The Complete Patient

I’m not sure why—maybe it’s some desire for greater order or to compartmentalize things more—but I’ve found myself lately trying to figure out where the raw milk and the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) issues fit into our conventional political system. In other words, should people like Richard Hebron, Lori McGrath, Mark Nolt, and Greg Niewendorp be darlings of the liberals or the conservatives?

It’s intriguing to me that the discussion on this blog almost never breaks down (descends?) along political lines. There have been many opportunities, including my previous post about the huge Michigan/Federal expenditures in connection with bovine TB. Yet the comments on my previous post, which were in a sense about the politics of government spending, focused on nonpolitical themes--the seeming impossibility to truly controlling the disease in wild animals and about trying to think of the government agencies as the people (being paid the money) they really are comprised of.

I’ve always been intrigued with politics, having been a political science major in college. I actually took a government examination after I graudated and was interviewed about being a high-level bureaucrat. I received invitations to come work for a number of agencies like the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, but when push came to shove, backed off. I really preferred journalism and writing. Imagine, though, I could be one of those FDA guys sending out warning letters to raw milk dairies or a USDA person writing up NAIS regulations!

Anyway, I’ve begun thinking about political labeling because I’ve had some feedback that both conservatives and liberals are uncomfortable with issues around the role of government in regulating, or over-regulating, the food supply.

As one example, I’ve posted a few of my blog items about Greg Niewendorp on FreeRepublic.com, which labels itself a “conservative” web site.

Here is one response: “Unlike most other people I don’t see the magic in the ‘small family farm.’ What’s so great about it? We have an abundance of inexpensive, safe, and reliable food. Gone are the good old days when fruit was so rare that people actually gave it as Christmas gifts. We’re better nourished and healthier than ever. So forgive me if I don’t lament the passing of the ‘small family farm.’”

To which another reader responded: “It’s a choice, see? What a concept--freedom. I realize freedom is an elusive concept around FreeRepublic these days.”

I’ve had a few conversations with dyed-in-the-wool liberals whom I would assume would be outraged by the government’s abuse of struggling farmers around the country and, while they aren’t as outspoken as the people on FreeRepublic, they seem similarly uncertain. Well, they seem to be saying, shouldn’t the government be protecting us from disease?

Now, obviously, this isn’t any kind of scientific sampling. But for all the cynicism that exists about the government, I sense a willingness to trust the authorities about matters involving food safety and nutrition. It’s very difficult for liberals or conservatives to conceive that the government would mislead them about something so basic as the science of disease.

We can probably say with a high degree of certainty that the founding fathers wouldn’t have a problem with raw milk—after all, it was a regular part of their lives—and would have a problem with tagging farm animals to enable the government to keep watch.

So is Greg Niewendorp a symbol for conservatives or liberals? Or libertarians? Maybe another question applies better: What is the politics of the germ theory? Whatever it might be, it seems to be at an early stage. Greg’s resistance to government “protection” makes both liberals and conservatives uncomfortable, so right now, he is alone politically in many ways.

To me, the matter of what farmers produce and what consumers purchase seems to come down to basic human liberties. These liberties were probably so self evident to the founders of our country that they didn’t even think to mention them in the Constitution.

***

There is a very interesting article in a newspaper called “The Bulletin”, which bills itself as “Philadelphia’s Family Newspaper”, about raw milk. The article is presented as a debate between pro and anti raw milkers, but what is curious to me is that it is one of the few such articles I've seen that avoids mention in its “anti” side of the propaganda that raw milk could kill you.

***

In response to Anna’s question about Joel Salatin’s latest book, “Everything I Want to Do Is Illegal”, I am in the midst of reading it. Lots of it pertains to things discussed on this site. More to come.

One of the subjects that inevitably comes up when trying to understand what’s going on between Greg Niewendorp and Michigan’s Department of Agriculture is money.

Greg has argued on several occasions that not only is the MDA’s testing program motivated by a desire to gain access to federal funds, but that the U.S. Department of Agriculture funds are geared toward gaining a better understanding about bovine TB.  (And as the comments on my last few posts suggest, there is a lot still to learn about bovine TB in both animals and people.) If that is the case, Greg argues, the program is “experimental,” and he should be able to decide whether he wants to take part in the experiment.

I did some more searching on MDA’s site, and found a press release from early 2007 that celebrates USDA’s awarding of nearly $2.5 million to MDA and Michigan State University for "bovine TB eradication." It turns out that a major component of the funding, something on the order of $1 million, is to be used on “ the Gamma-Interferon test pilot project, which will use 20,000 blood samples to determine if this test could replace the Comparative Cervical Tuberculin (CCT) test. Gamma-Interferon test will require less animal handling and results are projected to be available in considerably less time than the CCT test results, which are not available for 72 hours.” A control group versus a test group. Hmmm.

There is also mention of $23,000 “for administrative support to enhance their epidemiological efforts to evaluate the human health risks associated with bovine TB in Michigan.” (I’d like to see the results of that one.)

One other thing that bears mention: Michigan State University has two agriculture components—the Michigan State University Extension (MSUE) and the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station (MAES). Note the term “experiment” in the name.

In other words, there’s a whole lot of testing and evaluating and research going on. Does this constitute an experimental program? The MDA is certainly selling the USDA on coughing up the money on the basis of studying and researching bovine TB matters for future use. It may sound like a matter of semantics—different agencies and organizations need to hear different things—but isn’t that part of the problem? Lots of people saying different things for the sake of convenience--and money, big money.

Part of the problem for MDA and MSU is that Greg is refusing to accept semantics as an excuse or explanation. He figures that over the last ten years, MDA and MSU have spent about $100 million—about half from the USDA and half from the state—on bovine TB activities. With millions regularly flowing in to MDA and MSU, it’s tough to ever say the experiment is completed.

I’m trying to take stock of the Greg Niewendorp affair, and it’s not easy. The situation seems to be unfolding on two levels.

First, there’s Greg. He’s not just outspoken, he’s very outspoken. He is into both the subtleties of the regulations (agonizing over what the term “premises” really means), and the symbolism of his protest (he loves to read a tale of Irish protesters from the mid-1800s who were given death sentences, eventually commuted to life, and shipped off to Australia, where they became major political figures). When he begins talking about his property being under military occupation, well, I’m not sure where to go with that.

Yet I have to admire his bravery, his willingness to stand up to the state on behalf of a cause. It takes some guts to tell the state police to get off your property.

Which brings me to the second level, which is the complexity of the entire affair. The various comments over the last few days are testimony to that—questions about the prevalence of M.bovis, of which cattle are tested, the role of the sheriff, the possible legal options, etc., etc.

I spent some time just trying to assess Steve Bemis’ comments about whole herd testing and NAIS, and I realized how difficult it is to understand the rules and regulations about what is supposedly a simple test. The head of the Michigan Department of Agriculture posted a memo earlier this year that lays out the testing process. It explains that Michigan has three “zones” for testing: A “modified accredited zone” (which includes Greg’s county), a “modified accredited advanced zone”, and a “bovine tuberculosis free zone.”

I won’t bore you with all the details (you may want to read it for yourself), but essentially, in the modified accredited zone, “All cattle herds must complete an annual whole herd bovine tuberculosis test…,” while in the other two zones, “herds will be randomly selected for whole herd testing.”

The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) definitely fits into all of this, since the memo is prefaced with the statement, “Effective March 1, 2007, all cattle must be identified with official RFID electronic identification eartags prior to movement from a premises within Michigan, unless exempted by the director.” RFID eartags is code for NAIS. What I also read into this is that Greg’s herd must be tested, but not necessarily fitted with RFID tags, since he doesn’t move his herd from the premises.

But isn’t that part of the problem here? The regulators bombard farmers with these complex, highly restrictive, and arbitrary, regulations, supposedly based on scientific research and hard data. Yet when we go to examine the data that underlie the regulations, whether for raw milk or M.bovis, we find that our repositories of health information, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and scientific journals, contain incomplete information, or evidence indicating there’s not nearly as much of a problem as the complex and restrictive regulations would suggest. Blue smoke and mirrors, supreme.

I realize that the reason I keep listening to Greg and writing about his lonely odyssey is that he isn’t just challenging the bovine TB test and NAIS, he is really challenging basic notions of health and disease in animals and people—and making lots more sense than the state he is battling.

***

There is a nicely done small-paper article about a rally held last weekend at the farm of Mark Nolt, the Pennsylvania farmer I wrote about a few weeks back, who has defied state authorities by selling raw milk without a permit. It does a good job of communicating the sense of both support and outrage among the farmer's supporters.

Greg Niewendorp got his meeting with the Michigan Department of Agriculture earlier today, but it resolved nothing. Three officials, led by State Veterinarian Steve Halstead, initiated a conference call to urge Greg to allow the state to test his animals for bovine tuberculosis.

Greg reported on the meeting in a separate conference call this evening with a group of about a dozen supporters, which I attended. “They were trying to talk me into compliance. They didn’t get anywhere with me.” He did, however, receive an address of where to send his invoice for $15,000 as a penalty for an MDA official and two Michigan State Police trespassing on his farm last Tuesday (with no assurance it will be acted on). And he said Halstead gave him the names of two veterinarians to call to conduct the TB tests.

Several times, Greg told his supporters, “I want to face my accusers in the open,” such as at a public forum, where the whole matter of the appropriateness of the bovine TB program and related matters can be debated. “I want to use this situation as leverage to open a public debate on disease eradication, on the epidemiology of TB.”

His explanation of why there is a potential bovine TB problem in his area of Michigan: “We know there is TB bacteria in the soil. As soils grow more acidic, and become depleted of calcium, iron is taken up (by animals). Increased iron suppresses copper. That creates conditions ripe for microbacterial TB. As animals become acidic, you invite in the bacteria.”

He told the supporters that he has had great success raising a healthy herd of animals by addressing possible mineral imbalances in his animals. “I’ve taken control of this through a mineral tank. I have this miracle of extremely healthy cattle.”

He reiterated what Mary McGonigle-Martin reported in her research on yesterday’s posting: that raw milk is rarely associated with M. bovis. He also made mention of the Ted Beal research Steve Bemis describes. (In answer to the question about testing for bovine TB, only parts of Michigan are designated as bovine TB areas, while others are bovine-TB-free. There is an interesting map of Michigan showing bovine TB cases over the last 30 years, and Greg’s county, Charlevoix, doesn't show any cases of bovine TB involving deer, cattle, or other animals. In terms of what happens if bovine TB is found on a farm, take a look at an article I did for BusinessWeek.com earlier this year. It’s pretty grim, and the comments second that impression.)

It’s difficult to picture where this all might end up. By initiating a discussion with Greg, the MDA now looks much more reasonable than it did a week ago, when its agent arrived at Greg’s farm with a police escort. Is that push toward a more polite approach a prelude for seeking court action, or applying force?

Greg says he is prepared for either. “If they take me to court, I’m not going to lose. I’m in the process of taking down the Animal Industry Act.”

Debbie Stockton, who is with the Virginia Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, suggested the MDA might claim that Greg’s cattle threaten “an outbreak of disease,” and use that as an excuse to apply force.

If they try that option, Greg says he’s ready. “I have established a military occupation on my land. No one comes on…The only law enforcement agency allowed on my property is the sheriff.”

The slow-motion drama swirling around Greg Niewendorp and his refusal to participate in Michigan’s bovine TB testing program, may be picking up speed.

Greg said he heard rumors today at the East Jordan Coop Feed Mill, where local farmers buy bagged feed and have their grain ground, that, “They turned my case over to the USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) and federal marshals.” The rumors, he said, “are reliable enough…they sent the message through one of their minions.”

He says he never heard back from the Michigan Department of Agriculture about a hoped-for meeting with its officials this Wednesday, to follow up on the visit by an MDA agent and two state police officers last week.

A spokeswoman at the MDA, whom I reached today, said that while she isn’t permitted to talk about particular farmer cases, there is no federal involvement “to my knowledge” in any farmer situation. She added, “We have no meeting scheduled” with Niewendorp on Wednesday, or any other day.

From the sounds of both players in this drama, any meeting would have to bridge a huge chasm.

Greg’s overall goal is to confront the legitimacy of the MDA’s bovine tuberculosis testing program and, indeed, the entire Michigan Animal Industry Act, under which the program operates, with USDA funding. He argues that bovine TB isn’t highly contagious, as the MDA contends, but rather is a disease that strikes animals or people whose immune systems are run down. Animals that have “the proper mineral terrain” are at little risk for catching bovine TB.

The bovine TB testing program “is an industrial operation…hence, the Animal Industry Act,” he says. “I’m talking about a different model, based on...real food, for the restoration of our health.”

In the view of the MDA, though, the bovine TB testing program represents a challenge for Michigan farmers in the northern lower peninsula to overcome on their way to gaining clearance to be able to sell their products worldwide. The spokeswoman indicated that Greg is the first farmer to resist having his animals tested in the ten years of the program.

Indeed, she cast Greg as a spoilsport, and indicated that the MDA’s patience with his refusal is wearing thin. “This is a human health issue as well as an industry issue,” she said. “If we can’t test (any animals), we assume they are diseased. We want to protect the animal industry…it affects the entire country” in terms of reassuring overseas buyers of American beef, she said.

How long can Greg sit with his farm under quarantine? “What we have in Michigan is free-ranging deer picking up disease from cattle…Not only is that endangering the marketability of cattle, but it also endangers free roaming deer.” In other words, because Greg’s cattle haven’t been tested and are assumed to be diseased, they are assumed to be infecting deer, which pass the disease around among cattle on other farms.

“It cannot go on indefinitely,” she said. “There are 1,000 (cattle) farms and only one farmer is holding back the program.”

The program’s goal is to get the region of the northern lower peninsula declared TB-free by the USDA, she said. “We need to have everyone participating in the program in order for that to be done.” Typically, a region has to experience a five-year period with no positive TB cattle herds for it to be declared TB-free, she said.

Greg isn’t sure what the MDA’s next step might be. He could be arrested, or his herd could be confiscated. Whatever happens, he says he is prepared to confront the MDA, as he has done all along—with his refusal to have his animals tested, living under quarantine, escorting the MDA agent and police off his property, and contemplating an invoice for trespassing. In his view, the invoicing idea wasn't any more quixotic than the other steps he has taken.

He also wants to encourage supporters to help both the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund and the NonCompliance Relief Fund, described in a posting last March.

“The whole world is watching,” he said. “And I’m not blinking.”