As I watch this whole tomato contamination fiasco unfold—more than 500 people are reported to have become ill from salmonella in tomatoes—I can’t help but think that an important educational event is also taking place.
The media act out what Ken Conrad aptly describes following my previous post as “the psychological madness” that grips the country about bacteria. The media tell us the problem is that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration doesn’t have enough money to search out the pathogens, and that each tomato needs a bar code so it can be traced back to the farm it came from. I thought it was a reallocation of FDA agents that’s been the problem—just re-assign all the agents investigating raw milk. And how about a National Veggie Identification System to supplement the National Animal Identification System?
But I diverge. The media also report that consumers are acting much more rationally than the regulators. Consumers are heading to farmers markets to buy tomatoes because they know locally grown foods are much likelier to be safe.
And then there’s another counter-agribusiness trend: farmers in traditionally non-commodity areas are growing commodities like wheat.The rising prices of commodities are making farming more attractive in places like Vermont, which were decimated by the commodity milk economy.
The idea that our existing food system is unsustainable has been gathering steam over the last few years. A more recent idea is that food shouldn’t necessarily be cheap. When you consider the labor that goes into growing it, food should be more expensive. Now the rise in energy costs is making commodities more expensive, and creating incentives for small farms.
In the end, the tomato outbreak, on top of all the previous food-borne illnesses involving spinach, ground beef, and fast foods, may wind up having a positive effect. It may signal the unsustainability of agribusiness, and the need for something not only more sustainable, but more local, and more profitable.
***
Update: Aajonus Vonderplanitz seems to have had a change of heart about SB 201, the proposed California legislation designed to fix AB 1735’s coliform standard. In an email, he advises raw milk consumers to call their legislators on behalf of SB 201, saying the new proposal "is a temporary fix to keep raw milk on shelves until we can force the State to annul AB 1735’s coliform-count regulations that became law in January 2008."
(Mark McAfee)
To set the record straight about illnesses alleged to be caused by OPDC raw milk please review these facts;
There were two sick kids and not five or six as charged. The CDC report is extremely biased and the facts it contains is actually a basis for full exoneration of OPDC as the source of potential illness.
There is no evidence what so ever that more than two children were ever admitted to a hospital. Please show us any evidence that more than two kids ever stayed at a hosptial. It does not exist.
One of the two sick kids wore a wrist band placed by a doctor who had suspected ecoli that said do not give antibiotics. The hospital went ahead and gave antibiotics and with in hours it is reported that full blown life threatening HUS nearly killed the child. This is malpractice. nearly everyone in medicine should know that ecoli 0157H7 is highly antibiotic resistant. It does not work and instead kills off the bodies defending good bacteria and dramatically reduces the defensive ability of the immune system.
The two kids admitted to Loma Linda did indeed become very sick. They also fully recovered by the time the recall had been initiated on Sept 21st 2006. I know I visited them at Loma Linda and they were fully recovered not sick at all. But…both had consumed spinach ( their ilness was at the peak of the spinach crisis that killed three and sickened hundreds in September 2006 ) and this is in their medical records. The stool fecal samples taken from the two kids did not match. In fact one had ecoli 0157H7 and the other did not show Ecoli but rather a form of Shigella. THEY DID NOT MATCH EACH OTHER. If the source of their illness was common… their pathogens would have been common!! This is the smoking gun of the bias and anti raw milk fervor at the CDC and FDA. They hate raw milk and will do any thing, say anything, and print anything including lies to make their political agenda stick.
Lastly, the state of CA wrote an $11,700 dollar check and signed a binding settlement agreement to settle this recall. They came to OPDC and signed a "release of liability agreement" because no link could be found and no liability could be established for the false recall and unfounded quarantine of OPDC products. That is right not one single shread of evidence could be found that linked any sick kids with OPDC products. That is not in the CDC report. They just say that no link could be established!!
It is as if when something bad happens the FDA whips raw dairy products to distract us all from the real causes of illness and disease. We are the whipping boy but have done no wrong.
If raw milk so bad… show me the dead bodies. They do not exist. The FDA hates raw milk because instead of dead bodies we have live bodies and they are filled with health and better immune systems because of raw milk.
Mark McAfee
Founder OPDC
1-877 RAW MILK
Posted by: mark mcafee at June 21, 2008 1:50 PM
Dear Mr. McAfee,
As if the tragedy of sick children is not enough, your descriptions, finger pointing and excuses are appalling and will certainly stand as some of the most cowardly displays of professionalism that have arisen from this unfortunate outbreak event. Even more unfortunate is that there is apparently no end to your dishonorable behavior as you continue to repeat the same unsubstantiated remarks even years after the fact, as if that repetition will somehow make them true.
