Youve probably noticed by now that things look a little different here. The blog hosting company upgraded its software, and in the process, forced its blogs to adopt a new look. I wasnt unhappy with the old look, but if I wanted access to additional new features, I had to change over to a design that is part of the upgrade. More technical changes to come, hopefully of the beneficial kind.
Lots of people seem to be upset with me with my take of the Chris Martin YouTube tape. As if Im somehow making light of that familys suffering.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I have long expressed sympathy with the Martin family. No parent can look at the video of Chris Martin and not be upset about what the family went through.
That being said, I am at odds with the use to which the video is now being put. The Martins understandably want to reduce the chances that other parents will have to go through what their son went through. The problem comes with the method they have chosen to accomplish that task.
They really had two obvious choices, if they wanted to use their misfortune to affect change. First, they could have tried to promote more understanding of what makes a few people get very sick in outbreaks from pathogens. If raw milk was at fault (not a given), why did six kids get sick, and 30,000 other people not suffer any illnesses? We can ask the same question with regard to illnesses from ground beef, spinach, lettuce, peppers, etc.
I actually had a good discussion with Bill Marler about this topic. He said there is some thinking in the medical community that certain kids have specialized receptors on their kidneys that make them especially susceptible to pathogens. But we dont really know for sure. Why not promote more research in this area, where theres such a dearth of data?
The second choice the Martins had was to seek retribution against Organic Pastures and push for laws and legislation that restrict access to raw milk. That is the path they chose. As part of that path, they decided to turn a sad and upsetting video of their son on life support into a piece of propaganda supporting a political agenda and a political machine. (As just one other example of that machine, every time there is any kind of suspected illness from raw milk, I immediately receive an email from Bill Marler, and Im sure other media people receive the same email, as if to say, See, whatd I tell ya!). The Martins made that choice, I didnt.
Once you make that choice, though, you enter a different realm. Your story of tragedy or accomplishment is now held up as evidence for a particular ideology. Those of you who can remember back to the Cold War will recall that there were high-profile citizens who sometimes left the Soviet Union for the U.S., or vice versa. Once they made that switch, they were held up by their new country as prime evidence that its ideology was superior.
The struggle over raw milk and the larger struggle it symbolizes over nutritional freedom may not be the Cold War, but it is evolving into a bitter and intense ideological struggle. I understand that video camera dates can get turned off or batteries go dead.
The problem comes when you are using powerful symbols like video of sick children, not to try to rectify the problem of foodborne illness, but rather to try to sabotage a vital and thriving farm business, and restrict the access of millions of people to a food of their choice. I think I am entitled in that situation to demand that the other side have its ducks in a row.
The California Department of Health Services did a sloppy report on the illnesses. It wasnt clear exactly how many children became ill from E.coli 0157:H7 and whether a boy or girl got milk from a friend, and whether they all consumed raw milk, among various other problems. The Marler/Martin video of Chris is sloppily edited, suggesting that things happened on days when they likely didnt happen.
Normally, these kinds of things would be minor. But when youre trying to destroy people and take away peoples rights, I dont think you are entitled to that kind of leeway.
Part of the problem is that our government and public health authorities have been able to get away with half-truths and propaganda and sloppy reports for a long time in this struggle. Judges in California, New York, and Pennsylvania have expressed their distaste for examining serious and precise evidence on the other side, preferring instead to simply accept the party line expressed by the regulators. So its no surprise that the regulators and their supporters like Marler are sloppyno one makes any demands on them to do otherwise. And the authorities love images like Chris Martin, since it makes their jobs much easier.
Part of what is going on here is that the real victims in this warowners of small dairies and people who want access to nutritionally dense foods of their choice–have begun turning things around. Instead of sitting back and accepting all the lies and half-truths and sloppy documentation, they are fighting back with the other side of the story.
