Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tacticalogic

Yep. Plus, it’s your body. Why do we presume consumers are too stupid to understand the risks?


40 posted on 12/21/2011 6:18:08 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: 1010RD
"Why do we presume consumers are too stupid to understand the risks?"
Because some always will be. Children fed the milk by their family may not know the difference between raw and pasturized. Part of the problem might be that the particular farmer in question does not have a perfect record. Forest Grove was cited in March 2010 by the FDA as the source of an outbreak of at least 12 cases of campylobacteriosis caused by raw milk. Furthermore, the company received a warning from the FDA in 2007 stemming from alleged illegal distribution of raw milk across state lines. If he hadn't been linked to the sickening of 13 people who bought his milk in Vandalia, Michigan, He might not have been on the Fed's radar.
I support the Sheriff and the Amish and have a brother who regularly buys raw milk, but allow me to blame the victim here for a moment by saying he started this by giving more than a dozen people food poisoning across state lines. Otherwise the taxpayer funded didlo's would most likely be back in their cubicles at the agency playing solitaire instead of going on a field trip to an Amish country dairy intent on busting somebody to thereby earn a promotion.
43 posted on 12/22/2011 12:38:29 AM PST by ME-262 (We need Term Limits for the federal house and senate. We need new Bums up there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: 1010RD
Why do we presume consumers are too stupid to understand the risks?

"We" aren't doing it. There's a particular mindset that makes some people think they're smarter than everyone else, and need to tell them what do do for their own good.

These people gravitate toward federal bureaucracies, where they can exercise that tendency, and Congress has turned control of virtually every aspect of our lives over to them, via the "substantial effects" doctrine of the Commerce Clause that started with Wickard v Filburn.

They've proven time and time again they cannot be trusted to exercise that power within the boundaries of common sense. It's time we took it back - the original intent of the Commerce Clause never granted them that power to start with. We let them have it as a matter of convenience, and that was a really bad idea.

54 posted on 12/22/2011 8:49:21 AM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson