I want to probe a little further on the issue of my last post, about the brickbats being tentatively tossed by an ally at dairy chief John Sheehan and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
What struck me is that his friend, consultant Roy Costa, was expressing concern over substance rather than tactics.
I’ve seen and heard some questioning of the FDA over tactics, as in, “Raids and sting operations against small dairies aren’t winning us any friends, so what other tactics can we use to get these raw milk people to give up on this craziness?” But Costa is asking more fundamental questions: What if we’re wrong? What if there is something to what raw milk drinkers are saying?
I don’t expect Sheehan to suddenly begin scratching his head and saying, “Gee, maybe Costa is on to something.” But I expect that if one respected food protection guru is questioning him publicly, a good number of others are questioning him privately. At the International Association for Food Protection conference in February, there were a few rumblings about coming up with new ways to provide “protection.” It appears Lykke, who often represents the regulator viewpoint on this blog, isn’t a lone wolf.
Mark McAfee, in his comment on my previous post, alludes to the upcoming National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments, where his proposal to lift the prohibition on interstate milk shipments will be debated (along with herdshares). Interestingly, there are stirrings among regulators, encouraging each other to be sure to make themselves heard opposing Mark’s proposal.
Now, it’s possible to view these rumblings over a possible shift in the raw milk debate in either of two ways. One is to see it as a potential opportunity to begin initiating changes in the way the government approaches nutrition and food protection. For example, encouraging research to answer some of the questions posed on this blog—like what distinguishes people who become ill?
Another is to view these the way Paul Hubbard views it: unless you come around completely to our way of thinking, there’s nothing to talk about. Or Miguel’s view—let’s debate our theories and see which one is “right.”
There’s a temptation in what Paul and Miguel suggest, but unfortunately, their approaches are just not, in my view, practical in terms of furthering real change. For all the controversy Mark McAfee stirs up, he is taking an activist political approach, writing letters and filing petitions, attending official meetings and seeking debate.
The raw milk “problem” is, fundamentally, a political problem. As Shana Milkie points out, it’s a political problem not dissimilar from home schooling. The FDA controls much of what happens at the state level. I’ve said before, this is an ideological battle. The only way to resolve ideological battles is for either one side or the other to score a knockout (as the “free world” did to the Soviet Block in 1991), or for moderates on both sides of the fight to begin working out compromises that the ideologues can eventually grasp on to.
A good first start would be to launch some high-profile research on both the nutritional benefits and potential dangers of raw milk. That would help get the sides speaking with each other. Right now, there’s very little in the way of meaningful communication.
Unfortunately, so long as raw milk advocates say there’s nothing to discuss until the regulators change their view of the Germ Theory or admit raw milk is a beneficial food, well, nothing will be discussed.
"Miguel, Notice there is no response to you blog. Not surprising considering CP’s emotional flame."
From you question on the other post since it seems to fit with David’s new post….as far as continuing that discussion with miguel, I believe it has reached the point of "agree to disagree." I’ve agreed that the European papers show an association between raw milk consumption and protection against allergic conditions; also agreed that probiotics are beneficial and "gut immunity" is important; and, small farming is a critical part of our US landscape that we are in danger of losing.
All that said, raw milk can carry pathogens, make people sick, and is not the be-all, end-all solution in the context of health. I am interested in exploring how to make the product as safe as possible for those who want to consume it, but the recent "food safety approaches" miguel has presented are not convincing. I can’t picture any regulator or food scientist that would embrace food safety measures for a raw food product like milk that depend on some undefined population of "good bacteria" and a "sniff test." Furthermore, a number of the "references" to back up these arguments just went to inflammatory, unrelated links like MRSA in pigs…
I think David is spot on with his comment:
"Unfortunately, so long as raw milk advocates say there’s nothing to discuss until the regulators change their view of the Germ Theory or admit raw milk is a beneficial food, well, nothing will be discussed."
The raw milk problem is a life or death problem for "this crazy" old man. My father died of lung cancer at 52 years old after smoking for 40 years with free access to the cancer sticks approve by whom? The whom are the same folks [system] that wants to deny me at 72 1/2 REAL FOOD RAW DAIRY. Whats wrong with this picture???
