Yesterday was a good day for proponents of food rights. The California Assembly’s Health Committee unanimously passed SB 201 and its provisions for pathogen testing and HACCP (hazard analysis and critical control point) programs instead of a coliform standard. Today, the legislation goes to the Assembly’s Agriculture Committee.
And in North Carolina, the House Health Committee approved legislation that has the effect of negating a state Board of Agriculture regulation requiring raw milk be dyed. The legislation substitutes new required warning labels for the dying requirement.
Even the Associated Press, responding to objections from Mark McAfee, came out with a correction on its original story about Organic Pastures Dairy Co., saying two families filed suit over the illnesses, not five as previously reported. No, it’s not a huge correction, but when you’re dealing with establishment media like the Associated Press, any correction is a big deal—they hate to admit fallibility.
The only one who didn’t have a good day yesterday was Mark Nolt, the Pennsylvania producer of raw milk, who was found guilty on three more counts of selling raw dairy products without a license. According to a press report, he didn’t offer any defense. That definitely doesn’t work in the raw milk arena.
Which brings me back to the California situation. Mark McAfee is very upbeat, feeling that in yesterday committee vote, “The big hurdle has been overcome.”
He may be right, but I continue to worry about the California Department of Food and Agriculture. It has been silent on SB 201, supposedly because it’s not supposed to take a stand on legislation, but we know that its influence was key last January in preventing AB 1735 from being rescinded.
The fact is, the battle of SB 201 is just another chapter in a long bitterly fought battle that sometimes seems to be a personal battle of wills between the CDFA and Mark McAfee. Because Mark has decided to put himself out there, and sometimes seems to be changing his story, he takes a huge amount of heat, witness the first comment following my previous post.
Now, I presume curious is suggesting that Mark Calhoun’s response, because it sounds so lawyerly and dignified, is the accurate one. Yet we know from Mary McGonigle Martin’s frequent posts last year that no evidence of E.coli 0157:H7 was ever found in her son; thus, Calhoun’s statement about “6 children with identical, culture-confirmed cases of E-coli O157:H7,” is wrong.
It’s gotten so no one even knows any more if it was five children who had the identical E.coli 0157:H7 or six; three children who were hospitalized or two, a boy who drank milk at a friend’s or a girl, five children who consumed raw-milk products or six, two families who filed suit or five, and so on and so on.
Like many of the people here, Mark McAfee has told the story so many times, with a number of variations, that his version can’t be any more certain than Mark Calhoun’s. Mark McAfee, though, is one person who’s been under tremendous pressure–his complete livelihood is at stake–and hasn’t backed off any of the shots thrown at him. I’ve never met a business person, and I’ve met a lot, who’s been so unflinching and willing to answer questioners and critics, and I’m not sure this is totally a compliment.
But we should expect some consistency and forthrightness from the government regulators who are paid millions of dollars to protect us from real health problems, and here is where I have the biggest issue. Remember, CDFA declined two public requests from Sen. Dean Florez to testify at his hearing in April on SB 201, arousing his anger. It’s made no effort to try to clarify the numerous examples of inconsistency in the state public health report on the illnesses, and later the Centers for Disease Control report that repeated the same data.
I am a worrier by nature, but when I worry about what tricks the CDFA may have up its sleeve to spread disinformation and otherwise try to derail SB 201, I’m not so sure I’m off base.
Every time I drink a glass of OPDC Real Milk, I think what an unbelievable job Mark McAfee has done to get this thing turned around so I may have the choice and Freedom to drink Real Milk. I just got back from the Midwest and had to drink a Milk product for 4 days, I dont know if I could have done what he has done for so long, since over a year ago!
As much as everyone here loves to blast Mark McAfee, and I have been reading for a long time, if it wasnt for him, Real Milk would by now be extinct from California.
So quit living in the past, wake up and support the right to choose Real Milk and food choices, especially if you drink Real Milk from OPDC. If you dont thats okay too, Im sure we will continue to hear your socialistic viewpoints.
Cheers!
The Assembly analysis was posted.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0201-0250/sb_201_cfa_20080623_111728_asm_comm.html
SB 201
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Alliance of Western Milk Producers
California Dairy Institute
California Real Milk Association
Organic Pastures Dairy Company LLC
National Association of Nutrition Professionals
Western United Dairymen
Several individuals
Opposition
Health Officers Association of California
Excerpt:
Date of Hearing: June 24, 2008
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
Mervyn M. Dymally, Chair
SB 201 (Florez) – As Amended: June 18, 2008
SENATE VOTE : Not relevant
SUBJECT : Dairy farms: raw milk: testing: standards.
