One of the vivid memories I have of Mark Nolts trial last May in Pennsylvania for selling raw dairy products without a license was of a scene that took place outside the courtroom early in the morning, before the trial got under way. As protesters in a parking lot waved signs supporting Mark, about 100 yards away, an official of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture waited in front of the small courtroom for the doors to be unlocked.
One of the protesters, a man who looked to be in his fifties, approached him, very politely, and tried to engage the official. You know, we have to figure out a way to talk to each other, to solve this problem, the protester said. We are all people of good will. We cant be going on like this.
The PDA official nodded his head yes, but you could see in his body language that all he wanted was for the damned courtroom door to be unlocked, so he could get the hell away from this guy.
I thought about that scene as I read Amanda Roses lengthy analysis on The Epicurean about what went wrong with SB 201. She argues essentially that the pro-raw-milk people and dairies werent nice enough, or politically savvy enough, to the California Department of Food and Agriculture and governorthat they put out misleading press releases and failed to properly engage the executive branch.
All I can say is that her argument sounds potentially logicalthe kind of argument that likely applies to any number of failed legislative initiativesuntil you consider the reality that the CDFA never engages in any kind of public discussion about raw milk. In fact, agriculture and public health officials around the countryfrom both the states and the federal governmentare the same way. They almost never show up for public discussions of the pros and cons of raw milk. When John Sheehan, the chief dairy guy at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, gave his testimony against raw milk at the Maryland legislature in early 2007, he did it via a prepared text he sent inhe didnt actually appear and subject himself to questions. When a Washington, DC, radio station invited the FDA to send a representative to discuss raw milk with some proponents last year, it declined, saying raw milk is not a debatable issue.
Remember, the CDFA and other state agriculture and public health departments take their cues from the FDA. And for the FDA, the matter of raw milk is an ideological issue. There is nothing to debate if you are absolutely right.
Amanda unfortunately has a blame-the-victim mentalityif you had only been nice to the mugger, he wouldnt have beaten you up so badly. The reality is that the legislators who voted overwhelmingly for SB 201 are close to the people, and heard their phone calls pleading for the legislation. The CDFA is completely distant from the people, but it is well connected to the governor that appointed its leaders. The CDFA told the governor what action the FDA requires in such situations, and wrote out his veto message just to be sure everyone understood whos in charge. Theres nothing to discuss, in Pennsylvania or California or pretty much anywhere else.
It occurred to me then, that the state Department of Agriculture position should be an elected office, not an appointed one. Members of the dairy boards, particularly the chief should also be elected just as school boards are.
My husband has two questions:
1) Where does a government agency get the idea they should lobby on their own behalf?
2) What right does that agency have to supercede the will of the people?
With all the constitutional ammendments that get proposed year after year, why not propose one to make these positions ones that are elected by the people? Take it to the polls and let the people vote on it!
And for the record, Martin Sheen was a great publicity choice. He just came into the picture a little too late. I suggest nominating him for the next CDFA chief.
Gwen
Words like this only continue to keep communication closed. Such a shame.
1) There are many paths to seeking CDFA input if you are a California Senator if you wish to obtain it. Furthermore, the SB201 team could have sought specific advice from the UCD team that did testify in April to help veto-proof the bill.
2) CDFA reps met with an Organic Pastures team after the AB 1735 press conference. Mark M called Stephen Beam (CDFA dairy) a liar in the meeting over what I don’t remember. In any case, CDFA met formally with the dairy. Apparently they can be found and met with. The "hidden bureaucracy" concept I do agree with to some extent, but like all concepts, is an overly simplistic view of real life.
Off to the Ethicurean…
Amanda
Reader,
Are you so desensitized to being pushed around by bureaucracy that having your food choices dictated by government creates no outrage? Or is it that you happen to be comfortable with processed, industrial-style products, and dont care that your neighbor is not? Those questions are not intended to be rudethey very much deserve an answer!
For at least 40 years now the triumvirate of government, industry, and our medical establishment have pushed a dead-food diet composed primarily of processed grains and seed oils and chemical-laden, nutrient-depleted fruits, vegetables, and meats, and have done everything possible to prevent any veering off that path. In that time our collective health has deteriorated alarmingly, and the triumvirate has responded by digging in their heels, hardening their rhetoric, and even upping the ante by promoting vaccinations and environmental sanitization, and mandating medical insurance. Some folks dont want to play along. They want to pursue a different path. But the triumvirate has decreed that any but their own means to pursue health and happiness in not worthy, so they stand in the way of alternatives, with permits, process controls, fines, fees, and regulations. Can any reasonable person support that in theory or practice?