A prime example is the Weston A. Price Foundation. It has just added to its web site two documents refuting Bill Marlers examination of the scientific literature on raw milk. (Go to www.realmilk.org, and scroll down; there’s no direct link to the documents.) These analyses do a thorough job of explaining how research on food-borne illness is accomplished, and why raw milk gets the blame more often than it should. They are clearly written and make for educational reading. These refutations follow up on the WAPF’s excellent response to the U.S. Food and Drug Administrations slide show blasting raw milk.
To those who feel there are much bigger food and farm problems than the seemingly endless debate and discussion about the Martin illness, your points are very well taken. All I can say is that sometimes large political struggles are encapsulated by particularly emotional incidents and legal caseswitness the Dreyfus Affair in France and the Scopes Monkey trial in the U.S. Its not a pleasant business. But the outcomes of these situations can have wide ripple effects.
Waiting for "solid proof" translates to watching people suffer and die while the debate continues. Check out the history of cholera, smoking/cancer, and similar public health controversies that went on way too long because there wasn’t "solid proof." Sometimes action must be taken with suggestive, likely evidence. That doesn’t have to mean the "end" of an industry, but denial will just take you down the river . How about working toward real solutions to allow access to raw milk, not including deceptive advertising, unreliable testing regimes to "prove" safety of the product, and worst of all, downplaying of risks. Otherwise, what choice is left: remove the "pump handle."
With the disproportionate regulation of raw milk/ raw milk products they close small dairies.
With the disproportionate regulation of non-pasteurized cider and nuts, they close small orchards.
With the disproportionate enforcement of regulatory requirements they close small meat processing plants. (See "Big Problems? Blame the Little Guy" http://www.ethicurean.com )
With unequal and unconstitutional animal identification requirements (NAIS), they close small livestock operations.
Now they are touting irradiation of vegetables. so you can bet they will be strangling farmer’s markets and CSAs soon. David is right on this one.
None of these products have been shown to pose a significant threat to public health. indeed, in many cases small-holdings are summarily closed without causing any illness at all. This is in stark contrast to industrially-run operations that sicken and kill hundreds of people, yet are allowed to remain in operation for months and even years. Regulation is so shoddy in many cases that their products can’t even be identified to be recalled.
Meanwhile, agriculture workers who are forced to turn to the vertically integrated industrial/corporate system to sell their product are forced to accept meager wages in order to remain on their farms. Abattoir worker fare even worse.
Is it any wonder our food is unhealthy?
Is it possible to at least select another, more traditional, color format?
In other news, oxygen masks only work well as cell phones if the other person is real close by.
(I actually called an ICU and asked about their cell phone policy. I got a fascinating response and would report it here if I were a journalist.)
There is nothing special about a "journalist" compared to anyone else, and I encourage you to share whatever information you are morally comfortable with sharing.
Gwen
As far as the Martin family goes, I think they know they have created a piece of political propaganda but I’m sure they feel justified given their current situation. I don’t think there is anything wrong about pointing that out, and doing so certainly doesn’t warrant an apology.
My wife and two children (2 and 4) drink raw milk regularly with no problems. My youngest has had access to raw milk (mommy’s or bovine) since birth, and is significantly healthier than my first from a wellness/immunity perspective. Personally, I enjoy the debate about whether raw milk is "good" or "bad". What is frustrating is that the folks who think it is "bad" would deny the choice to those who think it is "good" … for the sake of the children.
Its pretty obvious from the video, and the timing of its release, and the remarks from the shyster, that raw milk is just the secondary target here. Someone wants their pound of flesh.
Now every occurrence gives one a chance for personal growtheven the most grave (actually those are the biggest opportunities). The key here is there is always a choicerise above, or grovel in the gutterits always up to you. Its sad to see the deterioration, the lowering of oneself, just for the sweet opiate of retribution. But one thing is for sure, when you jump in bed with a used prophylactic, chances are youre going to get dirty.
For shame.
"As far as the Martin family goes, I think they know they have created a piece of political propaganda but I’m sure they feel justified given their current situation. I don’t think there is anything wrong about pointing that out, and doing so certainly doesn’t warrant an apology"
What makes anyone so SURE of what this video was used for? Maybe the Martins just wanted to show what HUS looks like no matter how it is contracted.