Your lack of compassion for those children, your customers made ill, is truly unsettling but not nearly as disturbing as your comments afterward. While feigning interest in their welfare by visiting them in the hospital your statements have belittled their injuries, maligned dedicated medical practitioners by accusing them of malpractice, which you are unqualified to do and then you indicate that your exoneration somehow lies within the private medical records of these individuals that neither you or the general public will ever be privy to. How convenient.
What we are privy to however is the report from the California Department of Health Services dated February 6, 2007. This report indicates 6 children with identical, culture-confirmed cases of E-coli O157:H7, three of those children were hospitalized and two developed Hemolytic Urea Syndrome (HUS). All of them had a common link through consumption of your dairy products yet none of their E-coli DNA patterns matched the strain that was universally identified in the spinach outbreak that occurred at the same time. This completely invalidates your assertions that spinach was ultimately responsible for their illness and your credibility suffers as you continue to repeat these accusations.
Lastly, while you are quick to indict government regulatory agencies for malice and conspiracy you have been less than forthcoming in regard to your practices that allowed outsourcing from other dairies, which you were reluctant to disclose. This includes the now infamous Vander Eyk dairy which lost its organic certification soon after this outbreak happened for failure to follow commonly accepted organic standards. So while you are adamant about the safety and quality of your own product you were, at one time anyway, less discerning about those same issues for other producers even when you were selling their product under your label.
It is very possible that the true source of this outbreak will never be identified or the true dairy producer was not correctly identified. Whatever the reason, neither the outbreak itself or the pending litigation from it has inspired any humility in you or tamed your arrogance regarding this event. What this difficult situation has done unfortunately is provide an unpleasant insight into your lack of professional character and an ongoing forum to demonstrate your lack of integrity.
Posted by: Mark Calhoun at June 22, 2008 2:22 PM
An essential but perhaps unstated component of a successful HACCP program is honesty. If honesty is not part of the company’s culture and business model, the process will fail no matter how many tests, inspections, and audits are conducted.
Some interesting background about the origin of HACCP from the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (warning: not very raw foods oriented):
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/71427main_Space_Food_Spinoff_FS-2004-08-007-JSC.pdf
C2
More pertinent to humans (perhaps), was sometime within the last year the Weston A. Price quarterly journal published an article on Aruyvedic (Hindu) medicine and practices in India. Traditional uses for cow dung include packing it on the ground inside houses to make a solid floor, and medicinal uses include using it as a compress over wounds, resulting in significant healing power. I can’t recall whether it is eaten, but one salient report in the article was that such practices are falling away because the dung from cows fed a modern diet (including grains, although I’m uncertain in my recall and I’ve loaned the magazine out) is no longer safe for use in these traditional ways.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2315737&dopt=Abstract
Using talc (as westerners do) can be hazardous also.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002719.htm
http://www.nebraska.tv/Global/story.asp?S=8545880
The numbers sick keep raising; over 600. David is right, this outbreak will open more eyes to the fiasco of the govt’s inspection/protection system and drive more towards the local markets. A small boost to the local economy.
We can’t continue to obliterate stable healthy communities of soil bacteria by plowing,compacting,spraying with toxic(to soil bacteria) chemicals,fertilizing with toxic fertilizers,and oversaturating the soil with pathogen laden manure from sick livestock.
This system is simply not sustainable and will very soon leave us with nothing safe or nutritionally valuable to eat.Until we address the issue of soil health there is nothing that can be done to make our food safe.
http://www.foodsafety.ksu.edu/en/article-details.php?a=3&c=32&sc=419&id=1197
"The risk of contamination of produce due to Salmonella spp. was found to be increased when soil and water were present, and that soil and water actually act as reservoirs of the pathogen. Xuan and colleagues (2002) found that soil and water were factors in the infiltration of salmonella into the tissues of tomato. This supports the theory that preharvest contact with contaminated soil or water increased the contamination potential by certain pathogens and can lead to problems in pathogen removal and the efficacy of sanitizers."
"The uptake of Salmonella spp. by roots of hydroponically grown tomato plants has also been shown. Within one day of exposure to a high concentration mixture of Salmonella spp. pathogen cells were found in the hypocotyls, cotyledons, stems and leaves of young plants; though whether fruit is affected is not known at this time (Guo et al., 2002).
