 |
For Those Interested in the Research of Dr. Weston A. Price |
Posted on 11/11/2006 6:42:26 AM PST by CitadelArmyJag
The Raw Milk Wars Heat Up in Ohio
The state is aggressively pursuing farmers who make unpasteurized milk available to consumers. Will a Democratic governor declare a cease-fire?
Going Underground So intense is ODA's campaign against raw milk, the agency earlier this year even sent a written warning to Organic Pastures Dairy, the Fresno, Calif., dairy that tangled with California agriculture officials—against selling raw milk via mail order to Ohio residents. ODA's spokesperson readily acknowledges that it has no jurisdiction in California.
Mark McAfee, president of Organic Pastures, replied to the agency that the FDA doesn't prohibit interstate sales of his raw milk, since it's labeled as pet food, and then added this needle, "Please understand that there are literally thousands of people drinking raw milk in Ohio in the underground markets…this is only getting bigger and bigger."
As McAfee suggests, the ODA, along with other states, appears to be trying to hold back a tidal wave of demand. Food and agriculture officials are arguing that raw milk is dangerous, but too many consumers feel differently, seeing raw milk as a highly nutritious food capable of building their children's immune systems and relieving symptoms of ailments from asthma to autism.
New Regime When consumers want something so badly, they will pay enough that farmers will take the risk of supplying them with it, and in that sense, the comparison made to heroin and crack holds true.
One glimmer of hope for Ohio's enterprising dairies is Tuesday's election, which saw a Democrat, Ted Strickland, voted in as governor. According to Cox, this means that ODA's raw milk policy will almost certainly be replaced come early next year. It could also give impetus to stalled Ohio legislation that would allow farmer-to-consumer distribution of raw milk, such as via herd-sharing arrangements.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
How dare the government step in and tell a farmer that it is illegal to drink the milk from his own cow.
It all comes in from their inability to tax and make a buck off it.
|
For Those Interested in the Research of Dr. Weston A. Price |
Help me to understand this. What is wrong with pasteurizing milk?
I grew up on a farm and we actually owned our very own pasteurizer. You could pasteurize a gallon of milk at a time. When the time came that we no longer had our own milk cows, we bought raw milk from the local dairy and pasturized it.
Big Brother is watching out for you!
"..In May, 1943, Edsel Bryant Ford, son of auto magnate Henry Ford, died at the age of 49 in Detroit, of what some claimed was a broken heart. Biology, however, decreed that Ford died of undulant fever, apparently brought on by drinking unpasteurized milk from the Ford dairy herd, at the behest of his father's mistaken belief that all things natural must be good.
Sixty years later, raw, unpasteurized milk is gaining in popularity for many of the same reasons as the broader organic and natural foods movement: some people think it's healthier, some people think it tastes better, and for some people it's part of their religion. And some people get sick..."
"It all comes in from their inability to tax and make a buck off it."
BINGO!
The love of money is the root of all evil.
Not money. The love of it.
Down with Louis Pasteur!!
What's a plague or two among friends!!
Germs don't exist!!
"What is wrong with pasteurizing milk?"
Maybe pasteurizing destroys nutrients?
Is it proven to destroy nutrients? Or is this just another way to make a buck? We KNOW it destroys germs.
Well then we'd better start pasteurizing spinach. A lot of people got sick from it.
Why couldn't they tax it?
It's a sale like any other sale.
Whether it's smart to drink raw milk is a different issue, and the state has a legitimate interest in ensuring that food is safe, but I don't see the tax angle is being the reason for regulating it.
I am glad to help explain, but I need to run so this will be brief. Raw milk is a live food that is much more nutritious than pasteurized milk. Pasteurizing the milk, in many ways, destroys it. Additionally, w/ raw milk I can (and do) make yogurt, kefir, cottage cheese, whey, cream cheese, and many other things.
“Pasteurization destroys enzymes, diminishes vitamin content, denatures fragile milk proteins, destroys vitamins C, B12 and B6, kills beneficial bacteria, promotes pathogens and is associated with allergies, increased tooth decay, colic in infants, growth problems in children, osteoporosis, arthritis, heart disease and cancer. Calves fed pasteurized milk do poorly and many die before maturity. Raw milk sours naturally but pasteurized milk turns putrid; processors must remove slime and pus from pasteurized milk by a process of centrifugal clarification. Inspection of dairy herds for disease is not required for pasteurized milk.” www.realmilk.com
We already do, it's called cooking it.
How weird is it that it's easier to buy crack than raw milk?
Cows, and especially goats, are so easy to raise and the milk is usually much more than a single family can use.
If every person that had a few acres raised goats, milk prices would drop and the big dairy farmers would be out of business.
Dairy farmers have a monopoly, so to speak, that is assisted by the USDA.
“Down with Louis Pasteur!! What's a plague or two among friends!! Germs don't exist!!”
Please educate yourself: http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/history/biographies/louis_pasteur.htm
Pasteur himself acknowledged that pasteurization harmed the quality of the milk and was not a permanent solution.