I don’t think any apology is necessary.
Go to USDA web site read todays press release No. 021808
USDA ANNOUNCES PROPOSED RULE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISPOSITION OF DOWNER CATTLE
The Ag. Sec. gives the reason for the proposed banning of the slaughter of downer cattle
"TO MAINTAIN CONSUMER CONFINDENCE IN THE FOOD SUPPLY"
NOTHING SAID ABOUT FOOD SAFETY
Some of us have been stating for a long time the war on raw dairy is not about FOOD SAFETY doesnt this help to strengthen our point?
I’m also not happy with the display’s readability. Otherwise, a refreshing format.
You bet it will. And believing that we can sanitize ourselves into health is serious denial. No, it’s worse than denial, because it makes the solution a problem. While industrial food and aggressive use of antibiotics are turning our immune systems into tissue paper, we’re chasing down and killing the microbes that can save us. (And congratulating ourselves… all the way to the grave.)
On the cell phone, what I did not ask is whether they have any cell phones there that look like oxygen masks. I missed an opportunty. The probability of Mark’s claim can be assessed by anyone who cares to call Loma Linda.
If "germs" or "pathogens" are merely the effect of disease and not the cause,then all of the testing for strains of bacteria is pointless if we are trying to prevent disease.Until we really understand the real cause of disease we don’t stand a chance in preventing people from becoming sick.
There is certainly evidence that our attempts to eliminate bacteria with toxic chemicals is often the real cause of disease.
thanks,
Blair
Another thing. The boy is clearly sedated or asleep throughout the entire YouTube video. He may not have been for other parts of those days of the bipap or aerosol. It isn’t unusual for such masks to be on only when a patient is sleeping. When he was awake, particularly to eat, he would have had a nasal cannula on for oxygen rather than a bipap or mask; or nothing to assist his breathing at all if his oxygen level held out while he was awake and alert. And he would have been sitting up or moving around. It is entirely possible he could have been talking on his cell phone on the 23rd and 24th, or the same days these last 2 clips were taken. There are no clips on the 21st or 22nd, so it may have even been possible then. There is no NG tube in the last 2 clips, so I am going to assume that the child could have been eating food by then, and so was at times awake and without a mask. Just because he is asleep and breathing noisily doesn’t mean he was not awake and breathing quietly at other times of those days, or able to talk on a cell phone.
If the case is that the clips were merely taken during sleep moments, and the child also had waking moments without masks on those days, the video is misleading, and making the most of dramatizing the case. That makes Amanda just as guilty as David for making assumptions and attempting to make an argument about something she knows little about.
Gwen
So , yes , the video is VERY misleading . It takes watching it over and over to pick everything up. So lets stop pointing fingers and just focus on the fact that it is misleading, slanderous,(as it directly mentions OP and raw milk – even though it was not proven to be the cause – I am sure the kids ate other stuff) and is being used for propaganda purposes .
As an A-EMT 2 I found out quickly who the ambulance chasers were in our area. Opportunists who watched us like vultures waiting for a "story". I have nothing but disdain for those people.
Please post what you know about the cell phones. What was the policy in effect at the time of this particular case . Was this patient given special privileges ? And would they even discuss a particular case with you? What is the phone # for Loma Linda ICU ? Please share .
Thanks for asking, real farmer.
Guys — I’m supposed to be on bed rest, so you’ll be free of my harassment should I actually manage to follow orders. I don’t find this discussion to be the most intellectually fulfilling, so it’s all just as well. Interesting post on the Marler blog about SB 201. I find the bill to be sloppy from an implementation perspective (as I wrote on the Ethicurean), but I had not considered some of the issues that he is bringing up. It’s that sort of thing that’s far more interesting than getting blamed for lying about a policy that anyone with a phone and even limited brain function can easily verify. But heads up if you are not interested in reading comments from the dark side.
