Why Treating My Post-Traumatic Raw Milk Disorder With Kombucha Hasn't Worked
Saturday, January 16, 2010 at 10:09AM
I have a food secret. I’m a kombucha addict. I drink probably half a 16-ounce bottle of the fermented tea every day. I love the energy I feel from it.
Why have I kept it secret? Because I’ve been afraid that if I say anything publicly, I might lose my kombucha. Call it post-traumatic raw milk disorder.
I drink GT Kombucha, the multi-green variety. I know you can make kombucha yourself, but spoiled foodie that I sometimes am, I prefer the convenience of buying it at Whole Foods, so I confess, I pay more than I should, sometimes as much as $3.49 a bottle. I’ve seen it at small health food stores for $4 a bottle.
I’ve been watching the kombucha, especially my favorite multi-green variety, fly off the shelves at Whole Foods for about three years now. It’s so popular, I try to keep at least three or four bottles in my fridge, to allow for the fact that I could go a week without finding any at Whole Foods, it’s that popular.
Of course, the journalist in me has wanted to write about kombucha’s exploding popularity (and sometimes exploding out of bottles—it’s a bear to open, and a mini-bomb if you drop it), but I’ve restrained myself. As much as I love my kombucha, I know that aside from the explosion problem, it’s a dangerous drink in other ways—dangerous as in a potential target of the food-safety police at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It has three important attributes they detest:
--It’s unpasteurized;
--It’s fermented;
--Its makers say it’s healthy.
Think about that combination of attributes. Even states that allow raw milk to be sold won’t, with the exception of California and a couple other places, allow unpasteurized yogurt and kefir. (Question: has raw yogurt or kefir ever been implicated in an illness? I’ve never seen it noted in data from the Centers for Disease Control; yet raw dairies in nearly every state are prohibited from selling it. But I digress.) And for a manufacturer to say its food is healthy is to risk the FDA charging you with selling an untested drug because, in their scheme of things, only “tested” drugs can make health claims. (It does require you to adjust your sense of logic.)
So why am I divulging my secret now? Because Alternet published an article (thanks to Don Wittlinger for the original link) seemingly exposing the health claims some kombucha makers are making, along with “the documented risks” potentially posed by the fermented tea—namely, two cases of illness among kombucha drinkers in 1995, in which one person died. I won’t bore you with the details, but you get the idea of what a crazy reach we’re talking about.
The Alternet piece is a sad attempt at a provocative article designed only to create controversy where none exists, and to bait the FDA food police who probably never heard of kombucha or, if they tried it, figured that because it was fizzy, it was probably made from Coca Cola and thus not a health problem.
I even wrote an angry comment on the Alternet article, joining more than 70 already there, many of which expressed similar feelings, namely, find something more important to spend your time on.
But I decided to write something here, not just to vent about the article, but because I realize I should be able to talk openly about my kombucha habit. I shouldn’t be afraid that the food police are going to deprive me of important food.
All of which brings me back to the world of raw milk (isn’t that where I always wind up?). The backing off by Wisconsin authorities on raw milk has come about because people are objecting to the actions of the food police. Same in South Dakota, Ohio, Michigan, Massachusetts.
We can argue about whether the government should or shouldn’t be licensing, or whether the Wisconsin working group on raw milk is serious or just a delaying action, but when you come down to it, all this protest is as much or more about education as it is about specific legal tactics. When 50 people show up at a Milk Board hearing in Missouri, or 150 people pack a court house in Viroqua, WI on a freezing weekday morning, or more than 100 people crowd into a hearing room in Framingham, MA, it sends a message not only that people demand their rights, but that nutritionally-dense food is important to our health. To the extent more people are educated, more people will understand that because the FDA's hysteria about raw milk is baseless, other of their enforcement activities must be baseless, and they’ll seek out good food. The more people demand good food, the better it is for small farms, and the better it is for people’s health.
So I’m going to speak up about kombucha and raw milk, and any other serious food that may come into jeopardy from the food police (though I promise, there’s no “Kombucha Revolution” in my writing future).
And my suggestion is this: use all these regulatory and legal events—the new Wisconsin raw milk working group meetings, or Max Kane’s upcoming court hearings—as opportunities to spread the word, to educate. The battle for food rights is as much as a fight for legal rights as it is a propaganda war, and now the authorities are being forced to open up the airwaves to the other side.
Reader Comments (44)
I am FED up with BIG government and the FOOD police!
Still skeptical of DATCPs turnaround.
You can bet the FDA and others know all about Kombucha. There have been some adverse events associated with it at times, just as there have been with raw milk (and just about any other food). But, since there is no entrenched corporate lobby with monetary interest in it, it is free to "fly off the shelves" with the government's blessing.
