Filling in the Raw Milk Information Gap Will Take Time, But We May Be Seeing a Beginning
Thursday, August 13, 2009 at 10:01PM 
Ray Robinson milks his cows at the family dairy in Hardwick, MA, last Saturday.You have to wonder...
Pam and Ray Robinson run a small dairy farm with 35 cows in central Massachusetts, where they sell some of their milk raw directly to consumers. Earlier this summer, they gave away samples of raw milk from their stand at the farmers market on the town green in Hardwick, home of their dairy—the third summer they’ve been doing this to promote their dairy. Never a problem, but for reasons unknown, this summer someone complained to the local health authorities. Within days, the Robinsons had a “Cease and Desist” order from the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources, prohibiting them from handing out samples.
The Robinsons are licensed to sell raw milk, which means the state regularly tests their milk for bacteria counts. Aside from the fact that there’s no law the Robinsons could find that they violated (vendors at farmers markets pass out all kinds of samples, from sausage to cheese to yogurt, in my experience, and sometimes it sits out in the hot sun for a good while), you have to wonder why, if authorities were concerned, they wouldn’t perhaps help the Robinsons fix whatever perceived problem there was—perhaps encouraging more complete information about raw milk's benefits and risks.
All of which leads me back to a matter raised ever more often here: the absence of guidance and instructional information around raw milk. For example, should you believe statements that raw milk is extremely safe because it can’t support the growth of pathogens? What does it mean to “know your farmer”? What is the best way to get started consuming raw milk so as to reduce the chances of illness (since newbies seem to be at greater risk of illness than more experienced drinkers)?
Lykke raises another question with regard to the Dee Creek situation discussed in my previous post: “Where can inexperienced farmers go to get information on how to safely produce raw milk and raise dairy cows?” She notes that there’s little out there. “There are many on this board with lots of experience that I respect, but clearly, the Dee Creek example is one that fell between the cracks. Yet, there is only one pro-raw milk document describing best practices for a raw milk dairy and it cannot be found on the web.” Dave Milano’s point that many experienced dairy farmers follow bad practices is well taken, but the implication is that it’s no simple matter for farmers who want to devote themselves to raw milk to obtain guidance.
Little by little, though...
One raw milk consumer has made an effort to bridge part of the information gap. Amanda Rose has just completed a white paper on competitive exclusion. It tackles the question of whether or not raw milk supports pathogen growth. Interestingly, it comes at the subject from the viewpoint of the consumer trying to make safety judgments. It does a nice job of reviewing the key research, and concludes that raw milk isn’t a great medium for growing pathogens, but then it’s not impossible for pathogens to survive. In other words, a little bit of ammo for each side. The paper can be purchased for a small fee, plus it’s a nice way to support ongoing research by an intrepid raw milk consumer.
And there’s this surprise story (thanks, Don Neeper) about Pennsylvania State University’s agricultural extension program working with a raw dairy farmer to extend his marketing reach. Pennsylvania has definitely had its problems with raw dairy farmers, so this kind of officially sanctioned education effort, small as it is, has to be seen as nearly revolutionary in the raw milk scheme of things.
Another small victory for the information-deprived: the Weston A. Price Foundation has adjusted its web site to acknowledge the potential presence of pathogens: “Real Milk, that is, raw whole milk from grass-fed cows (fed pasture, hay and silage), produced under clean conditions and promptly refrigerated, contains many anti-microbial and immune-supporting components; but this protective system in raw milk can be overwhelmed, and the milk contaminated, in situations conducive to filth and disease."
And the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund has some great printed advisory material for farmers on how to run a top-quality operation, along with how to set up a herdshare. It's just not as readily available as today's Internet crowd is increasingly demanding.
Why is it so difficult to obtain objective information about a food of interest to rapidly growing numbers of consumers? Extremism. Many pro-raw-milk people deny that people become ill from raw milk. If you can’t get sick, why provide guidance?
And many anti-raw-milk people argue that consumers who take the plunge run a big risk of becoming seriously ill. If you believe raw milk is inherently dangerous, why provide guidance on how to avoid illness?
Maybe the pendulum is beginning to swing more toward the center.
Reader Comments (7)
You're right that we need more data, and most of it needs more research, but there is information about raising healthy animals and producing clean milk. I think it's also important to understand gut flora, because that's what determines how bold you can be.
There was a raw milk summit in 2006 in Nebraska which came out with this document:
http://www.cfra.org/files/Raw-Milk-Use-and-Safety-Fact-Sheet.pdf
It's a great start.
There are other articles and websites on the internet that if the consumer bothers to investigate, will provide a great education. www.raw_milk_facts.com for one.