We are simply asking to be left alone to make our own food choices. Why is that so terrible? Perhaps, as Amanda Rose implies, the concept is not complex enough.
Well, if you want debate, others and I will be happy to engage you civilly in a discussion of, for example, the relative value of different nutritional plans, and the relationships between them and health. But if you wish to debate how many links ought to be in my chain, forget it.
"Are you so desensitized to being pushed around by bureaucracy that having your food choices dictated by government creates no outrage? "
I am outraged by any government or industry that denies causing foodborne disease, and uses political tactics to avoid facing and fixing the problem.
"Or is it that you happen to be comfortable with processed, industrial-style products, and dont care that your neighbor is not? "
If my neighbor is subjected to propaganda (a la Weston Price), I will inform them of the facts.
Your supposed interest in conversation, sounds like more of the same: "Forget it."
I’m going to follow Amanda over to the Ethicurean where there is balance in looking at the nuances of this complex issue that walks the line between science and social policy (perhaps too complex for this board) .
You and I disagree on what the problem is. Your definition of propaganda and mine are opposite. I consider, for example, diabetes, to be a "foodborne disease" resultant of the promotion of processed carbohydrates and the demonization of fat, by the American Heart Association, the medical establishment in general, government, and industry. I find their recommendations to be propaganda. But I am not allowed to act on my beliefs.
I and so many others like me have seen our lives turn around by abandoning today’s nutritional status quo. I am watching now as more and more people, including health professionals, turn their backs on the wretched mess created by conventional wisdom, and look to other theories of health and wellness. Meanwhile, the powers that be work AGAINST us, maintain a laughably narrow focus on infectious disease (and react inappropriately to it as well) and generally behave as if their ideas trump my rights.
Indeed, health and its biological underpinnings are a complicated business. Understanding fully the intricacies of our natural environment may even be beyond our capabilities. I am well aware of that, and very comfortable with it. But CONSTRUCTED complexity is what we have here, and that is the refuge of scoundrels.
And as long as there is conversation between the farmer and the consumer, the establishment must resort to lies, deception, and propaganda to combat community.
We must keep farmers talking with milk drinkers!
They will never be able to take it away, now….no matter how hard they try….and every ‘success’ they have in doing so, just makes (our resolve, and) the demand stronger.
They’ve already lost….and don’t even realize it. (We must be wary though…for they will be more dangerous when they do realize it)
I do believe this will succeed. I suppose, like any other type of discrimination, it doesn’t make sense as to why there need be a battle for it. Is it not our inalieanable (sp) right to choose? Something as simple as choosing what you want to consume, or a persons freedom from slavery or the right to choose how to raise your children. Didn’t many of our forefathers come to this country to avoid that in thier homeland? (The exception of slavery from Africa-any type of slavery is wrong).
I cannot see any reason other than money and control to prohibit our freedoms. It appears that many feel that the raw dairy farmers don’t adhere to sanitary practices. I believe that the majority do adhere to sanitary practices just as I would want to believe that other companies adhere to safety and sanitary practices. If the raw dairies didn’t adhere to the sanitary practices, the milk would be no different than from the factory farms. Yet, I don’t see in the media any complaints or banning of those places. Only promotion of thier products. Did the spinach farms get shut down? What was the outcome of thier breech of sanitation and the poisoning of the American public? Whatever happened to that dairy in the 80s who contaminated all those 1000s? Gag in the bag is still in business, why weren’t they forced to shut down? How about the slaughter houses? What is so different between them and raw dairy?
It looks like you are not open to different view points.
Reading the posts on this site shows that many assume that the chicken is supposed to be contaminated with salmonella. It is ok to sell contaminated food? When did it become not ok to microwave chicken? years ago, I lived on TV dinners, the plastic trays did not go into a regular oven.
I was told by a PhD of Political Science that the only thing that changes policy of an agency of government is…. the directional application of "extreme pain".
When the pain is eased by moving to another position where there is less pain then the position will be changed. So the raw milk issue is an issue of how much pain can be endured by CDFA prior to moving positions.