Amanda
Thanks for asking, real farmer.
Guys — I’m supposed to be on bed rest, so you’ll be free of my harassment should I actually manage to follow orders. I don’t find this discussion to be the most intellectually fulfilling, so it’s all just as well. Interesting post on the Marler blog about SB 201. I find the bill to be sloppy from an implementation perspective (as I wrote on the Ethicurean), but I had not considered some of the issues that he is bringing up. It’s that sort of thing that’s far more interesting than getting blamed for lying about a policy that anyone with a phone and even limited brain function can easily verify. But heads up if you are not interested in reading comments from the dark side.
Amanda
Did you, Amanda, call the actual hospital the child in the video was in?
Just answer the question clearly, please.
Gwen
You hit the nail on the head- much of this thread is not very intellectual and some comments by folks supposedly in the health care profession border on scary. Marler’s recent letter makes one think – anyone actually serious about looking at the essence of SB 201 should read it. Those that just want to pat themselves on the back and avoid understanding different points of view should avoid it.
http://www.marlerblog.com/2008/08/articles/lawyer-oped/raw-milk-debate-continues-with-sb201/
Also, this article is off topic, but really interesting:
Digging Into Wal-Marts Locally Grown Numbers
http://www.perishablepundit.com/punditprint.php?date=08/28/08&pundit=1
In particular, when someone is being villified, I expect the person villifying them to have their facts in order. I expect them to support those facts if something is found wrong with them. Hiding behind incomplete facts; holding information back (when purposeful or when the information doesn’t exist), even when asked to give them; claiming one is sick and asking me to fill in the holes in their argument for them are parts of another person’s weak argument I am not willing to accommodate. You make the argument, you do your own work to maintain it.
Gwen
I have not taken part in the discussion on the California bill at all. Nil. If you are inviting me in on that discussion, you may be suprised at my viewpoints. I have been falsely accused of promoting infants and children drinking raw milk already, so you’d better go back and read before you make any assumptions.
Currently in this thread, I happen to have a bee in my bonnet about a specific topic – villification of people – anyone – who might happen to think raw milk should be legal; and failing to support their arguments in these villifications. I don’t actually care whether or not this child used a cell phone in the hospital or not. I care that it was brought up as a reason to villify Mark McAfee; and the people trying to villify him have focused on a cell phone while wearing an oxygen mask, and when their argument is questioned, the discussion is suddenly not intellectual enough for them; and they are on bedrest and can’t carry through on that argument.
So please, tell me what exact things I said specifically that are "scary," and why you think so. Shoot away.
Gwen
The issue is that Mark McAfee makes light of these illnesses all the time. For anyone unfamiliar with the cell phone reference, go to the previous post and check it out.
The fact is that this child had 4-5 more weeks in the hospital *after* Mark’s visit. He was not out of the woods at that point, according to his mother’s writing. He was in the hospital for a total of 8 weeks. Does it really matter what made him sick? Do he and his parents deserve to be treated with such disrespect because they had *the audacity* to report that he actually consumed an OP product?
I don’t stand behind Mark on this issue at all. In fact, I would stand as far away as possible. I have a lot of regrets over the way we behaved in 2006. I posted this before, here it is again:
http://www.rebuild-from-depression.com/blog/2008/08/raw_milk_generosity.html
As part of my own penance for being such a jerk, I will certainly support this family now, inflammatory videos or not. Food for thought: would the video exist had we given this family support?
This personal experience has given me great respect for dairy owners who handle outbreaks with grace and with compassion toward their sick customers. They don’t have to admit guilt to do so. They just have to show a bit of humanity.
