The buyers club crackdown, which saw members of a Georgia buyers club being forced to pour out their own milk, has now moved to Wisconsin. There, Max Kane, the head of the Belle’s Lunchbox buyers club that supplies raw milk customers in Chicago, has a court date December 21 to tell a judge why he shouldn’t answer questions from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
The Wisconsin DATCP previously subpoenaed Max Kane last spring, seeking information about the buyers club. He showed up at the session with copies of the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions, and protested that he wouldn’t testify in violation of the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self incrimination.
He says the Wisconsin authorities have since responded that they are willing to grant him immunity against prosecution, in exchange for his testimony. When he refused that, he says, they offered him a further deal: just shut down your buyers club and we’ll forget the whole thing. He’s refused that as well.
He says that providing any information about his buyers club will potentially open him up to prosecution by the federal government, via the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. “I know that once I give them information, I will have a big target on my back, because the FDA will be waiting to go after me. They haven’t given me immunity.”
Max Kane has reason to fear the FDA. If you’ll recall, he obtained emails that incriminate the FDA in a plan hatched earlier this year to crack down on Midwest buyers clubs. And the judge on December 21 could conceivably rule that Max Kane is in contempt of court, and throw him into jail. There are precedents for such action, particularly against reporters and editors who refuse to hand over lists of sources in new stories involving suspects in criminal actions.
Clearly, Wisconsin is on the war path against raw milk. A number of raw dairy farmers in the state are understood to have received warning letters about their sale of raw milk.
Part of the problem in Wisconsin is that the rules about distribution and sale of raw milk are unclear. At times, the state has been permissive about herd shares and buyers clubs, and at other times (like now) it hasn’t been. It allows so-called “incidental sales” of raw milk by dairy farmers–sales supposedly not central to the dairy–but the exact meaning of that term has never been spelled out in court.
A number of states operate like Wisconsin. They prohibit or don’t specifically allow raw milk sales, but at different times they tolerate such sales to varying degrees via herdshares and buyers clubs.
That ambiguity, which allows regulators to crack down whenever the mood strikes them, is part of what makes disagreements about raw milk so complicated. One of the things I especially liked about food poisoning lawyer Bill Marler’s proposal a few days ago about allowing sales of raw milk directly from farms was his backing of a clear approach for distributing raw milk. I don’t think his way is necessarily the best, but it is clear and understandable, and in the current atmosphere of high emotions and rancor, clarity counts for a lot. That’s what the various sides should be working towards: clarity, rather than trying to get small-time distributors like Max Kane to violate Constitutional protections and forcibly testify against themselves.
***
As mentioned in the comments following my previous post, there is an interesting assessment of the raw milk debate (with some controversial comments about Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures), along with quotes from The Raw Milk Revolution.
And this nice review of my book. Thanks also to Gwen Elderberry for her very complimentary words in the reader comments on Amazon.
Max called me this week and asked me to speak and rally with him on the 21st of December in Wisconsin just before his court appearance. I will be there. I also told Max that I want very much to testify for him about the normalcy that can be the reality when raw milk is out in the open available to everyone and tested and inspected with standars, laws and regulations….like here in California.
I want the judge to hear from me in person so that there is no mistaking that raw milk can be a normal thing and available to everyone that chooses to drink it. The more normal raw milk can be treated the better for us all. We will see what Max’s lawyer says to my offer.
This is a time when we must take a chapter from Martin Luther King and Cesar Chavez. This is a time when the consciuos must awake the sick and unconscious to teach them and lead them from the darkness of immune depression and the drug induced biologically paranoid pharma coma that America’s citizens find themselves. Lets all turn out to show our support for Max as he places himself at the very foot of all our health liberties. In CA we fought our raw milk fight at the SB 201 hearings and we won our political battle when CDFA and the FDA refused to show themselves and Dr. Ron Hull, Dr. Ted Beals, Walter Robb ( COO of Wholefoods ), Mike Schmidt ( Blue Bus Raw Milk Freedom Fighter ) of Canada and even friends from France, Italy came and 1000 raw milk retailers and consumers testified and were counted at several hearings that were held. Now it is time to defend our nutritional rights where ever they are being denied to us. We are all Americans and we must fight like our lives depend on it….because it does. For some weirdly strange reason Raw Milk is our Wounded Knee ( taken from Joel Salatins words in Davids book ) and we must seize this time and this purpose to make a stand. If not we will find ourselves even more dependent on the sicko dead food immune depressing construct that threatens to dominate us all.
December 21st is the day…..be conscious, be active, be there.
Camera crews…. this is your chance to hear and see the raw milk peoples voices speaking truth to power from the heart and the gut. Guaranteed the FDA will not be there neither will the oposition….they are cowards. They can not stand against the people….they have no spines to hear the testimonials from the mother lions.
I have seen this before.
Mark McAfee
Also at our SB 201 hearings were David Gumpert, Liz Reitzig ( pregnant as ever ) and Sally Fallon….and so many other unnamed good people. That was a very good battle and it made all the difference in CA.
Now there are many assemblymen and senators and staffers in CA that drink raw milk. It was a turning point. Lets show them how normal raw milk can be. I will bring ten half gallons of CA Raw Milk with me and drink it with the demonstrators on the steps of the Wisconsin court house steps.
They will not take my raw milk from me…no matter were I physically stand on Americas soil.
Mark
Earlier this year on this blog I proposed "11 Great Thoughts" in an attempt to create a discussion framework for, among other things, voluntary standards for raw milk producers, coupled with clear warnings and helpful linkages to the public health system to assist in tracking problems when they occur. At the risk of boring everyone to tears, I’ve trimmed them a bit and repeat them here in the hope that they might do what I originally hoped, namely stimulate discussion with less heat and more light.
1) Mark McAfee’s Citizens Petition to FDA on interstate raw milk shipments is modeled on Ron Paul’s HR 778, which is still buried in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. HR 778 is intended to get FDA totally out of regulating interstate commerce in raw milk simply based on its lack of pasteurization.
2) There should be some kind of consistent identification of raw milk and raw milk products coupled with standard warning language, whether basic such as current restaurant-style warnings, or more elaborate such as current California warnings.
3) Claims for health benefits may be made by any customer in the producer’s advertising or sales forum only if in the form of personal testimonials or peer-reviewed scientific papers; or by the producer in the producer’s advertising or sales forum only if in the form of a statistically accurate summary of unsolicited customer testimonials or peer-reviewed scientific papers.
4) Sales at retail, where the consumer is likely not to know the producer, should have increased testing under state law.
5) Transactions (whether sales, cow shares or otherwise depending on state law) direct from farmer to consumer whether on the farm or otherwise, or from farmers with herds smaller than a yearly-average [100] milking cows, should not be regulated other than by individual agreement.
[precedent for a similar exemption of raw milk, is the federal Egg Products Inspection Act (Pub. L. 91-597, 84 Stat.1620 et seq.) which exempts eggs direct farm-to-consumer or any sales from flocks of less than 3000 birds. At the state level, some states permit sales to various degrees and at the other extreme, some few prohibit all kinds of raw milk transactions; these issues will have to be dealt with at the state level.]
6) Parents are free to feed their children whatever foods they choose.
7) Farmers and individuals who provide raw milk or raw milk products to "others" should have legal protection in litigation (absent reckless behavior or actual knowledge of pathogens or other significant risk factors) so long as the proper identification and warnings (as in, #2) were provided and, in the case of "others" who are minors, so long as the identification and warnings were effectively communicated to the minor’s parent or guardian prior to consumption.
8) Educational materials (directed to both producers and consumers) for the safe production, handling and processing of raw milk and raw milk products should be developed and widely distributed generally and in the producer’s advertising and sales media.
9) An open, collaborative, transparent and scientifically rigorous and neutral approach should be taken by producers, consumers and public health officials in all instances of disease outbreak with a common commitment both to protect public health and to protect continued viability of responsible producers. Public health warnings which are not connected to outbreaks of illness or warnings which prove to have been unfounded, shall be followed by public health advisory followups which are communicated with the same level and extent of publicity as the initial warning, including exoneration of producers as appropriate.
10) Independent research (including analyses of testimonials and other real-life evidence as well as traditional reductionist studies) should be publicly funded to examine the nutritional value, environmental impacts of production, and the acute and chronic impacts on human health from raw and traditional foods and from industrially-produced foods.
11) Broader insurance availability for producers and other risk-sharing approaches should be developed as a counterweight to regulation-by-litigation.
[Farmers might consider voluntary production standards such as various kinds of testing protocols or simply rely on many years of problem-free operation, so as to induce insurers to write policies, otherwise the insurers will want to "go automatic" and insist on compliance with various regulations which is their current typical mode. Similarly, a litigation defense which is founded in compliance with the testing protocols of a voluntary standard or in decades of trouble-free operation by simply "looking at the animals and watching what’s in the filter," should help to defend against litigation, and ultimately, to reduce litigation.]
RE your 11 Great Thoughts: These points make such obvious sense to me that I think Of course they should become incorporated into regulations regarding real milk. Problem is, it takes two parties to have a discussion. I suspect most here would find little fault with them.
Perhaps others who would like the availability of real milk diminished, or significantly more regulated could chime in and sharpen them a bit further.
As more and more people have rediscovered the benefits of real milk, demand pressures increased (including from out-of-state visitors) and farmers responded by selling more than the allowed amount of the same product that they had been selling before with little regulatory oversight. The new law allows farmers to sell up to 40 gallons of raw milk daily directly to consumers perhaps 8 to 10 cows worth.
Vermont has a small population and is a state where historically all politics is local. Vermonters are traditionally independent-minded, but have not been particularly activist oriented. The Rural Vermont organization and others have slowly been waking people up. I believe this new law, the Unpasteurized Milk Bill, gained the governors signature on its second attempt through the legislature quite a defeat for BigDairy.
Lykke asked in the last post if this was a win:win; lose:lose; win:lose; lose:win compromise. Id vote for win/lose A win for the ability to sell enough real milk to be very modestly economically viable (provided that you already own the land, and the pasture plus the out-buildings are in decent shape), but a loss because they must more clearly deal with unreasonable regulations.
I say unreasonable because small producers have been offering significant quantities of real milk to consumers in Vermont for a long time and to my awareness, there have been no outbreaks (remember, an outbreak is only two or more in number) attributed to small Vermont producers for a VERY long time. Their method/model of production (including some not-so-spotless dairy barns/parlors) has a long, safe track record (Lykke, please correct or confirm this record.) and now they must deal with new regulations where there previously had been no significant problem.
I say a loss, also, because the farmers have to deal with the VT Department of Health and the Agency of Agriculture which view the concept of letting farms sell raw milk as a potentially dangerous health risk. (Notice the weasel-word potentially) Also, Patsy Kelso, state epidemiologist of the Vermont Department of Health, describes the departments stance: people shouldnt drink raw milk.
With helping friends like this, who needs enemies?
But what constitutes a scientific approach?
We are now in the throes of a supposed influenza disaster. We hear from our government and our scientists that tens of thousands die each year from flu. But look carefully at the CDCs own data and a different picture emerges. Check page 32 of this CDC document, which lists death rates from selected causes:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf
You will see that in 2004 there were 1,100 deaths attributed to influenza. Where are the tens of thouseands? Well, it turns out that the commonly reported influenza death rate is actually deaths from influenza + pneumonia. Now influenza and pneumonia are certainly linked, but it is very apparent that establishment science is quite uninterested in figuring out exactly why. A reasonable person might wonder why pneumonia is a sometimes complication of flu. Could it be that immune function is compromised? And why should that be?
Id suggest that its because of medical cares dogged promotion of antibiotics and environmental sanitization, reluctance to investigate the causes of infection while so much money can be made by managing infectious diseases, and promotion (with agribusiness) of the idea that live food is no better and sometimes worse than processed food. Are we to trust this sort of narrowly paradigmatical group of neutral scientists to search out the cause of disease, or to declare whether health benefits can be enjoyed from drinking raw milk? Are we being responsible when we allow that group to influence the authorities now after Max Kane? What about the document pictured in Davids post?
Let me remind you that Trust your Farmer is the foundation of the raw milk movement. I put my trust in you when I purchased raw milk from OPDC in 2006. How was I to know that you were outsourcing for some of your raw milk products and using your bottling equipment to bottle this non OPDC product? E.coli 0157:H7 is a particularly feisty bacterium which can require a few as 10 cells to make a person ill. I want to believe you when you say you have stopped the practice of outsourcing, but other evidence is suggesting a different picture.
If you choose not to respond to my question, I will assume you have continued to outsource for some of your raw milk product sin the year 2009.
This was my previous comment:
I thought Jill Richardson did a fair job of presenting both sides of the issue regarding the raw milk debate. What caught my attention was this statement about Mark McAfee and OPDC:
[He sells his product in retail locations like Whole Foods (within California only), and he outsources some of his production as his demand outstrips his supply. However that means that he does not have direct control over all of the dairy products sold under his label, and it also means that his customers have relatively little information about where their raw dairy products come from.]
Now the way this information is presented, it sounds like Mark is currently outsourcing for some of his products. Now Im confused. Earlier this month (actually October 22nd) I asked Mark this question:
[Over this past year, have you outsourced raw milk to meet the demand of selling your raw milk products? Have any of your raw milk products been packaged with the OPDC label, but created from outsourced raw milk? The products Im referring to are butter, cream, qephor, & cheese; not fluid raw milk.
The same question goes for colostrum also. Over this past year, have you outsourced colostrum and bottled it with the OPDC label?]
This was Marks response:
[I think I have answered this question several times and in several places. But….no problem I will answer it again.
In California all Grade A Raw Market milk must come from TB tested and CDFA approved cows. We do not outsource raw milk to make our Grade A products. Yes…in 2006 we did buy some colostrum (not a grade A product but rather a DHS dietary supplement) from other organic dairies to meet our demand. Yes…in the past we have bought some raw milk from other grass fed raw milk dairies to make some of our truly raw cheddar cheese ( which is aged for 60 days and allowed to be sold across state lines by the FDA and not a Grade A product either ). At present ( and for quite some time ) OPDC only makes our products from our own raw milk. This is what I have said in the past and the story is still the same.]
Ive become quite interested in the topic of OPDC outsourcing practices, so I revisited Amanda Roses blog and reread her Elephant in the Raw Milk Room article.
http://www.rebuild-from-depression.com/blog/2008/04/the_elephant_in_the_raw_milk_r.html
I was quite surprised at the note that was added September 27, 2009. Notice the year.2009. This is what it states:
[Note added September 27, 2009:
About six months before I wrote this entry in April of 2008, when I was working on the AB1735 campaign for raw milk in California, I urged Mark McAfee at Organic Pastures to make his outsourcing public by including a page on his website with the products that are made from outside dairies and with information about those dairies. I offered to write the content for him. Over the following months, our conversation continued. While I did not tell him in advance that I would be posting this particular piece, we had a six-month-long discussion of the topic.
Mark does state in the comments here that he no longer outsources, but I did confirm from him in June of 2009 that OPDC does continue to bring in outside product for butter. He purchases milk from a milk broker who brokers milk intended for pasteurization. Under California law, it is illegal for a raw milk dairy to bottle milk (whole and skim) and cream that was intended for pasteurization. There is no such reference in the law to butter, cheese, or colostrum-related products.]
It is clear that in the past, Mark McAfee has outsourced for colostrum, butter and to make cheese and packaged it with the OPDC label. Based on the information above, it is still unclear if Mark continues the practice of outsourcing. So Im going to ask Mark McAfee one more time about the outsourcing issue. Mark, are you currently or have you anytime in the year of 2009 outsourced for any of your raw milk products or colostrum?
Mary McGonigle-Martin
http://www.lavidalocavore.org/diary/2674/sue-me-sue-me-what-can-you-do-me
What will the supporters in the raw milk movement think if OPDC has been outsourcing for butter (or any other raw milk/colostrum products) in 2009 and not informing the consumers? What will the consumers think? Trust you farmer. What does that exactly mean?
cp
There was an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak investigated in VT in 2008:
http://caledonianrecord.com/Main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=41896
No others since 2000 looking at this table:
http://tinyurl.com/yeurj72
Mary/cp,
Outsourcing – meaning he buys raw milk from other dairies that was destined to be sent for pasteurization to make OPDC raw butter or other raw dairy products? Is that legal?
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T6S-4RNJ8MB-3&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1071299929&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=afaadb3cd7a80ab99ca50d5e0d52abac
"Prerequisite to this model are thorough studies to understand how L. monocytogenes and other pathogens adapt their cellular physiology to overcome heat and other stresses."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC107882/
" Bacterial invasion of mammalian cells is a complex process which involves active participation by the microbe and the eukaryotic target (17, 20). Current models indicate that pathogenic bacteria use several different mechanisms to sense their microenvironment and adjust expression of their virulence factors accordingly (reviewed in reference 17). Thus, it is possible that blockade of invasion could prevent elaboration of bacterial products critical for stimulating adhesion molecule expression. Recent data show that expression of L. monocytogenes hly, plcB, actA, and plcA and production of their respective proteins is upregulated by incubation under stress conditions, such as a shift from rich to minimal medium, heat shock, or growth within mammalian cells (3, 25, 43). In the experiments presented here, these virulence factors were not directly responsible for HUVEC stimulation. Nevertheless, regulation of L. monocytogenes virulence genes in response to microenvironmental cues supports the concept that invasion could trigger expression of the gene or genes necessary for stimulating HUVEC."
A rough translation of this would be that whether or not the microorganism becomes "pathogenic" or virulent in someones body depends ENTIRELY on the microenvironment it finds itself in and the stresses it has been subject to in it’s immediate previous generations.What does this mean in our every day choice of foods to eat?Using bacteriocidal agents in food production is counterproductive.These things eliminate harmless bacteria and make harmless bacteria virulent.Heat shock, irradiation and high pressure treatments do the same.
Those who insist that we must kill microbes in order to have safe food are pressuring food producers to use increasingly more deadly methods to eliminate microbes.If we want safer food we will have to stop thinking this way.We don’t need to add any steps to the process of sterilizing the food we eat.We need to remove most of them.Starting with the way farmers treat the soil.We have created these problems ourselves by looking at food production as a business,separating it into too many stages and insisting that profit is the reason that we are involved in food production.Don’t be led astray,health is the goal not money.
Mary ,cp,Lykke and Amanda ,
While you work tirelessly to keep our minds focused on those frightening bacteria that might be in our food,behind your back the people who produce your food are responding to the fear of bacteria by adding ever increasing amounts of toxins to your food.These toxins are what is making people sick and no one is testing to see how big a dose we are getting now.
Yes. That is what outsourcing is. In the past, Mark McAfee has purchased raw milk and colostrum from an organic dairy intended for pasteurization and bottled colostrum, cream, and made butter and cheese from this milk. It was all sold with the OPDC label as if it came from his cows. The practice of outsourcing for raw milk products and colostrum is not illegal, but it is certainly a deceitful, unethical and dangerous business practice.
However, outsourcing fluid raw milk from an organic dairy intended for pasteurization and then selling it as fluid raw milk is illegal.
I do question what category kefir falls under. It is a raw milk product, or considered fluid raw milk? If is it is considered a raw milk product, then technically outsourced raw milk could be used. The milk is fermented with grains and now sold as kefir. If kefir is considered fluid raw milk, using outsourced milk would be illegal.
miguel,
I think you would enjoy reading Slow Death By Rubber Duck: How the Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Life Affects our Health. Another good book is Detoxify or Die. People are testing. Using a far-infrared sauna can get these toxins out of your body. http://www.sunlightsaunas.com/
miguel, do you support the practice of outsourcing for raw milk products? I would be shocked if your answer was yes.
Mary McGonigle-Martin
Can you direct me to any information about antibacterial,disinfectant or antibiotic testing that is routinely done on food?I know that milk is tested for antibiotic residue,but only six antibiotics out of the 80 or so that are used on dairy cows can be tested for and only 4 of those are routinely tested for.Of course dairy farmers are very careful about any use of those 4.I sincerely doubt that food producers are at all concerned about residues of antibacterials.In fact I see everyday that processors and regulators believe that the residues are harmless if not beneficial because they reduce the number of bacteria in our food.They also upset the balance in our gut.
We outsource a lot of things,the salt and cultures used in cheesemaking,for a while we got butter from another farm because we didn’t have enough.It wasn’t really outsourcing in that we made it very clear that it wasn’t from our cows.It was just an attempt to get more of something that people wanted.As long as there is full disclosure to those eating the food ,I see nothing wrong with farms working together to provide what people want.As long as you are just worried about BACTERIA! in your food you are just distracting people from very real problems in food production.
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
Mari’s Climb
http://www.triplicate.com/20091029107351/News/Local-News/MARIS-CLIMB
This is interesting too:
Special Digest: Have a raw milk shake, he said/she said style
http://www.ethicurean.com/2009/10/30/raw-milk-shake/
"until I decided to smoke some recreational herbs to commemorate my late brother’s"
Recreational herbs? hahaha
"he outsources some of his production as his demand outstrips his supply. However, that means that he does not have direct control over all of the dairy products sold under his label, an" "McAfee’s unique practices (like outsourcing), "
Alluding to something that can harm a business or persons character makes one libel. Where is the proof?
David,
Why is there a limit on how much raw milk can be sold?
cp
By the way, when you outsourced to make butter, did you purchase milk that was intended for pasteurization? Considering that you taste your milk to make sure it doesnt have a pathogen (you can tell by the taste if is off), I would have a hard time believing you were cavalier about outsourced product you chose for your customers.
miguel, people are becoming ill from drinking raw milk that is contaminated with a pathogen. This is a fact. Antibiotics are in our food supply and water supply. Everyone is exposed to them on some level if they do not eat food that is grown in their own gardens or raised on their own farms (or purchased from farmers that do this for you). What is the point you are trying to make?
Mary
I was not aware of this incident. Thank you researching illness outbreaks attributed to raw milk in Vermont a place where milking cows used to be a major occupation and now is a major industry. Orleans County is one of Vermonts poorest counties and many of these rural families sell a little extra milk from their single cow to help make ends meet. The cows premises are likely to have lots of flies and cobwebs, mud all around the milking parlors entrance, and lots of quality grass and hay.
I read your linked article and question how seriously VT Public Health took this outbreak. Apparently, there were no serious consequences. Legalistically, an outbreak is two or more illnesses from a single source. Again, a regulating agency publicized a real milk outbreak before they had conclusive facts. Three people became ill. Two of them were at a picnic where ice cream from real milk was served. (Who knows what else they ate in common. Did these illnesses actually stem from a single source?
From the article: The name of the raw milk producer is not being released, because the state cannot be sure that the milk was the source, she said (Patsy Kelso, the Health Departments epidemiologist. ) In other words, the Department made a guess that the source was raw milk. – – Another regulatory agency giving a bad rap based only on circumstantial evidence?
Only three people have been known to become (moderately?) ill from raw milk in 9 years in Vermont – a time when regulators, generally, were being particularly vigilant. But more important than pointing out likely regulatory bias, A LOT of people drank real milk over that period of time in Vermont and just three ill people could be found? My, my. Weve got a really bad problem / epidemic here!! These folks spent time and resources that would have been better spent pursuing something really relevant. What a bummer.
The Raw Milk Revolution: The Civil Rights Movement of Food
Makenna Goodman interviews our gracious host David Gumpert
HMMM The civil rights movement of food.
Our greatgrandparents fought for their right to choose to freely drink a glass of whiskey. Our greatgrandmothers had to fight for their right to vote. 40 years ago our black fellow citizens had to fight for and even shed blood to obtain their natural born rights. Today we are also fighting for our right to choose what we place in our mouth or have injected into our bodies. What does this bit of history reveal about they that rule over us?
Therein is the power of paradigms. One simply cannot see to the right when the head is pointed left. I wonder (honestly) if there is any reasonable chance at all that the seeming infinite inertia of germ theory, of the notion that exposure to "pathogens" equates with disease, will ever be overcome.
Yesterday a nurse said to me, in the same breath, that urinary tract infections are the result of pathogens entering the bladder via urinary catheters, yet there can be "colonization" of urine without infection. The question as to why such a thing can be so if the invading bacteria are truly pathogenic and therefore at fault was met with a momentary blank stare, then a shrug-of-the-shoulders comment: "Not everybody reacts the same way."
That there is little to no understanding of the implications of such statements is frustrating among laypeople, but absolutely maddening among health care professionals. We can only recognize, patiently, that it is extremely difficult to shake long-held beliefs, especially when those beliefs are reinforced by experts and by embedded cultural and business practice.
******************************************************************
On another note: I received David’s book yesterday and am about a quarter of the way through. It is a very fine (and brave) piece of work (so far, with no sign of letting up), and because of it I now find myself in favor of a federal regulation that all Americans be required to read David’s account of the Gary Oaks affair. Of course non-compliance with this rule could not be tolerated and must be met with force adequate to… Ahhh, forget it.
"Today we are also fighting for our right to choose what we place in our mouth or have injected into our bodies. What does this bit of history reveal about they that rule over us?"
Two things struck me.
First was the very last part. "…they that rule over us."
This has become the attitude of government…ALL government…elected politicians and appointed bureaucrats alike, at the federal, state, and local levels. "They" rule over us, or so they think…and we allow this thinking to continue, every time we return one of these elitists to office.
The attitude currently shown by the government is basically "This is a people’s government, run by and for the good of the people…as soon as they are smart enough, educated enough (by "us") to do so. Until then, for the good of the people, "we" must run things FOR them, making decisions for them."
Folks, that isn’t a democracy (which we aren’t and never were intended to be. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner), nor is it a democratic republic as our founding fathers intended. It is communism at it’s most basic. The people will be allowed to run things as soon as they are smart enough and educated (brainwashed) enough to do so…trouble is the people never quite get smart or educated enough for the ruling class to hand control back to them.
I don’t know and really don’t care how y’all feel about Glenn Beck, but love him or hate him, he repeats one thing over and over that applies to this question of "who rules who" in general, and to us who believe in making our own nutritional choices in particular.
"We don’t work for them. They work for us." (Glenn Beck, ad nauseum).
First WE have to, again, really believe that, not as a cute saying, but as a strongly held belief. We have to grasp it and hold on, wrap ourselves around it, assimilate it…then we need to apply it, through whatever means necessary, to those who believe they rule us.
The second thing that struck me about the end of Don’s comment was, "Today we are also fighting for our right to choose what we place in our mouth or have injected into our bodies."
I’ve been saying that so long for so often that folks here who have read my comments are surely sick of my beating that particular dead horse…but I was just a wee bit wrong. I suddenly had an epiphany.
I’ve said over and over we should demand our rights. Well, no we shouldn’t. If we demand that the government give us our rights we are saying the government has the authority to give…and to take…those rights. They have no such authority. Read our country’s foundational treatise, the Constitution. In almost EVERY case, the Constitution declares that our rights are derived from, given by, God, and that the ONLY thing the government should do regarding rights is protect them. Not approve or disapprove them. Not adjust them. Not "give" them. Just protect them.
So…we must do two things. Quit allowing the communist idea that "they" rule "us" until we are advanced enough to rule ourselves to be the effect of our government, and tell, not ask, the government to do as the constitution says is within it’s job to do…protect our rights, not attempt to "give" or "take" rights that are not theirs to dispense.
Again I ask, "Are there no Nathan Hale’s left?"
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
"miguel, people are becoming ill from drinking raw milk that is contaminated with a pathogen. This is a fact."
Is it a fact? I am skeptical. Show me some recent research that supports this theory.
In the past few years people who study microbes have unraveled a few of the mysteries about microbes.Apparently a microbe that is busy making vitamins or hormones that regulate our bodies does under some circumstances start recycling our body cells instead.It does this in response to a disruption in the normal function of the cells around it.Microbes live in well established communities in our bodies alongside our own cells.When the community experiences a disaster,the immediate job at hand is to clean up the dead and dieing cells that are in the way of normal community activities.Microbes can quickly switch DNA to adjust to the new situation so that they can carry out their new jobs.An observer might make the mistake of assuming that these newly abundant offspring of the commensal microbes have arrived in large number from someplace outside the body.The symptoms of illness are all a result of our bodies ,along with the help of these microbes,eliminating dead and damaged cells.The CAUSE of the illness is the event or condition that originally did the damage to the community of microbes and body cells.If we suspect any food as the source of illness we need to take a close look at what in that food could have done the damage that induced the commensal bacteria to mutate into a clean up crew.The damage precedes the proliferation of those microbes that you refer to as "pathogens".Stop being afraid of these microbes,they are an important part of healing.Do some research about adaptive mutation of microbes.Read how genetic engineers use these adaptive properties of microbes to produce microbes that manufacture the vitamins and hormones that pharmaceutical companies sell.
The real excitement is not in David’s book launch or in other raw milk politics issues. The real excitement is right here at my house. We should all be so lucky. I have the best ever Halloween plan that has totally eclipsed my raw milk costume. I may not even send out that email about the costume.
Life is right here:
http://hilltop.typepad.com/irving_gills_williams_hou/2009/10/halloween-plans-for-the-lost-roadand-my-666th-tweet.html
Amanda
http://networkedblogs.com/p16026834
Chris Lewis
Dr Stefan Lanka offers a 10000 Euro reward to any who is able to produce a scientific paper proving that the H1N1 virus exists! Plus is HIV-AIDS virus real?
It was reported today that people are dying of H1N1. What is the truth?
Perhaps our germ here experts can shed some light on whether or not we are being lied to concerning germs and the pathogen theories currently the law of the land.
Im still waiting for your reply. The Ethicurean posted this yesterday. http://www.ethicurean.com/2009/10/30/raw-milk-shake/
If the facts are correct, it appears that you may have been lying about your recent outsourcing practices for butter????? On October 22, 2009, I asked you if OPDC outsourced for any of its raw milk products in the year 2009. You said no. So, Im giving you a 2nd chance to answer this question in case you accidently said no, and you meant yes.
By the way, I must compliment you on the design of your new butter containersvery attractive. However, I did not notice a disclaimer on the label stating that is was an outsourced product (if in fact it is). In the future, if you continue the practice of outsourcing for butter, this might be a good idea. You know what a stickler I am about ethics and integrity for raw milk dairy farmers. The raw milk movement is based on the slogan, trust your farmer. Can you be trusted?
Mary McGonigle-Martin
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Emperors-New-Clothes.htm
"one fine day two swindlers, calling themselves weavers, arrived. They declared that they could make the most magnificent cloth that one could imagine; cloth of most beautiful colours and elaborate patterns. Not only was the material so beautiful, but the clothes made from it had the special power of being invisible to everyone who was stupid or not fit. for his post."
" now the Emperor was curious to see the costly stuff for himself while it was still upon the looms. Accompanied by a number of selected ministers, among whom were the two poor ministers who had already been before, the Emperor went to the weavers. There they sat in front of the empty looms, weaving more diligently than ever, yet without a single thread upon the looms.
"Is not the cloth magnificent?" said the two ministers. "See here, the splendid pattern, the glorious colors." Each pointed to the empty loom. Each thought that the other could see the material.
"What can this mean?" said the Emperor to himself. "This is terrible. Am I so stupid? Am I not fit to be Emperor? This is disastrous," he thought. But aloud he said, "Oh, the cloth is perfectly wonderful. It has a splendid pattern and such charming colors." And he nodded his approval and smiled appreciatively and stared at the empty looms. He would not, he could not, admit he saw nothing, when his two ministers had praised the material so highly. And all his men looked and looked at the empty looms. Not one of them saw anything there at all. Nevertheless, they all said, "Oh, the cloth is magnificent."
"d so the Emperor set off under the high canopy, at the head of the great procession. It was a great success. All the people standing by and at the windows cheered and cried, "Oh, how splendid are the Emperor’s new clothes. What a magnificent train! How well the clothes fit!" No one dared to admit that he couldn’t see anything, for who would want it to be known that he was either stupid or unfit for his post?"
" among the crowds a little child suddenly gasped out, "But he hasn’t got anything on." And the people began to whisper to one another what the child had said. "He hasn’t got anything on." "There’s a little child saying he hasn’t got anything on." Till everyone was saying, "But he hasn’t got anything on." The Emperor himself had the uncomfortable feeling that what they were whispering was only too true. "But I will have to go through with the procession," he said to himself.
So he drew himself up and walked boldly on holding his head higher than before, and the courtiers held on to the train that wasn’t there at all."
Mark, I find your answers disingenuous, and frankly they appear, at least to me, to be so constructed as to allow you to dance around an obvious question without actually answering it and without actually lying.
You answer by changing directions, parsing, and obfuscating as well or better than any Washington lawyer/politician I have ever seen, and I’ve seen a lot…up close and personal. When asked about milk, you manage to make it about cheese, butter, colostrum, kefir, or ANYTHING that does not fall under the definition of fluid milk. You seek to set the terms of the discussion by redefining the question, or wording in the question, to fit the answer you want to give.
Your answers remind me of Bill Clinton questioning what the definition of "is" is, or of his claiming he didn’t have "sex" with that woman…because it wasn’t intercourse, it was oral sex.
Frankly I am tired of all the dancing and wiggling. On the unlikely chance you really didn’t understand what was being asked, let my see if this will get through:
Mark, if I or anyone here purchased, since March of this year, ANY dairy based product, be it liquid milk, powdered milk, colustrum, cheese, butter, kefir, or ANY other dairy based product, that carried an Organic Pastures label, did it contain ANY dairy product that came from any cow, goat, sheep, or any other animal that was not directly owned and/or totally controlled by Organic Pastures? If you sell sauerkraut, I’m not talking about the cabbage or salt, if you sell beef I’m not talking about THAT cow. I’m talking about any product the general public would consider a dairy product (claiming not to know what the general public would consider a dairy product would be considered continuing to dance. You aren’t stupid).
Mark, as related to the question as posed, do you now, or have you since March 2009, outsourced for any dairy product, either for direct sale, or for further processing for sale, any product carrying the Organic Pastures label? It’s a simple question. Yes or no. Anything else is continuing to dance, and I’d guess most of our feet are tired.
And for Mary…your point was made long ago. You think Mark outsources and lies about it. OK…point made, but quit harping on it. You’ve made your point.
I think most on this site are sick of the nanny state making our nutritional decisions…and others that should be relegated to personal responsibility status…for us. I know I am. Your constant showing of this article or that, quoting this person or the other one…you obvious attempts to discredit Mark…all this simply makes you look like a one-woman-self-appointed nanny state all unto yourself. Give it a break. We can find the same articles you find, research the same information you research…we can be what we preach for all to be, well informed consumers, without wading through what has obviously become Nanny Mary’s Anti-Mark Crusade.
I don’t need a nanny, be it named the Food and Drug Administration or Mary McGonigle-Martin.
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
If you dont like what I write, please skip over it. You might not find what I say to be useful, but David may need some material for the updated version of his book.
The Nanny
BTW, I wasn’t aware that the purpose of this blog was to provide fodder for David’s next book, OR to wage a campaign against McAffee…I thought the purpose was to provide a forum for intelligent discussion of food related issues.
My bad.
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
I agree that the tiresome Mark McAfee prosecution here should rest – he is not required to incriminate himself publically on this blog. If you don’t trust his practices, buy elsewhere. Mary’s beef I get, but Amanda’s self-righteous, self-centered ads are over the top. Amanda, love your dedication, but lately your shine has dulled. Mark, quit spinning – just keep doing what you do best; it would help if you came clean though..That might put an end to this – otoh, it may never end…. Bless you for the work that you do!
Mr. Gumpert, I owe you an apology – I am delinquent in responding to you about speaking engagement in Colorado – trying to nail down a date and iron out the details – looks like late February now??? I so hope you can come, and I am so proud to sponsor you. You are a magnificent journalist, a humble person, a skillful facilitator.
-Blair
Is it too much to ask from a raw milk farmer: don’t outsource? Does that explain the 2006 outbreak? It might.
IMHO, we need to move forward in this debate…Blair had some great thoughts in the almost last comment under the previous post about approaches for working with regulators and how its hard- awesome insight. Steve Bemis re-presented 11 Great Thoughts. Bill Marler described a possible on-farm model for raw milk sales. VT created a new regulation that is unique, for good or bad. South Dakota is thinking about a simlar regulation. Moo Shine running is another approach, but engaging in legal sales of raw milk based on rational compromise seems more productive and safe than going underground.
David K.,
I appreciate your frustration with a single media report about 3 cases in VT. Who knows if the county even decided it was raw milk (2008 statistics are not yet available). Bottom line: when there is an E. coli case, the same form is used on every one of them. There is a huge beef recall going on, and I promise you that when they interviewed the patients, they asked the same questions: did you drink raw milk, eat ground beef, visit a petting zoo, etc. I’ll see if I can find an online version of the questions asked, but the epidemiologists and/or public health nurses do not conduct interviews with a form that says only: did you drink raw milk? That is absurd. If they go through all the questions, and raw milk is the only one that stands out…more investigation. Check the DNA profiles, look to see if there are more cases. In the end, it often turns out they have no idea what food caused the illness. In other cases, they find one commonality: combine the evidence, and together it might show: raw milk, ground beef, cookie dough, spinach, sprouts. It is like putting together pieces of a puzzle (but, sometimes not all the pieces to the puzzle are in the box you get to work with as foodborne illness detective).
the anti-raw group here argues the same tried and true angle of dogma, propaganda and fear mongering developed over the last few decades. they probable even know this but being so dedicated to controlling others actions they have got to use these tools, as they’ve been very effective for so long.
i guess the question i ponder most is: do people still really fall for this. a tipping point has to be reached soon if it hasn’t been already.
so many are taking the red pill and refusing the blue one that lets them go back to the plastic world out society has turned into. documaries, books, tv shows. michel pollan might be the guy convincing so many to take the red pill. how far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?
it’s a scary thing learning how our food "system" really works. it takes a lot of effort and courage to finely "get it"
speaking of tipping points. people are really mad about the bail-outs and economic meltdown currently underway and our congress is trying to force thru healtcare after every townhall meeting in the country said Whooh! not so fast!
the way our gov’t has handled things it looks pretty much all down hill from here. who’s gonna pay this debt? who’s gonna pay in every (un)imaginable way. us of course…
gov’t has a big black eye right now and folks can see it. state budgets are in the dumper. revenue is drying up for gov’t in a big way, the pressure is on and gov’t will change pretty soon. which way will it change is unknown. smaller, freindlier, more helpful. or bigger more expensive and more controlling.
which one is more sustainable in the long run, or even the short run any more…
david k. i think it is milk farmer and/or miguel who gets credit for knowing how to milk and what to look for.
thanks everyone for the great reading here and mr g terrific blog you built, best of the web contender i think.
Blair — If the "know your farmer" bit means anything at all, Mark does need to step forward. He told me in June that his customers know all about the outsourcing. Apparently not everyone does, so he needs to explain it. In his market, it is his obligation. Like I said, I’m long-since bored on the issue and moving on. Let people buy milk broker products.
On my shameless ads, you would have really liked the raw milk Halloween costume. It’s almost too bad I found a much more fruitful outlet for my time.
We had a great Halloween here. I posted on Facebook about the "lost road" and asked if there were any Halloween takers. Friends we had not seen for a while called and we had the best time down there. We didn’t find empty pants walking around, but we all took "scary hike portraits" in the woods, discovered a really great creek area, and had sourdough pancakes. It doesn’t get much better than that. We’ve met a lot of cool people over the years through this unusual house and now some of those people are coming back to visit our discovery. I hope Bob comes some time to explore it with us (he posted on that blog in classic Bob). I like Bob. I know where Bob stands and what he stands for. He looks like good people to me. Anyone like Bob is invited here too — that includes Mary. I know where she stands and I get it. My "promotion" of the road has been a great way to reconnect. I am totally shameless about that. I encourage you guys to find your own "lost road" and have a great time.
Amanda
Bob…welcome back…your forthrightness and vigor have been missed.
Hugh, yes we know how to milk…and what to look for. We are coming up on our 800 day of milking…everyday..for over two years, with no break. (unlike other who are ‘farm owners’, and hire help to milk their hundred cows, some of us actually control their quality, daily, IN the barn) I love wiping teats!
Lykke…you some incredible nerve talking about personal attacks…especially when you state that all raw milk farmers have filthy farms, and are in it just for the $16 per gallon. Your exposure to correctly produced raw milk, and a majority of those who produce it, is severely lacking. Mark is the aberration…most raw milk farmers milk their own cows, and are trying to scrape the money together to keep their farms….few have investment bankers on their rolodexes, state legislators on their cell phones or private planes…. and none that I know would EVER consider outsourcing their product to another. Don’t let the high profile, and hunger for attention obscure the reality. Most raw milk farmers can control their passion for the substance, and the profits it can bring….and are content to milk their cows in anonymity.
Fact is though, that the aggression toward raw milk is increasing…and the fools that are perpetrating it are doing the people (who want it) a great disservice. Fact also that the regulators don’t treat raw milk, or those who drink it, with the same rules for other foods (or consumers)
Frankly, the FDA is totally out of control….have you seen were they’ve unilaterally established rules where raw oysters will no longer be allowed to be sold in the future (no input from oyster fisherman, raw bar owners, or consumers). Something must be done about these administrators who have no clue to reality, and are imposing their warped will on the populace.
Man, this tipping point can’t come soon enough….for the longer it waits, the more the outrage will grow, and the uglier it has the potential to be……
I hadn’t heard about totally prohibiting raw oysters, I thought it was going to be during a certain period during the year. (Not that I agree with any of this. I also don’t eat oysters. I believe it is a persons right to choose what they wish to consume. what will be controlled next? ) More people die from salmonella that raw oysters, yet the foods carrying salmonella aren’t banned.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no5/mead.htm
The govt "assumes" much.
Thanks.
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
JIll Richardson is off course and dead wrong. She did not interview me for her piece which is filled with blatant lies and misstatements. It is part of a miss information campaign. She stated that OPDC outsources for its raw milk bottling.
THIS IS A LIE!!!!
I am trying my best to find an email address for Ms. Jill so my attorney can write her a very ugly letter to demand that she retract the statements and post an apology. She seems to like Dr. Mike Payne. He now wants a HACCP plan for raw milk in CA but stood against SB 201 which would have implemented a HACCP plan for raw milk….he is a raw milk hater extraordinaire and one of the big ag, UC Davis, CDFA tools used to do the cock fighting for "antiraw milk political operations" in CA.
Jills piece is no more than garbage and a distraction.
Mary and CP and Lykke…one more time. OPDC does not outsource for the production of its products. How more clear can I be. On point as requested….that includes the time period between January 2009 to the present ( and far before that time period as well ).
Just so everyone knows…it is not illegal in CA to buy raw milk that is intended for pastuerization and sell it for human consumption. The law is silent on this. What is required is that the cows be tested for TB and Brucellosis and that the bacterial counts pass the raw milk standards. There is not one word about whether raw milk is intended for people or pastuerization. I know this part of the code very well.
Again….OPDC does not outsource for the production of its products. Instead OPDC bought an additional 50 cows in the last severl months to supply the needed extra milk.
Hope this clears the air…..one more ( last ) time.
By the way….I was not ignorring you all. I was away at an intensive IFR Pilot training conference for three days. It was a great distraction from the raw milk battles. At least mother nature is honest and if things get bad you just stay on the ground and wait it out.
In stark contrast…there is no waiting out the battle that rages here.
Mark
and…
"Again….OPDC does not outsource for the production of its products. Instead OPDC bought an additional 50 cows in the last several months to supply the needed extra milk.
Hope this clears the air…..one more ( last ) time."
I’d say that’s about as straightforward as one can get. No dancing, No parsing. Plain and simple…no outsourcing for any product since at least as far back as January 2009.
Mary…and others…I’m no big fan of Mark McAffee/Organic Pastures. When I think of eco-friendly, customer oriented sustainable agriculture, Organic Pastures is a bit too "corporate" for the mental picture that description conjures up, at least for me.
With that said, folks, I’d say that the issue (and constantly repeated question, ad nauseum) has been directly answered, barring evidence to the contrary.
Notice I said EVIDENCE. Not rumor. Not unsupported innuendo. Not gossip. Not supposition. Not opinion.
EVIDENCE.
Evidence. If you have it, bring it. If you don’t, I’d say you’re done.
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
No retraction forth coming. The reporter "claims" she did her homework. Did She?
Who do you believe? I will stand with Mark until the "evidence" from the "pasture" is produced.
Watch 4 minute video UNBELIEVABLE
Enviromental attorney says Ohio Issue 2 is "inapporiate" use of Constitution
Are "they" that rule over us MAD or do "they" just consider us chattle and sheep to slaughter? What ever happened to the so called legislative process? This exact same is thing happening at all levels of gov. is it not?
This is the email that I used to update the information on the elephant post.
***Email excerpt June 16, 2009 from Mark McAfee****
As far as colostrum is concerned we have not bought outside colostrum since 2006 after the recall incident.
As far as butter is concerned you are correct we have purchased outside organic grass fed raw milk from Steuves on occasion to skim off the cream to make raw butter. The skim then goes back to be processed at other organic creameries. This is no secret and in the past we have informed our consumers that must do this or there will be not enough raw butter. It takes 100 pounds of milk to make 4 pounds of butter. OPDC could never feed the starving raw milk consumers of CA if all we did was use our own milk. We work in cooperation with other organic grass fed dairies to get the job done ( at least on the raw butter side.we only use our milk for all other products ).
The last load of milk we bought for this purpose was in March of 2009 and we continue to do this at peak demand times for raw butter. This is legal and this is safe.
CDFA does not test butter for pathogens because it does not support there growth. The butyric acids and low water concentrations and high fat levels just do not support pathogens in this manufactured class 4 product even though it is 100% raw.
I am not sure what you want me to tell Mark Kastel. I would be happy to amend the scorecard if something I have done is not accurate.
Not one drop of our raw milk has ever been outsourced. The Cornicopia Score card is based on raw milk and not other products ( if I am not mistaken ).
****End excerpt***
Why does Jill not have a posted email address on her website ( or anywhere for that matter ). She is a sneaky little snake and not a worthy information source or a wirter that cares about truth or her reputation. She never interviewed me to confirm the information. She hides when I discover that her information is malicious and libelous. She is a buddy with Mike Payne PhD at UC Davis and he hates everything about raw milk. He said under oath in court as an expert witness for CDFA that he would never drink raw milk and he would never agree that raw milk could be made safe under any conditions or standards even when tested for pathogens and less than 10 coliforms.
Jill is in bed with Dr. Mike Payne and they are both using the press to advance their goal of lambasting our food choices and raw milk…that says it all.
Mark McAfee
It would seem we have a liar in out midst. The question left is…who?
Mark answers the outsourcing question plainly, with no parsing, no dancing, in his November 2 comment, thusly:
"Mary and CP and Lykke…one more time. OPDC does not outsource for the production of its products. How more clear can I be. On point as requested….that includes the time period between January 2009 to the present ( and far before that time period as well )."
My question in the post prior to his answer was equally plain:
"Mark, if I or anyone here purchased, since March of this year, ANY dairy based product, be it liquid milk, powdered milk, colustrum, cheese, butter, kefir, or ANY other dairy based product, that carried an Organic Pastures label, did it contain ANY dairy product that came from any cow, goat, sheep, or any other animal that was not directly owned and/or totally controlled by Organic Pastures?"
Simple yes or no question…simple, forthright answer in the negative. Case closed…or is it?
I said I believed it was, absent any EVIDENCE…not rumor or innuendo. Not even a poorly sourced article from AlterNet (not a reliable "organization" in my opinion).
Then Amanda posts this, a quote from an email she says she received from Mark:
"As far as butter is concerned you are correct we have purchased outside organic grass fed raw milk from Steuves on occasion to skim off the cream to make raw butter…that must do this or there will be not enough raw butter…OPDC could never feed the starving raw milk consumers of CA if all we did was use our own milk…We work in cooperation with other organic grass fed dairies to get the job done ( at least on the raw butter side.we only use our milk for all other products )."
I asked for evidence…Amanda provided it. Now we know that either Mark is a liar when he said in his comment here that OP did not, and had not this year, outsource in order to provide dairy products under the OP label…or Amanda is a liar because she fabricated the email she posted here a little while ago.
Y’all take your pick, but I believe Amanda. She has nothing to gain by lying, while Mark has a lot to lose if it were to become common knowledge that some of his dairy products, as defined by my question, are outsourced.
It kinda’ shoots "know your farmer" right in the butt, doesn’t it?
So, in my opinion, Amanda has it right and Mark is a liar.
So sue me Mark…I’ll even give you my address. Discovery will be fun.
Bob Hayles
http://www.juicymaters.com
p.s. Mark, claiming that since your comment addressed ""Mary and CP and Lykke…one more time.", and not my direct question that included butter…claiming you didn’t lie based on that, would be more dancing. The band stopped playing, Mark.
p.p.s. On a personal note Mark, you give good raw dairymen (and women) a bad name. As one, I resent that.
"Small farmers will become extinct because they will not be able to meet the standards the board will lay out."
I disagree with this statement. This issue has been discussed endlessly in Farm Bureau councils across the state, and arose out of JUST SUCH COMPLAINTS. The EPA, PETA and HSUS are trying to make it sound like it is a bad bill for the small farmer. That is because these entities would like to push through regulations that really WOULD make it bad for the small farmer (not just big farmers), and a board with representation, even from animal rights people, would make it harder for them to accomplish this.
I received my license, and must follow guidelines created by the Ohio Board of Nursing to practice in the state of Ohio. It does not stop me from practicing. It requires that I pass tests showing I have knowledge of laws and how my job is supposed to be done, based on established nursing theory. A livestock care standards board would be very similar. While this sounds dangerous to many farmers, it is to their benefit in light of the alternative. The board is being created as a direct response to livestock standards legislation HSUS and PETA have pushed through Congress by the back door in Michigan and California, with MUCH less previous publicity and public education than this issue is getting. The idea of the board arose directly out of concern FOR the small farmer in the state of Ohio. It was created with the small farmer, and survival of agriculture in our state, in mind.
Many of my neighbors have had authorities called on them in a harassing way by animal rights people for supposed neglect or abuse. All of the neighbors receiving visits had road visibility. Livestock care standards are being forced on us by animal rights activists – on the local SMALL farmers, not the factory farms who have big lawyers. It is no coincidence that these are the very people spreading misinformation about the bill and trying to hold it up. They had other plans, and the farmers in Ohio got ahead of them.
If the issue is held up, their plan comes into play next. We will not have as much forewarning, and I’m not willing to wait for that to happen.