The Complete Patient

Officials of the California Department of Food and Agriculture have already begun whispering sweet little nothings into the governor’s ear about the dangers of SB 201. The Fresno Bee reports that the governor’s office has expressed reservations, based on CDFA opposition.

That means it’s going to be up to the public to keep the matter public. Mary Blair McMorran, in her comment on my previous post, has it right—it’s harder for these officials and their big-name allies to pull their dark-side shenanigans if consumers are watching and monitoring and expressing themselves. “All the Marlers in the world don't stand a chance against freedom of choice, and a citizenry prepared to fight for it. California has to stand up and fight. The only way they'll lose this is if they let someone else fight for them.”

There’s one other hopeful sign: If the governor were to veto SB 201, the odds of an override, by two-thirds majorities in the legislature, would appear feasible based on the fact that nearly all the legislators are on record as being in favor of the legislation.

***

The CDFA apparently got its way with that little educational farm project I reported on recently, without having to fire a shot. The directors at the ranch caved quickly, reports Robin Countrman-Velk. “The Board of Directors knew all milk products were pasteurized (including that fed to goat kids) but chose to ignore this fact and continually accuse me of ‘selling’ raw milk… The ‘fear mongering’ worked… so sad that Truth has no place in politics! It is very sad that the ‘Bad Guys’ have won here and the children and families have lost. Our program is being shut down and all of our animals displaced. I have raised these animals from birth or actually been there to deliver them. It is like losing my own child.”

***

One of the arguments made by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and public health officials is that raw milk and pasteurized milk have the same nutritional value. Now there’s a report in the current issue of  Scientific American examining why it is that organic milk lasts so much longer than ordinary milk (both pasteurized) that effectively questions that notion. In a brief item, a professor of animal nutrition at Pennsylvania State University says the reason has nothing to do with milk being organic, but rather the fact that most organic milk is ultrapasteurized—heated to 280 degrees for two to four seconds, versus 160 degrees for 15 seconds for most standard pasteurized milk—because it usually travels longer distances than regular milk to get to market. “Pasteurization does not kill all the bacteria, just enough so that you do not get a stomachache,” says the professor. “UHT, on the other hand, wipes out everything.” In addition, “UHT destroys some of the milk’s vitamin content—not a significant amount—and affects some of its proteins, rendering milk unusable for cheese.”

Raw milk doesn’t even get the good professor’s consideration, though I don’t think his response would be a surprise. Unfortunately, I can’t link to the article, since Scientific American is only available by purchasing the entire issue.