On an entirely different issue, my husband says he’s going to put one of those blocks on this site (like you use for your children). If I’m not back, it’s not because I’ve gone into early labor or anything. I am on bed rest, but it’s more preventative. Online reading is very tempting on bed rest, but I have to agree with my husband that the content of this particular blog may not really be the best thing for my mental health. (Marler blog too. LOL)
Amanda
By Wade Frazier
Why Civilizations Collapse and Organisms Self-Destruct
While performing the research for this website, striking similarities became evident when comparing the currently prevailing dynamic for how civilizations have collapsed to a compelling alternative dynamic for how the human body succumbs to degenerative disease. Those dynamics can help illuminate the path to free energy.
Joseph Tainter proposed the currently favored dynamic for why civilizations have collapsed over the millennia. Civilizations generally appeared when people became sedentary, which was dependent on a local and stable energy source. Such stationary sources usually relied on the domestication of plants and animals (although not always, such as with the Pacific Northwest culture that relied on salmon swimming up rivers). The energy surplus provided by domestication and the concentration of humans in settled areas allowed for human specialization, and professions developed. Tainter described the increasing specialization and its attendant advances as the investment in complexity which was paid with the coin of energy, which has been the engine of all ecosystems and economic systems for all time. In ancient civilizations, food delivered most energy. After studying all proposed explanations for the collapse of civilizations, Tainter concluded that collapse came due to energy scarcity. When a hungry urban specialist returned to the countryside for greater food security, the city lost some of its collective skill. When the trickle of exiting specialists became a flood, often taking with them anything they could carry, the urban environments began to collapse. The specialists reverted to more primitive behavior in order to survive, which doomed the civilization.
Louis Pasteurs germ theory of disease is a cornerstone of modern biology and medicine. However, there is persuasive evidence that Pasteurs germ theory is a flawed plagiarism of his contemporary, Antoine Bchamp, whose discoveries pointed toward a different paradigm than Pasteurs. One consequence of Bchamps discoveries was a different dynamic to describe life and decay processes. During the 20th century, a number of scientists, either following Bchamps lead or pursuing their research independently, discovered similar if not identical dynamics. Those discoveries are partly based on viewing life processes with microscopes (1, 2) that achieve resolutions considered impossible by Isaac Newtons optical theory. The findings of those microscopes are virtually irrefutable, particularly by a scientific establishment that refuses to look through them, in a situation that recalls Galileos detractors refusing to look through his telescope to see Jupiters moons.
The dynamic first noted by Bchamp and further developed by his professional descendants begins with the understanding that multi-cellular life forms are made possible by specialization. When life was unicellular, each cell had to do it all: acquiring energy and other nutrients, maintaining its metabolism, expelling waste and living. The human body is filled with specialized cells that form the foundation of every organ, structure and system. When those specialized cells receive proper nutrition (most nutrition is energy) they effectively perform their specialized task. However, as Gaston Naessens precisely documented long ago, when cells do not receive proper nutrition, they begin losing their specialization. If the body fails to live up to the deal, those specialized cells take matters into their own hands. They lose their specialization, revert to more primitive behaviors to survive, and even begin robbing nutrients from their neighbors, becoming biological brigands. Every degenerative disease that Naessens studied had the same sub-cellular dynamic, the most common outward manifestation being cancer.
In both the collapse of civilization and the self-destruction of the human body, the specialists abandoned specialization when the system failed to meet their needs. When civilizations collapsed, attempts to preserve them included coercing specialists to remain at their urban posts. However, providing them what they needed was both the cause and the cure. Coercing the specialist dealt with the symptom instead of the cause. Similarly, todays orthodox cancer treatments attack those former specialists that reverted to more primitive behavior in their quest for survival. Naessens brilliant treatment feeds the cancer cells instead of attacking them.
