I see it. Take it for what its worth.
Ive lived on the farm for fifty-six years. The farm has been in our family for thee generations and I have not encountered or heard mention of Johnes disease in any of the livestock. Winter dysentery, yes. It is a common occurrence in dairy cattle that are fed sweetened hot rations. Once I stopped feeding these rations and stopped giving the cattle toxic dewormers winter dysentery has been a non-issue.
Ken
You can call things however you want (and I will do the same), but that doesn’t mean you are more right than me, or vise versa. If you get down to the nuts and bolts of things pertaining to dairy, we should all be on the same page, but not necessarily in the same paragraph. I already know that Johne’s was recognized in the late 1800s. I highly doubt that those farms back then were even remotely close to what we have now. How many of those farmers milked with machine for example? So, we can’t compare then to now, and try to think that the problem only exists in farms other than the ones who pasture, AND leave calves with their dams–it simply isn’t true! I didn’t have enough time earlier to give more examples, and now it’s getting too late to go into further detail on my Johne’s experience that did NOT include my stock. I want to finish the rest of my comment.
You’ve never had any Johne’s, well consider yourself lucky. Some us weren’t so fortunate. As for winter dysentery, the vet was the one who suggested it on the first cow, and turned out he was wrong. Besides, she was the only cow who had the symptoms. The feed may have had some molasses in it, but that doesn’t make it a *hot* ration. You can cite “common occurrence” in whatever you want, just keep in mind, not everything fits inside that box.
I had winter dysentery go through my herd about six or seven years ago. The vet said it would hit EVERYBODY in the herd (can’t blame it on sweetened rations because only the milking string was getting grain), from young stock, to mature cattle, and IT DID, except for ONE cow. Something was up with her because she didn’t act right prior to that, and I ended up removing her from the herd. The vet also said it was transmissible through the air, and since I live on a highway, a lot of livestock trailers pass by my farm quite frequently, and I’m REAL CLOSE to the road.
There is a reason why the incidence of Johnes disease is 8-9 times higher in dairy herds. Confinement and resulting exposure is only one aspect of the scenario. Yet the fact that johnes is a problem associated primarily to confined herd is significant because animals raised under such conditions have a tendency to be manipulated to the nth degree.
It was in the mid 1800 that distillers mash, aka swill grain was introduced as a feed for dairy cattle. Its low nutritional content and acidifying nature lead to sickness and disease in the cows.
Feeding molasses and excessive amounts of grain to cattle dangerously raises the acid level in the cows stomach creating metabolic stress and conditions such as acidosis, which create prime conditions for the existence of diseases such as Johns.
One of the reasons why it is so important for a calf to be able to suck on its mother 8-10 times a day is because the activity generates huge mounts of saliva which help to digest and neutralize food and stomach contents. Saliva also contains antibodies and enzymes such as lysozyme that help to regulate microbial activity.
Ken
Again, I am NOT referring to confinement cattle! There are a lot of things which occur more frequently in those kinds of herds, I already know that information. I’m unsure whether your comments are directed at me, or those who would possibly read them. In case it is at me, you’re not talking to a newbie, nor am I an ignoramus when it comes to cattle. Try not to use a “one size shoe fits all” approach when commenting about those who operate outside the parameters you set for yourself.
I believe that God made us all unique individuals for a reason. We are not “cookie cutter” people, but at the same time, I’m pretty sure that I would be able to *link together* just about everybody (just about) that has commented here since I first started reading. And yet, you and Mark continue to have a pissing match. Aim high!
I realize that there are things of this world (as far as dairy is concerned) that have strayed from how God intended. I also believe that the human population is too far gone to expect miracles overnight, or in the not too distant future. It is going to take time, and lots of it. In the mean time, we don’t need any dairy morality police telling everyone else how to farm.
As for Johne’s, you’ve commented on something that you’ve never experienced. Quoting average statistics is not presenting an accurate picture. On my last Johne’s cow, I asked the vet if it was a lost cause to keep a heifer calf out of her, based on what I had already experienced (and not just with my herd). His instructions were:
Do NOT let it nurse (in case the cow had her own manure on the teats, and to prevent transfer via colostrum/milk).
Remove it as soon as possible after birth, and preferably, not let the cow clean her calf.
Give it a colostrum replacement (in case there were others in the herd who were infected, but not identified).
In utero infection increases with each successive calving (she was already a 7 or 8 year old cow).
I don’t know if you are aware of this, but a cow’s milk, as well as her blood, or manure can be tested for Johne’s. It doesn’t matter what kind of farm she is on. I sold some cattle to a woman who requested they be tested first, and all she does is milk a handful for herself, and will maybe eventually start a herdshare.
