The Wisconsin attorney general’s office sent dairy farmer Vernon Hershberger a little invite this past week. It came from an assistant attorney general, Eric D. Defort.
“I am writing to invite you to meet with me at the Sauk County Sheriff’s Office at 1300 Lange Court in Baraboo, WI, on Thursday, December 1, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. so that I may inform you of the progress of the investigation of your dairy and retail food establishment. Feel free to bring an attorney to the meeting.”
Vernon HershbergerHershberger is the Wisconsin dairy farmer, you may remember, who cut the seals placed on his coolers in 2010 by inspectors from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. He doesn’t think he wants to have this little tête-à-tête with the AG. His reason? “I don’t have a retail store,” he tells me. “I have a private club.” He has nearly 200 members in his club, who pay an annual membership fee for the privilege of obtaining their food privately.
DATCP is feeling newly emboldened by a state court decision by Patrick Fiedler in August. So emboldened, it has taken to sending out letters to farmers selling privately, telling them to button up, get licenses.
“On August 17, 2011 Judge Patrick J. Fiedler of the Wisconsin Circuit Court issued a decision in the case of Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund…” the letter to one farmer (whom I don’t have permission to identify) starts.
“The judge’s decision essentially stated that a store which exists solely for the purpose of selling food and beverages to members is not exempt from the requirement to hold a retail food establishment license. Upon issuance of this decision, we have reviewed all the open cases which relate to the matter contended in this lawsuit. We believe that the decision reached by Judge Fiedler is relevant to you; our records indicate that you may be operating an unlicensed retail food establishment which sells unpasteurized milk and dairy products and an unlicensed dairy processing plant which produces unpasteurized dairy products.”
Indeed, DATCP is so emboldened it isn’t even waiting for an appeals court to rule on the Fiedler decision. What’s the rush? Maybe the same factors that have pushed the Maine Dept. of Agriculture to go after Dan Brown, a Blue Hill farmer. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration sees the demand for private food, for food sovereignty, for raw dairy, skyrocketing. It worries that things are getting away from it. It is pushing the states–you want all that luscious green money we are handing out in joint agreements, training, enforcement? You go after small farmers, hit them with all you’ve got.
***
I haven’t asked him, but maybe Hershberger would rather attend a second event being sponsored by the Raw Milk Freedom Riders. This one will challenge the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s prohibition on shipping raw milk across state lines, with at least five mothers transporting milk from Wisconsin to Illinois, on Thursday, December 8 (details at the Raw Milk Freedom Riders web site). The moms will be acting as agents, distributing the milk at a rally at noon that day in Chicago.
The first such event, you may recall, was held November 1, and involved mothers transporting raw milk from Pennsylvania to Maryland, for their own personal use. This time, the moms will be expanding the agenda. Asserting their right to access the foods of their choice, and to ask a friend or neighbor (or “agent,” as the lawyers refer to it) to obtain their food for them.
I guarantee, the Raw Milk Freedom Riders will have a much more fun event than the Wisconsin AG.
***
Okay, a last word on the Organic Pastures Dairy Co. situation…Just kidding, I know there won’t be a last word on that for a long time. But in the spirit of a last word, I think one of the big problems when a crisis like this occurs, especially in the raw milk arena, is that various issues get mixed and matched, and we lose sight of what’s really happening. Here are three important ones in this situation.
1. Acknowledging the 2006 illnesses. Believe me, I don’t like to be agreeing with Bill Marler, but the case is strong that OPDC’s milk made kids sick. Let’s acknowledge that, and move on. To the extent we continue debating it, we distract from issues that are likely to recur here, like uneven and unfair enforcement of regulations against raw dairy producers.
2. Related to the previous point, let’s be prepared to focus on the real issues. Mary Martin inadvertently brings up the issue of unequal enforcementone when she says in a comment following my previous post, about a lettuce recall, “This is how recalls work when there is not an illness. It is no different than all the hamburger recalls that occur when a pathogen is found during routine testing.” No, that is not how recalls work when raw dairy is involved. Look at the cases of Morningland Dairy and Estrella Cheese. Recalls are used to shutter producers. Focusing on 2006 allows the apologists for the anti-raw-dairy crowd–Marler, Martin, Milky Way– to distract from such real issues. They will never ever say a word of criticism about those outrages when they can keep focusing on the 2006 illnesses. These outrages may well come up again for OPDC in the current situation–let’s be prepared for the authorities to try to keep OPDC shuttered for an extended period, regardless of what evidence about the current situation shows. Same for the issue of access to nutrient-dense food, which Marietta Pellicano brings up. That is a huge driver in this whole struggle, but once again, it gets lost when we are debating what happened and didn’t happen in 2006.
3. Learning more about the role of pathogens in causing illness. I agree with Gwen Elderberry and others that there are huge gaps in our knowledge about pathogens. We need to learn more, and we will certainly learn much more in the near future. We just can’t use that problem to suggest that OPDC can’t be held accountable, in 2006 or possibly today. OPDC operates in the public arena, has all the licenses and permits and equipment that are required by the regulators to produce raw milk. It has to play by the same rules as all public producers.
I just want to say thank you for this blog. I find all of this fascinating! Off to the market to deal with angry customers who can't get their OPDC…!!!
Kristen
Why all the lies you ask?
What you perceive as a lie I see as a differing of opinions and/or beliefs.
I do not think they (Mark or Sally) are the type of people who would deliberately or maliciously lie about something as serious as Chris illness.
They probably question the validity of genetic blueprinting as I and others have, whereas you appear to accept it as fact. I am not at all suggesting that Chris became ill as a result of consuming spinach, although I do have my reservations as to whether or not OP milk was responsiblesorry David.
Your argument with respect to the cause of the 2006 illnesses is also dependent on epidemiological results. Here again you consider them as fact yet I have to agree with Gwen, I also have little faith in the epidemiological process.
Criticisms and insults have been thrown around here and anger is ever present and ready to spill over into a discussion. This however is what you get when imperfect people try to solve complex problems with incomplete knowledge.
Through this blog David has given us all an excellent opportunity to recognize our limitations and discover the true meaning of freedom.
Silvia and Gwen
Thanks for the information. Its good to hear that anti-motility agents such as morphine are discouraged by most physicians in cases of diarrhea.
Ken Conrad
1. Estrella Family Creamery (raw milk cheeses) – WA
2. Hartmann Dairy (raw milk and other raw dairy products) – MN
3. Morningland Dairy (raw milk cheeses) – MO
4. Sally Jackson Cheeses (raw milk cheeses) – WA
5. Brunton Dairy – (pasteurized milk) – PA
6. Organic Pastures Dairy (raw milk and raw dairy products) – CA
Source: http://bit.ly/rN8zLd
MW
I am afraid, however, that you and I agree about raw milk on more than just what caused the 2006 E. coli outbreak.
For example, we also agree that there is gross unfairness on how FDA, FSIS and State Ag treats small versus large producers. You and I have spoken about it, and I have spoken out on it more than a few times on my blog and directly to officials. I think that all should be treated equally.
You and I also agree that raw milk sales should be legal, inspected and regulated. I think where we differ is that I think the farms should be small and the milk sold onsite instead of commercially in retail. There are issues to discuss, but they are solvable.
I know that finding differences and having an enemy gives you and your readers some measure of comfort. What would your write about otherwise? What comments would you get?
Frankly, it is long past time that we all stop doing it on both raw milk and far more important issues of the day. Continuing to slice differences more finely will solve nothing.
Bingo! This statement may encompass the reasoning for the attacks on the small farmers. There appears to be fear exuding from their court. As more people move to purchase from the small farmers, as more people open their eyes to the contamination of our environment and food system, TPTB are retaliating against the farmers, spreading fear. Again follow the money. Who tends to loose as the Food movement grows? It isn't about safety. If it was, the processing and animal/produce environments would drastically change.
During WWII propaganda was used in Europe, the Far East and here in America to sway the masses in the direction the govt wanted them to go.
Ken,
When you asked about anti-motility agents, I thought only of the specific anti-motility agents, ie; lomotil, Imodium, Kaopectate, Maalox, Pepto,etc,
I neglected to include Opioids, which most common side effect is slow to none with GI motility. That is why stool softeners are often ordered to be taken with the Opioids as a preventive.
You said, I do not think they (Mark or Sally) are the type of people who would deliberately or maliciously lie about something as serious as Chris illness.
That is exactly what has been done. Unfortunately for Sally, she believed whatever Mark told her.
I will not post all the lies on this blog, because everyone is sick of this war. If I decide to address it, it will be in another venue.
It is obvious to all of us that you have some unresolved anger from Chris's illness. Otherwise you would not have provided a picture during this most recent e. Coli event. I can only imagine how awful it was to watch him in extreme suffering. However, it's not good to hold onto anger and resentment as they eat at you and not at the people you are angry with. I think it would some counseling would greatly benefit you. Oftentimes counselors instruct people to write a letter to the person to whom they are angry. You usually don't mail the letter, the point is to let out your emotions and begin an emotional healing process.
Excellent article on e. Coli. Question for y'all: how can epidemiological results be accurate if e. Coli are excellent at gene-swapping?
–WOOF
When one incorporates their business (takes out an LLC, S-Corp or C-Corp), what they are doing is waiving their individual rights in order to receive liability protection for their business. If your corporation injures someone with one of its products, the only damages that can be sought are the assets of the corporation; personal assets (your house, car, bank accounts) are protected. But, as I said, in order to receive this protection, you have waived your individual rights under contract with the state. One of the stipulations of this contract is that you agree to abide by the statutes that govern your corporation. All of these farmshares in Wisconsin are LLCs. They do not have individual rights, but rather only the rights granted to them by the state. Please refer to the court decision of Hale v. Henkel:
"There is a clear distinction in this particular case between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 47 (1905).
When Judge Fielder says in his decision "you do not have the right to…", he's not meaning "you" in the individual sense, but "you" the corporation (the Zinnickers and the Craigs both have LLCs). He is absolutely correct in stating this. They waived their individual rights in order to receive liability protection, and agreed to abide by the statutes governing corporations. And corporations do not have constitutional rights, they only have the rights granted to them by the state. This is a vital distinction, and one I believe must be understood by everyone in this movement if we are going to succeed.
Thanks for your list of dairies shuttered. Three of the five are raw dairies that never made a single individual ill.
Bill Marler,
I appreciate that we agree on certain aspects of the raw milk issue, and have had some amicable private discussions over the years. If you have publicly criticized the FDA and other regulators on behalf of any raw dairies, I wasn't aware of it, and I'd be curious to see the criticism. I do know that you expressed some support of the original Wisconsin legislation to legalize raw milk from the farm in 2009, and then you were quoted in the new book, "Poisoned", as taking credit for convincing the governor to veto the bill.
But I agree, it certainly would be helpful to reduce the rancor in this arena.
David
As a point of clarification, #1 and #3 had no illnesses reported; #6 is still under investigation. #2 was linked to E. coli O157:H7, Campylobacter, and Cryptosporidium infections; #4 was linked to E. coli O157:H7 infections ; and #5, the pasteurized milk outbreak, was linked to yersiniosis illnesses.
MW
Three children in the outbreak have HUS. Both my son and the other ill girl in the 2006 outbreak had to be placed on ventilators. The reporter wanted to see what HUS looked like.
My motivation for speaking to the reporter did not come from a place of anger or revenge. It was from a place of education. Ecoli. 0157:H7 which develops into HUS, kills young children. It is quite serious.
Thank you for your concern about my emotional health. I have a Masters degree in counseling psychology. I am quite familiar with the letter writing. I work as a high school counselor and deal with angry teens.
Photo of HUS.
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=what+does+hemolytic+uremic+syndrome+look+like&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=MTc&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=Tc1SBM8IinlbuM:&imgrefurl=http://tulsapedsresidency.net/wards/gu/HUS.doc&docid=sA8OVy4OWInJ3M&imgurl=http://www.contemporarypediatrics.com/contpeds/data/articlestandard/contpeds/522004/140241/k9a054f3.jpg&w=605&h=519&ei=dIzJTp3PD5G6tgfRysn3Cw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=1031&vpy=276&dur=2207&hovh=208&hovw=242&tx=84&ty=139&sig=106287468683620717933&page=1&tbnh=125&tbnw=150&start=0&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:12,s:0&biw=1409&bih=750
Clicking on the link to the right of the screen is very informative about HUS and AHUS.
David,
Was it the Whitaker (sp) farm's pasteurized milk that killed those people just a few years ago?
Ken,
The 2nd link talks about the importance of NOT giving anti-motility agents in the presence of HUS or suspected HUS.
Thank you for your post. I believe you are entirely correct.
If I may add my 2 cents, I find it interesting that the word "private" is being used and thrown around like it is understood. (i.e. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration sees the demand for private food… skyrocketing.). If it was understood, and the case was scrutinized, people would not be trumpeting Michael Schmidt as being such a hero, or a victim of a bad law. An objective observation will show that "responsible food freedom" (sic) was edified in his original court decision, but in the appeal, the Crown (Prosecutor) showed that in deed the proponent of the same was the one irresponsible.
If we are to get anywhere, it would be prudent that we recognize that the general ignorance is with ourselves, and that many of us are blindly following the blind. As such, the general status of victim mentality will prevail.
Until we admit that we are not schooled in law (and I don't mean law school, but in the fundamental principles of law, and the general process of administering justice), we are hopelessly lost.
Steve Lyle, with the state food and agriculture department, countered that "milk is perishable, so the product consumed by the children was not available for testing" by the time they got sick "and that's typically to be expected."
Organic Pastures produces about 24,000 gallons of milk a day, which is "95% of the raw milk in California, so the bottom line is California is not going to have its raw milk," McAfee says.
On Friday the dairy was informed by state officials that a second round of testing to ensure that its product was safe would be required before it could begin selling unpasteurized products, Organic Pastures spokeswoman Kaleigh Lutz says. "We're looking at around Dec. 1."
Until then they will turn as much of the milk as they can into cheese, which is legal to sell if it is aged at least 60 days. The rest will be sent out for pasteurization, she says."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-11-21/raw-milk-recall/51322292/1
http://www.marlerblog.com/case-news/when-are-raw-sprouts-like-raw-milk/
http://www.marlerblog.com/case-news/should-estrella-family-creamery-be-treated-differently-than-sangar-when-it-comes-to-listeria/
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/does-this-recent-sprout-salmonella-outbreak-show-a-hole-in-the-new-food-safety-law-called-the-tester/
As you know, I have had the above conversation with you privately and I have raised the same concerns with FDA and State Ag officials directly (how has that gone for you?). I do believe that regulatory fairness is a must. However, I do not think that raw dairy should get a free pass because of FDA and FSIS failures too numerous to mention in inspecting and regulating Big Food.
I have been highly critical of much of what our government fails to do relative to food safety. You mischaracterizing my purpose is again not very helpful.
As for your veiled indication that I am less than truthful shame on you. I have been very clear in my approach to raw milk and cheese legislation. When I got involved in the SB 201 veto in California and in vetoing the raw milk bill in Wisconsin, it was because both did not meet what I think are reasonable criteria that I have published on your blog before:
1. Raw milk should be sold only on farms that are certified by the state and inspected and tested regularly. Make ambiguous black market milk/cheese sales and "pet food sales" meant for human consumption clearly illegal
2. Raw milk should not be sold in grocery stores or across state lines–the risks of mass production and transportation are too great; the risk of a casual purchase by someone misunderstanding the risks is too great, as well
3. Farms should be required to have insurance coverage sufficient to cover reasonable damages to their customers
4. Practices such as outsourcing (buying raw milk from farms not licensed for raw milk production) should be illegal
5. Colostrum should be regulated as a dairy product, not a nutritional supplement
6. Warning signs on the bottles and at point-of-purchase should be mandatory. An example: "WARNING: This product has not been pasteurized and may contain harmful bacteria (not limited to E. coli O157:H7, Campylobacter, Listeria and Salmonella). Pregnant women, infants, children, the elderly and persons with lowered resistance to disease (immune compromised) have the highest risk of harm, which includes Diarrhea, Vomiting, Fever, Dehydration, Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Reactive Arthritis, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Miscarriage, or Death, from use of this product."
I accept your apology.
Regarding your misunderstanding and distrust of epidemiology and molecular epidemiology, all I can say is that there is a terrible communication problem by professionals in these disciplines. Specifically, transfer of information from preventive medicine specialists to the public whether talking about infectious diseases or diabetes and other chronic illnesses. Clearly, it cannot be expected that you and others took biostatistics and epidemiology classes. The profession has become so erudite, they perhaps make no sense to the general public. That doesn't mean it has no value, but a failure in communication is obvious.
As a regular reader of this blog, I would defer to Ron Klein to explain the epidemiology and molecular biology as it relates to dairy microbiology and human infection. He has the perfect understanding of the science, and a passion for the food rights issue.
MW
Would you propose those same measure for ALL foods and substances that have the potential to harm consumers? You do realize that there would be nothing left on the shelves. I truly do not want to live in a world of your making.
"The evidence against using GI antimotility agents in treating HUS is more solid. They are known to increase the risk for development of toxic megacolon or progression from hemorrhagic colitis to HUS and should be avoided.4"
"E coli O157:H7 also has been identified in raw milk, cheese, yogurt, mayonnaise, fermented sausage, cooked maize, lettuce, seed sprouts, and unpasteurized cider. Fruits and vegetables are increasingly implicated in cases of E coli O157:H7 infection. E coli O157:H7 also has been transmitted through contaminated drinking water, contact with contaminated water at beaches and pools, person- to-person contact, and direct contact with animals. "
We have teams working 20 hours per day to prepare OPDC for reinspection and our reopening. This will not be a prolonged recall. We have very precise plans and schedules that we are following with the full knowledge and cooperation of our inspectors at CDFA. Our fecal and split environmental sample results should be reported tomorrow. They were sent to Memphis to a very special lab for analysis. The state should have their fecal tests back on Tuesday. Watch our FB page for updates.
When we Reopen we will be a new company. We have taken this time to completely rebuild our creamery facilities. We are all very excited and exhausted
One last comment:
The most frustrating thing to me is this. There is absolutely no fairness or credit given for all of the great medical benefits that raw milk provides when considering the possibility of rare illness. When 4000'children die each year from asthma, and Raw Milk prevents Asthma?????
Where is the credit for lives saved….children unmourned????
Where is the credit for little lives saved…. Little healthy, gorgeous kids, with no snotty, noses no ear infections????
This pioneering raw milk movement is a lonely place when it comes to justice… By it is the warmest place on earth when it comes to love and hope for a healthy next generation.
We will have OP back very soon.
Mary please weigh and consider the lives made better and deaths prevented.
Hugs to all Xoxo
I'm not even sure what we are arguing about any more…I actually had seen a couple of the pieces you link to on your blog–the one about Estrella essentially quotes the FDA's complaint against Estrella, accusing the company of being uncooperative. Apart from this, Estrella has presented various testimony that it was very cooperative. My point in these recent cheese cases,among others, is that the FDA has taken very harsh action against producers that haven't sickened anyone, as opposed to trying to help them resolve problems and get back into business–producing product and employing people.
And I'm confused about the Wisconsin situation. Your list of conditions for legalizing raw milk seems to include most of what the Wisconsin legislation provided. I've never understood why you pushed for a veto, and you don't explain further in your comment here, either.
Now we can see the huge ramifications of the Wisconsin veto in the current post, about Vernon Hershberger and the farmers being told to shutter their "unlicensed" stores. Wisconsin is determined to use its existing legislation and Judge Fiedler's decision to uphold it to wipe out all farms producing raw milk.
I have gotten the sense in the last year you are more sympathetic to the raw dairy industry, and to regulatory unfairness. I'm really not trying to pick a fight. I was mainly expressing frustration that you and Mary Martin and Milky Way were all over OPDC's 2006 inconsistencies, and then Mary suggested that recalls are rather mundane affairs, when in fact they have been used by the FDA and state agencies to put several raw dairy producers discussed in detail here out of business in situations that haven't seemed to upset you all.
But us advocates of food rights need all the friends we can get. Maybe you want to join the Raw Milk Freedom Riders on December 8 in Chicago?
Milky Way,
You're correct, it was two of the five producers that didn't have any illnesses, not three.
Lola Granola,
Not sure who's giving you legal advice, but corporations have many of the rights of individuals, including free speech.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
David
"Maybe you want to join the Raw Milk Freedom Riders on December 8 in Chicago? "
I would join if your group cared about raw milk safety, and showed effort to reduce the number of outbreaks and illnesses
http://bit.ly/rN8zLd
The drum circle chanting raw milk is magic…not going anywhere.
MW
I am aware of corporate personhood, and while most think of corporate personhood as the legal loophole that gives the likes of Cargill free speech, it is also the loophole that gives "rights" to your strawman (your "legal person" or "legal fiction"). Rights that are granted are not natural law and do not apply to natural persons. (Notice the first line of the Wiki article references "natural persons" vs. "legal persons".)
Corporations do not have the unlimited right to contract as expressed in the decision of Hale v. Henkel, nor do corporations have the right to due process under the law. Can corporations plead the 4th? Corporations must have a lawyer represent them in legal matters, but individuals can represent themselves ("pro se").
Corporations must open their records to the state when the state wants to see them. Individuals do not have to do this without a warrant.