Another question. I believe that the author of the Old testatment places raw dairy at the very top of the food list that I should consume so in free America how much longer can I do that. It seems like there is a conflict between the state and the author of the OT at least in my view.
Coments or ridicule welcome I have thick skin [I think].
I wish all of you could join me at the NCIMS conference in Florida starting April 17th.
My petition to redress and amend CFR 1240.61 and allow tested and regulated retail approved raw milk to cross state lines will be heard by at least two committees.
What I find fascinating ( and I am rejoicing ) is the fact that the NCIMS petition and request for support for amendment is being heard b y committees that have several FDA members sitting on them. Dr. Steven Beam PhD from CDFA ( CDFA is the CA regulating agency for OPDC raw milk ) chairs one of the committees that will hear the petition and argument. This is huge!!!!!
Dr. Beam can vouch for OPDC, Claravale and CA raw milk safety and its track record. It was his very bright idea to make the standards for CA raw milk exactly the same as pasteurized milk in finished form ( AB 1735 and the less than 10 coliform count ). So he can brag that he has created the worlds safest and cleanest raw milk market and he is a super hero for raw milk standards.
This should be a really big opportunity to discuss raw milk in general and get out all the dogma and stuff that is dragged along with this issue. None of this applies to CA raw milk because of Dr.Beams tought and smart standards. This will put the entire issue into a new place and I am very interested to know where this open dialogue takes us all.
Bottom line is this…..raw milk is not made safer or more dangerous by physical location.
Raw milk does not know whether it is being drank in Las Vegas or Los Angeles. That is a fact that the FDA will find very difficult to argue against. If it is safe for CA shouldn’t it be safe for people living just beyond the state line???
The last point is about immunity and freedom. I will ask the FDA what it is that they are doing to enhance the immune systems of Americans. There answer will be interesting. I will also ask them what they are doing to shorten the ever growing list of pathogens.
I am not sure if they know what makes up an immune system to begin with.
We will see.
Mark McAfee
http://www.scivee.tv/node/8053
Understanding antibiotic resistance is an important part of understanding why the incidence of food poisoning is increasing.The microbiologists are telling us that the war on bacteria is having unexpected results.We have unintentionally changed the bacteria that we live with.By adding antibiotics and antimicrobial agents to our soil,water, food and bodies we are selecting from all of the bacteria in our world,those bacteria that have resistance to these antimicrobial substances.The side effect is that the microbes that used to compete with and control the populations of these resistant microbes have become a smaller percentage of the microbes we live with.
http://www.scivee.tv/node/8054
http://www.scivee.tv/node/8135
You will notice that these people are still saying that" pathogens cause disease",but when they say we are creating an ecosystem that selects for pathogens that are resistant to antimicrobials aren’t they telling us that the environment is really responsible for nurturing the pathogens ?You decide what the underlying cause of disease is.
It is not a good idea to come out and say that the germ theory is false for financial reasons .But these microbiologists seem to agree in substance with what I have said about antimicrobials in food being the underlying cause of disease.
The problem of antimicrobial resistance begins in the soil when manure filled with antimicrobials is spread on the soil.The soil is the reservoir of bacteria that is in our food and our gut.The change in our food safety system has to begin with the soil.
Antibiotic resistance of lactic acid bacteria and Bifidobacterium spp. isolated from dairy and pharmaceutical products
http://tiny.cc/wsMHl
Antibiotic resistance in food lactic acid bacteriaa review
http://tinyurl.com/c39om8
I do agree with you on several things.Raw milk sometimes is dangerous even though it doesn’t come from a factory farm.Our neighbors have milked cows on a small scale(10 to 15 cows) for many years.To them having enough manure to keep their land fertile was an important goal.So, they decided to build two hog confinement buildings housing 550 fattening hogs each.The manure from these hogs would be a large part of their profit from doing this.They contracted with one of the huge hog corporations to fill their hog hotels with hogs.They were very happy with all the manure they had to build the fertility of their soil.They gave their vegetable garden a liberal dressing of this liquid gold and plowed it under.They covered the cow pasture and hay fields liberally too.When the vegetables were ready to eat and the milk from the lush pasture was coming in ,they all began to feel ill.They had to avoid drinking the milk.They plowed the vegetables under and moved the garden to a place that hadn’t been fertilized with the pig manure.The antibiotic laden manure has filled their soil with antibiotic resistant microbes and killed off the susceptable organisms.They borrowed money to put up the hog hotels,so they are trapped in this miserable situation until they can pay off the loans.They are completely at the mercy of the large corporation that they contract with in order to keep the hog hotels filled and bringing in money.