I thought of something else. You brought up stats on beef herds, and the percentage of those infected. Well, that’s interesting, because I don’t know of anyone who milks beef cattle. I do know there are a few breeds that CAN be milked, but how common is it? So, unless it’s a cow/calf herd, most of those animals don’t stick around more than two years, which is also the minimum amount of time before they can be tested (if there is a lesser time frame, I haven’t heard about it). Could it be a possibility that the number is higher than 8%? If cows and calves are together in those kinds of herds, then the incidence of Johne’s should be 0%, right?
If you want to continue with verbal gymnastics, be my guest. I have another idea for you. How about going to visit Dairy Carrie (dairycarrie.com), and post some of your comments on her blog. She has a much bigger audience than there is here. You can tell her how wrong she is for not leaving calves with their dams. Let’s see how far you get.
As a believer in God I embrace empirical science that is objective and seeks the truth. I challenge however any science that puts human knowledge above God and tries to redefine His natural order.
What can be more fundamental to Gods creation and natural order then a calve nursing on its mother? Indeed there are times when that is not possible, but then again let us not go out of our way to make it the norm for the sake of satisfying a convenience or a theoretical and incomplete understanding of the microbial world.
I respect Mark for what he is trying to accomplish, I dont always agree with his methods and evidently he is going to do what he believes is right and I will do likewise, as it should be.
Ken
visit Dairy Carrie (dairycarrie.com)
God help me, but at first glance Dairy Carrie looks like a waste of my time. Can you point to the pay dirt to be found there? That would be helpful.
Another quick question: re. the importance of the size of the audience- this is important how?
All the best,
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard, RMD (raw milk drinker)
I merely pointed it out because I thought Ken should leave his comfort zone, and post the same type of comments he posts here. I also mentioned the size of audience because he wouldn’t get a response from just one person (if any at all). I’ve posted her blog link before, and told anyone who visits, that they should consider themselves lucky, because the anti-animal agriculture activists are frequent posters there (you’d get bashed for even thinking about drinking milk, and oh, the horrible things they say). Why don’t you try it out???
You say it looks like a waste of your time, and I’m sure there are those who would find this blog a waste of their time as well (non-raw milk drinkers, but hey, I’m here). I realize the “birds of a feather…”, but I’m not stuck in a bubble. Apparently, you missed my comment from a while back where I stated I’ve read some very interesting things here, and it doesn’t matter what my stance is. I guess that isn’t a good enough reason to comment.
I understand what you’re getting at, but like I said, I believe the human population is too far gone right now, and it will take time to reverse things (if we ever get there). It doesn’t help in this country (I know you are from Canada) that there are those who want to remove God from everything in existence. The ACLU excels in that department. We live in an evil world, and Ephesians 6:13 is my daily reminder. I’m not perfect, but then, neither are you, or anyone else.
I know longer celebrate the pagan version of Christmas, and it bothers me to know how many have no idea of what it’s even about. There are plenty of people who have lost various *things*–you fill in the description, just for saying “Merry Christmas”. Don’t you think we should be working back to the core, instead of trying to change the results from those who strayed? Human beings are flawed, and again, go back to the core, and find out why this happened. It has taken me a really long time to get to this point, and pieces are slowly putting themselves in place, but I am persistent. Trial by fire has taken on a whole new meaning to me these last few years.
What this boils down to is, you do what you are going to do, and let Mark do the same. We are not in control anyway, so let God sort that out. He did give us free will (and a brain, although too many don’t use theirs).
I can relate to what you are saying. I am not so sure I share your cynicism.
I believe everything happens for a reason so here we are only God truly understands what will become of it all.
As far as my comfort zone is concerned, the only time I am truly there is when Im working with the cattle.
Anyone that has frequented this site from the beginning is very much aware that discussions can get quite heated. I can assure you I have been out of my comfort zone on numerous occasions, on a variety of topics, in a variety of locations websites and otherwise.
Ken
We’ll be having a fabulous time gazing at the flames from our open fireplace and hugging to celebrate the weather.
Numerous occasions sounds like a good name for a promiscuous rock band.
If youre a pagan you believe in something, and whatever your philosophy is, its important to the discussion for as Albert Einstein stated Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Ken
Tell that to my Neopagan friends who are busy worshipping the Triple Goddess and the newborn Sun God today. I think they believe that many Gods and Goddesses exist, at least, that’s what it sounds like. And they’re just as serious about it as any church-going Christian.
Here is a profound statement you might wish to consider, Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light?years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.