COMMENTS :
1)PURPOSE OF THIS BILL . According to the author, current law
requiring raw milk to test at or below the limit of 10
coliform bacteria per milliliter is too restrictive and will
result in driving California’s two raw milk dairies out of
business and removing the availability of raw milk on store
shelves. The author asserts that the 10 coliform count is
impossible for these particular dairies to meet consistently
because coliform bacteria are regularly present in the
environment and in cows and the nature of their business
requires the milk to be in an unpasteurized state.
Furthermore, the author contends that the 10 coliform standard
is largely a measure of sanitation and less a measurement of
the presence of harmful bacteria. Consequently, the author
states that this bill proposes a more effective but less
restrictive approach to sanitation and microbial standards by
requiring raw milk dairies that choose to opt in to develop
and maintain a HACCP plan to address every critical process on
the dairy. The author adds that this bill also subjects raw
milk dairies to rigorous testing absent in current law by
requiring them to submit samples to independent and
state-approved laboratories at least twice per week.
2)COLIFORM . According to CDFA, coliforms are a group of
bacteria commonly found in the environment, including soil,
surface water, vegetation, and the intestinal tracts of
warm-blooded animals. Most coliforms do not cause disease,
but a small percentage, including E. coli, salmonella,
listeria, and campylobacter, can cause illness in people,
especially young children, the elderly, and those with
weakened immune systems. Since most coliform bacteria are not
harmful, the finding of coliforms in milk does not necessarily
mean that a disease causing, or pathogenic, form of the
bacteria is present. However, elevated coliform counts in
milk and dairy products suggest unsanitary conditions exist
during production, processing or packaging. In the dairy farm
setting, a coliform count is a useful indicator of the extent
of fecal bacteria in the milk, and is a recognized index of
the level of sanitation at a facility.
CDFA states that the process of pasteurization easily kills
coliform bacteria in dairy products. Therefore, according to
CDFA, the finding of coliforms in pasteurized products
indicates some level of contamination has occurred after
pasteurization during product manufacturing or packaging. For
milk sold raw, where no intervening pasteurization step is
utilized, CDFA indicates that coliform counts reflect
sanitation practices throughout milk handling, from the cow to
final bottling. In addition to food safety and public health
concerns, coliforms, along with other bacteria, may produce
off flavors in milk and reduce shelf life of dairy products.
CDFA advises that strict sanitary practices be followed to
minimize the risk to people consuming raw milk products,
including thorough cleansing and sanitization of all the
milking system equipment, proper herd health maintenance,
proper hygiene control for employees, sufficient refrigeration
for proper cooling and storage, and cross-contamination
prevention.
3)BACKGROUND LITIGATION . AB 1735 (Committee on Agriculture),
Chapter 339, Statutes of 2007, establishes a limit of 10
coliform bacteria per milliliter of raw milk that is sold to
consumers. After the bill became law, opposition, including
the state’s two raw milk producers and raw milk consumers,
came forward and raised concerns that this standard could not
be met and consumers may not have access to raw milk. In
March 2008, the Hollister Superior Court in San Benito County
granted the state’s two raw milk dairy operators, Claravale
Dairy, Inc., and Organic Pastures Dairy Company, LLC., a
temporary restraining order (TRO) enjoining and barring CDFA
from using the 10 coliform count as a measure in raw milk
production based on arguments from the dairy operators that
the new standard is unnecessary and raw milk naturally
contains helpful bacteria that neutralize harmful bacteria.
However, in May 2008, the court denied a request by the dairy
operators for a preliminary injunction to continue prohibiting
the state from enforcing the 10 coliform standard for raw milk
and ordered the earlier TRO dissolved after the state argued
that it had a rational basis for establishing the standard in
AB 1735 in order to protect the public from food-related
illness.
4)RECENT RECALLS . In September 2006, CDFA announced a
statewide recall and quarantine order of raw milk produced by
Organic Pastures in Fresno County. Under the recall, all
Organic Pastures whole and skim raw milk was pulled
immediately from retail shelves. The quarantine order came
following a report that raw milk caused bacterial illness,
identified as E. coli, in a 10-year old girl and a subsequent
investigation by DPH (formerly the Department of Health
Services) detected two additional bacterial illnesses in
children consuming raw milk. Epidemiologic data collected by
DPH at the time pointed to a link in all three cases with
Organic Pastures raw milk but, according to CDFA, laboratory
samples of raw milk from the dairy did not detect E. coli
contamination. In September 2007, CDFA issued an order to
withdraw Organic Pastures raw cream from retail distribution
when listeria bacteria was detected as a result of product
testing conducted as part of routine inspection and sample
collection at the facility. According to Organic Pastures,
the cream was purchased from a non-raw milk dairy.