Symptom suppression always fails when the cause remains unaddressed. In crisis situations, suppressing symptoms may be appropriate, but the only lasting solution is addressing the cause. A stressed body causes degenerative disease, whether from poor nutrition (dead food is responsible for most poor nutrition), imbibing caffeine, nicotine, alcohol and other stimulants/depressants, industrial pollutants (fluoride and many others), psychological stress and other stresses such as inhaling smoke. The essence of Western medicine is symptom suppression. The U.S. medical establishment rarely compensates people for preventing disease. To borrow from Ben Franklin, why sell prevention by the ounce, when cure can be sold by the pound? Virtually every alternative cancer treatment that abandons the attack the tumor paradigm of Western medicine (and they are almost all harmless, cheap and vastly more effective than surgery, radiation and chemotherapy) is outlawed in the United States. Western medicine has yet to adopt the paradigm that deals with causes, and even attacks and suppresses it because it is not lucrative. However, the most important issue is not that Western medicine is a racket that only provides symptom suppression, but that nearly everybody plays along, giving their power away to that establishment. Accepting responsibility for ones health requires self-discipline, the kind that few regularly exercise. The system also indoctrinates people into ceding their power to it. The only viable solution is people accepting responsibility for their health and practicing prevention.
Whether it was an urban specialist returning to the farm or a specialized cell turning cancerous, each specialist bore some responsibility for the systems failure. Blind specialization, without seeing the whole, is part of the problem. R. Buckminster Fuller observed that specialization in science has served to keep scientists controlled by the ruling class. Activists must distinguish the forest from the trees, branches from roots, and address causes instead of symptoms in order to be effective. Not only could such efforts forestall the looming catastrophe, it could begin looking a lot like heaven on earth if relatively few people began directing their efforts toward causes instead of symptoms. "
The Hippocratic Oath is also a real eye opener – how many doctors take this oath and break it ? How many have violated the "do no harm" rule ?
As the gut goes so does the body.
Thanks.
i don’t know if you are aware of this or not but when i read your post some "google" ads appeared on the right side margin. the first ad was this one:
E. coli O157:H7 Help
Contact the most experienced E. coli and HUS Attorneys
http://www.MarlerClark.com
and there was another "ad" that had to do with some claim that people should never drink milk unless it is pasteurized. is there any way you can regain control over your blog so these pernicious ads don’t appear?
Miguel thanks for your post. We and millions of people are far worse off by the complete rejection of Bechamp.
Unless I missed something I would have to disagree with Tainers concluding that civilaztions collapse as a result of energy scarcity and the return of specialist to the countryside.
Romes loss of their Republic was due in large part to the destruction of small family farms, totally corrupt government , debasing their currency by removing gold and silver from their coins, creating a welfare system, invading , looting and occupying foreign nations.
I fear we are even worse off than Rome was.
We poison our own air via the Chemtrails. This summer the Xs, Hs, and weird cloud formations filled the skies over our home. We dump fluoride and chlorine deadly poisons in our water supplies. We are producing foodless foods and filling them with thousands of toxins and arresting farmers without their "papers". Nixon in 1972 remove gold backing of the US dollar its now worthless we have been functioning on monopoly money, via credit and debt. Every dollar in existance has been created by someones debt and the debt cannot by paid off because they do not print the money need to pay the resulting interest. Rome had their games and vile entertainment and we have ours.
I fear that we are closer to collapse than any of us dareto even think about.
Do TPTB know what they are doing to us? Some do here is one.
"DEFICIT SPENDING IS SIMPLY A SCHEME FOR HIDDEN CONFISCATION OF WEALTH" ALAN GREESPAN 1966
I grew up on raw milk. I gently pasteurize the milk I raise and feed to my own children, namely because I have saved one of my goats from listeriosis in the past; and have heard doctors talk about patients they were caring for with listeriosis and campylobacter. It isn’t something I want my children to have.
I feel that raw milk should be legal because what we consume should be a free food choice. People have asked me for raw milk to make cheese with. Why should it be illegal for me to sell it to them? Why shouldn’t I be able to buy raw milk when my goats aren’t producing, to do with what I like?
The reasons I hear are namely 1) Others promote raw milk consumption for infants and children and thus people are misinformed as to the dangers, and so it should not even be accessable; 2) I as a consumer am not intelligent or educated enough to make my own informed choices regarding my food and 3) People will not know the difference between industrial processed foods and organically, pastured produced foods and consume food that is dangerous for them.