The same holds true of CDFA and their activities against Claravale and OPDC. We must take the pain and not flinch. AB 1735 was meant to be a metered infliction of pain that gets worse and worse…to the point of surrender.
In public it is nice to be kind….but where it counts is not in public. Where it counts is behind the scenes. Gary Cox and FTCLDF will apply a choke hold with truth exposure that will surely bring "bug eyed cyanosis" to CDFA and perhaps even a few resignations. This level of legally applied pain will change the CDFA position. If I was Dr.Stephen Beam ( yes I did call him a liar when he said that he was just following FDA requirements for raw milk…when there are none ) and or anyone near him…I would look for a job at Monsanto or FDA. As Assemblyman Tom Berryhill said during AB 1604 hearings " CDFA heads should roll" for misleading this assembly committee. Assemblywoman Nicole Para ( the author and sponsor of AB 1735 ) was passionate when she said that she had been misled by CDFA and that AB 1715 would stand only "over my dead body". She said that the raw milk consumers and dairies had been cheated by the AB 1735 process.
Dr. Beam…it is your head that the Honorable Representative Tom Berryhill was referring too. Your date with destiny is less than 80 days away. This is how things will change. Heads rolling and pain application….all while being very kind and nice.
The niave should rethink life alittle. This is food war. Do not think one little thing different. There are plenty of bodies to count. The body count is at the feet of the FDA and their legally sold yet toxic drugs and their "dead food" sterilized immune system destroying foods. Get tough guys. We must fight to regain our rights. Rights taken from us secretely in the dark of night….while we were being distracted by routine inspections with out one word spoken by CDFA for a year. All as their raw milk land mine secret passed through the CA legislature on a consent calender with out notice or hearing one word spoken.
Lots and lots of direction pain…. all with outward kindness and politeness.
Mark McAfee
OPDC
You are a pain in the donkey. Change occurs through communication. Suppose the regulator(s) you hate vacated. Guess what, "you" are not a ilkely candidate for the position/replacement.
At one time, this Reader explored communication. It showed promise, but deteriorated into a series of insults, and the dark side of the raw milk movement was uncovered. Disappointing.
The battle against raw milk is as fierce as it is in the first place because pasteurization of milk is something we’ve all grown up with and accepted. When people start seeing research abstracts, that will probably change.
But you know, that’s all I ask. If you think you’re right, show me the money. Quit telling me you’re right because you say so, and frigging prove it.
I mean, it’s not like the government ever recommends foods or drugs that turn out to actively harm people. *cough*DES*cough*cough*
Keep up the good work. Being a leader (and you are a leader) leaves one open to the slings and arrows of those who disagree with you. Be brave and thank you.
Warning: Don’t feed the troll (reader). I sense great weakening and it is close to death.
http://www.marlerblog.com/uploads/file/Campylobacter_DelNorteCounty_10022008.pdf
I could only open the 1st page. Do you have any comments on whatever is in the link you posted? Is this the same outbreak that was posted earlier this year?
"I think they (the FDA) have opened a Pandora’s Box," she told ConsumerAffairs.com today. "They have basically said they are going to allow the food supply to be contaminated.
"It seems to me that rather than finding a way to make our food supply safer by not allowing any toxin, the FDA has found a way to allow some to come in to the food supply," said Mary, who lives in Baldwin City, Kansas. "That just scares me."
I am in agreement with this lady. Why is it "ok" to have some foods contaminated and not others? Wonder what made the 130 student in So ca sick? Don’t want to say it came from the school food supply.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/R_ecalls_amp_A_lerts_3/100611492008_FDA_Melamine_found_in_flavored_drink.shtml
The original post was on the Marler Blog….I couldn’t find it in another place….the link seems to work from here. This relates to the cow share program discussed earlier.
http://www.marlerblog.com/2008/10/articles/legal-cases/yet-another-raw-milk-outbreak-report-campylobacter/
Maria
Oh well, it was established that that particular dairy stopped selling raw dairy.
Did you have a point to make or a comment in regards to the link you posted?
marlor seems to be extreme on his various web pages, reminds me of the fanatics in other areas of life. GBS is associated with vaccinations and they are still handed out like candy. Go figure.
hahahaha
This is the best entertainment yet.
It is almost dead. We just observed a few of it’s last spasmodic involuntary contractions.
Andy you have nothing to add, repating the same anti raw milk prooganda over and over again. I see the genesis of another troll.