I’ve not been able to partake as much as I would like in the fascinating conversation following my previous post about Scott Freeman and the possibility his Colorado dairy’s milk has been a source of campylobacter illness. There’s this book I am authoring about raw milk (which I announced last December), and well, the deadline is approaching much more quickly than I would like (as in days).
But the discussion has been amazing on several levels. First, it marks a welcome shift in attitude and approach that many on this blog had become accustomed to, and that marks many of the examples in my book, in which stonewalling regulators arrive after reports of illness, or even just lab reports about possible pathogens in milk, to torment raw dairy producers.
Second, it provides an unfolding tale, in real time, about the vagaries of food-borne illness. We have been able to witness first-hand:
–The dairy farmer’s dilemma. In the midst of his business and personal crisis, Scott Freeman continues to provide us with his insights. What’s amazing is how calm and analytical he has remained through what has to be a highly stressful situation. “The fact that so many non raw milk drinkers are sick makes me wonder if our milk was really contaminated and that we are targeted by TPTB,” he says. “However, what if our milk was contaminated? What is the appropriate attitude, behavior and action in that case? The latest info from the HD was that about 30% of our shareholders were sick enough to indicate campy.”
–The public health perspective. I was fascinated simply to see the forms the public health officials fill out (links provided courtesy of Blair and Lykke). They are striking in their simplicity, and my guess is they haven’t changed much over the last twenty years. The suggestions by a number of people that the forms, and overall investigations, should take account of recent antibiotic usage is just one example of well-taken ideas for potential updating and for applying such reporting to badly needed research. A number of people have gotten on Lykke as representative of an unreasonable public health perspective, but I for one am very impressed by her/his experience-based insights, and obvious efforts to answer reader objections (even if not always bending the way readers would like). Lykke has definitely informed the discussion, and I look forward to being further educated.
–How the media cover the situation. There was a time not long ago when the media coverage in such a situation would have totally favored the regulators. In fact, the media might not have even bothered to contact Scott Freeman. But as the links to news and television reports in this case make clear, things have changed. The coverage isn’t necessarily sympathetic to raw milk, but at least it is more complete than we have seen in the past. The fact that the media are covering the issue in more even-handed fashion is something that helps make the public health officials more reasonable and flexible.
–The need to keep a cool head. A number of readers want Scott Freeman to aggressively resist the public health investigation, and to make a case of the rights of the herdshare shareholders. There are definitely arguments that can be made that Colorado public health officials are infringing on the rights of shareholders who have a contract with Scott Freeman’s dairy. But the reality is that settling such disputes in court is extremely cumbersome and time consuming, and in the meantime, public health officials are likely to get their way via court orders or whatever. Scott says it well: “This incident may be best used educationally and the ‘fight’ saved for the day we need to help direct congressional change. So far we have a good relationship with the Colorado Health Departments and I still believe there is middle ground both sides can work towards.”
Scott’s embracing of the middle ground is an inspiration to many. Much as I appreciate the education, I for one hope it’s a quick course, and he can soon devote himself fully to his primary mission of providing raw milk to eager consumers.
The pertinent information of interest is that if these rules are approved, farmers and rural residents who produce and sell food out of their homes will not have the right to prevent state agents from taking food samples, which presumably gives agents the ability to enter a cottage producer’s kitchen whenever they choose. There are also now specific requirements for labelling foods sold by cottage producers, and many will need to modify their labels to meet the new requirements. One cottage producer in the state has already expressed alarm that her canned salsa will now be banned under the new rules, and lacto-fermented foods such as pickles or sauerkraut may also be disallowed. There is a public hearing scheduled in Columbus for these new rules on May 13th, with the details below.
My personal suspicion is that these rules may be a specific response to the Manna Storehouse lawsuit, since rule 901:3-20-04 will now specifically prohibit a cottage food producer from selling shrink-wrapped products. Jackie Stowers claimed exemption from inspection using her status as a cottage food producer, and under the new rules Manna Storehouse will no longer qualify as one.
Here are links to the text of each of the new rules:
http://www.registerofohio.state.oh.us/pdfs/901/3/20/901$3-20-01_PH_OF_N_RU_20090406_1615.pdf
http://www.registerofohio.state.oh.us/pdfs/901/3/20/901$3-20-02_PH_OF_N_RU_20090406_1615.pdf
http://www.registerofohio.state.oh.us/pdfs/901/3/20/901$3-20-03_PH_OF_N_RU_20090406_1615.pdf
http://www.registerofohio.state.oh.us/pdfs/901/3/20/901$3-20-04_PH_OF_N_RU_20090406_1615.pdf
http://www.registerofohio.state.oh.us/pdfs/901/3/20/901$3-20-05_PH_OF_N_RU_20090406_1615.pdf
The JCARR report under which they appear can be viewed at this link:
https://www.jcarr.state.oh.us/public/GetReport?r=Weekly_Report.Apr_6,_2009_to_Apr_10,_2009.pdf
Here is the link for the public hearing notice, with instructions on where to send written comments:
http://www.registerofohio.state.oh.us/pdfs/phn/901$3_NO_71798_20090406_1615.pdf
The contact person at the ODA for these proposed rules is legal counsel Tim Norris, (614) 728-6390.