What will the govt do to prohibit/prevent further contamination of our food supply with antibiotics? Or other chemicals?
http://www.enviroalternatives.com/foodcontaminated.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/yourhealth/6624467.html
Is the FDAs recommendation to eat 9 servings of fruit and vegetables per day? We have to be very careful to keep our consumption of contaminates at the minium. I am having a hard time understanding why tptb allow any contaminates to enter our food chain?
The govt has allowed the continued contamination in our food supply; medicine, herbicides/pesticides, irradiation, pasteurization. They are to blame for the adulteration of food and not informing the pubilc of the effects of consuming these contaminated foods.
Over the years there has been small stories in the media in reference to antimicrobe soaps and cleaners and how the "germs" where becoming immune to them. Neither the govt nor the media elaborated nor did they truely inform the public on the severity of it. IMHO
Miguel,
I think it was 6th grade science that we learned what goes into your soil will be picked up in produce and from grass fed animals and enter the food chain. Some MDs are suggesting to people on anibiotics to eat yogurt, after reading Lykke’s link, that may not help.
http://www.ethicurean.com/2009/03/19/digest-news-77/
"More squealing from the porkers: The National Pork Producers Council objects to federal legislation introduced Tuesday by Rep. Louise Slaughter (no pun intended, really), the only microbiologist in the U.S. Congress, that would restrict the use of medically-important antibiotics in livestock production. (Brownfield) Parke Wilde comments. (U.S. Food Policy) (See background post on the use of antibiotics and how it leads to superbugs in meat here)"
I hope this passes.
"What I’m hoping to do is get a system, whether it’s voluntary or MANDATORY"
"it [livestock tracking] must protect the country from market disruptions and homeland security threats"
Does this sound like CHANGE or just more of the same fearmongering? Does NAIS enter thru the front door or the back door?
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE52Q6FZ20090327
Nor will getting regulated/inspected raw milk available help us. For it was those regulations which have been part of the cause for the dramatic loss of dairies in this country. Giving bureaucrats the tools to arbitrarily shut us down (slowly or quickly) won’t help anything.
Why should I compromise my RIGHT to produce food to feed my family and my neighbor’s families? Why should I give control of how I produce food to bureaucrats who have a vested interest in maintaining the current economic status quo? The history of these regulations is one of driving small producers out of business to be replaced by dirty large scale production. Think about it, it is suicide.
We have reached the point of no return where there is no comprising or Big Brother will be spoon feeding us all!
When it was legal, product from California (OP – thank you Mark!) was my best option — but I do not believe they qualify as small or local.
You are probably right about exemptions. We just need to be careful of a two things: that ALL intrastate sales (direct to the consumer or not) are exempt from Federal regulations period, and that such exemptions apply to value added processing as well.
We don’t want to limit exemptions to selling commodity milk/wheat/meat and shut down all the butter/cheese/bread/jam making going on.
I’m grateful to collect research and comments provided by David, Miguel, Ken, Lykke, Don, Sylvia, Steve, Pete, Mark – all of you – should be required reading. Today I selected comments & links from 4 separate blogs to send to Colorado producers. Not enough, but plenty.
Raw Milk, Politics, Health & Freedom College – free and online!
It’s interesting being in catch-up mode; one realizes after reading comments sequentially that some links provided were not clicked on by some, because they repeat themselves and don’t address new concepts raised. (The GMO issue, the anti-biotic flood, for example). If you don’t read the links, or watch the videos, you don’t catch the gist of the dialogue, and we’re not all on the same page, and that slows us down.
However, I must say this is the most progressive blog I’ve ever seen. As in moving forward, with intelligent exchange, and respect for differing viewpoints. How can you learn if you only listen to those you agree with?
David Gumpert et al, thanks for this blog. Your journalism is exemplary, and your readers rock!
-Blair
Thank you so much for your kind words. I’m sure the people you mentioned will appreciate your compliments as well. They do most of the heavy lifting around here that makes for such interesting and enlightening discussion.
David