Here are the statutes and the department that govern Wisconsin corporations (the set of statutes specifically deal with LLCs):
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/183.pdf
http://www.wdfi.org/
Corporations are created by the state and governed by the state, and are complex systems with complex rules. Yet the raw milk movement in general will not acknowledge this, and instead keeps looking to the farmshare (corporate) model as the answer to the illegality of raw milk. We scream about our "rights" upon Judge Fielder's decision, but don't understand that we signed our rights away to the state when we filled out our Articles of Incorporation.
I filled in analysis of the data you linked to, at the end of my previous post, and found that it showed a sharp decline from 2010 to 2011. Does that qualify as concern for safety? See you in Chicago?
David
Not sure why you continue to see Judge Fiedler as the second coming of Oliver Wendall Holmes, but the reality is that nothing in our legal system is set in stone. For example, courts have overruled the supposed protection being incorporated provides to personal assets. Similarly, sole proprietorships, which are individual enterprises that are not incorporated, have been ruled subject to various licensing and permit provisions. And various entities have been ruled to have rights to organize private clubs, apart from certain regulations. One judge's opinion is just that–one judge's opinion.
Mark McAfee,
If your Facebook page is any indication, many of your customers have been singing raw milk's praises to the California Department of Food and Agriculture.
David
David,
I still believe that the above statement hits the nail on the head. The govt has proven time and again that it is not the people they support. If the govt shuts down most of the small dairies and produce farms, they will control all the food. We will no longer have any choice in what foods we consume. There is a lot of money that has a great potential of being lost.
The shills who erroneously spout that raw milk supporters don't care for safety and imply that they don't show an "effort to reduce the number of outbreaks and illnesses", re-enforces their job as shills.
2008; 3 men have died and at least one pregnant woman miscarried
1983 outbreak in Boston caused by pasteurized milk led to 14 deaths.
2011 Five people have been sickened with Yersinia enterocolitica after drinking pasteurized milk
The list goes on and on..Outbreaks have been in all foods, sharing lists doesn't do more than show there have been outbreaks.
Working on causes and ways to prevent the outbreaks is what is needed. IF MW really cared then s/he would be sharing information on ways to help prevent outbreaks… MW hasn't offered anything more than a shills word.
As for the two raw cheese operations that had no illnesses, wasnt the real issue with Estrella that the listeria continued to be found at the dairy. I cant remember the specifics about Morningland other than their brand of cheese were found in the raid at Rawsome contaminated with listeria.
Both dairies were expected to destroy all of their contaminated products. Would that be any different than the recall taking place right now with lettuce? All of these products will be tossed and they will have to clean up their facility before they can continue business. If they continue to produce prepackage salad and E.coli shows up again, they will not be allowed to sell it. There is no double standard here.
I think the real issue with the two raw cheese producers is that once listeria finds a home in a cheese making facility, it is difficult to get rid of. Listeria also seems to be a very political pathogen. It appears that in the natural environment small amounts exist and some believe a zero tolerance standard is unrealistic. This is why these two businesses were forced out of business. It is all about the listeria. They would probably still be in business if the pathogen found was E.coli 0157:H7 or Salmonella. These are not pathogens that are natural to the environment and it is easier to rid them from your production line.
Here is my question, is it really OK to sell cheese contaminated with listeria? What level of listeria contamination is acceptable? How would that be quantified in a product? Listeria happens to be the pathogen that causes the most deaths.
The Weston A. Price Foundation and the FTCLDF have made a bunch of money off of raw milk enthusiasts, and now RAWMI wants to get on the gravy train.
Farmers are getting bad legal advice with farm shares and end up in hot water with the state.
As more people believe the lies and half-truths that WAPF and McAfee promote, more are getting sick.
More money, more legal hassles, more illnesses at the enthusiasts' expense.
Buy your own cow, drink at your own risk and bypass the farm share b.s.
The same can be said of mercury, melamine, formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80 (Tween-80),ammonium sulfate, formalin, and sucrose,sorbitol,monosodium L-glutamate, glycerin, and phenol -a compound obtained by distillation of coal tar…….What levels are acceptable?
(Other than the melamine, the rest are some of the ingredients in vaccinations)
Is that what you got from my post? I used a comparison and I also asked; "…….What levels are acceptable? " Where did I say: "it is acceptable to have listeria in raw cheese" ? I don't see any words to that effect.
http://www.foodsafetymagazine.com/article.asp?id=3480&sub=sub1
"The guidance document divides foods into two categories: foods that support the growth of L. monocytogenes are to be placed in the high-risk category, and the MC would remain at absence in 25 g (0.04 cfu/g); and foods that do not support the growth of L. monocytogenes are to be placed in the low-risk category, and the microbiological criteria for these foods would be less than 100 cfu/g. If the food contains L. monocytogenes at levels higher than those mentioned above, per category, the food would be considered adulterated. "
I am not the apologist for the state you make me out to be, rather I have tried to analyze the Zinnicker/Craig case to the best of my ability based on how I understand the law and have formed conclusions based on that understanding. The cold fact of the matter is that no matter how much you dislike Judge Fielder's ruling, or consider it "just one man's opinion", it is current law, and that is what we have unless his ruling is overturned in appeal.
You questioned where I was getting my legal advice, and in doing so suggested that the advice I'm getting is wrong. Well, David, I know where you're getting your advice (and not just Wikipedia), but have you ever considered that perhaps your advice is wrong? I was one of the farmers who worked with FTCLDF to set up a farmshare and and I'm one of the farmers who got a letter from DATCP. I was told directly by Pete Kennedy in a conference call that there wasn't enough money in the FTCLDF's coffers and that if I wanted FTCLDF defense against DATCP I'd have to cough up more cash. This left me with an extremely bad taste in my mouth and I sought a second legal opinion. This second opinion correlated with what I understood about the law, and I took it. I have since then educated myself a little better about how the law works. Would my advice stand up in court? That remains to be seen, but what I do know is that what FTCLDF is doing is not working, and to me it seems obvious why.
Have you or anyone else in the raw milk movement consulted with legal counsel that is not involved with FTCLDF? I wrote extensively about the Zinnicker/Craig decision here when the ruling came out, and no one bothered to comment on it. This suggests to me that this movement is woefully undereducated in the law, and as such is willing to trust anything and everything that comes from FTCLDF, and if questioned, people say, well, Gary and Pete are "nice guys". "Nice guys" is an emotional response to a logical question, and furthers nothing but people's sense of hysteria and misinformation. When I was setting up my farmshare, I asked Pete Kennedy directly about the incidental sales clause for grade A farms in Wisconsin, and he answered by saying that DATCP keep changing its mind and doesn't see it as valid. Yet Bill Marler on his website says raw milk is legal in Wisconsin on grade A farms through the incidental sales clause. Isn't it funny that two different attorneys have two different answers? Perhaps Bill knows that a law that isn't clear is no law at all. So how do you know FTCLDF's is right?
Why did FTCLDF take the Zinnicker/Craig case to civil court and not administrative court? If you have an issue with an administrative body, you go to administrative court. In bypassing administrative court, FTCLDF and its defendants in essence told the civil court that they agreed to administrative ruling and had no problem with it, but then tried to argue administrative rule in civil court. Is this the best course of action in order to win? I don't know, let's just take Pete and Gary's word for it because they're "nice guys".
You and I may have to disagree about the direction the court proceedings are taking unless you have something concrete to offer to the contrary. In the meantime, all I've ever asked is that people educate themselves just a little bit about how these farmshares (corporations) work so that they can decide for themselves if these are the best course of action, instead of being dependent on someone else deciding for them.
"Prepasteurization UV illumination, which combines new and older technologies, has the promise of inactivating spores and pathogens that might occur on farm or in plant and cause public health concerns. The work thus far seems to provide that added measure of quality necessary to extend shelf life and lower spore counts in powder."
More adulteration to milk coming to a store near you.
Barney, I don't have a place to put a cow.
I'm praying that the California children are out of the woods at this point. They are on my mind, whatever they consumed or didn't consume.
@Milky Way. I know your post was directed at Sylvia, but I am in her profession. I took statistics at OSU when I was majoring in clothing design, and received a "D." However, they were also included in one of my Associate's Degree nursing classes. A C or better in a specific behavioral statistics class is required for a bachelors degree, if I remember correctly, according to accreditation standards. I'm taking it again next term. I'll get back to you. I would like to point out however, that the nursing field has incorporated a relatively new requirement you might be interested in, called "Evidence based practice (EBP)." They are in the process of embedding it in national standards. EBP requires that statistics be professionally reviewed from many, many sources, to determine of there is EVIDENCE that their use in PRACTICE is valuable and effective. My question about E. coli 0157:H7 testing being done in only the most severe cases, quite possibly missing most E. coli 0157:H7 infections was a direct result of learning, in a class, how to incorporate EBP. I found that indeed, most infections are most likely missed because most loose stools are not tested for this at all.
I understand entirely how you find E. coli in severe, bloody diarrhea. But picture this. In the past 14 years, I have cleaned up diarrhea on hundreds of people, possibly thousands of times, and I have never, ever collected a stool for E. coli. You can talk to me until you're blue about finding E. coli in stool from someone who drank raw milk, and I'm still going to ask you, "But what about THEM?" And, "What are you doing about figuring out how this got into the raw milk?"
@Mary and Blue Dog. When I first began spending time with my husband, he kept telling me all about what meditation was. I just listened for a long time. Then I finally explained to him what a Quaker was. We later got married.
@Bill Marler. Safety or Freedom? Sue the producers or feed the masses? You've chosen your path; I'll choose mine.
Would you propose those same measure for ALL foods and substances that have the potential to harm consumers? You do realize that there would be nothing left on the shelves. I truly do not want to live in a world of your making."
November 20, 2011 | Sophie Lovett [end of quote]
Couldn't have said it better myself. The reason those points sound draconian is because they are. Our court system, and all of its components, are truly lazy and really want the laws changed but they don't want the laws changed, ya know?
Read this. It's incredibly true, accurate and disgusting all at the same time.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27684
It's time the DOJ pulled up its big boy knickers. This is the 21st century but they forget about that. The DOJ only wants to honor the constitution if it plays right into their hands, and they only want changes that won't bring them change. Other than that, they're great! They are an organization of legitimate crooks (talk about an oxymoron) with more bends and twists than the Snake River.
Re Estrella and Morningland, I've never suggested they be allowed to sell cheese contaminated with listeria. I've asked that they be treated the same as other food producers with contaminated product and/or facilities, and no illnesses reported. In both cases, complete recalls of all product were ordered rather than recalls of the affected cheese type, which is the common approach. Moreover, Morningland was ordered to destroy its entire existing inventory of cheese, even after FDA testing failed to find listeria in its facilities. Estralla was making significant progress in cleaning up its facility when it was shuttered by FDA. I've posted examples of similar companies with listeria problems that have merely received warning letters. It's clear FDA was out to get these companies, likely because of their connection to raw milk, and (mis-)used the regulations to accomplish its goals, which I find outrageous.
Lola granola,
"Isn't it funny that two different attorneys have two different answers? Perhaps Bill knows that a law that isn't clear is no law at all. So how do you know FTCLDF's is right?"
Did I say I know FTCLDF is right? Reminds me of a savvy guy I knew who wondered why lawyers have so many hands. "It's always, 'on the one hand…on the other hand…and furthermore…" Lawyers are notorious for contradicting themselves. Judges, too. When you engage a lawyer, though, you ought to do it intending to take his or her advice. Liittle worse than arguing with your own lawyer.
I think what's going on in this raw milk/herdshare/private contract realm is that the precedents that lawyers and judges prefer aren't as plentiful as they might like. When in doubt, the judges side with the cops/regulators/government lawyers. This whole arena is in a state of flux. That makes it exciting. The fact that FTCLDF isn't winning a lot is much more likely a result of this flux rather than any grand conspiracy by FTCLDF to snooker its members.
David
They were "habitual violator" and yet they weren't tossed in jail, nor led away in cuffs. Who is running the egg houses now?
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/20/MNSL1M1AOA.DTL#ixzz1eOyAfBpr
The sad news in this article is:
"Of the five children who were sickened by E. coli in the most recent raw milk recall, three had to be hospitalized because their kidneys were starting to fail. The two Contra Costa children, siblings under age 5, were still in a hospital as of the end of last week."
As a mother of two siblings under five who has fed raw milk from the dairy in question to my children, I couldn't imagine being in the hospital with BOTH of my children's kidney's starting to fail. Tears in my eyes. This is just too sad.
I find "Flim Flam's" comment loosely paraphrased as 'who cares if a few little kids get sick' highly offensive and irresponsible if he himself is a raw milk producer.
http://www.organicpastures.com/pdfs/Recall%20Lab%20Results%20A7%20L%20Analytical%20Laboratories%2011.21.11.pdf
Those were our negative manure test results that were collected as split samples of compiled samples taken by DHS in the pastures and in the dairy barn and other manure areas. All were negative. DHS took more than 400 samples from what we were told. We compiled ours together and tested them in batches.
More of the same… giant corporations.
From the article:
"DeCoster… built a vast egg empire with hard work and ruthless tactics. He continued and even expanded his egg farms even as they were cited and charged with immigration, safety, environmental and labor violations. As he clashed with regulators, he won over others by generously donating his money for local municipal projects."
Ahhh, that's why fresh milk providers are being harrassed: They're not bribing…uh, "generously donating" money to politician's favorite projects.
It is easy to speculate from the comfort of your computer. But it is not your farm, your livelihood, your land or your reputation on the line.
We farmers cannot afford to speculate. We have to get it right the first time.
I still think that if you want raw milk you should buy your own cow, then you're 100% responsible for the milk's safety. That way there's no finger pointing.
The host is indeed the matrix of disease not so much because it harbors or has been exposed to a ubiquitous, opportunistic organism but rather due to the fact that it has been predisposed to unnatural medical and environmental toxins (vaccines, drugs, hormones and an array of chemicals. This predisposition coupled with the hosts innate qualities is what nurtures illness and determines the degree and intensity of its progression.
Our priorities are half ass backwards and were burning bridges behind ourselves if we continue to focus on, manipulate and antagonize our allies, namely those who produce natural whole foods and the many organisms which are clearly necessary for maintaining a balanced and healthy ecosystem.
Our focus aught to be to rectify that which is unnatural. TPTB appears hell-bent on the opposite.