The answer to many people in the regulation field is to make raw foods less accessable than things that cause more deaths exponentially – alcohol consumption, driving, and flying in an airplane.
I have a problem with that. Our government overregulates us, and it is getting to a point where it makes us ill. I work in the healthcare industry, and I have been immersed in enough HUGE ethical issues where patient and family choice is involved, that this is where I stand. It is a CHOICE. Just as choosing NOT to have a heart cath is ethical, even when it is likely lethal to not have one. If the 3rd best heart cath team in the state can respect a person’s choice not to have a heart cath when someone’s LAD (the widowmaker) artery is 80-90% occluded, WHY shouldn’t I be permitted to buy raw milk? It isn’t poison hemlock, for godsakes.
Lawyers should only be involved in the event that a company claims something that they can’t carry through. IF I were to drink OP raw milk, and I knew that put me at risk of becoming ill, and I become ill, that is a risk I took. On the other hand, if OP claims to be campylobacter-free, that is another matter.
In the issue of discussion, attacking Mark McAfee for stating someone told him the kid was using his cellphone just is absurd. Why bother? I can understand that this discussion has been going on a long time, and nerves are wearing thin, but it would be really nice if we could stick to intellectual facts.
And for the record, my youngest child spent the first 7 days of her life on an oscillating ventilator, and an infection was not found, but not ruled out. My heart wrenched when I first saw the video of Chris, and I feel his parents’ emotions. I have not called the video propaganda. In fact, it has inspired some discussion, that hopefully in the end will be fruitful. I reacted strongly, and I am as guilty as both David and Amanda on jumping to conclusions about something I didn’t know about. Hopefully in the end we all learn from it.
The focus of Marler (and many) seems to be outlawing raw milk altogether, although I could be wrong. I think the real issue there is what Amanda has named – outsourcing to a commercial dairy without informing the customer.
Gwen
How many people who have gotten sick from a food product has had the owner of the company come to see them? I get the impression Mark McAfee was genuinely concerned because he truly believes it couldn’t be the milk. Thus the spinach defense. It sounds like he’s had contact with all the families of the children that had e-coli illness linked to OP milk. The fact that he’s posting on a blog about it while a lawsuit is filed, instead of laying low, seems to imply he’s pretty confident his product wasn’t at fault. Confident or not he could have also been doing a bit of fact gathering just to clear his product. Maybe he was a little nervous about the outsourced milk.
I read the quote about the kids being on cell phones. Who said that to him exactly? Is it mentioned somethere in older posts? I’m curious because I thought Chris was about 7 yrs old. I don’t know a lot of 7 yr olds that have cell phones. That seemed a bit odd. But Lauren, who was a little older (pre-teen?) at the time, could have been talking to friends or texting. Girls that age seem to have a lot to talk about with friends. Or maybe her Mom didn’t want her talking to Mark so she put him off. There could be a lot of details missing from this story.
http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD92S4NJ80%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1011&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCL1_UNEWS
But what about the birds flying overhead and pooping?? We’re doomed!!
Yeah I guess a fence won’t keep them or the pigeons out – gatling gun might.
I don’t believe the article mentioned if there were laborers in the field – could they have been a source also?
Thanks for the background change. Much easier on the eyes.
I unfortunately don’t have any control over the Google ads. They haven’t been a problem for the most part. They are the blog’s only source of income and, believe me, they don’t generate much income. The ads for Marler, though, give you some insight into his marketing approach. Any time certain terms come up, like E.coli, or food-borne illness, he’s there, hustling for business.
The primary reason some hospitals discourage cell phone use is that the older telemetry equipment can occaisionally malfunction due to the cell phone signals. Newer equipment is designed so cell phone signals don’t interfere. The second reason is that healthcare facilities do not want camera phones used. Our hospital has signs on all the doors, "CAMERA PHONES ARE PROHIBITED." Know what? The nurses and doctors sit at the nurse’s station and share pictures from home on their….camera phones.
Gwen