In a 2006 review, Vectors and conditions for preharvest contamination of fruits and vegetables with pathogens capable of causing enteric diseases, Larry Beuchat of the Center for Food Safety and Department of Food Science and Technology at the University of Georgia, concluded:
"Manure, manure compost, sewage, sludge, irrigation water, and runoff water represent avenues for introduction of pathogenic bacteria, parasites, and viruses to soil in which fruits and vegetables intended to be eaten raw are grown. Pathogens vary in their
ability to survive in soil amendments and in soil. Inactivation rates and persistence in soil are also influenced by soil type, rainfall, temperature, and agronomic practices. Some pathogens can survive in soil for periods of time exceeding those needed to grow
plants from seeds or seedlings to the point of harvest. Pathogens originating from preharvest environments may contaminate the surface of produce and evidence is mounting that contamination of internal tissues can also occur. Prevention of preharvest contamination of fruits and vegetables is an essential part of a systems approach focused on applying interventions designed to achieve delivery of microbiologically safe produce to the consumer.""
http://www.efficientmicrobes.co.za/AboutEM.aspx
"Summary
The different species of effective micro organisms (Photosynthetic, Lactic acid bacteria and Yeast) have their respective functions. However, photosynthetic bacteria could be considered the focus of EM activity. Photosynthetic bacteria support the activities of the other microbes. This phenomenon is termed "Coexistence" and "Coprosperity".
The enhancement of populations of EM in soils by its application promotes the development of existing beneficial soil micro organisms. Thus, the micro flora of the soil becomes abundant; thereby the soil develops a well-balanced microbial system. In this process harmful species are suppressed, thereby reducing microbial species that cause soil born diseases. This results in plants growing exceptionally well in soils which are dominated by beneficial and effective micro organisms. Use of EM improves soil conditions resulting in greater yields, and healthier more nutritious plants.
History of EM
Throughout the 1970s and 80s Dr. Higa pioneered the research that led to the development and commercialization of EM technology. This natural biotechnology has since been successfully commercialized throughout world markets in human health, agriculture, livestock and industrial waste treatment. Thousands of research and efficacy studies have been conducted and documented in projects, conferences and books around the world.
Originally, EM was developed for use in agriculture (crop farming) as an alternative to agricultural chemicals such as pesticides and fertilizers. EM however is not a conventional fertilizer and unlike the purpose of fertilizers, the purpose of EM is to increase the number of beneficial micro organisms in the soil. This improves the soil’s microbial health and promotes a healthy environment for plants. It can also be used as a processing tool to manufacture organic fertilizers.
From crop farming, its application flowed naturally into livestock. EM is actively used in livestock operations, including hog, cattle/dairy, and poultry. From livestock, the positive effects on the livestock waste and effluent into lagoons and rivers led to the use of EM for environmental purposes: from land/soil remediation to water purification. EM environmental applications throughout the world have included cleaning polluted waterways, lakes and lagoons, in septic systems, municipal wastewater treatment plants, and landfills/dump sites. As EM became used extensively in livestock, research began into its use as a functional food supplement for human health. It was discovered that EM exhibits very beneficial effects as an antioxidant and probiotic on the digestive system."
So based on these Youtube and blog posts, we have all the evidence we need and to heck with due process? I’ve been following most of the posts but the stories don’t add up. It is loud, but not clear. Who is Mark Calhoun, and why does he trust public records? Why wasn’t the outsourced dairy tested?
Steve and Sylvia thanks for the good information. I don’t suppose anyone is going to purposely try a little manure in their milk, but apparently it used to be a safe practice.
When salt was retrieved from the sea, I thought it contained trace amounts of iodine? Also read that high consumption of omega-3 oils increases one’s iodine demand. It’s never simple, huh.
Steve – Switching my dogs to a raw diet cleared up poor coat, bad teeth, chronic ear infections and chronic itching. Oh, and wicked chronic vet bills. It’s not convenient but it sure reaps rewards.
I don’t think this growing awareness is
just from tainted tomatoes or spinach or ground beef – evidence is streaming in from all over that we’ve been hoodwinked (or just lazy?) for decades about medicine, milk, human and canine health, government integrity and economic vitality.
-Blair
A product called Nature’s Variety packages a frozen raw diet (chicken, lamb, & beef) for pets. It comes in easy to serve medallions. Fruit, veggies, egss, bone, liver, etc, are also mixed. The only negative is that it is not organic.
when i farmed (in a past life) my friend and i tried EM with amazing results. what an amazingly good thing to have if you are growing vegetables! a little goes a long way.
Meanwhile, the Assembly Health Committee in California just voted unanimously to approve SB201 – the Assembly Agriculture Committee is tomorrow (keep those cards and letters coming), and if approved there, it will be put to full Assembly vote.
Maybe, just maybe, the message is getting through.
http://www.ific.org/foodinsight/2008/ma/omegasfi208.cfm
These links briefly explain the balance between the omega-6 and omega-3.