Ken Conrad
If you only test for something when you want to find it and don't look for it when you don't want to know it's there, you have very spurious statistics and a faulty epidemiology based on them.
We have ignored host characteristics which are crucial to the development of disease. The epidemiology we have embraced is often politically-based rather than science-based.
Don't say "it can't happen here". … without the internet, it would be happening this very hour – as it has in every communist country – but you'd never know about it
J C Ryle said "controversy may be our duty" … not that everyone has to get out there and challenge the powers-that-be, but some of us are called to it
Thousands of people in BC are geting REAL MILK now, who weren't before, partly because of the publicity.
keep on milking but quit sniping at the ones at the forefront
"Drinking unpasteurized milk isn't the same as eating raw vegetables or other agricultural products that could carry dangerous bacteria, health officials said." "One of the big issues is how food is consumed," James Watt, chief of the state Health Services Department's division of communicable disease control, said. "Those other foods are typically cooked, or at least can be washed."
All those people who got sick from the cantaloupe, sprouts, green onions, lettuce, etc. didn't cook it or wash it…and that is why they got sick, right? If they are eating RAW veggies then they are NOT cooked…..Mr Watt doesn't sound too smart.
"from 1987 to September 2010. During the 27-year period, there were at least 133 outbreaks due to the consumption of raw milk and raw milk products. These outbreaks caused 2,659 cases of illnesses, 269 hospitalizations, 3 deaths, 6 stillbirths and 2 miscarriages. "
It doesn't state where the raw milk was obtained from… In a 27 year period there were 11 deaths from raw dairy. Wow, and how many from pasteurized milk?
2008 pasteurized milk 3 men and at least 1 miscarriage from the dairys plant in Shrewsbury,
Following from Cheeseslave link below: all pasteurized dairy induced illnesses;
1985March, 1 outbreak, 16,284 confirmed cases, at same plant in Melrose Park, IL
1985197,000 cases of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella infections from one dairy in California
19851,500+ cases, Salmonella culture confirmed, in Northern Illinois
1987Massive outbreak of over 16,000 culture-confirmed cases of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella typhimurium traced to pasteurized milk in Georgia
19932 outbreaks statewide, 28 cases Salmonella infection
19943 outbreaks, 105 cases, E. Coli & Listeria in California
1993-1994outbreak of Salmonella enteritidis in over 200 due to pasteurized ice cream in Minnesota, South Dakota and Wisconsin
19951 outbreak, 3 cases in California
1995outbreak of Yersinia enterocolitica in 10 children, 3 hospitalized due to post-pasteurization contamination
19962 outbreaks Campylobactor and Salmonella, 48 cases in California
19972 outbreaks, 28 cases Salmonella in California
http://www.cheeseslave.com/drinking-pasteurized-milk-is-dangerous/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3316720
"We farmers cannot afford to speculate. We have to get it right the first time."
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there are no guarantees, in court or in life. Any lawyer who tells you different is someone to cross off your list of candidates.
It's not a matter of speculating. but of making the best judgments you can with the information you have at hand.
David
"listeriosis epidemic that claimed 48 lives in Los Angeles County in 1985 traces California's worst food poisoning case ever to raw or poorly pasteurized milk used to make cheese"
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/04/17/garden/salmonella-outbreak-is-traced.html
At least 9 deaths and this is before the outbreak was done.
http://jeffosadec.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/massive-outbreak-of-antimicrobial-resistant-salmonellosis-traced-to-pasteurized-milk.pdf
This says 18 deaths
at least 69 deaths from pasteurized dairy in the same 27 year period as the govt points out for raw dairy which had 11 deaths. Appears raw dairy is safer than pasteurized.
Also…Claravale Raw Milk is selling at over $10 per "quart"….that is right, $40 per gallon in LA. There is rationing going on and the far worse. Cat fights and mothers with babies get raw milk first.
Kind of reminds me of the the life boats on the Titanic.
I did not see my post that I thought went up last week where I apologized for offending some CA Cow Share operators. I want to try this again.
I want to publically apologize for making a comment regarding one of our FB moms and her post. The post mentioned that she drank Mostly OPDC, the inference being that she drank other raw milk as well. One of her kids was sickened for just a few days and recovered at home without hospitalization.
I did not intend to offend anyone and I want to extend my deepest apologies to anyone that felt slighted by my comment. We do not know the exact origins of the recall that is ongoing right now. That is the bottom line. All tests have come back negative from our milk herd manure samples.
We are making huge progress towards our creamery renovations and have made firm arrangements with CDFA inspectors on our time line for concluding the recall.
Most kind regards,
Mark
In the time frame the govt gave, 27 years, at least 69 people died after consuming pasteurized dairy and about 11 died from consuming raw dairy.
In those same 27 years, there is GREATER than 231210 illnesses from pasteurized dairy. I don't recall reading raw dairy illnesses near that high.
I had to chuckle when I read that, since FTCLDF has promoted and continues to promote the 'cowshare' model as *the* solution to the illegality of raw milk.
The 'cowshare' model is not being upheld in court, yet FTCLDF continues to promote them as legitimate. Instead of working with the legal system to find a way to provide raw milk, we've devised the 'cowshare' model and are desperately trying to make it fit into the legal system. It's like trying to stick a square peg in a round hole.
"Cow or Goat-Share Programs Can Save Family Farms!"
"How are we helping save family farms? Each week we help 4 – 5 new family farm members become cow or goat-share operations."
http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/cow-shares.html
When I consulted Pete Kennedy regarding my farmshare, he dismissed the incidental sales clause (even though Bill Marler seems to recognize it as legitimate) and told me that the farmshare was the *only* way to legally sell raw milk in Wisconsin.
This is what I was told to do:
Take out an LLC. Sell all of the cows to the LLC. (I retained ownership of the land, the barn, the equipment and 'rented' it to the LLC. Paperwork nightmare.)
Since one cannot sell more than 25 share of stock in an LLC without reporting each sale to the state (Names, SSNs, etc.), I was told to sell ONE share to a buyers club (an "unincorporated association").
I could then sell unlimited memberships in the buyers club.
Now, I don't know how the other farmshares in Wisconsin are set up, but does this situation sound like one is buying a cow? Or a share in a farm?
If the local senior center collectively buys one share of stock in Microsoft, and my grandma is a member of the senior center, is she a Microsoft stock owner? What percentage of that share of stock is hers?
When "members" bought into my farmshare, they bought into a minuscule amount of the farm (1% was owned by the buyers club). They also agreed to waive their rights to profit from the farm, and to waive their right to sue in case of injury or illness (not that this would necessarily be upheld in court, but it is what people agreed to to become members).
This is what my legal counsel said was legitimate. And when it came under fire by the state, I was told that I would have to pay more money to get me out of this mess.
Perhaps you see this as the "best judgments you can with the information you have at hand", David, but I do not. If I were an outsider looking at this, I would see this as fraud. But as insiders, we see this as okay? Do we want to spend years in litigation with the state defending this model and possibly lose our farms in the process? Anyone who's okay with that is welcome to do it. Informed consent is what is needed, though.
I had thought that when you buy into a cow share, the partial owner of the cow is on the bill of sale for the cow? If not the bill of sale, on some paper stating who the owners of the cow are?