5)RECENT INFORMATIONAL HEARING . In April 2008, the Senate
Agriculture Committee and Senate Select Committee on
Food-Borne Illness convened a joint informational hearing
related to farm fresh milk. Panels of interested
stakeholders, representing scientists, public health
officials, raw milk dairies, raw milk retailers, and raw milk
consumers provided testimony regarding public health concerns,
product safety, potential benefits of unprocessed milk, and
consumer choice. During the hearing, participants noted that
raw milk processing lacks a single critical control point, or
kill-step, such as pasteurization, that is designed to
eliminate pathogens in the milk. Some scientists suggested a
HACCP plan as an alternative to the current single 10 coliform
count test performed once a month because it focuses on the
end result as an indicator of sanitation while a HACCP plan
focuses on sanitation throughout the entire milking process by
requiring monitoring, employee training, record-keeping, and
verification. While other experts pointed to the risks for
illness associated with the consumption of raw milk and cited
the federal Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) warning that
it is inherently dangerous, several raw milk consumers
insisted that milk in its natural state is full of beneficial
enzymes, vitamins, proteins, and good bacteria that help to
counter conditions as diverse as lactose intolerance, asthma,
allergies, ear infections, and autism.
6)DAIRY HACCP PLANS . According to the FDA, a HACCP plan is a
systematic approach to identifying, evaluating, and
controlling food safety hazards. A dairy HACCP plan covers
the entire dairy foods manufacturing process starting with the
cow and finishing with the consumption of the final product.
The HACCP plan identifies chemical, physical, or microbial
hazards associated with the production and distribution of
milk and minimizes these hazards by monitoring and controlling
the process at carefully selected points known as critical
control points (CCPs) to ensure safe dairy products. In
instituting a HACCP plan, microbial and operational expertise
is needed to systematically and scientifically evaluate a
product’s process from raw materials through distribution.
The dairy HACCP plan includes a process to verify that the
CCPs have been met, a corrective action plan to address
instances in which the CCPs are not met, and a record keeping
system to document compliance with the HACCP plan. The plan
is reviewed as part of a facility’s routine permitting
inspection.
7)FEDERAL RAW MILK POLICY . Federal law requires milk that is
shipped across state lines to be pasteurized. The FDA
maintains on its Website that raw milk should not be consumed
by anyone at any time for any purpose and may contain harmful
pathogens, including but not limited to, E. coli, salmonella,
listeria, and campylobacter. The FDA’s Website also cites
statistics from the federal Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) indicating that from 1998 to 2005, there were
45 outbreaks of food-borne illness in which unpasteurized milk
or cheese likely made from unpasteurized milk were implicated.
Lastly, the FDA asserts that pasteurization protects
consumers because it kills the pathogenic bacteria through the
heating process while raw milk potentially harbors a wide
range of dangerous pathogens that can cause illness.
8)OTHER STATES . Raw milk policy varies greatly across the
nation, with some states banning the sale of raw milk.
California, Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Washington have
specific coliform standards for milk sold raw to consumers.
9)SUPPORT . The California Real Milk Association (CREMA) writes
in support that this strikes the appropriate balance between
protecting the safety of raw milk products and ensuring that
these products are available on retail shelves for the 40,000
raw milk consumers in California. CREMA asserts that this
bill proposes more stringent standards for farm fresh milk
than what is provided under current law and ensures that
thousands of consumers and their children have access to this
whole and unprocessed food to maintain health. Organic
Pastures points out in support that pasteurized milk, like raw
milk, is not without its own set of risks and it has also been
linked to food-borne illness. Organic Pastures asserts that,
regardless of the risks associated with farm fresh milk,
consumers should be entitled to choose whether or not they
want to drink it. The National Association of Nutrition
Professionals notes that this bill allows consumers to
continue to purchase raw milk but makes certain that it is
safe by, among other things, prohibiting raw milk dairies from
receiving milk from non-raw milk dairies. Lastly, dairy trade
organizations state that this bill keeps the existing coliform
bacteria standard in place, and in addition, provides an
alternative safety program that a raw milk producer/processor
can use to meet sanitation standards that dairy product
consumers insist upon.
