I thought I was having some fun with my previous post about John Sheehan and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration being nervous about the explosion of interest in raw milk. Little did I realize that I was terribly understating the situation. The people at the FDA are positively paranoid.

There’s no need to make up fictitious conversations to determine that. It’s all in the black and white officialese of a federal court document. That’s something that presumably many government-paid pencil pushers review and analyze before submission.

Technically, the document is a U.S. Justice Department request for a permanent injunction in a civil suit seeking to bar Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Co., from selling raw milk outside California. The government’s case against OPDC is well known and has been reported extensively on this blog, from the investigation tactics to the criminal case that wound up earlier this year. (Thanks to Bill Marler, the food poisoning lawyer, for the tip-off on the document.)

This current request covers much of the same ground—about how OPDC sold raw milk as pet food and how FDA sleuths worked day and night to break the case by ordering milk over the telephone. Sherlock Holmes would have been proud.

Two new justifications, direct from the FDA, are invoked in this U.S. government request, to back up the request for a permanent injunction. I’ll leave it to you to decide which is the more outrageous. 

1. “Mark McAfee has repeatedly made threats of violence against government officials on The Complete Patient (www.thecompletepatient.com), a website dedicated to the promotion of raw milk.” This comes from Barbara Cassens, district director of the FDA in San Francisco. (I certainly do appreciate the FDA promoting my blog, but quick correction: it is not “dedicated to the promotion of raw milk.”)

Okay, now about the threats of violence. Cassens cites three instances, all pulled from comments Mark McAfee made on this blog. The closest to a threat (and even that’s a stretch) is his suggestion that “another Wounded Knee, Ruby Ridge or Waco could easily happen in America…I shoot and own guns…but you will never see them displayed or used against cops or any person. Until the tipping point. At that point my life is then the value which must be laid down in the balance and it is worth giving in trade.” I’m sorry, but this statement is the equivalent of the New Hampshire state motto, carried on each license plate: “Live free or die.” That motto is more of a threat than Mark McAfee’s personal political analysis—after all, how are we supposed to “die” in the NH scheme? When McAfee’s so-called “tipping point” comes, I would venture.

The other two comments? Political theatre, at best. One is a hypothetical response to reports that public health officials might forcibly vaccinate citizens. It’s not a stretch to suggest such tactics would constitute government violence against citizens, and all Mark McAfee is suggesting in response is “a rolling video camera, a call to 911, a pleasant but firm request to immediately leave…” If all that failed (in other words, if police wouldn’t help or invaders didn’t leave)? “…followed by a Sig Sauer .45 point directly at their heads.” Courts have repeatedly upheld the right of citizens to use firearms against home invaders.

The second is that “he encouraged raw milk producers to videotape government inspections.” Yes, Mark McAfee did suggest that, and farmers and consumers have begun taking up his suggestion. Why would FDA types be so upset about being videotaped, to suggest it constitutes a “threat of violence”? Poor little babies must be camera shy.

Finally, Cassens includes a kind of P.S. to her statement—a challenge to anyone thinking of attending the courthouse demonstration December 21 in Viroqua, WI, in support of raw milk buyers club owner Max Kane. It quotes Mark McAfee’s pledge (again from this blog) to “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…” That comment, Cassens says, constitutes “his plan to transport raw milk in interstate commerce and to drink the raw milk with other raw milk advocates.”

Now, wouldn’t that make a great legal case: does a farmer from one state have the right to consume his own farm’s raw milk in another state? Worthy of Supreme Court consideration, I’d say.

And what about the “other raw milk advocates”? Would they be violating the prohibition on interstate sale of raw milk by consuming California milk in Wisconsin? As a political science buff, I’d definitely be willing to get myself arrested to test the constitutionality of that one. And I think lots of others would, too. Do the sops at the FDA really want to push it? I would think not, but then, I have been too often guilty of overestimating both the FDA’s political acuity and its respect for individual rights.

By the way, guys (at the FDA), here’s a little civics refresher. The U.S. Constitution’s first amendment provides that, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” No, you can’t yell “Fire!” in a crowded movie theatre and you can’t publicly accuse a neighbor or friend of criminal activities when you know they’re innocent, but beyond that, we have very wide latitude in what we’re allowed to say. My bet is that most federal judges would see Mark McAfee’s political commentary for what it is: political commentary.

2. Now, I’ve pretty much worn myself out with the political side of the FDA song-and-dance, but as I suggested earlier in this post, there’s a second justification in this legal document for the government’s case. I don’t have the energy to give it the attention it deserves, but then, maybe it doesn’t deserve much attention. It’s a statement near the end by Dr. Stefano Luccioli, the Senior Medical Advisor with the FDA’s Center for Food Sarety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), as the FDA’s response to Mark McAfee’s statements that raw milk can help alleviate the symptoms of asthma and allergies.

Dr. Luccioli’s statement assesses raw milk as a “drug,” and as such, essentially sets up raw milk as a straw man. To qualify as a “drug” in the FDA’s definition, a substance must pass through all kinds of controlled tests and analysis that no producer could afford. In that context, there’s no way raw milk could be viewed in the least bit positively. Still, the good doctor’s statement deserves a close reading, to understand the FDA’s refusal to make even the slightest acknowledgment that individual consumers with allergies and asthma may be experiencing a reduction in symptoms. Here are just three statements from Dr. Luccioli that indicate the ideological nature of the FDA’s stand:

— “I have never heard of a physician recommending raw milk for the treatment of these conditions.” Well, here’s one: Dr. Thomas Cowan, and some of his suggestions. (Scroll down to the March 2009 newsletter.) And I’ve met several physicians who recommend raw milk, and I’m just one non-medical individual. I wonder how hard Dr. Luccioli searched.

–On European studies indicating that raw milk benefits children with asthma and allergies: “…the fact that none of the studies that purport to show a protective effect from raw milk were performed on United States raw milk samples or on United States farms is another reason that they cannot be relied upon to demonstrate any direct casual relationship between raw milk consumption and beneficial outcomes.” All I can say is, denial is a potent emotion. 

–Testimonials don’t count—“…in addition to lacking appropriate controls to limit potential bias and conclusions that are not supported by the science, are often deficient in the number of subjects necessary to make statistical interpretations about efficacy and, therefore, do not meet scientific criteria for a well designed clinical study.”

One question: You think the FDA is open to learning more about the possible benefits of raw milk?

And a suggestion: Try to come to the demonstration for Max Kane in Viroqua, WI, Dec. 21, and let the FDA know what consumers think about its efforts to deprive us of the right to access raw milk.

***

Blogger Alex Lewin has lots of good information about the hearing tomorrow evening in Framingham, MA, to decide whether farmer Doug Stephan will receive a raw milk permit. Doug Stephan is looking for all the support he can get, so if you live in the area, plan to attend.