In fact, since I've been drinking these probiotic foods, the problems I used to have with food frequently going right through me after eating at restaurants has ended. I think restaurant foods are much more likely to be contaminated with bad microbes than most other food sources, but taking these probiotics regularly gives me protection against them. Perhaps our food safety fanatics should be more concerned about restaurant food.
Let's have food freedom for all !
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1317428/
" The genome-probing microarray (GPM) was developed for quantitative, high-throughput monitoring of community dynamics in lactic acid bacteria (LAB) fermentation through the deposit of 149 microbial genomes as probes on a glass slide. Compared to oligonucleotide microarrays, the specificity of GPM was remarkably increased to a species-specific level. GPM possesses about 10- to 100-fold higher sensitivity (2.5 ng of genomic DNA) than the currently used 50-mer oligonucleotide microarrays. ..... In order to assess the applicability of GPMs, LAB community dynamics were monitored during the fermentation of kimchi, a traditional Korean food. In this work, approximately 100 diverse LAB species could be quantitatively analyzed as actively involved in kimchi fermentation."
"Although there are several methods to characterize the contribution of LAB to human health and the dairy industry, no appropriate tool has been developed yet for the estimation of the comprehensive, quantitative dynamics of microbial populations during fermentation processes. In this work, diverse LAB communities (more than 100 species) could be observed to be actively involved in the fermentation of kimchi and its ripening during storage. Several Weissella species were the most dominant microflora in kimchi fermented at 4°C. This is a very distinctive observation considering that other LAB fermentation products such as artisanal cheeses (Lactobacillus) (38), malt whisky (Leuconostoc and Lactococcus) (52), Mexican maize dough (Streptococcus) (3), Italian sausages (Lactobacillus) (11), raw milk products (Lactococcus lactis) (32), and traditional sour cassava starch (Bifidobacterium, Lactococcus, Streptococcus, Enterococcus, and Lactobacillus) (1) have not been reported to be associated with the genus Weissella. GPM profiles of kimchi samples evolved significantly after 7 to 9 days of fermentation, showing that some Streptococcus and Lactobacillus species disappeared after the decrease in pH. No known molecular tools are available that can provide this kind of global picture of fermentation processes in a short time."
Unexplained Severe Illness Possibly Associated with Consumption of Kombucha Tea -- Iowa, 1995
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00039742.htm
David - I don't think FDA or others care if this drink is described as "healthy." The problem is when a seller starts claiming it "cures" medical conditions like cancer, ulcers, flu, autism...
Sometimes I think these unsubstantiated health claims should be dealt with through personal responsibility vs. spending regulatory time getting companies to remove the labels. Suckers have been born every minute for ages, and there's a snake oil salesman waiting for them around every corner. Buyer beware on the health claims, IMHO.
What makes a product healthful?
Multiple choice:
A. It does no harm
B. It improves some aspect of physiology
C. It provides relief from the symptoms of illness
D. It cures illness
E. Some combination of the above
Think about this. Is relativity a factor? Perhaps the healthfulness of a product ought to be described as the degree to which it meets all of the above. Should a product be disqualified because it could cause harm to all who consume it, or even to certain individuals? Is harm to the environment (caused by the product itself or by production methods) a factor? Where does water fit in, or iodine, or echinacea, or corn syrup, or cinnamon, or refined white flour, or raw milk, or pasteurized milk?
Food labeling is, IMO, far more complex than we think. And complexity, as always, is a haven for scoundrels.
http://www.marlerblog.com/2010/01/articles/lawyer-oped/tweet-me-at-bmarler-the-amount-of-your-donation-to-the-red-cross-for-haiti-i-will-match-up-to-10000/
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9520&title=Tarpley_Wall_St_Monstrous_Orgy_Of_Greed
As the numbers grow, it can only be successful.
"Buyer beware on the health claims, "
Indeed, beware the side effects of many drugs; statins-instead of changing lifestyles/nutrition, just pop a pill and see what happens to your liver: Got a fever? How about some tylenol? aspirin? The warnings on the bottles of maximum doses aren't read by consumers, they still have toxic livers from tylenol, ulcers from aspirin... drug recalls.
Dave M. Has excellent questions and points. Will they be answered? Ignored? or responded to like a politician (given a nonanswer/lie)?
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/81901927.html
"U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials say they are powerless to regulate BPA, although they have declared the chemical to be a safety concern for fetuses, babies and young children."
tptb are unable to regulate a known poison? Must be too much money involved. kombucha is most assuredly small pennies and probably safe David G.
sorry, i should have posted this earlier when david announced that datcp has formed a raw milk group working group.
it appears that most of the proposed members are either government anti-raw milk officials or are large scale agribusiness practitioners.
we can hope, however, that there will be a sincere and honest effort to do it right, as was done in michigan.