Ken
I NEVER even gave it a thought that yesterday was the winter solstice. My comment was directed at Ken, and was trying to describe how I feel about certain things (like getting back to the ‘core’, and the time of year is what prompted me to say what I did). It’s a good thing that I’m responding, instead of my sister, so leave it at that. I’ve heard plenty of people over the years who say the “Christmas” celebration (the way it is celebrated) is pagan. If you prefer to live your life that way, I don’t care, and am not about to try and convert you, regardless of what some Christians believe. A former neighbor of mine is atheist, but she didn’t hesitate to say “Merry Christmas”, and wasn’t offended if you said it back to her.
IMO, some people really need to ‘lighten up’, and quit getting ‘offended’ at everything which goes against their beliefs–there’s way too much of that going on in the world, and I’m really getting sick and tired of hearing about those whose feelings got hurt. Waaaah, grow up already. That includes those whose feathers get ruffled over ‘pasteurized milk’. We are all here because of ‘milk’ in general, no matter what the form takes (raw or pasteurized).
I had a friend here yesterday who was reading these comments while I milked. She is a raw milk drinker, and a hand milker to boot. Neither one of us is trying to change what the other does, and we get along just fine. We discuss all kinds of stuff, but after what she read here (also pointed out the winter solstice, and how the Christmas date came to be–to satisfy the pagans and their ‘holiday’. Take it however you want), she mentioned how everyone talked over each other, and if it were her, she’d just walk away from this blog.
DD, I tend to agree with you. As someone who is Jewish, this is always a strange time of the year. Jews don’t worship Jesus, so they don’t celebrate Christmas. Our culture (particularly the retailers) make this effort to link Christmas with Hanukah, but there really is no comparison in terms of religious relevance, except that they happen around the same time of year. But that’s okay, I personally appreciate the effort by Christians to include non-Christians in celebrating the spirit of giving and peace. Like you say, I’ve learned to relax about it.
A few years ago, there was someone parked at the edge of my driveway. I became concerned, so me being me, I went outside to investigate. The guy got out of his car and said, “Not to worry, I was just watching your chickens”. He had a slight bit of a non-US accent, and proceeded to tell me why he was in the area. He was working temporarily at one of the mental health centers in my town. He asked what I did here, and I told him it was a dairy farm. He wanted to know if it would be okay if he came back the next day (a Saturday) to watch what I did. It didn’t bother me any if he wanted to, and was here for seven hours! He also told me he had been an MD for twelve years, and then went back to school to become a psychiatrist. I told the dairy friend I work for, and I guess he must have thought I made things up. Well, the guy came by several more times, so I asked it he wanted to visit another farm. We ended up staying for supper. When we left, he said, “A nice Christian family”. They said a prayer before the meal, and out of respect, he went along with it. I already knew he was Muslim because he told me. Was there a problem either way? Nope. I haven’t heard from him in quite some time (we would email occasionally), and he told me he was going to go visit his family in Egypt shortly after he was done with his work here, but said he would be coming back to work at the same place in a few months, but never did. I really don’t know if something happened to him, because was real interesting to talk to.
Hanuka exists because the Jewish people were being forced, by the ruling authorities, to forsake the Instructions (Torah) of G-d and to eat swine flesh….under the threat of immediate death.
Many Jews simply acquiesced and did what they were told.
A small minority did not acquiesce.
Mattathias, a leader in Judah, took a stand and said NO to the ruling authority…
You can listen to the complete history here…
https://archive.org/search.php?query=1%20maccabees
https://archive.org/details/2_maccabees_la_1406_librivox
Note that the Maccabees did not initiate these battles…the Maccabees fought back because the ruling authorities wanted to kill them and what they believed in….namely their Belief in G-d and His Instructions….The Maccabees were simply defending their way of Life as G-d told them how to Live. Thousands of Jews died because of their Believe in G-d’s Instructions for their Way of Life.
I do not advocate any violence in the Raw Milk battle that we are in.
I am merely giving a historical parallel….
This raw milk battle is similar in some ways to Hanuka. It is about power.
We are being told by our ruling authorities to forsake raw milk, and instead eat their “food”. (The FSMA will also be expanding this to other raw foods). And in many areas, they ban access to Raw Milk and many people simply go along with these instructions..
Instead of an immediate death like the Maccabees, if we do not consume real foods, we will die a slow death by illness….Just look at the sickness and illness around you in your family, friends and neighbors…I can attest to many diseases because my family, friends and neighbors are following the commands of the ruling authorities and refuse to eat real food.
Raw Foods == Healthy Life
Highly Processed Foods == Sickly Life
Hanuka is the Hebrew word for dedication.
You can find reference to Hanuka in the New Testament in John 10:22 At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon.
(interesting….Christmas is not mentioned in the New Testament…and the NT does not even tell us when the Savior was Born…so maybe the birth of Christ is not as important as compared to His Resurrection 3 days after Passover!!!)
–bill