What am I missing and where is this route taking us?
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:B2943BCLwCgJ:www.noharm.org/details.cfm%3FID%3D1648%26type%3Ddocument+arsenic+campylobacter+resistance&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
http://ps.fass.org/cgi/content/full/86/1/2
Mining operations and using poultry litter as fertilizer are sources of arsenic in food and water.That these outbreaks are usually occuring in the spring and fall is also interesting.I don’t have any answers,just questions.Arsenic works in the same way as antibiotics do in our bodies.It upsets the normal balance of microbes and selects for those that have resistance to it.In this way campylobacter is a marker bacteria for the presence of Arsenic.Simply blaming the outbreak on the milk doesn’t seem to get at the cause of these outbreaks.I see from reading articles from past springtime outbreaks that these outbreaks can be predicted every spring and that the knee jerk reaction is always to shut down some raw milk dairy.It would be interesting if next spring when the snow thaws and the poultry litter is being spread,that all of the dairies made cheese out of the milk for a few weeks,just to see if there would still be a disease outbreak.I’ll bet there would be.
I beg to disagree, lykke is just as those who responded after my post on your last entry say.
What is with the constant accusation of "denial" of outbreaks? If you ask questions to certain responses you are apparently "denying" outbreaks. In a nutshell that is how lykke is coming across, as does tptb.
Miguel, it is easier to use raw milk as a scapegoat.
I am in Orlando Florida at the NCIMS conference. Tommorrow morning I make my pitch to amend CFR 1240.61.
I will ask the NCIMS to support a change in the interstate prohibition on raw milk. Given last weeks wonderful Food Network airing and other recent news….who knows what could happen.
The airlines lost my baggage….first time for me. Thankfully I kept my presentation information packages with my laptop and all will be ok. I will look like a farmer and will not be dressed up….but what the hell. My nice clothes are somewhere in Chicago!!
I stood in line this evening and briefly spoke with Dr. Steven Beam from CDFA in CA here in Orlando at the hotel.
Lastly….a little breaking news!!
We would like to announce that both of Marlers 2006 OPDC Raw Milk cases have settled.
There will be no further comment from any party….
All the best,
Mark
The so-called middle ground so many are enamored of is now for all practical purposes, a masquerade. The middle has shifted way, way to one side. Think about just the issues discussed recently on this blog… Could government even a short fifty years ago have shut down a church pie sale, or considered laws preventing good Americans from selling something they make in their kitchens, and subjecting those home kitchens to rules and inspections, without being laughed out of existence? We discuss the plusses and minuses of government actions today that a generation ago would have been unthinkable.
When Lykke makes suggestions as to how American citizens should behave in order to give them a chance to come to the table, we should immediately wonder how exactly it got to be THEIR table. This is supposed to be OUR land, OUR lives, OUR table. Coming to the table to discuss how much more power the enforcement class should have is to begin defeated. We are by now so overloaded with rules, permits, fines, and fees, that we have become desensitized to them. We thus stand by while an aggressive, often misguided, and ever more controlling government nibbles away at the last of our freedoms.
Food freedoms being so basic, it is amazing to me that the regulatory machine seems to move along so handily in that area, but that’s the trend. Governments interest is in establishing control, not in finding truth and justice, and certainly not in protecting freedoms. They have moved, and continue to move, inexorably in that direction.
Mark McAfee above mentions the value of eye-to-eye meetings. He is so right. The only bright spot in the recent rash of bureaucratic food power grabs is that individual inspectors sometimes act humanely, and when face-to-face with real people, are sometimes open to ideas and discussion. But government will, and is, overwhelming that as well. Heres a brief example: Our Dept. Of Health hospital inspectors are now using computer templates. Whatever minor infraction they see must be catalogued, and a computer program automatically calculates a fine. No room for human judgment. Why? Because anything that softens control cannot be tolerated. (The assessed fine amounts, not incidentally, are increasing at an alarming rateclearly a means of funding bureaucracy without having to impose another knotty and unpopular tax increase. Then by increasing the number and density of rules, agencies assure that there WILL be fines to collect. We were recently fined, for example, for having a box of fluorescent tubes that was not taped shut.)
Well, if rules on top of rules is what America wants, heres one we ought to consider: Each day every American should be required to eat at least one nutrient-dense, raw, natural meal, and read one of Don Wittlingers blog comments.