All of those things maybe true, but do not forget the reason why pasteurization started in the first place. People were dying from bacterial infections. If you get sick or die from ingesting raw milk are you or your heirs going to sue the farmer for selling you raw milk?
As long as the cow is Brucellosis tested often, and most states have been Brucellosis free for a while, the milk should be fine, as far as I know. Raw milk is certainly tastier with all it's butter fat. I used to drink it occasianally as a child and my husband grew up on it.
As the profits increase, the raw milk pushers will be fighting for turf. There will be blood in the streets as milk gangs fight over market share.
We need a war on milk to stop people from harming themselves and keep the milk gangs from spreading.
Whether raw milk is healthy or unhealthy to drink is one question...whether the state is right to outlaw the sale of raw milk is another.
I think individuals ought to be able to decided for themselves whether they want their milk pasteurized or raw. But then, I have little patience with governmental efforts to protect me from myself, particularly when those efforts may line somebody else's pockets.
There are pluses and minuses for raw milk and pasteurized milk.
As I've not heard of real outbreak of disease (e.g., undulant fever)
from raw milk, I suspect the current governmental action (also going
on in Michigan) is more a case of guvmint bureaucrats "justifying
their existence" or getting a buzz off a power-trip.
Dont' get me wrong; the products must be properly labeled and distributed.
But this current campaign sounds like a drive to just put a lot of
"little guys" out of bidness.
Clearly Ohio regulators have whey too much time on their hands.
Because pasteurization is required in much of the country. It certainly happened frequently before pasteurization existed.
Humans have been drinking raw milk since man first domesticated beast. You are correct in pointing to the reason that pasteurization took hold; people were getting sick and pasteurization arose as a temporary solution that was not intended to become permanent. Pasteurization never addressed the underlying problem of the sick and unhealthy cows that were being moved in from the country to urban areas to provide for the people massing there during the industrial revolution. Most of the milk provided to these people came from cows kept within the city in abhorrent conditions that made them all sick. Yes, boiling the milk the milk killed all the bad pathogens, but it kills everything else too and denatures the milk proteins. Pasteur realized this and decried the wholesale pasteurization of milk outside of areas where people were getting sick, but alas, it was found to be MUCH more profitable, and thus it stuck.
The most valuable part of the milk is the butterfat. Skim milk was a byproduct that they used to throw away before they started convincing people to drink it because it was “healthy.” Even “Whole” milk only has a modicum of the original cream, and they get to sell it back to you in the form of butter, cheese, ice cream, etc.
You pay twice for inferior products whereas somebody who has access to raw milk is able to make whatever they want to.
Bottom line is this: If you eat raw meat it could very well make you sick, correct? Does the government mandate that all meat be sold cooked? NO. It’s your prerogative if you want to gobble down a bowl of raw ground beef. It should be a matter of personal choice if somebody chooses to drink their milk raw.
There's nothing better than "real" milk straight from the cow. And sneaking some of the cream that floats on top, yum!
Better kill a few nutrients and all the bacteria. TB, undulant fever, Brucellosis are but a few nasties that come to you via unpasteurized milk. Yes, I have consumed lots of milk from our milk cow that was raw and did not get sick but with the available means of self protection it is stupid not to use it. Same goes for packing iron.
Yep.
I had a friend that got undulant fever, probably from raw milk she
consumed while on missions in Guatemala.
It actually baffled doctors in our town and she had to go out-of-state
to a med school to get correctly diagnosed.
These recent investigations of the raw milk producers may have good
intentions, but the case in Michigan sounds a bit capricious.
IIRC, the guy got all his hardware (computer, etc) consfiscated,
but no charges filed even after a couple of weeks.
(Of course, that might change).
I remain conflicted about the situation, as to whether the state inspectors
are just doing their jobs or going "out of bounds".
With all do respect, a farmer who is conscientious about the health of his animals should know if they are sick and would pitch their milk. Bovine TB and brucellosis have been virtually (if not completely) wiped out here in Ohio for some time now.
I knew there was a good reason that I never went back to Ohio. Those people are stupid. If I want to drink raw milk, that's my business.
VOA, I am somebody that personally believes in raw milk. That being said, haha, I dont think that I would be drinking raw milk from a Guatemalan mission...
Its important to know your farmers and their commitment to the good health of their animals and the safety of their products.
Interesting discussion.
I agree that ol' Taxin Ted wont do a thing... Its a shame, it would at least give me something to like about the creep.
When they come into your home with a search warrant, that is out of bounds unless you are Al Capone or William Jefferson D-LA.
Since we are out of power and no longer responsible for the Republicans who are now "retired", we need to get back to our roots - these ham-handed "enforcement" punks and their tax-draining ilk are a great place to start, IMO.
It is - it has the same nutrients and none of the fat. If you drink a lot of milk you definitely notice a difference in being able to control one's weight by switching over to this. Unless you are saying that the fat content being less is a lie, your "started convincing" argument doesn't make a great deal of sense.
How dare the government step in and tell a farmer that it is illegal to drink the milk from his own cow.
I realize that they too know their side of the argument is so weak it can't stand on its merits.
There's been at least two peer-reviewed reports in the last two years suggesting more than a possible link between cows infected with Johne's (Mycobacterium paratuberculosis) and humans infected with Crone's disease. Testing is possible, but issues with test sensitivity need to be considered.
NAHMS '96 noted that found that ~22 percent of US dairy farms have at least 10% of the herd infected with Johne's disease. Given that, I would carefully consider drinking raw milk from a herd not practicing Johne's management best practices.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732754/posts Post #12
There used to be a Christian dairy (there was a Bible verse on the bottle) that sold milk in at least the Knoxville TN area and it said there was no -- what was it? -- BST in it...or some letter combination like that.
I also heard George Noory talking about it and he said it was bad stuff (the BST).
I'm not sure the dairy is still around. It was pricier than regular milk. Bi-Lo used to carry it but then Food City took over the area Bi-Lo's.
I also like the taste of raw milk better. Where else can I drink whole milk that doesn't taste like glue? Not to mention it never goes bad.
Unfortunately, at $9 a gallon our family can't afford to buy raw milk.
What armed bureau is going to be responsible for kicking down the barn doors in the dead of night to confiscate this contraband before the cows can tip the pails over?
I'm suprised that so far we haven't had any of the war ond drug zealots step in and pronounce a death sentence on anyone who would violate the law by consuming illegal milk. Nor has anyone opined that drinking raw milk is wrong because it's illegal, period, end of story.
"Down with Louis Pasteur!!
What's a plague or two among friends!!
Germs don't exist!!"
Thanks for the note. This raw milk thing is primitivistic. I wonder if we should ask our doctors NOT to wash their hands in between patients.
<\sarc>
I should have put it up earlier...
but here's a link to the thread/article on the similar situation
in Michigan:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732754/posts
One thing I learned when I heard about this story on an "ag" radio
station in my area was the term "cowshare".
Apparently the legal way the sellers of raw milk to consumers operate
is to legally sell a "share" in the cow and it's products (e.g., raw milk),
hence the term "cowshare" Or "cow share" (I've only heard it on the radio,
so I don't know how it should look in print)
We obviously need a Department of Milk Enforcement who has military style weapons and equipment. They will also need no knock warrants and have to do dynamic entries when going after these criminals.
The users should only get life. It wouldn’t be right to put people to death for just drinking illegal milk. The pushers on the other hand should be put to death at the earliest opportunity.
What's missing is a discussion of the importance of the health of the cow that the raw milk comes frm. When pasteurization of milk became widespread (after thousands of years of raw milk use) the health of many commercial dairy herds was poor as the cows were fed brewery wastes and garbage. In contrast a cow on good pasture with good herbage, no antibiotics, no added hormones, etc. will yield a healthful raw milk rich with antibodies that would keep her calf heathy and can in some instances benefit humans.
And imparts a false sense of security:
Multidrug-resistant Salmonella Typhimurium infection from milk contaminated after pasteurization
Contamination of pasteurized milk by Bacillus cereus in the filling machine
Pasteurized milk as a vehicle of infection in an outbreak of listeriosis
Point is this: there is risk in all foods. From contamination, from poor nutrition, long term, short term from whatever, in spite of all of those governmental regulations and laws. In spite of them. The government can't protect you from everything and it is foolish to expect it to. When it comes down to technology vs. disease, technology can only do so much.
There is a lot of hype and scare out there about raw milk. Raw milk has to be tested. Bulk, raw milk - the stuff that gets sold for pasteurization by the 5000 gallon tank - frequently comes up with high pathogen counts. Why? Because the dairies don't care. The stuff is going to get pasteurized anyway so why worry about some stray E. coli or a diseased herd. Why worry about an unsanitary tank on the trunk. It's all going to wash out in the pasteurization.. right? You couldn't pay me to drink raw milk coming off a dairy like that.
The small boutique dairies, the ones that are producing milk intended for raw consumption (by, uh, pets *wink*wink*) are not going to allow their herds to be diseased or to eat suboptimal diets. They know what the stakes are if someone gets sick off their milk. They make their methods and procesess and test results available to the consumer. The risk, such as it is, is an informed one.
The argument that raw milk (intended for consumption raw) is frightfully dangerous requires that pasteurized milk be perfectly safe. The data just cannot support that. As recently as 2004, the CDC (.pdf) reported 38 people fell of foodborne illness from drinking raw milk. It also reported 100 people fell ill drinking pasteurized milk. 175 people fell ill from eating ice cream (a pasteurized milk product), 595 got sick from eating cheese products. Do pathogens survive pasteurization? Sure. Is some of this post-contamination? Sure. There is risk in every food. Even banana pudding (50 ill).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.