But you should try kefir "soda." http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2009/09/how-to-make-homemade-kefir-soda-pop-why-make-kefir-soda-pop-and-how-does-it-taste.html
It's even more health-supporting and ever so much yummier! (Even my kids and Mountain Dew addicted hubby will drink it!)
I always say that Kombucha is a way to celebrate life but raw milk is life itself.
After we started producing our Bucha we soon had our first FDA DHS inspection. It was very interesting. They tried to approach Kombucha the same way that they approach practically everything else.....that is everything must be sterile or super clean.
We were able to make some friends by starting the entire visit and safety review by making a case that Kombucha was safe because it was not sterile and that sterile was the friend of bad bugs....we explained that Bucha was a living food and contained bacteria and could not be sterile. It would die.
The FDA went away and has not returned. The young FDA guys were completely unprepared to deal with probiotics and living food. After their education about the human immune system and showing them their own NIH DHS probiotics website...they just went quiet and became old friends. It seems to me that the FDA has poorly prepared their inspectors to deal with artisanal and farmstead producers of food. So this task becomes ours. We must take charge of their education. We even explained to them how Bucha and raw milk where very much related in so many ways.
Education is the key....it helps when the education does not have to overturn 150 years of moneyed raw milk dogma. Kombucha does not have the dogma or stigma associated with it.
Yet...Bucha is very much like fermented raw milk Kefir. Bucha is however becoming more and more mainstream and seriuos money is being made on it. We will see how money corrupts it and changes its relationship with the FDA.
Mark
For those that don't make their own kefir lacto fermented veggies or kombucha tea you don't know what you are missing. Its all really easy and you know whats in it nothing beats HOMEMADE!!!
I agree....
Every kitchen should have a Bucha batch brewing and also a batch of Raw Milk Kefir fermenting away.
There is nothing like starting your day with a Kefir smoothie ( banana's, fruiit, raw egg, honey and lots of wow!! ).
These are the elements of the health wisdom of the ages.
Lykke,
What if raw milk cured asthma....how can we ever get the FDA to authorize it as a treatment. It takes years of study at their approved labs costing millions. Not to mention the corruption.
How do we ever get to a point where we can suggest that raw milk is a cure for anything. Please give me an insight into your perspective. Foods are not patentable so raising funds to go through this process is near impossible.
Mark
After years of taking multiple choice tests, I'll take a stab at your choices.
Multiple choice:
A. It does no harm
B. It improves some aspect of physiology
C. It provides relief from the symptoms of illness
D. It cures illness
E. Some combination of the above
Answer: should probably be a narrative question not MC, or include the placebo effect, which is not trivial. Sometimes changing food habits results in a positive effect that has nothing to do with the food itself, but the motivation factor (and something spiritual - even the feeling of doing something "good" like buying from someone who cares about the way their animals are raised, or how their food is produced - the human factor can be healing even though the food is just food). Do you get where I'm going?
On the labeling, agree it is very complicated. For example, I could care less if something is GMO. I don't think that is any different than the extensive natural Mendelian breeding we've done since leaving the caves. There is nothing "natural" about our current crops, GMO or not. The new technologies are an extension of what we as a species have been doing since we could.
Mark,
You are the King of Marketing.
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/three-approved-gmos-linked-to-organ-damage/
KNICK KNACK PADDYWHACK.....................
As to the recent kerfuffle with BPA, the FDA has reversed the assertion that it is harmless, but has stopped short of banning it. Now the taxpayers have to spend 30 million USD on "targeted" studies to demonstrate the obvious - BPA is an endocrine disruptor- while the food industry scrambles to find another way to package their noxious products. In this way the "regulators" provide cover to industry while turning a blind to the real environmental and health damages caused by this substance.
Are these the mug shots of America's food poisoners and their beasts and the petri dish in which they do their dirty work?
The small farmers get shut down while big ag. continues to produce the SAD. But so what as someone said food is just food and lets not care about GMOs and all the other monsters placed on America's table. Hey the allopaths can patch us up can't they?
Again I ask please forgive my sarcasm.
I agree with Don that you flunked the test. Of course placebo effects are, as you say, “not trivial,” but they are also not relevant in this context (except as far as they offer an opportunity to take a cheap swipe at food’s effects on health). But the real ringer in your response is about GMOs.
The GMO story is one worthy of a Hollywood thriller, complete with government-business collusion, FDA incompetence, ruined whistle-blowers, wild ignorance and twisting of science, and full exercising of the theory that money makes right. Much of the story would have been hidden from us except for freedom-of-information requests by investigative reporters, and concerned scientists willing to risk their careers to expose corporate and government lies.
On the topic of GMOs, read Seeds Of Deception, by Jeffrey Smith (which itself is as well-reasoned and documented as a good research article) before you make up your mind.
And Lykke, I would dearly like to hear an explanation of how the insertion of animal DNA into plants is consistent with Mendelian "breeding" genetics.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/pusztai.html