10)OPPOSITION . The Health Officers Association of California
(HOAC) contends in opposition that this bill is an attempt to
circumvent the existing 10 coliform standard by allowing raw
milk dairies to establish internal HACCP plans at various
points in the production process. HOAC asserts that the
current coliform standard is not an unreasonable burden for
raw milk producers to meet as long as they maintain proper
cleaning and care of the animals and appropriate sanitary
practices for workers and equipment.
11)RELATED LEGISLATION . AB 2284 (Galgiani) makes changes to the
cooling requirements for storage and transportation of
pasteurized and market, including raw, milk. AB 2284 is
pending in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
12)PRIOR LEGISLATION .
a) AB 1735 (Committee on Agriculture), Chapter 339,
Statutes of 2007, establishes a limit of 10 coliform
bacteria per milliliter of raw milk that is sold to
consumers.
b) AB 1604 (Parra) would have repealed the current standard
of 10 coliform bacteria or less per milliliter for raw milk
that is sold to the public and required enforcement of the
coliform bacteria standard to be suspended until June 30,
2008. AB 1604 was referred to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee but never received a hearing.
13)SUGGESTED TECHNICAL AMENDMENT . On page 4, line 15, insert a
period after "milk".
14)DOUBLE REFERRAL . This bill has been double-referred. Should
this bill pass out of this committee, it will be referred to
the Assembly Committee on Agriculture.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/mss/press/May2008/Calhoun%20mortgage%20fraud.pdf
http://www.calhoun.typepad.com/
Congrats for the degree.
http://blog.markcalhoun.com/
Soldier from Iraq.
Or this Mark Calhoun? ~~>http://www.vegsource.com/talk/healingheart//messages/1201509.html
"Geez Sylvia, you went through all of that just to bash the guys opinion???"
Wow, You ask an honest question and you get smart-asses. Is there a reason to be so rude? Does it matter who he is? Nope, it sure doesn’t. I was curious,hadn’t heard the name, thought it may have been someone who I’d wish to read more about. Is that a crime? Appears to be to you.
In what way did I "bash the guys opinion"? I asked who he was and the two of you respond in a very immature manner.
It is *because* Mark McAfee is the most visible raw milk producer out there that I have particularly grave concerns about the outsourcing of cream and colostrum from non raw milk dairies and his apparent lack of a grip on the facts. If he were not so high profile, I would consider the seemingly unethical practices and sometimes unfortunate way with words to be purely his own business. Like it or not, he is the poster boy for our cause and as such I wish he were a more "impeccable warrior" as Don Juan would say.
A huge thank you to Senator Dean Florez, Josh Walters Esq ( Florez staff ) , Assemblywoman Nicole Parra, Assemblyman Tom Berryhill, Walter Robb Wholefoods President, Christine Chessen ( Co-founder CREMA), Dr. Robert Irons, Dr. Ron Hull, Dr. Ted Beals, Patty Glaviano ( raw milk super mom ) Sally Fallon WAP and Aajonus for their testimony and work to help pass SB 201.
Andthe greatest thanks go to the thousands of raw milk supporters and callers from all over CA, the nation and the world that called begging the Assembly members support for SB 201 -The Fresh Raw Milk Act of 2008. The bill is considered by many to be the premier model for how raw should be regulated in the future.
When passed it will be the raw milk standard and bench mark for the next 100 years.
It is not over and it is not law yet. but the greatest apparent hurdles have been passed with 100% consent.
More work is yet to be done we are so much closer now than ever.
Most kind regards,
Mark McAfee
OPDC
I’d hate to have every word I said quoted and examined. The inconsistencies would be too numerous to count. Mark’s overall message is consistently clear. He has courage and conviction, and I appreciate his taking the arrows on our behalf.
Sylvia – I googled Calhoun too. 🙂
Whatever his/her name is, the post smelled like a mole’s carefully worded plant. Sort of like the FDA’s reiteration of "facts" that are meant to intimidate and scare.
This debate has doubt, fear and righteousness kicked about like hackysacks. I hope truth wins.
-Blair
What’s more, the information given by this poster is often inaccurate, and often rude and inciteful. I have spent most of today catching up on my email and blogs, and after hours of this, when I stop by here, a blog that pertains to an issue I care about, I have to ignore such behavior as irrelevant. Sylvia, I’ve been reading much more informative stuff today. Thanks for trying to find out if the author wouldn’t.
Thank you, Mark McAfee, from me personally. Never had your milk, but thank you.
Gwen (my real name)