If you are a WAPF reader, go to their Farm section - lots of scientific info there.
Go to NOFAMass or NOFA VT websites.
Go to www.eatwild.com
Go to some small ag conferences (AcresUSA, American Grassfed Assoc, WAPF - even our local extension office has some great material & lectures.)
Subscribe to AcresUSA, Stockman Grass Farmer magazines.)
The Untold Story of Milk, by Ron Schmid ND
Google lactoferrin, lactoperoxidase, nisin (a few of the enzymes in raw milk) - why is it I find more patent applications for products with these enzymes than I do ads for for raw milk? Follow the money.
Read Gumpert's blog. :-)
Hint: You won't find it on a government website, and it's not in a nutshell.
-Blair
By not assisting those who wish to produce certain foods in what many believe to be a healthy and safe manner, the govts behavior only serves to further alienate people from them.
Do “Cease and Desist” notices give reasons? It would seem that a reason is warrented. Maybe posting it on the milk stand at the market and any web site would open peoples eyes more? But, then the farmer would take a greater risk of more harassment from the govt.
It is always government's way to first meddle in affairs in which it has no business poking its nose, then when the inevitable disaster ensues, demand more power and money to fix the problem. This is what government has done in agriculture (in concert with commodity-pushing industrial ag businesses) and in finance and healthcare as well. It's a win-win game for government types, for in the process they create ever more dependence on government largesse, and create ever more bureaucrats to administer it all, and all of them then become reliable supporters of... what else? More government. Do that long enough, and you'll end up right where we are today.
There is no shortage of information on right ag practice (unless you are looking for it in the government-industrial complex). Honestly, anyone with a good internet connection can get all the information they want. (Is the worry that Gumpert's blog will shut down from overuse if all the farmers change their ways?)
The real problem is that government has fixed the game so that our farmers no longer answer to consumers, but only to big-business processors and government bureaucrats. Farmers have no incentive whatsoever to investigate anything but how to improve their output quantity, while perversely, government fights at every turn those few pesky independent farmers who attempt to market directly to consumers.
Most all the farmers I know think of themselves as independent sorts, but I can't see it. Most are merely employees receiving fixed prices for products as a virtual piece-work wage. If, as Mark implied in one of his last comments, the average farmer was reconnected to the retail customer (especially if that customer was free of government/medical/industrial ag indoctrination) there would be ample interest in the writing and experience of P.A. Yeomans, Charles Waters, Joel Salatin, miguel, and others.
These standards plus modern organic technologies and testing science makes the practice of producing raw milk very safe....not perfect...but very safe.
One thing has changed since the AAMMC.... we have stressed and created super bacteria and our immune systems have become more weakened as consumers.
These are two biggies....it is fascinating to note that neither of these challenges came about because of the organic movement....we are 100% innocent.
It was big GOT DEAD MILK dairy, big FOOD INC and medical pharma that weakened immunity and created super bugs.
Now we lowly raw milk dairymen get to clean up the mess and rescue those that will take the immune lifeline of raw milk.
Everyone seems to think that raw milk is so hard to produce....in CA look at the example!!
Good standards...good testing, grass pastures and no antibiotics. This is not rocket science....the hardest part of raw milk is education of the general public. A huge learning curve has been put in place by a campaign of fear and ignorance.
In CA 420 stores and 50,000 people per week. This is not a fluke....our standards at www.rawusa.org work.
Raw milk is a take personal responsibility food....for farmers and consumers alike.
Mark
For example, the WAPF encourages children with asthma to consume raw milk. This cohort of children gets hit with a double whammy if the milk is contaminated with a pathogen. Their immune system is underdeveloped and weakened because they are ill.
Blair, thanks for the link to the Nebraska document. This is the most realistic information I’ve read on raw milk. It does address pathogens, but no where does it describe the illnesses that can occur from a pathogen. People can’t be informed if they don’t really comprehend what it means to be infected with a pathogen from cow poop. What does Salmonella, Campylobacter, E.coli 01567:H7, Listeria, etc, look like when an infant/child/adult becomes ill? What are the symptoms they experience? What are the serious life long consequences if the symptoms are more than vomiting and diarrhea for a few days to a week? This reality needs to be addressed by the raw milk community. It is their moral obligation.
David, you ask some good questions. Thank you for this post.
cp
Here’s a very detailed story describing the consequences of ingesting E.coli 0157:H7. It is easily passed to family members from one contaminated person.
cp
To characterize WAPF as irresponsible is laughable; they've taught me boatloads about responsibility - and health.
-Blair