To simplify it: I would be the buyer of the cow (The farmer would choose the cow for me as I wouldn't know what to look for in the cow), I would board the cow on your farm for a fee, and you would care for and milk her for me, for a fee. I don't see this as being much different than if you were to board and care for a race horse for me. A private agreement between 2 or more people.
I have been milking a herd of cows for over 25 years, I am not a newbie.
After reading all of the comments on this blog for 5 years, I am not willing to risk my farm or my livelihood, like I had mentioned in a previous post, for someone who is not willing to take that same risk themselves.
I already sell my milk to a processor. I am feeding the public and not being selfish when I said " if you want RAW milk buy your own cow". My point was the owner of the cow[s] knows how they were fed, cared for, and milked, and what they do with their milk is up to them!!!
Most people do not want the hassle of taking care of a large, smelly animal twice a day. They do not want that responsibility. Yet they want the benefit. If they want the benefit, they should accept the responsibility, also.
You make it sound irresponsible if people that aren't familiar with taking care of a cow still want milk and have to rely on someone else to obtain that product. True, getting your own cow is an option.
Using that same logic in the rest of your, or anyone's, life can get to be nigh on impossible though. There used to be a time when people were more independent and I think that is a worthwhile thing to strive for, but not to the extreme. I enjoy the benefits of electricity, but don't have a power plant in my back yard. I enjoy the benefits of driving a car around, but I have no idea how to make my own car. I enjoy the heat from my wood burning stove, yet I wouldn't know how to smelt the metal and then blacksmith it into shape if I had to do it myself. There are countless things that we rely on others for in our lives. If we had to adopt the principle of "If you need it, you have to get it yourself." I think the quality of my life would be much less than it is now.
Your post can seem to others as pretty arrogant. I have my cow so to heck with all of the rest of you. Get your own cow, I'm not going to help you. I think the government would like us to have that attitude. That promotes reliance on their support as it pretty difficult to do everything all on our own.
Brandon
I do not have the knowledge of caring properly for a cow. I also don't have anyone near me to assist with advice, I also do not have a place to put a cow. I am currently in a city and they frown upon a cow in the limits. I'd love to be able to go out and buy a 5-10 acre farm and produce my own foods. Income is limited and at this point in my life, it wouldn't be realistic to try and farm on my own.
Paying the farmer (who has the knowledge, space, etc) to care for and milk a cow, ensures income for the farmer and I get the product I want by either purchasing the cow and/or paying the farmer to care for and milk my cow all or in part. It is a win/win for both of us.
Mark, go to #2, according to the govt, there have been @11 deaths due to raw dairy….. I am aware they (as other entities) skew information. I am aware that they count the bathtub cheeses and raw milk from the nasty factory dairies.
Good catch, Sylvia. The anti-fresh milk crowd frequently say that "even ONE person becoming ill from raw milk is too many!"
But let thousands become ill and dozens, even hundreds, die from pasteurized milk over the same time period, and the same people murmur, "Well, that's regrettable but acceptable, because look at how many people drink it… the ratio is way lower with pasteurized milk."
Hypocrites!
Imagine what would happen if fresh milk caused even one death tomorrow? MMartin, Milky Way, Bill Marler, et al, would start smoking their keyboards in furiously typing how irresponsible and uncaring all we fresh milk producers are; and the FDA and every other alphabet agent would close the operation down forever, arrest the producer on murder charges, and put the screws on as many of the other producers as they can find to shut them down forever as well, even if they never made one person ill: "Even ONE death from raw milk is too many! Drinking raw milk is Russian Roulette!"
Yet despite many deaths, pasteurized producers are not closed down forever. "Oh well, accidents happen… and the public still needs to be fed…"
I believe some cowshare agreements are as you described, but definitely not all of them (looking at me as a prime example), and I think that's where this movement is getting itself into trouble.
Weve been told by the WAPF and FTCLDF that these are simple agister arrangements, when oftentimes they are anything but. The farmshares that have come under fire in Wisconsin (I can only speak about Wisconsin, I have no knowledge of the laws or arrangements in other states) are not simple agister arrangements, but existing farms that are corporations (LLCs contracts with the state), with licenses (grade A – contracts with the state) and contracts with processors. And unlike an agister arrangement, in Wisconsin you are not buying a cow; you are buying the *right to access* the milk via farm ownership, as farm owners can legally drink their own milk.
I have said before that Id love to see a true agister arrangement come under fire, just for the precedent it would set, but I dont think I ever will, as I believe the state views these as legitimate, especially since they are not involved in commerce in any way.
The point that I have been trying to make is that when we read that the Wisconsin farmshares are in DATCPs crosshairs again instead of reacting with emotion (Thats not fair!) we should be reacting with logic (Does the state have a case? Are these setups legitimate?). If we continue to react with emotion, nothing will change and farms will continue to come under the states ire.
"I did not see my post that I thought went up last week where I apologized for offending some CA Cow Share operators. I want to try this again.
"I want to publically apologize for making a comment regarding one of our FB moms and her post. The post mentioned that she drank Mostly OPDC, the inference being that she drank other raw milk as well. One of her kids was sickened for just a few days and recovered at home without hospitalization.
"I did not intend to offend anyone and I want to extend my deepest apologies to anyone that felt slighted by my comment. We do not know the exact origins of the recall that is ongoing right now. That is the bottom line. All tests have come back negative from our milk herd manure samples
.
Mark, thank you for being so true to you!
Last week you "apologized" and now you want to "try this again". When I read your "apology" above, what I hear is not that you regret your latest attack on cow-shares. I only hear that you want us to forgive you – you want us to understand why you "threw us under the (CDFA) bus".
Poor Mark! I empathize with how you must have felt… Being accused of sickening five children hundreds of miles from one another, supposedly with the same DNA "blueprint", it was only natural to suspect that the explanation was unlicensed, unregulated cow shares, milking a few cows, operating under the radar, infecting the OPDC customer base with identical "blueprint" DNA counties hundreds of miles apart! How do those cow shares do it?
Luckily, you have a solution! You'll use this opportunity to redirect the CDFA's wrath to the cow shares! If any of them are "offended", well, after the damage is done, a quick "apology" will restore their trust in you.
"We do not know the exact origins of the recall that is going on right now. That is the bottom line." Co-mingling milk from 400+ grain-fed, "100% pastured" cows via pipeline into bulk tanks and then distributing that milk via hundreds of stores to tens of thousands of unknown consumers scattered across 50-100 thousand square miles, I imagine that it is hard to learn the exact origins anything, even with a NASA-grade "RAMP" plan.
But whatever the origin, at least you are clear about who's side you're on here.
I thank you for that, Mark!
Where are you getting your figures for Claravale? Around these parts it's anywhere from $6.50 for a quart plus the refundable bottle deposit at $2.00 (Lazy Acres, Santa Barbara) to $5.89 plus the bottle fee at Lassen's (Santa Barbara, Ventura). Of course they can't keep it on the shelves…
Where are these stories of cat fights and rationing coming from? That would make great news clips and stories for the 6 o'clock news…
Kristen
In the 5 years I've been reading this blog there have been only two topics of discussion –
Raw milk safety, how to produce clean raw milk, outbreaks and RAWMI.
How to buy raw milk if you don't own a cow and it's illegal to buy otherwise, cowshares and Farm To Consumer.
