Where the Rubber Meets the Road, Will Raw Milk Consumers Lay Aside Their Fears to Back Up Resisters?
Friday, November 20, 2009 at 10:49AM 
One of the reasons Vermont’s new raw milk regulations have attracted so much favorable attention is that they are based on production versus process standards. In other words, let farmers feed their cows or cool their milk according to any of several processes, just so they achieve the needed standards.
Tim Wightman makes that same point in his comment following my previous post: “Set the standards on a production model, not a process model. Research what constitutes quality milk, actually ramp up the old tests used to do so in the 50's through 70's, apply those, and there is your standard. How one gets there is up to the producer..not the consumer but the producer. IF we apply a process model the conversation will only get bogged down in emotional responses and a mis-informed consumer base as it relates to the animals needs to produce a quality product. Grass can be in that production model..but cannot be the only process to achieve quality milk.”
But before we can get to the point of setting standards, we need, as Steve Bemis suggests, the freedom of access to raw milk. The matter of setting standards is a productive discussion to have, yet all involved in this arena need to appreciate that the standards won’t do a lot of good if governmental authorities are conducting harassment and interference exercises. While consumers may have limited knowledge to help set the standards, consumers need to be prepared to help producers win the battle for access.
Just in the last few weeks, we’ve seen at least three raw milk advocates challenge authorities’ efforts to interfere with supplies.
There’s been Scott Trautman, a Wisconsin dairy farmer; Max Kane, a Wisconsin buyers club owner; and now, Bob Hayles, a Georgia farmer and raw milk advocate.
Per his comment following my previous post, Bob has just written a letter to Georgia’s agriculture commissioner, essentially warning him that consumers will be buying milk in neighboring South Carolina, and bringing it back to Georgia—following the same routine as members of a buyers club recently forced by the Georgia Department of Agriculture to dispose of their South Carolina milk.
News of Bob Hayles’ challenge was tweeted far and wide yesterday.
But the big question for not only him, but Scott Trautman and Max Kane, is whether consumers care enough and are brave enough to actually show up and provide in-person backing to these resisters. In the case of Bob Hayles, consumers need to both buy milk and then possibly defy regulators and/or law enforcement representatives.
While yesterday’s tweets suggested much initial enthusiasm for Bob Hayles' approach, there is reason to suspect it could be of the mile-wide-inch-deep variety.
While the market for raw milk seems from all signs to be expanding significantly, the record of raw milk consumers in backing raw dairy victims has been tenuous, at best. Richard Hebron, the victim of a 2006 “sting” operation while delivering raw milk to Ann Arbor, MI, herdshare owners, saw his deliveries sliced up to 20% in the immediate aftermath of the seizure of $8,000 worth of consumers’ products. Many consumers apparently feared they could be hauled in by police or regulators, and abandoned Richard.
When Greg Niewendorp, a Michigan cattle farmer, resisted the state’s efforts to implement the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), he was similarly left pretty much on his own by other farmers. Turnout at courthouse rallies in New York for Barb and Steve Smith, who have been fighting to maintain a type of herdshare arrangement for Ithaca, NY, consumers, has been tepid, at best.
My sense is that we’re going to see more such open challenges to the authorities mounted by raw dairy producers and distributors, as authorities in places like Wisconsin and Georgia seek to tighten the screws on consumers. But these challenges will only succeed if consumers are willing to stand up and be counted, and maybe even be arrested in the process.
The unfortunate reality is that we’ve given up or lost key rights when it comes to choosing and controlling our food. Once you lose rights, you almost always have to fight to get them back. Fighting means sacrifice. Are raw milk consumers ready to make the necessary sacrifices? The jury is out. One thing is for sure: The opposition is watching closely (and nervously) for signs that consumers are serious about securing their rights. Lots of bravado without follow-through will only strengthen the opposition's sense that consumers aren't truly serious about fighting the battle.
***
Thanks to Kimberly Hartke for her nice writeup of my talk Saturday at the Weston A. Price Foundation.
In the same vein, thanks to everyone who’s had nice things to say about my book on this blog over the last few weeks. It’s been very gratifying (though I promise not to remove comments that include criticisms).
I also wanted to say how great it was to see so many bloggers at the Weston A. Price Foundation’s Wise Traditions conference over the weekend. I knew many by name from their comments, but quite a few came up to me to say they were readers who hadn’t yet commented. I encouraged them to join the fray.
Reader Comments (30)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-proclamation-national-farm-city-week
Presidential Proclamation -- National Farm-City Week
A PROCLAMATION
Our Nation's farm and ranch families supply many of the basic necessities of our daily life. They manage a large portion of our country's fertile land base, and they are caretakers of our valuable natural resources and diverse ecosystems. Their connections with urban and suburban communities are critical to our economy and to the nourishment of our people. During National Farm-City Week, we express gratitude for the contributions of our Nation's farmers and ranchers, and we rededicate ourselves to providing all Americans with access to healthy food, and thus, a healthy future.
Pioneered by Native Americans, agriculture was our Nation's first industry. For agriculture to thrive in the 21st century, we must continue to cultivate the relationships between farmers and rural businesses and their partners and customers in cities and towns. American farmers and ranchers are proud to grow the food, feed, fuel, and fiber that enhance our national security and prosperity, and remain steadfast stewards of the land they love. We must ensure that farming is maintained as an economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable way of life for future generations.
This Thanksgiving season, we celebrate farms of every size that produce fruits, vegetables, dairy, and livestock indispensable to the health of our families. We also recognize the vital ties between our urban and suburban communities and their local farmers through regional food systems, farmers markets, and community gardens. During National Farm-City Week, we celebrate the bounty of America, and we honor the commitment of those who grow, harvest, and deliver agricultural goods to feed our country and grow our economy.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim the week ending on Thanksgiving Day of each year as National Farm-City Week. I call on Americans as they gather with their families and friends to reflect on the accomplishments of all who dedicate their lives to promoting our ation's agricultural abundance and environmental stewardship.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of November, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.
BARACK OBAMA
Some farmers have unrealistic expectations of those that choose to do business with them. I know of one farmer, when business was good, who expressed that they were looking for "full farm customers" only and openly express disdain in front of other customers about local WAPF members and how they weren't interested in doing business with them. Then when things went south, rant and rave about how they didn't feel the local community was supporting their farm. All of sudden now that the chips are down small purchases are acceptable? They're looking for these same people they spoke badly about before to come out in the streets to support them? Sometimes there's more to the story than meets the eye.
If we are successful, we are a bit concerned that there might be problems with conventional dairies switching to sell raw milk without changing their production methods, other than to meet the state grade A requirements. This might increase the risk for contaminated raw milk from cows that are heavily grain fed. We are contemplating ways to reach out to both producers that make the switch and to consumers to recognize the benefits of raw milk from grass-fed cows with minimal or no grain feeding, both for the quality of the milk and for the reduced risk of contamination. One idea is to have some sort of "seal of approval", ideally from a national group. It might be beneficial to have a national raw milk dairy association, similar to what is found in a few states now, that could provide the "seal of approval" as well as guidelines for optimal production of good quality and safe raw milk. Another possibility is to have a more independent group like WAPF or the Cornucopia Institute provide a "seal of approval" program. I would much rather see this approach instead of adding more government regulations.
I’m happy to hear that you were so entertained by the poop. Over the past few years, people who have become ill from drinking raw milk don’t see the humor in cow poop; and they didn’t become ill from CAFO raw milk. They drank raw milk produced by small family farms following WAPF principles. You can love the cows and goats and feed them grass, but pathogens can still be present in the poop. It is a fairy tale to claim that all who consume raw milk live happily ever after.
What would you say to the parent of a child or an adult who became ill from raw milk about cow poop? Would you tell them that their fears are irrational?
Once again, I’m happy for all who have experienced positive health benefits from consuming raw milk. However, this is not the story for everyone. You have good people looking for a healthier diet for their families. Either through the internet, family or friends, they hear about the health benefits of drinking raw milk. They try it, and for some they become extremely ill the first time they consumed it. What about these people? Do the proponents of raw milk bear any responsibility for their pro raw milk information without balancing it with information about the possible risk of pathogen contamination?
Also Alyssa, when you’re at OPDC next week, why don’t you ask Mark McAfee about his outsourcing practices. Or maybe you’re O.K. with deceit. You appear to trust this farmer.
cp
http://www.marlerblog.com/2009/11/articles/legal-cases/yet-another-e-coli-o157h7-outbreak-linked-to-a-childrens-animal-petting-zoo/
cp
I'd like to know how you would like to have us prevent the needless deaths and horrible injuries suffered by thousands of children on US highways each year. We could probably cut the death toll in half by reducing speed limits to 30 mph on all highways. But would that be reasonable?
It is a 2 way street. Why are some entities "allowed" to produce and shove down the public's throat that which is contaminated and/or filled with added chemicals and not be required to inform the public of these dangers? The govt et al do not bear any responsibility for their actions or lack of actions.
Do they inform the public what those over processed foods will do to your body? Do they inform what the short and long term consumption results are? Do they inform what the dangers are of medications/vaccinations/chemicals are? No, the public is not informed unless they do their own research.
Here is Sacramento as it was in Tampa, when you washed your car and didn't wipe it dry, there was a white powdery residue left on your car. Trying to find out what this powder is is not an easy task. If it leaves powdery residue on your car, what is it leaving in your body? Are people informed about this? No, not at all. Just one small example.
Does any one ever read all of what is written about a drug/vaccinations? No, they take the word of the health care provider/pharmacist; Because they have faith that these people are looking out for them, just as many believe the govt is looking out for them.
Do the health care providers know everything about all drugs? No, they do not, it would be impossible for them to keep up, there are too many.
It is the consumers responsibility to investigate and hopefully ask questions of what they do not understand so they can make an informed choice. They have to participate in their own lives and not play follow the leader blindly.
"concerned that there might be problems with conventional dairies switching to sell raw milk without changing their production methods,"
This would be cause for concern.
Changing the subject to a different topic (car wrecks) is a weak way to make your point about raw milk (basically it confirms that you don't have a coherent response to cp's concerns). I'm trying to picture Cargill or some Big Ag group in a room talking about harming children with contaminated burgers and the executives saying, 'yeah, but car wrecks kill more children than our burgers, so we don't need to worry about food safety.'
Changing CAFO dairies to grass feeding will not alter food safety risks if they "go raw.' There is no evidence that grass feeding consistently reduces pathogens, or contributes to food safety: http://tinyurl.com/y9l9jyg. There may be other benefits to grass feeding, but food safety isn't among them; and a number of outbreaks have been linked to "grass fed' only milk and beef cattle.
I find it very interesting that Tim Wrightman's Raw Milk Production Handbook promotes grass feeding and includes a long, informative description about healthy pastures/soil. But, he also discusses when grain is appropriate such as in very cold weather, thus going against the WAPF grass fed dogma (which BTW is dictating a process). Not all places in the US have ideal conditions for feeding "grass only,' and the dairy cattle can suffer from it (see Dee Creek where the animals were starved trying to keep up milk production on a misguided grass only diet). WAPF seems to base their dogma on a midwest model, and pushes for a one size fits all approach to feeding across the whole country.
But, not every dairy conforms. It is curious that one of the oldest raw milk dairies in the country is not "grass only," and has not been linked to any outbreaks that I could find. From their website:
"Are Claravale Farm’s cows totally pasture fed?
http://claravaledairy.com/faq.html
No. We feed our cows a traditional diet of hay, feeds, and pastures. Claravale Farm is a traditionally run dairy and we don’t think total pasture feeding of dairy cattle is appropriate for a number of reasons. Contrary to popular belief, total, year round pasture feeding is not natural for cattle and is not the way in which dairy cattle have historically been managed. More typical is for dairy cattle to get access to some pasture for a short period of time during the natural growing season (winter and spring here) and to be fed mostly hay, grain and other produce during the rest of the year. This is what we do at Claravale. In this way, farmers have historically taken advantage of natural yearly cycles of rainfall and production. Year round pasture feeding of dairy cows requires the artificial creation of year round pastures by intensive irrigation, which requires energy and water, both limited resources in California.
Dairy cattle produce large quantities of milk, which puts a large strain on their bodies. Pastures alone are seldom adequate to keep them in good enough condition to be able to keep up this production without burning out. Dairy cows need additional nutrition to be in top condition.
Grass fed cows produce milk that has an “off” flavor. The older literature contains many references to the fact that cows which are on pasture produce milk which tastes bad. It is usually recommended in this literature that the cows be taken off of the pasture for a few hours before milking to limit this effect. These days, this is not a factor with most milk producers (including organic milk producers) because the milk is cooked and processed before sale so it doesn’t taste good anyway. The effects of the grass on milk taste will be masked by the effects of all the other processes. Every year when our cows do get some pasture we always get complaints about the taste of the milk. At Claravale Farm, taste is an important component of quality so we don’t totally grass feed our cows, but rather give them a varied, traditional diet designed to keep them healthy while producing delicious milk."
I agree with what you are saying.
Lykke,
My point in raising highway deaths is twofold: 1) to illustrate that there are always trade-offs between freedom and safety, and 2) to show the hypocrisy of those who seem more concerned about one death from raw milk versus 40,000 deaths on our highways. Some of us don't want to sacrifice food quality for food safety. This is a matter of freedom. We as consumers should have the right to choose.
Should we require that all vegetables be cooked before being sold? That's pretty much equivalent to requiring all milk to be pasteurized. I remember reading recently that contaminated vegetables cause about 40% of all food-borne illness.
As far as cow diet and pathogen production, I don't pretend to have the answers here. But I would not drink raw milk from a CAFO dairy nor recommend it to consumers. I would like to see those who are more knowledgeable on this subject come to a consensus on a certification program that would help to increase quality and safety of raw milk.
The pseudo outrage against raw milk is indeed absurd.
How many people died today at the hands of raw milk [0]and how died today at the hands of the established accepted standard medical practice [684.9]?
What evokes such volatile opposion to raw milk? What is so unique about raw milk? Could it be that it is the one and only food that will free us from the inevitable diseases we will certainly suffer from if continue to consume the so called SAD. SAD = sickness and disease plus national bankrupcy via the health care system!
Yes we are truely at the crossroads in our nations history will we make the right "choise" ? Not if TPTB have their way.
I agree with your comment about scale. In the big picture, resources should be allocated based on the most bang for the buck. If you think there is a large dollar amount directed at raw milk by the government, you are mistaken. It is one very small piece of the priority pie, but perhaps because you're involved, it seems bigger than life.
Sometimes I think about raw milk this way...say I wanted to get some cows or goats and sell raw milk. Well, first I'd contact Farmer Tim or Dave Milano because they seem to know what they're talking about. Next, I would be concerned about the regulations and how to work within them. It would suck if selling raw milk was totally illegal (and I might contact Bob Hayles about that, lol). Say it was legal to produce and sell raw milk, and I was researching the safety part. I wouldn't look up statistics on car wrecks or the US health care system. After doing real research, I certainly wouldn't make a joke about allowing fecal material into the raw milk that I planned to sell to trusting customers.
When I first read Alyssa's comment about the fear of poop, I did not think that she was in any way trying to downplay the pain and anguish of any person that has been negatively affected by raw milk. No one ever said, for kids or for adults, that it is impossible to get sick from the feces of any animal. It is possible.
When Bryan brought up the number of children that die in car accidents, I didn't think he meant that we should in any way ingnore the fact that it is possible for a person to get sick (very sick - even up to the point of death) from drinking raw milk.
I think the point that is trying to be made is that there are areas where many more people are negatively affected, yet as a society we think the risk associated with those activities are perfectly OK. Should we all stop using cars because x number of people died yesterday? Obviously no. That doesn't mean that we could care less about the people that died yesterday in car accidents, it means that we will still choose to drive even though we know the possible consequences of those actions. It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for ways to make car driving more safe, there is always room for improvement.
On the milk side, should we make raw milk illegal or unobtainable? I do not believe that is a good choice. I know there have been people that have had problems with raw milk. It is heart rending to hear about people that have been affected negatively by raw milk. I feel for those individuals and for their families. I hope with all my heart that there might be a way for their situations to improve. I do not think however that raw milk should be made illegal or unobtainable for people that so chose to consume it. I am of the opinion that your chances of disease are much less by drinking raw milk, but there will be exceptions to every statement. That is how it has always been and how it will always be.
I think that those people who say we should make raw milk unobtainable should then also say that most foods we consume should be made unobtainable. There are so many other "healthy" foods that can make us sick that we should all just stop eating, period. That will do us a ton of good. Then none of us will get sick from eating. The problem is we have to eat.
So then the question is begged of what to do about the bad bacteria. Well, the currently accepted theory is to try and eliminate it all. I think we as a society are starting to realize that total elimination is not at all possible. We are also starting to learn that as humans we are made up of 90% bacteria and 10% human stuff. Wow, if we kill off all of the bacteria, where will that leave us? If we want to live healthy lives, we have to figure out a way to feed and nourish the good bacteria in us that provide us with what our bodies need. What foods will do that? Definately not sterilized and processed foods.
The main take away from my long and rambling comment, is that I do not think that any of us "Raw Milk Proponents" would try to downplay what has happened to individuals that became sick from raw milk. I think that we all want a product that is safe to eat/drink and we want to be able to choose what we consume without having to do so illegally.
This has been said so many times, in so many ways on this blog.
"Sometimes I think about raw milk this way...say I wanted to get some cows or goats and sell raw milk. Well, first I'd contact Farmer Tim or Dave Milano because they seem to know what they're talking about. Next, I would be concerned about the regulations and how to work within them. It would suck if selling raw milk was totally illegal (and I might contact Bob Hayles about that, lol)."
If a person wanted to produce raw dairy for consumption, then the first thing would be to research the animals of their choice. Research the care and feeding etc. Knowledge of the animals and product is needed so that you'd know what questions to ask. If you didn't do your own research, how would you know what to ask? Talking with a variety of experienced dairy people is important also. Seeing how different operations are done would be a plus.
Legal or illegal? People will do anything to get what is important to them. I have yet to hear a good reason why the sale of raw milk should be illegal. More people are made ill from lunchmeats, yet they are legal. Why is that?
Funny that you posted about Claravale not 100% grass fed. I had a quart of their milk yesterday, it tasted off, the date was still good. I tossed it. It may have not been handled properly during shipping, it may have sat on a loading dock at the store, the refrigeration may be in need of repair at the store. Maybe the cows ate some stink weed. I'll never find out what was wrong with it. Years ago I tossed many gallons of pasteurized milk because of "off:" tastes or spoilage.
Seems it is a matter of preference as to how you want your milk, grass or mixed grass/grain. Like chocolate, if I can't get my brand of Belgium chocolate then I buy Guittard brand- otherwise I do without, just a matter of taste.
I’m not making the argument that raw milk should be illegal. However, in states where it is legal or may soon be legal, I believe it should be regulated. The state of Washington has a very successful model motivated and developed because people were becoming ill drinking black market raw milk and raw milk cheese.
When debating the consumption of raw milk, what always gets lost is the fact that raw milk is promoted as a “cure” for many serious ailments. You can’t compare the risk of consuming raw milk to eating hamburgers, chicken and leafy greens. These other foods are not being systemically promoted as “healing” foods.
Mark McAfee and I agree on one thing. The state of U.S. citizens’ health is dismal. People are desperate for answers or alternative means to treat their illnesses. This is the dangerous part about the raw milk movement. Adults and children who are immune compromised are encouraged to try raw milk as the cure. This is the very population that is at risk of becoming seriously ill if the milk is contaminated with a pathogen.
There needs to be truth, ethics and integrity in the raw milk movement. People shouldn’t be told that raw milk kills pathogens, giving the impression that pathogen contamination is impossible. Raw milk does not kill pathogens. People should not be told that pasture fed animals can’t harbor pathogens. Raw milk outbreaks involving pasture fed animals have occurred. And raw milk outbreaks should not be denied. The leaders in the raw milk movement are guilty of this tactic. It is very disturbing.
The weakness in the raw milk movement is that only the pros of raw milk have been promoted. Pathogen contamination has been down played or not mentioned at all. Go to pro raw milk websites and see if you can find any realistic information about pathogens that can be found in raw milk and the illnesses they can cause.
For people to make a truly informed decision about consuming raw milk, both the pros and cons of raw milk need to be addressed in the literature, on websites and in books that promote the consumption of raw milk. To date, this has not occurred.
Where raw milk is sold, I think it would be a good idea for pathogen warning labels to be located front and center on all milk containers. If it is sold in a grocery store, I would like to see warning signs posted on the shelves. All websites promoting or selling raw milk should be required to post a disclaimer pathogen warning message on their home page.
Brandon, I don’t know where you live or if you get your raw milk legally. Let’s play this scenario out. You are part of a cow share program. You know your farmer. You know many of the other members. You love being connected with others who share your passion for nutrient dense foods. You have been drinking raw milk for many years. The word of the cow share program has spread and the number of families buying into the programs has expanded. One day, you get a call from the farmer that is responsible for the cows. He tells you that 10 children and 3 adults have become ill from the milk. Some of the ill children were new to the cow share program. Four children have been hospitalized and all have complete kidney failure. They are in critical condition and may die. They are suspecting the milk was contaminated with the bacterium E.coli 0157:H7 and later it was confirmed that many of the children and adults all have the matching blueprint of E.coli 0157:H7.
1. How do you think you would be emotionally affected by this experience?
2. Would you believe raw milk caused the illnesses?
3. Should the cow share program be shutdown until they can find where the pathogen came from or should they be allowed to still distribute the milk as long as everyone has been informed of a possible outbreak?
4. If you have children, would you still feel comfortable allowing them to continue drinking raw milk from this cow share program?
One final question, what lead you to your decision to drink raw milk?
cp
If Clarevales milk tasted off could you describe the off taste?
If I may suggest, rather throw out the milk you could have heated it up and added some yogurt culture to it or simply allowed it to sit on the counter for several days and use it in baking etc.
Cp
You state, “Go to pro raw milk websites and see if you can find any realistic information about pathogens that can be found in raw milk and the illnesses they can cause”.
Is the above statement based on your realistic understanding of a pathogen?
I agree with Don, “The pseudo outrage against raw milk is indeed absurd”.
Ken Conrad
HMMM Freedom of choise trumps fearmongering I can agree wth that. Anyone here willing to deprive David of his right to choose to drink raw milk or his right not to drink raw milk?
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/x511160609/A-taste-for-raw-milk-Framingham-farmer-hoping-so
Government regulations in agriculture are a reflection of a purposely directed cheap food policy that undermines independence, diversity, sustainability and viability.
Large or small, specialized intensive farming operations that adhere to the current exploitive, belligerent status quo are a white elephant and rely heavily on government as well as corporate subsidies including cheap government approved adulterated inputs. They are the bane of destructive land and livestock management practices.
Ken Conrad
The milk wasn't sour, it had a strange flavor, almost like a chemical taste. I am assuming perhaps the cows ate something? Since I hadn't experienced that "flavor" of milk, I chose to not take a chance and tossed it. The 3-4 drinks I took didn't make me ill, I couldn't figure out what the taste was. If it was only soured, I'd have used it for something. I probably toss a lot of good food as I'm not always sure if it is good.
The information here has been amazing
Ron Paul Is Right! FDA Should Lift Its Ban On Interstate Sale of Raw Milk For Human Consumption
http://efoodalert.blogspot.com/2009/11/ron-paul-is-right.html
What I'd Recommend: Raw vs Pasteurized Milk
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2009/11/what-id-recommend-raw-vs-pasteurized-milk/index.html