Just because I’m suggesting that we be a little kinder to each other, and to a handful of individuals who disagree with the majority on raw milk regulation, doesn’t mean I hold any illusions about the regulators.

Basically, the regulators, starting at the top with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, are determined to eliminate our supply of raw milk. If they can’t eliminate it, they want to reduce the supply as much as possible. That’s why they have focused so much time and energy going after Mark McAfee and his Organic Pastures Dairy Co. with federal indictments, even threatening him with jail—all over selling milk to individuals, and God forbid, for their animals, outside California.

OPDC is the nation’s largest single seller of raw milk, by a large amount, supplying likely close to 10% of the nation’s raw milk (40,000 customers out of an estimated 500,000 raw milk consumers nationally). If they can eliminate Mark, they will have scored a huge psychological victory, as well as having eliminated a major source of raw milk in the U.S.

The FDA pushes the states to do its dirty work on intrastate sales and distribution of raw milk. Now state regulators are using a single outbreak in Connecticut to eliminate retail sales of raw milk there.

And as we well know, the regulators have been merciless in harassing dairy farmers in New York and Pennsylvania who have dared to challenge their strong-arm tactics.

An Observer is correct when he/she says following my previous post: “…raw dairy is viewed differently by public health. All the insults in the world are not likely to change that.”

What I find revealing is that, aside from An Observer, Concerned Person, and an occasional few others, the regulator community refuses to come out of the darkness and discuss reasonable compromises like those Steve Bemis has come up with and discussed extensively and constructively with others on this blog. I think the reason they won’t is that the regulators have their eye on the bigger prize I described earlier—the entire elimination of raw milk.

The reason they won’t emerge into the sunlight is that they fear being blinded—by reason and truth. If they have to discuss the issue, they can’t reasonably conclude that raw milk should be eliminated. And once they do that, well, you get into the related issues of food sanitization, excessive processing of our food, misguided policies on registering animals and…before you know it, the entire Germ Theory is in danger. That’s why it’s so important to the regulators. To the extent they keep a lid on the truth about raw milk—that it is as safe or more safe than many other popular foods, and highly nutritious to boot—they can do their dirty work on other issues as well.

The regulators’ real problem is that the word is getting out, and ordinary people are coming to understand the lies that have been perpetrated. On blogs and listserves, more and more people are inquiring about raw milk, and on YouTube, young families and would-be broadcasters are singing the praises of raw milk.

Truth has a way of winning out. It has an easier time if proponents are both fully committed and united. President Barack Obama said it well yesterday when he declared: “What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.”

***

Thank you, Gwen Elderberry, for naming a goat after me. I am truly touched. I’ve never had a person or animal named after me. May Gumpert the goat be prolific, and his offspring produce huge quantities of highly nutritious milk that is consumed far and wide.