We try to produce clean raw milk yet there are outbreaks and illnesses. We try to buy milk through a cowshare yet the court system doesn't see this as legal.
It is not illegal to buy and milk your own cow. This would solve these two problems and end the discussion on these two topics.
If you can find a farmer that wants to play these GAMES with the state, more power to you. This farmer will not risk his farm fighting with the state and the health department, especially in light of some of these discussions. I'm sorry if that makes you mad, but I know I'm not alone in thinking this. If you milk your own cow, you don't need a cowshare, you don't need Farm To Consumer, you don't need RAWMI.
http://www.foodrenegade.com/how-will-you-fight-for-raw-milk/
"According to the Center For Disease Controls own survey, at least 10 million people in the U.S. consume raw milk regularly!"
If @ 10 million drink raw milk regularly.. and only 11 died in 27 years….that shows it is so much safer than pasteurized dairy
Barney,
Your opinion doesn't make me mad at all, it is your right to do as you see fit. If I was able to care for a cow, feed and milk her and know all the things a person needs to know for good health, then I would do it. I live in a city, I don't have the money it takes to care for a cow, nor the knowledge. If a farmer wishes to sell me their milk, or wishes to have an agreement with me regarding me obtaining milk, then that is great. If not, then I look elsewhere or don't drink milk. Simple
http://lancasteronline.com/article/local/397980_Local-farm-in-middle-of-fight-over-raw-milk.html
http://lancasteronline.com/article/local/397980_Local-farm-in-middle-of-fight-over-raw-milk.html
http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/got-raw-milk-ontario-dairy-farmer-fights-for-raw-milk-and-food-rights/
http://healthfreedoms.org/2011/01/22/raw-milk-dairy-farm-fights-back-and-wins/
http://www.organicconsumers.org/raw-milk/
232 million pasteurized milk69 deaths
31 million raw milk11 deaths
"Wow, Mr Marler. Some of those points are mighty draconian. Why do you hate freedom?
Would you propose those same measure for ALL foods and substances that have the potential to harm consumers? You do realize that there would be nothing left on the shelves. I truly do not want to live in a world of your making. "
From a gal that eats raw organic pastured chicken…
nancy
The Claravale price gouging was reported to be at "Full of Life" in LA. Claravale was not doing this….it was the store. The producer can not change prices in the computer systems fast enough. Price changes generally take about 45 days or so….at least it does for us.
Check this out….this is FDA yellow science and corruption. Do they think we are all in Kindergarten or idiots???
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/Product-SpecificInformation/MilkSafety/ConsumerInformationAboutMilkSafety/ucm247991.htm
The FDA really believes this stuff….read this. They completely discount the entire PARSIFAL study. I wonder how they will deal with the GABRIELA study that backs up PARSIFAL 100%.
Remember that PARSIFAL used the EU terminology Farm Fresh Milk instead of Raw Milk…so the FDA says the study is not about Raw Milk. GABRIELA did not make this mistake and clarified the PARSIFAL…it was "raw milk and its Raw Whey protein" that stabilized MAST cells and reduced Asthma.
The FDA says that raw milk contains no beneficial probiotic bacteria and only contains pathogenic bacteria.
The FDA says that raw milk has nothing to do with Lactose Intolerance??!! !!?? try explaining that all the raw milk consumers that get gas cramps with pasteurized milk but not raw. What are they thinking?….this is political coverup and protection for CAFO-PMO stuff.
The FDA has really shot their foot this time. They are printing their lies in full view for us all to see. Kind of like the Emperor that is naked in public but is too proud to acknowledge it.
Yes….the FDA is naked before us all. Naked before the truth and exposed in their corrupt science. They deny peer reviewed internationally published research…they say there is no evidence or studies….makes me sick. That is a political statement not a scientific statement.
The FDA is a farce and must be dismantled. It is the greatest threat to American Health.
With that thought….enjoy great food and nourishment of your mind body and soul this thanks giving.
Mark and the OPDC team
Well….I may not disagree with that BUT… those deaths still came from PMO CAFO raw milk that was sent to be pasteuerized. Seems like the FDA loves to protect their pasteurizer and blames the screw-ups and deaths on anything but their blessed pasteurizer that can do no harm or wrong. The pasteurizer and its environment is dangerous. It creates a safe harbor for pathogens like listeria.
Mark
Answer: I hold no brief for law that skirts freedom and liberty.
This cuts two ways: if you want your freedom and liberty, take it, fully.
Negotiate as free. Contract as free. Profit as free. Take your losses as free.
Cut your losses as free. Associate as free. Speak as free. Dont whine. Pay your taxes as free. Defend your freedom and liberty.
If you want to be a slave, obey your master(s).
It is my opinion that we are each, by nature, free. Hence freedom and liberty are a better fit than slavery, a better fit than socialism.
Bill Whittle, as an essayist, made the comment that if the Marxists had any actual common sense, then after getting all worked up over mid 19th century problems that have long since been solved by the combinations of the industrial revolution and free markets, private property recognized and defended, and capitalism, these Marxist would recognize solved problems for what they are, solved problems, and move on. But no, they multi-generationally pervert and subvert their societies, an effort to conform events, which are unstoppably moving in some other direction, into an Hegelian Dialectic / Marxist-Leninist mold. This shows a thorough and gross lack of actual common sense on their part. And, very unfortunately, portions of the cultural landscape are framed by their efforts. Their foolish efforts.
As to my own cow (I call her Wally, short for Walter Mitty), she is very well behaved. She is a mixed Fernian-Celt Shropshire Lad breed and produces delicious milk with the highest fat content of any breed. If Im gone for two or three days, she knows this and produces much less, and holds it too, until I get back home. Wally also keeps the goats in line, and will turn on the special faucet, grab the hose in her mouth and wash the car if I park in front of the garage instead of inside the garage (check it out on YouTube, Wally the wild cow). BTW I live in a third-floor apartment, so Wally does all this by sneaking out to the local park at night and in the very early morning and she shares her milk by going door-to-door on the way back from the park, ringing the door bell, and my neighbors can take what they want right from the spigot. The point of my nonsense here about my non-existent cow, is that division of labor is as legitimate a fact of most folks life as it is a fact that my eyes are my eyes and not my ears and vice-versa. So I dont actually have a cow. But I will put my resources into supporting what I choose to support. Who doesnt do that? I do not support tortured, nutritionally debilitating milk products. As we were about to enjoy three wonderful cheeses from the Cheese Board in Berkeley, one lady helped to unwrap the cheeses and nearly tossed one in the trash with the comment that itd clearly, horribly, spoiled. I intercepted the item and inspected it. It was fantastic, beyond good. Sniffing it, I realized, truthfully, it smelled more like baby shit than anything else, but I grew up eating stinky cheeses and knew the good stuff when it came my way.
So hooray for the division of labor!
To all the folk that work with the animals and the land to produce vital foods: thank you, from the bottom of my heart. God bless you, and keep you, and make his face shine upon you and give you peace.
Mary Martin: Your arithmetic is errorless. In my opinion, your argument is as weak as many a folks gut/immune system.
To each and everyone of you, heres to the health, body and soul, of you and yours.
May your Thanksgiving Day, 2011, be wonderful and blessed.
David Gumpert: as always, special thanks to you.
Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard