Header graphic for print
Marler Blog Providing Commentary on Food Poisoning Outbreaks & Litigation

FDA seeks permanent injunction against Pennsylvania dairy, Rainbow Acres Farm

From and FDA Press Release:

Rainbow Acres distributed raw milk in violation of federal law

The Justice Department, at the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, has filed a complaint for permanent injunction against Daniel L. Allgyer, owner of the Rainbow Acres Farm, in Kinzers, Pa., for distributing unpasteurized (or “raw”) milk for human consumption in interstate commerce.

The complaint, filed on April 19, 2011, in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, also alleges that Allgyer violated federal law by misbranding the “raw” milk containers by failing to provide the label information required by law. Defendant Allgyer was served with the complaint earlier today.

Raw milk can contain a wide variety of harmful bacteria, including Listeria, E.coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, Yersinia, and Brucella.

“Drinking raw milk is dangerous and shouldn’t be consumed under any circumstances,” said Dara A. Corrigan, FDA’s associate commissioner for regulatory affairs. “FDA has warned the defendant on multiple occasions that introducing raw milk into interstate commerce is in violation of Federal law.”

FDA investigators determined during an inspection of Rainbow Acres Farm that the farm was producing, packaging, selling, and distributing unpasteurized and unlabeled milk for human consumption in interstate commerce.

The FDA issued a Warning Letter to Allgyer on April 20, 2010, informing him of the violations and stating that regulatory action might be taken. The farm has continued to operate in violation of federal law.

If the court grants an injunction, Allgyer may be prohibited from distributing unpasteurized milk and milk products for human consumption in interstate commerce.

  • Bill Anderson

    So this begs the question:
    Has Mr. Allgyer been implicated in an outbreak associated with his raw milk? I see no reference to a specific contamination or illness cluster from Mr. Allgyer’s raw milk in this press release.
    Or perhaps this is this just grandstanding by the FDA, to appease the big dairy processors who are getting nervous about increasing consumer demand for raw milk?
    I’m going to guess the latter. Perhaps you can prove me wrong, Bill.

  • Doc Mudd

    With more than half a million dairy cows producing over 10 billion pounds of milk annually, I rather doubt professional dairy farmers in Pennsylvania fear market competition from some obtuse little lawbreaker peddlng contraband miik out of state.
    Food safety is FDA’s intent and purpose. Break the law, flaunt the lawbreaking and you’re eventually gonna get a visit from law enforcement. No different from habitually running stop signs or pushing your luck with serial smash-and-grabs during broad daylight. Not exactly criminal masterminds, these raw milkie profiteers.
    Why wait for the inevitable outbreak before Mr. Allgyer’s dangerous behavior is curbed? Nope, definitely not masterminds, these characters.
    Good for FDA – happy to see them doing their jobs. That’s what we’re paying them to do.

  • I think this is fairly simple – he is breaking the law by selling raw milk across state lines.

  • Bill Anderson

    The only way that unjust laws are changed is when people break them. Ghandi did not win India’s independence by following the law. The civil rights movement did not end segregation by following Jim Crow laws.
    Please show me the evidence of contamination and/or illness from this farm. Otherwise, you have no leg to stand on, Bill. You are just a parrot of FDA and big dairy.

  • Please Bill, cut the generalization bullshit – I have sued “big dairy” and I have been a harsh critic of government and a number of issues – including food safety. I agree with you that unjust laws should be challenged, but doing so has consequences. I know that FTCLDF is fighting the interstate sale issue in court. It will be interesting to see the outcome.

  • Bill Anderson

    I’m not making a generalization, I’m just talking about this. Since there is no evidence of contamination or illness, why are you defending FDA? Clearly our “food safety” regulators are acting out of some motivation other than food safety, in this case.
    Hmm…. I wonder what that motivation could be…?

  • Bill, the farmer violated the law. You may not like the law (I presume he does not as well), but there are consequences for violating laws – unjust or not. I assume he feels the law is unjust as well and presumably expected that eventually the FDA might act. He can fight that law, as others are doing. He can decide to involve himself in politics to change the law, as others are doing. But, he broke the law which I assume was his motivation (and making a few bucks by selling raw milk). Enforcing the law is the FDA’s motivation – or, it should be.

  • Bill Anderson

    Well, the FDA does not always enforce the law evenly, as we see here:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/business/26milk.html
    hmm… I wonder why the selective enforcement? They have not cracked down on the illegal use of anti-biotics in CAFO dairy herds yet, but have decided to crack down on raw milk.
    hmm… I wonder why?

  • Bill Anderson

    Those articles only dealt with animals already sent to slaughter. And from the looks of it, they were pretty gentle with those farms, in comparison to how they are dealing with this case.
    The real question is why efforts to prevent those antibiotics from getting into the milk supply have been postponed? Unless things have changed since the NYT article was published in January, there is every reason to believe some of those anti-biotics are making it into the commercial milk supply and being ingested by consumers of dairy products.

  • Dog Doctor

    We are at it again.
    1) Dairy sited for selling interstate raw milk which has been against the law since the 1908’s. They were given a warning letter. FDA files injunction. We get the same reaction from the raw milk crowd, it is an illegal law. Well it has been held up in the courts so far.
    2) There is another outbreak link to raw milk, respond from raw milk crowd, denial and conspiracy theories. Outbreak associated with another food, raw milk crowd, see we are not as bad as they are, and go after them.
    3) Report on new study, showing outbreaks linked to raw milk and other countries, raw milk crowd, denial, and pseudo science on the benefit.
    Mr. Anderson, can I suggest a time and space saver for all of us since you don’t bring new information to the debate let’s just number your issues
    1) Drinking raw milk is a right
    2) Drinking raw milk is beneficial
    3) Selling raw milk preserves the family farm
    4) Everyone who is against raw milk is in league with evil forces.
    5) Modern agriculture is bad and the root of all problems, and if you support it you are bad.
    That way when you respond to one of Mr. Marler’s Post you can like this one you can put
    Bill A. “response 1” and after everyone points out that your wrong. Your next post can be Bill A. “response 4”. Another example would be responding to other posts, you could post Bill A “response 2”, followed by Bill A “response 4”. This would simplify everyone’s life.
    Many people including Minkpuppy, Doc Mudd, Mr. Marler and I provide lists and lists of articles from a variety of sources from FDA, CDC, NIH, etc. I try to stay away from US government studies since you are convinced that the evil US government is out to get you and the raw milk industry. I site studies from developing countries and Europe linking raw milk to illness since these areas doesn’t follow US agriculture practices and in many developing countries farming practices are very similar to situation that existed here at the turn of the century. But despite all the information you rehash the same statements and arguments hence the numbering of your issues.
    As to everyone being in league with big anything, I want to explain this once and for all. Trying to make it as clear as possible to all the conspiracy kooks, if you are a local, state, or Federal civil employee, you are bond by laws that dictate your ethics and conduct. You have to provide finical statements to the government organization that you are working for that you are NOT receiving money from any regulated industry or interest and you have to sit through annual ethics training on these issues. So despite all your comments, no public official received money from big dairy or Monsanto, etc. I have been with the Federal government for over 25 years in various regulatory agencies and from time to time been threaten by representatives from said industries when I have been doing my job enforcing the regulations. I was acquainted with one of the inspectors that were shot at the sausage plant in California that person along with others gave their lives protecting your food, so your comments about our duplicity with industry are outrageous. So let’s drop that line right now.
    Frankly, if you want to find and site a study that demonstrates the benefits of drinking raw milk lets discuss the merits of it. I did a Google search for Westin A Price because I wanted to review the foundations website when people were criticizing Mr. Marler’s and Real Raw Milk Facts and the first three items on Google were websites with articles discrediting Dr. Price and his studies. The only valid studies I have found related to reduction to asthma which is linked to living in too clean environment. The old adage about feed children pound dirt may be correct. In other words the protective effect may be just let kids go out and play in the environment to reduce asthma. Otherwise, the other studies have been discounted or dismissed. I am glad that you can site individual cases were people found relief from a variety of elements but the world is complex and other things changed in their environment as well, so individual cases don’t prove anything. They may suggest but not prove.
    As to the civil rights or right to drink raw milk, that works for informed consenting adults, just as we let people smoke, drink alcohol, the decisions we prescribe to adults but giving raw milk to children is the same as the child safety seat issue, vaccination, physicals, and the other items that Doc Raymond mentioned. Your defense of this farmer as civil disobedience is laughable, would you feel the same if someone lit a cigarette at the table next to you in a restaurant? What about someone giving a mixed drink to a child? What about running a stop sign or red light? What about printing your own money? There are number of laws that we find inconvenient but it doesn’t give us the right to break them. If you want to talk about selling raw milk in tobacco and liquor stores with clear information about the risks and for adult use only, we might have a starting point for discussion but otherwise the rights issue is dead. The constitution talks about providing for the general welfare, which is what public health is all about. Protecting the general welfare by protecting the public’s health is our mission.
    As to preserving the small family farm, there many other products and farming practices which can preserve the family farm from producing honey to local produce. One of the issues I have noticed about “small raw milk dairies” or cow shares is that you have people who purchase a few cows that have no familiarity with animal husbandry, or what is involved. We have seen in outbreaks where the animals are kept in poor conditions or not probably medicated or feed because these people didn’t know any better. If you have ever heard of organization called Heifer International, they have a very good program to help developing countries establish small farm animal agriculture and good educational material. Often they do not start with dairy animals but may start with chickens and move up. Free range poultry and egg collection is a much easier way to start in organic animal husbandry than the dairy business.
    In your discussion of the cheese making process, you are apparently following the old artisan traditions of if it works don’t change it which can work for the most part and is how beer and cheese were made for centuries before we understood the science. When the beer maker would take out his special paddle to stir the mixture to start the beer process, we know now that special paddle had his starter culture which he maintained but know the process now. But your description of microbes and how they interact with the environment shows a very limited understanding of the science. It is interesting that you attribute motivation to some microbes as protecting you and only attacking “evil” people or deserving people which I find very bizarre especially when I see it mentioned frequently are raw milk discussion, it is very disturbing. It appears that raw milk movement is trying to blame the victims for their illness see Mr. Marler’ next blog about that issue.
    Therefore Mr. Anderson unless you can bring new information to the table, let’s just numbers your reasons and we can move forward.

  • Bill Anderson

    Your understanding of me and my views is rather misguided, Dog Doctor. I’m not going to address everything you just said, because it is totally beside the point.
    My point here is that the FDA is grandstanding in order to appease big dairy. There is no evidence of illness or contamination from this farm, and there are much bigger issues FDA needs to be dealing with, like the contamination of the commercial milk supply with illegal antibiotics, and the use of rBGH in dairy herds.
    See this — http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers/gm-hormones-in-dairy/In-depth-Look-at-rbgh
    In light of these facts, it could not be more clear to me what FDA’s priorities are.

  • Dog Doctor

    Mr. Anderson, you need to see ‘Antibiotic residue avoidance in milk and dairy beef” http://www.progressivedairy.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5364:antibiotic-residue-avoidance-in-milk-and-dairy-beef&catid=49:management&Itemid=75
    “All farm bulk tank milk and tanker truck milk must be tested for evidence of antibiotic residue prior to processing, according to the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Milk found with antibiotic residues is dumped, with the dairy producer bearing the cost for the dumped milk.
    The National Milk Drug Residue Database is operated by an independent third party under contract with the FDA. According to the database report for 2009, 0.026 percent of all samples tested were positive for a drug residue, down from 0.104 percent in 1996 (Table 1).”
    You are miss representing the New York times article. The program being discussed is an enhanced antibiotic detection program. Under the PMO, milk is tested for antibiotics prior to processing.

  • Minkpuppy

    I think this article pretty much sums up our friend Bill. A and the raw milk crowd:

    The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science

    http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney

  • Dog Doctor

    Mr. Anderson which view is misguided. All points were taken from your previous postings on various blogs on this site.

  • Dog Doctor

    Also Mr. Anderson, it seems on this post you are harping on points 4 & 5

  • Minkpuppy

    Most dairy farmers know (I hope) that they have to dump the milk from cows being treated with antibiotics. As Dog Doctor pointed out, all milk has to be tested and if they get caught, they lose a lot of money. 0.026% of samples testing positive for antibiotics is not the problem Bill A. implies but there’s always room for improvement. The numbers should be zero. I would dearly love to see some of Bill A. “proof” that the milk supply is contaminated with illegal antibiotics.

    Antibiotics found in dairy cattle at slaughter is a totally seperate issue from antibiotics in milk. When it comes to the slaughter plant, the dairy and veal farmers that do get busted probably don’t view the animal itself in the same way they view the milk. They forget that the cow or calf will eventually enter the food chain also and don’t much care if they take a hit for antibiotics residue in the meat because they’re already losing money on the animal. They ignore the antibiotic withdrawal times in their haste to dump a worthless cow and that creates a whole new set of problems. Dairy producers must be educated to obey drug withdrawal times before sending animals to slaughter in the same manner that they should observe withdrawal times when discarding affected milk.

    In addition, there’s very few set tolerances for many drugs and chemicals residues because FDA, FSIS and the EPA can’t get it together and agree on anything. That’s the core issue that needs to be addressed.

    All this is a distraction of the real issue in this article. The farmer deliberately and knowingly broke the law prohibiting interstate sales of raw milk. It’s one thing to disagree with the law but there’s much better ways of addressing it than getting arrested and thrown in jail while your business is shut down and leaving your family to pick up the pieces as a consequence for you standing up for your principles.

  • L.L.

    Bill A.,
    Given the emerging problem with aged raw milk cheeses in the US, and the increasing number of illnesses/outbreaks linked to fluid raw milk since 2000 (following a reduction in the 1990s), it would seem the regulators responsible for dairy food safety at FDA and in the state agriculture/public health departments are exactly on-target with their priorities. The only critique might be that many of these governmental programs are underfunded and therefore unable to conduct surveillance and outbreak investigations as thoroughly and timely as would be ideal to protect the public health (speaking for all infectious diseases, not just foodborne).
    Perhaps not a perfect analogy, but regarding your point about it being unjust to enforce dairy laws unless there are illnesses/outbreaks…similarly, would you suggest that it is unjust to punish someone for driving drunk if there was no proof they had injured or killed someone at the time they were caught? Should they just be let go and allowed to continue the illegal behavior until they are caught hurting someone?

  • “The only way that unjust laws are changed is when people break them.”
    . . . . …uh…no, that’s just lawbreaking, it doesn’t change anything.
    “…there are much bigger issues FDA needs to be dealing with, like the contamination of the commercial milk supply with illegal antibiotics…”
    . . . . …uh…except, there is no contamination – routinely tested, all of it, all of the time.
    “…the FDA is grandstanding in order to appease big dairy…”
    . . . . …uh…no, actually FDA is simply doing its job, enforcing the law, God bless ’em.
    I dunno. Liederkranz for brains?
    That’s the most charitable possible explanation I can offer. Sad, really.
    Cranial gray cheese is a terrible thing to waste.

  • Bill Anderson

    I am well aware of the existing safeguards against antibiotics in the commercial milk supply. However, the NYT article I linked to was referring to antibiotics which are NOT currently screened for in loads of milk, but which are showing up at unacceptable levels in dairy animals that have already been slaughtered. This would suggest that these anti-biotics are probably present in the commercial milk supply, but are not being detected because there is no rapid test developped for those antibiotics.
    And let’s not forget about rBGH/rBST. It should have never been approved by the FDA to begin with. Do you really believe that there is “no significant difference” between the milk of cows treated with rBGH and those not? The FDA does, but this judge looked at the scientific evidence and flatly contradicted FDA, exposing them as handmaidens of big dairy:
    http://news.change.org/stories/federal-court-strikes-down-ohio-ban-on-rbgh-free-milk-label
    As I said… this Rainbow Acres Farm is just grandstanding by the FDA to appease big dairy. It really has nothing to do with food safety. Show me the evidence of illness or contamination from this farm?

  • Bill Anderson

    Another corporate-posioning travesty that our regulatory agencies are ignoring:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTG05oMG3EY

  • Doc Mudd

    “Show me the evidence of illness or contamination from this farm”
    OK, now this is just precious cute!
    Real, documented medical risk being long established but having arbitrarily ruled out prevention, just how many victims must there be, in your amateur opinion, to finally justify FDA action?
    .
    So then, there arises this little conundrum from your new gambit…
    …if you would be so courteous, Bill A, show us documented irrefutable repeatable scientific evidence of injury from rBST, GMO, pasteurization, CAFO, etc., etc., before you go off on your next spurious anti-agriculture rant. We insist on a published body count before we indulge any more of your raving Luddite conjecture.
    Hoist on your own petard, old chum. Funny how this sort of thing only happens when you venture out into the real world, never when you’re safely barricaded in your cozy internet echo chamber over at http://www.thecomplete, uh…complete something or other.

  • Bill Anderson

    There has not been a single death from drinking fluid raw milk in the U.S. in over 30 years.
    On the other hand… http://www.naturalnews.com/021959.html
    Avandia body count: 80,000 and counting
    This is an FDA-approved prescription pharmacutical. It took me about 30 seconds to find that link. Here are some more resources about Avandia:
    http://www.gaia-health.com/articles251/000269-fda-tries-to-silence-info-documenting-avandia-deaths.shtml
    http://www.avandiadeaths.org/
    This is the manufactuer of Avandia:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlaxoSmithKline
    “[GlaxoSmithKline] is the world’s third largest pharmaceutical company measured by revenues (after Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer).”
    Need I say any more? FDA is in the pocket of big business. I could go on, if you’d like me to.

  • Bill Anderson

    http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/lies-damned-lies-and-food-safety/#more-22566
    “Risk Assessment in the hands of centralized corruptible agencies is no protection for consumers as the disease and health epidemic in the U.S. linked to over processed, industrial foods shows. Even while the U.S. is at the epicenter of the food related public health crises, the U.S. government is trying to export its Food laws which deregulate the industry and over regulate ordinary citizens and small enterprise. This deregulation of the big and toxic and over regulation of the small and ecological is at the core of Food Fascism …” – Vandana Shiva

  • Bill Anderson

    Also, why did I just totally forgot to mention this HUGE skeleton in the closet of the PMO and big dairy?
    Johnes disease.
    It can survive pasteurization temperatures, and is linked to human crohnes disease.
    http://www.crohns.org/congress/index.htm (scroll down to post entitled “PARA Submits Package to Agriculture Committee”)
    http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2010/05/29/crohns-disease-conspiracy-or-cover-up/
    http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2010/09/s-510-and-crohns-disease.html
    According to studies done in the UK, Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis can be cultured from 5% – 20% of commercial pasteurized milk samples taken from the grocery store shelf.
    BUT you are trying to tell me that raw milk from a farm which has never caused illness and from which there is no evidence of contamination is a bigger threat to public health and food safety?
    I think Vandana Shiva hit the nail on the head. The agenda at FDA is not food safety. Their agenda is food fascism.

  • Doc Mudd

    Public health and law inforcement are “Food Fascism”, in what parallel universe?
    Seriously, no reasonable person would take their food safety advice from Vandana Shiva, a mouthy obese elitist Indian poseur who argues for adoption of inefficient farming techniques to the caloric detriment of her far, far less corpulent socially ostracized countrymen.
    Shouting the term “fascism” at this point in the discussion is a colorful and not entirely unexpected touch. It’s just the bugler sounding retreat.
    Perhaps you should retrench in your cozy nurturing echo chamber website where you can exhange and embellish dumb ideas among interested fellow crackpots and amateur anarchists. Where facts and common sense are not permitted to conflict with your imaginative science-fiction storytelling. Where petty outlaws are admired as catalysts of elitists’ advancement. Where consumer welfare and public health are regarded as fascist obstacles to free enterprise. Where chanting an absurd notion over and over and over and over causes it to magically become true!
    In the meantime, FDA has work to do.

  • Dog Doctor

    Mr. Anderson, I can see Doc Mudd beat me to the punch on your posts.
    Actually, it would be refreshing if we could have a rational discussion. Where everyone brings their facts to the table and we debate one topic at time instead of jumping all over and focus on raw milk issues.
    Mr. Anderson, in reviewing your comments on this blog, I would note that you followed the outline I suggested. You started on the rights issue, that this dairy had the right to violate a law that you don’t agree with. You followed by posts that were basically stating the government, big agriculture is evil and in conspiracy against raw dairies which you stayed on for several posts. You followed by posts where you pointed out things that you consider worse than raw milk with the concept that this issue should be dealt with prior to milk.
    Finally, you posted about Johnnes, you may not realize that protecting the public from Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis is a reason that many public health officials are considering and advocating raising the temperatures requirement of pasteurization.
    You also point out a study from the UK where people can purchase raw milk. This fact is something you and other raw milk supporters like to point out.
    This lends itself to several questions
    1) What documented protections do you have that raw milk does not expose people to Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis?
    2) How much do you know about Johnness disease in dairy herds?
    3) Do you know that it can be found in small herds as well as large?
    4) That many times it is sub clinical (meaning no visible signs or symptoms).
    When I was in practice, the average herd size was around 100 head with about 60 to 80 cows milking at any one time. Most of the operations were small family farms, and most were well run but a small number still had cows with Johnnes so this is a not CAFO only problem which is what you like to jump on. From experience, the biggest factor on the health of the animals on a farm is having a good dedicated manager / farmer more than anything else. I have seen poor conditions in small and large farms.
    Some of small farms have been little more than junkyards offering “organic” meat which was slaughter in exempt status. So you have to judge each farm on its merits and stop the generalizations that small farms solve all the problems they don’t. If we ever get to a formal debate, we discuss the various issues involved in various farming models including animal health, environmental impact etc.
    In Summary Mr. Anderson, jumping around in posts, contradictions and lack of valid data sources does not nothing to prove your arguments.

  • Bill Anderson

    You insisted on a body count. So I showed you a body count, from FDA approved drugs. 80,000 from Avandia and counting. Do I need to post the links again? Do I need to produce more examples of body counts and damaged health from FDA?
    Now show me, where is the body count from drinking raw milk? Oh that’s right, there isn’t one!! Not a single person has died from drinking raw milk in the US in over 30 years.
    I am aware that subclinical Johnes can exist on both large and small farms, and that both large and small farms can have good or poor management. But the fact of the matter is that most use of Posilac (brand name of rBST) and GMO crops happens on the large farms. Most use of organic and pasture-based farming techniques happens on small farms. There are always some exceptions to this trend (I know a farm in eastern Wisconsin that pasture grazes 500 dairy cows, and there are a few small farms that still use posilac and gmo crops) but in general, small farms have practices that are more consistant with good health. Also, small farms with fewer animals have a smaller chance of contamination of the bulk tank milk.
    Now, go see the comments here: http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Raw-milk-under-scrutiny-after-North-Texas-illnesses-120321579.html?commentPage=0#comments
    If this is any indication, I’d say that public health agencies in this country have a MAJOR PR problem. I think this thread is the perfect demonstration of why. I have provided numerous links with scientific evidence, showing corruption and abuse at FDA, and how FDA flagarently ignores legitimate public health concerns when they don’t fit into the narrow agenda of big business. You on the other hand have resorted to obfuscation and calling names (Luddite, mouthy obese elitist Indian poseur, crackpots and amateur anarchists, Liederkranz for brains, etc… mostly coming from one poster)
    And you are supposed to be the represntatives of the “public health” and “food safety” community? Is it any wonder why people have no faith in you guys?
    Now please show me the evidence of contamination or illness from Rainbow Acres Farm, or admit that you are wrong, and that the law FDA is claiming to enforce is an unjust protectionist racket for big dairy.

  • Bill Anderson

    Also, I have to wonder, if most of the folks in the raw milk movement are “amateur anarchists”, then what does a “professional anarchist” look like?
    Perhaps this?
    http://thebovine.wordpress.com/
    Michael Schmidt has been successful in convincing the courts to exempt his cow-share from the Ontario compulsary pasteurization laws. He is now being represented by the Candadian equivilent of the ACLU in the milk marketing board’s appeal.
    Guess where I got that Vandana Shiva article?
    http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/lies-damned-lies-and-food-safety/#more-22566

  • Minkpuppy

    Bill A. says “Show me the evidence of illness or contamination from this farm”.

    Well here’s the kicker Bill A. The FDA doesn’t have to have evidence of illness or contamination from this farm BECAUSE IT’S AGAINST FEDERAL LAW TO SHIP UNPASTUEURIZED MILK INTO INTERSTATE COMMERCE!

    Why is that so hard for you to wrap your brain around? No one has the right to break the law just because they don’t agree with it.

    I think the drunk driving analogy is a good one. Should I go free because I didn’t kill or injure anyone even though my blood alcohol content is over the legal limit? NO! I need to be pulled off the road and thrown in the drunk tank for the night, after I refuse the breathalyzer, of course (because I do have the right to refuse that in the state of Texas).

    This farmer broke the law. FDA is enforcing the law as is their right. End of story. This has nothing to do with antibiotic residues, or Johne’s disease or anything else. The focus of this discussion should be on the LAWS regarding raw milk only. Stop trying to cloud the issue.

    Besides you just shot your argument all to hell when you said current pasteurization temperatures don’t kill Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis. Anyone with even an ounce of intelligence would then deduce that if pastuerization doesn’t kill the bacteria then it MUST BE PRESENT IN THE RAW MILK.

    If you’re going to make claims like that then back it up and show Dog Doctor and I some proof that Johne’s is not a risk in raw milk. Betcha can’t do it.

  • Minkpuppy

    Oh yeah, let’s not forget. The laws preventing unpastuerized milk from entering interstate commerce existed LONG before CAFO’s and “Big Dairy” so lets just drop the whole regulatory officials being pawns of industry crap, shall we?
    Industry hasn’t paid my salary since 1994. I don’t do a damn thing for industry, I do my job for the consumers who want safe food. I do my best within the scope of my duties, ethics regulations, the federal regulations and laws to reign in industry. I have rules to follow that don’t include cowtowing to the company I’m inspecting. Inspectors that are bending over backwards for industry lose their jobs pretty quickly.
    If we’re not doing our jobs as you say, it’s because YOU (meaning the congress who represents you) hasn’t given us the scope, funding, staffing and and authority to do so. Put that in your pipe and smoke it buddy.

  • Dog Doctor

    Bill A. if you really want a body count walk through any cemetery that is over hundred years old and look at the graves of children. That is why various milk sanitation, purity and pasteurization acts were passed 1899 Manchester Corporation Act of 1899. In Chicago in 1908, you had the first milk pasteurization ordinance. We are trying to prevent the events of the turn of the century where 25% of the foodborne illnesses were link to milk. We are trying to learn from history and not repeat it. In 1900, in the US as an infant you had a 1 in 3 chance of dying before your first birthday. Many factors contributed that including poor sanitation and contaminated milk. In 2000, the infant mortality rate was less than 10 deaths per 100,000 (or 0.01%). We can debate all the factors involved but historical studies attribute to improved pre natal care, pasteurization of milk, vaccination, and improved sanitation so there is your body count. If we hadn’t made these improvements, it is estimated that in 2000; 500,000 infants would have died in their first year of life (page 148 of “Public health: what it is and how it works” Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2009). Or you want look at http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com and the discussion of difference between milk in the 1930’s and now. Bill A. for your body count, I suggest that we take a quarter of the babies saved through improvements in public health representing the average percentage of food borne outbreaks related to milk at the turn of the century so 25% of 500,000 that is 125,000 is that enough bodies for you? Mr. Anderson that half million lives saved is why we do public health and why we are fighting to maintain the progress that we have made over the century. Many of the battles to improve public health have been hard fought against those that fight the new, fight spending on civic improvements such as water treatment plants, sewage treatment plants, new regulations, and new education but reducing infant mortality from 30% to 0.01% is accomplishment we are proud of achieving. Reducing milk borne outbreaks form 25% to just a few a years is another one.

  • Bill Anderson

    I can’t believe that our own “public health” experts are so ignorant of history, blinded by dogmas, that I am now the ones educating them.
    A history lesson for you:
    The milk that caused so many infant deaths during the industrial revolution is NOT the same raw milk that is being sold for raw consumption today. The crowded urban dairies, where cows ate a diet primarily of spent grains from distilleries and breweries, were indeed breeding grounds for disease, and a major cause of infant mortality. Those “distillery dairies” were the precursors to the modern CAFO dairies which I rail against.
    However, raw milk produced in the countryside from pasture-grazed cows, and sanitarily harvested by a dedicated professional dairyman, was the milk that was reccomended by physicians, pedetricians, and medical doctors of the time. Medical doctors even created “Medical Milk Comissions” in many major urban centers, to inspect farms producing certified raw milk for those who could afford it. Pasteurization, on the other hand, was merely a “band-aid” solution for the filthy milk from the urban distillery dairies, that was promoted by wealthy businessman Nathaniel Strauss. MDs and public health professional, of the time, by and large preferred certified raw milk from the countryside over pastuerized filthy urban milk.
    My how far we’ve come since then…
    http://www.realmilk.com/untoldstory_1.html
    I do not dispute with you that there is good reason that pasteurization was instituted in that particular historical context, but we are not living in urban slums of the industrial revolution anymore. Modern milk harvest and storage technology, combined with advanced labratory testing can ensure the purity of milk without the neccessity of pasteurization.
    You can continue frothing at the mouth with your CAFO, PMO, NCIMS, GMO, rBGH, Monsanto, FDA dogmas. But it is pretty clear that public opinion is turning against you. More and more people want fresh whole foods, and the longer you continue to try to limit people’s choice with authortarian tactics such as these, the more damaging it will be to the repetuation of your profession. I welcome it. I would love to see the public turn wholesale against the failed “public health” profession which has overseen unprecedented increases in lifestyle diseases such as obesity and diabetes over the last 30 years. Public opinion is working again you, the more you do this kind of stuff.
    Keep up the good work guys, making yourself look like food fascists.
    Now show me the evidence of contamination or illness from Rainbow Acres Farm, or admit that you are wrong.

  • Doc Mudd

    Heh, some cheesy “history lesson”.
    A choppy revisionist history spun hard and flung against the wall, hoping it sticks.
    Our self-described ‘historian’ managed, incredibly, to overlook the bringing under control of bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis by test & slaughter. Likewise, deftly skipped over early successes bringing udder infections under control, once again by test & slaughter. Succeeded in entirely missing only the most pertinent public health developments ever in the dairy industry, after pasteurization!
    Not much of a historian, at all. And a mediocre propagandist when it comes down to details.
    Also not much of a confidence builder when one contemplates the probable authenticity and safety of the over-hyped ‘modern’ “raw milk that is being sold for raw consumption today”, as hawked by our unsolicited ‘history teacher’. Oh, yes ma’am, different from raw milk of the good ol’ days, but also exactly the same…depending on romantic nostalgic expectations of the about-to-be-fleeced raw milk customer. Just tell ’em what they want to hear and take their money.
    Snake oil sales pitchmen certainly haven’t changed since the early days of the industrial revolution, that much we can discern. They are alive and well in the raw milk movement today – Samuel Hopkins Adams must be spinning in his grave.
    http://www.museumofquackery.com/ephemera/oct7-01.htm
    “Cheesy” pretty much covers it.

  • Minkpuppy

    Ok–I’ve tried to respond twice now but my crappy wireless broadband connection is crapping out on my. Crappity crap crap crap.
    Which is why we pastueruize milk. Crap. In the milk. Comes from cows and goats, on pasture in CAFOS wherever you find cows there’s crap. But somehow, the crap from cows raised on organic pastures is magically disease-free and the cows fart sunshine instead of methane that causes global warming.
    I suggest everyone read the article I linked to earlier and use their suggestions in approaching young Bill. Here it is again:
    The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science
    http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney

  • Dog Doctor

    Mr. Anderson, I am truly torn between responding to your post either by laughter or taking it seriously. Laughter because this is typically well program response, If you respond I noticed you are posting on the next blog so if you follow your typically pattern you will not post on this blog again, I expect in all caps. If you want to see how you are being manipulated I suggest you search You Tube for Billionaire’s Tea Party ( or read it at http://www.mediaed.org/assets/products/153/transcript_153.pdf) since this one of your favorite information sources.
    My image of you at this point is someone who is frustrated that people refuse to see your point since you are so absolutely sure in your beliefs and can’t understand why other people just don’t concede. Hopefully you will take Mr. Marler’s advice and relax a little.
    On a serious side, no one has to prove an outbreak or contamination, selling raw milk for human consumption is illegal in the United States until someone changes law. The Federal and State agencies enforce the laws, so contact your representative to change them. Raw milk is not the only material that is controlled in interstate commerce, try buying cigarettes in one state and selling them in another state or just using them. A couple in New York a few years ago was fined $30,000 for going to North Carolina to buy their cigarettes for their person use and not paying New York State and City Tax. Give FDA credit for not fining people for buying milk for their own consumption and taking it across state lines. Fireworks and firearms are other items that are controlled in interstate commerce that are permitted in some states and not others. Sorry that is way life is.
    The other thing to consider is that this dairy was warned a year ago, and they could have done what so many others have done to skirt the law. Sell it as bath milk, pet food, or developed a cow share program. I am not encouraging these practices but they are also not state secrets at this point.
    On the contamination issue, you brought up Johnne’s disease and Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis. Please prove this herd was negative and how raw milk can protect consumers from this disease? You brought it up? Another potential concern is bovine leukosis’ virus. Also what sampling has been done to prove this herd is negative for Salmonella or E. coli O157:H7.
    On the history issue, have you read any text books on the term of century conditions or gone to a library and look at old papers? In High School and College, I had to use printed material as reference material and didn’t have the internet to go to, so I have read several reports and articles about conditions during that time. Like most good propaganda you friend as some things correct but omits critical issues, and over generalize others. There was a scandal about the dairies he describes and there were people who also sold diluted milk, chalky water, or other substances as milk. I grew up in the southeast and when I graduated veterinary college, worked with some wonderful dairymen who were near retirement but around at that time. These gentlemen took great pride in their work ethic, and their trade. They were some of the pioneers in cooperatives and actually fought with public health to develop milk standards and pasteurization to defeat those were trying to defraud and injury the public.
    So Mr. Anderson, you can scream back about the evil FDA, CAFO’s and Monsanto, etc but it will not change history, or the law.
    A final thought to consider before you respond, those of us who have been in regulatory medicine are often threaten, berated, and belittled. We have a joke about arguing with inspectors, it is like wrestling a pig in mud, you have to watch out he might like it. So save your insults for someone who cares, and just won’t laugh.
    Let’s have some facts, not just conspiracy theory, and hoopla. Please cite a journal article.

  • L.L.

    Bill A.,
    There two things that are really exasperating reading through all this back-and-forth with you: 1) you speak as an authority, but then don’t answer the questions people ask (instead you change the subject to something about big ag, GMOs, etc.) and 2) you make these wildly wrong statements about the other posters and their motivations. Admittedly, on the latter, you don’t know the identity of most of the bloggers so it is easier to stereotype them into your profile of anyone who questions raw milk (as if “we” all fit into the same mold). Outside of your limited experience with WI DATCP and blogging with strangers, have you met any public health workers or researchers (the likely profile of those writing on this blog)? It gets amusing reading your descriptions of people you’re blogging with knowing how off base you are in your assumptions. You might consider broadening your views by meeting some real people that work in food safety and have concerns about raw milk consumption, especially for children and infants. BTW, 100s of food safety nerds are coming to your state this summer; perhaps you should stop by, visit the Real Raw Milk Facts booth, listen to some talks…maybe learn something factual about food safety, science, and the people who work in this profession: http://www.foodprotection.org/about-us/news-releases/80/iafp-2011-to-be-held-in-milwaukee-wisconsin/ .

  • Bill, I’ll be there. How about a “beer summit?”. And, if you are spending too much time on the Internet and not making cheese, I can spot you the entry fee.

  • Minkpuppy

    It seems the raw milk lobby isn’t the only one campaigning against pasteurization. The raw honey folks are also. No way in heck am I feeding raw honey to an infant.
    http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/blog/148003/11/04/28/honey-were-not-feeding-sam-honey-few-more-months?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+barfblog-latest+%28barfblog%29
    What the heck is going on in this country? Have we forgotten that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it? The Raw Milk Ordinance and laws like it were put in place to prevent conditions like Mr. Anderson describes from ever happening again. Could they be tweaked and revised? Yes, I think so but only if it’s backed up with SOUND SCIENCE and workable and enforceable regulations for a raw milk certification program.
    I don’t care if I have the right to drink raw milk or not. I don’t drink milk. Can’t stand the taste of it unless it’s loaded with tons of that evil, unhealthy chocolate or made into cheese, yogurt or ice cream. You can drink raw milk all you want and enjoy the placebo effects it gives you. I’ll stick to my pasteurized cheese and dairy products and I would appreciate it if you keep your grubby paws off my dead milk. AT least I know that my dead milk won’t kill me with E. coli or TB or something. Thank you.

  • Doc Mudd

    It isn’t your “right to drink raw milk or not” that’s in question here, Minkpuppy, it’s your right to SELL raw milk…to gullible consumers…for profit…without regard for their welfare…or that of their kids…or their elderly relatives. It’s interstate commerce in a knowingly risky product that’s the issue here.

  • Bill cav ok

    Theres that general welfare article popping up again, now which specific article was that. Sorry it’s not. it’s preamble . The same one they used for the new healthcare system .

  • Theresa Kentner

    Thanks for that link, L.L. I will have to look up more information on this group and this Food Safety Conference.

  • Bill Anderson

    The history of dairying is very complex, as I’m sure we’d all agree. Do you want to know the history of some rare old-world variety of cheese? I could write numerous essays if you want me to, on French, Swiss, Italian, and English varieties, and the history of those cheeses. It would all be beside the point here.
    I was simply addressing the propoganda being presented about raw milk being a cause of infant mortality. It is true, it was a major cause of infant mortality, IN A VERY NARROW HISTORICAL CONTEXT — in urban slums during the industrial revolution.
    Humans have been husbanding dairy animals for thousands of year without pasteurization. For most of human history, FERMENTATION was the preferred method of food safety and preservation. If raw milk was really as inherintly dangerous as you make it out to be, the practice of dairying would have fallen out of favor long ago.
    I have attempted to have an intelligent conversation with numerous public health people about this raw milk issue, but most of them refuse to discuss it. There are steps that can be taken to ensure the safety of raw milk, particuarily raw milk cheese. The French seem to be getting along fine with their soft-ripened raw milk cheese aged much less than 60 days. Its true there are occasional outbreaks, but that is true of all foods including pasteurized dairy products. I don’t need you marching out a litany of small outbreaks from France. I could do the same for any food you name.
    It is the authoritarian “food fascist” attitude of our so-called public health community which is both responsible for many of the heightened risks of raw milk consumption (as compared to nations where it is accepted and regulated), and for the epidemic of lifestyle-related diseases over the last 30 years (obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, etc…)
    Let me know how your food fascism… ahem, sorry… food protection summit goes. Personally, I am prefer more democratic approachs to issues of food safety, such as the concept of food soveriegnty. I’ll let you know when the next conference on that topic is (you missed the last one, unfortunately, it was in March, here in Wisconsin).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_sovereignty

  • Minkpuppy

    *face palm* I was being sarcastic Mudd. Dealing with illogical arguments brings that out in me. Never mind that I’m exhausted from my duties as an ass-kissing shill for industry. Being a food fascist is hard work you know. (more sarcasm BTW).

    Our little “friend” seems to think breaking laws he doesn’t like is his right. We’ve all reminded him that it’s the law we’re dealing with here but he keeps resorting to his tired old lines about “rights” and food fascism etc.

    This thread has spiralled out of control and should have been curtailed by a moderator long before this point. But As Dog Doctor said, Fighting with an inspector is like wrestling with a pig in the mud. After awhile, you realize the pig likes it. For some reason, I just can’t stop poking this guy with a stick.

  • Bill Anderson

    Here we see that the public health authorities in Canada have refused to accept laboratory samples for farms selling raw milk.
    http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/first-cow-share-canada-accredited-raw-milk-farm-targeted-by-govt-agents/
    In other words, they WANT people to get sick from raw milk, by denying producers the resources to ensure the safety of their product.
    We must ask ourselves again: Is this really about food safety? Cleary it is not. If food safety was truely the agenda, they would be happy to accept the laboratory samples and report the tests back without harrassment or discriminatory treatment.

  • Mary McGonigle-Martin

    Thanks everyone for the great discussion. I really enjoyed it.
    Bill Anderson, the 2nd edition of the Untold Story of Milk is full of lies. Just ask Sally Fallon about chapter 15, 16 and 17th. These are the chapters she personally edited in the book. I’m sure you can understand why it would rub me the wrong way that she would spread lies in print about my son’s illness. It is very disturbing and actually sick that someone would stoop this low. I know that there is a “war” going on regarding raw milk, but my child was an innocent victim. This is the type of bullshit that needs to stop.
    Just let me know if you would ever like to speak to me. I can give you an ear full that you will never forget.

  • Minkpuppy

    Well Mr. Anderson, maybe it’s your approach to the public health officials that’s the problem here. If you come at them like you do here, I’m not surprised the door gets slammed in your face. Us federal regulatory officers get a wee bit bitchy when we’re told we’re fascists. We don’tmake the laws but we do have to enforce them. We put up with a lot of Bullshit that makes you look like a schoolkid on the playground so fling your insults all you want. It won’t help your cause any. As far as propagandA goes, the only thing I see is the slop you spew. Everyone else here is dealing with validated research and data.

    We’re not just talking infant mortality here- adults like my great-great grandparents were also victims of TB contracted through raw milk. Milk was the major vehicle for TB in the late 1800’s and it wasn’t confined to just those urban dairies you like to blame. I’m skeptical that the folks back then had the resources to certify that their clean raw milk was free of TB or brucellosis or listeria. Microbiology wasn’t that advanced in the late 1800’s.

    The milk laws were put in place so that we don’t ever have to experience the public health issues associated with raw milk ever again. We have to be very careful about loosening those laws and those changes have to be Based in good science not spurious health claims. I have yet to see you produce one scientific journal article to support your claims. Your only defense is to keep throwing up that we’re fascists and indoctrinated by dogma.

    I deal in logic and science when it comes to public health. You provide neither.

  • Dog Doctor

    “Bill cav ok”
    In case you missed the preamble and section 8
    The Constitution of the United States of America
    [Preamble ]
    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
    Section 8.
    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
    I know the ” tea party” wants to ignore that part of the Constitution since serves their masters see “billionaire’s tea party” But “general welfare” is in the document twice.

  • Irritated Consumer

    Hi everyone. I am not going to get into the debate regarding right/wrong with raw milk. I do agree that it is a subject that needs further research, etc. There are obvious pros to the pasteurized milk, but I have seen cases where, for health reasons, families started using raw milk & their health (specifically the kids) improved remarkably. I see both sides of the coin, but what I see in this blog are 2 distinct groups (those for raw milk, those against raw milk) who keep talking AT each other & not listening. Each side picks out what they consider the “weak” points & attack…with the other side then counter-attacking. I DO believe that our government monitoring agencies do sometimes miss the forest for the trees.
    In this case, what is to be gained from going after Rainbow Acres? So, the owner stops shipping across state lines. What’s to stop the consumers who have been using this raw milk from finding another way to get their milk? With our law enforcement resources stretched so thin already, do we really want to set ourselves up for Prohibition-type shipping? Why not find a way to fix the laws &, for those of you who really believe that FDA, etc, do a really good job of testing, tracking, etc, our food, have the FDA monitor the raw milk farms to see what happens? You are talking about taking a natural product that has been consumed for thousands of years & turning it into a type of illegal drug. Bottom line, just as we have choices in vegetables, etc, that are “organic” vs non-organic (ie, treated with hormones, drugs, etc, that get into our systems), we should have the choice in milk. And, in case you’re wondering, I buy my nicely pasteurized milk at a supermarket – but, it is a choice. As I stated above, I have seen the positive effects of raw milk, and have had the opportunity to purchase it, but have chosen not to. This choice was simply due to financial considerations, NOT to the issues that have been debated.
    I feel that, in trying to make our food supply safer, we have gone overboard & our bodies are so full of drug residue from the cows, etc, that our bodies are losing the ability to produce better immune systems. Do I think that someone with a compromised immune system should be forced to consume raw or organic food or drink? Absolutely not! But, our country was founded by a group of people who were trying to get away from an oppressive government that made all of the choices for them; now, we are moving into that territory. I believe that we should be allowed to make our own choices about the food we consume. Should raw dairy farms & organic farms be monitored? Absolutely!! Otherwise, we’d have the farm equivalent of “puppy mills” where uneducated people suddenly want to become “raw dairy farmers” or “organic produce/beef, etc farmers” in order to make big money, quickly. These are the types of people that would let their dairy cows eat substandard feed, etc, that would lead to the diseases that we’re trying to avoid.
    The one thing of the above debate that I DID find disturbing was the comparison of the drunk driver. This is like comparing apples and oranges. If a person chooses to purchase and consume raw milk, that person is running the risk of hurting him/her self, and no one else. Of course, if they give it to their child, same thing. As parents, we have the right to feed our children as we see fit, as long as we are providing them with all of the necessary nutrients (ie, healthy, well-balanced diet) that they need. If raw milk were to be made a choice, it could come with the FDA’s typical warning label “Not recommended for __________” and again, be left to the parents to make the best choice for their children. Again, the stress being EDUCATED choices. Anyway, I digress and back to the comparison. A person choosing to drink raw milk is making a personal choice the affects himself (tired of being politically correct, so will use the traditional “male” reference, if you don’t mind). A person choosing to get drunk makes same type of personal choice; however, it is not a “personal” choice affecting no one else once he gets behind the wheel of a car. Now his choice is about to possibly inflict damage on someone who has not chosen to be hurt or killed by said driver. So, while the basic premise is the same (both are based on our right to make choices on what we consume), the point of this is “should I be allowed to continue to drive drunk until I hit, hurt, or kill someone?” which has nothing to do with someone choosing to drink raw milk. Last I checked, raw milk does not make people drunk & therefore does not cause someone else’s death.
    Drunk driving should be against the law……….drinking raw milk? This should be a choice, not one controlled by laws, but yes, monitored for safety. Is this an easy prospect? Not at all, but what we should ALL be working toward.

  • Thanks for taking the tone down a notch. “Choice” – we all want to make sure we are not ever told what to do. “I should be able to do as I please with myself and my kids.” In theory that makes a lot of sense. With raw milk, vaccines and seat belts I am not so sure.
    Raw milk in many ways is marketed as a wonder drug to people – especially children and it has had very bad results – http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/real-life-stories/. Not one of the parents in these videos ever thought for a moment that raw milk could kill their kid or the kid visiting their home or the kid who gets infected secondarily.
    I agree with you on education, that is why I funded http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com to help tell both sides of the story.

  • L.L.

    As noted, drunk driving isn’t a perfect analogy, but has some similarities in the context of this post about a farmer breaking a law and whether he should be punished if he didn’t injure anyone (that we know of). And, raw milk is not always a personal choice. Many of the agents that can contaminate raw milk are communicable diseases. This recent study from CT reports two children who didn’t drink raw milk, but became ill through secondary and tertiary contact with a child that had become sick from drinking contaminated milk. The bacteria, E. coli O157 in this case, is shed in the ill persons’ stool and can spread from person to person through lapses in hygiene. Thus, the risks from drinking raw milk are a public health concern, not just a personal choice…
    Link to CT paper: http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/51/12/1411.full.pdf+html

  • Doc Mudd

    Well stated, L.L.
    The considerable ripple effect of raw milkie negilgence is too often overlooked or played down.
    Incredible, also, that WAPF is not culpable with their hyperbolic cheerleading woo.

  • L.L.

    “Incredible, also, that WAPF is not culpable with their hyperbolic cheerleading woo.”
    The Ethicurean published a piece on that topic a couple years ago: http://www.ethicurean.com/2009/07/20/raw-milk-mem/

  • Actually, WAFP can be liable if a consumer relies on their propaganda to purchase raw milk and their child is injured.

  • JJ

    Everyone buying the milk KNOWS ITS RAW MILK. THEY WANT RAW MILK. THEY SEEK OUT RAW MILK.
    Maybe we can get “Medical Raw Milk” if we cant get the real thing.

  • Theresa Kentner

    I am also glad that the tone went down a notch. I was surprised how my honest concern for keeping food safe and learning more some how got me linked to fascism.
    Some of us, I am sure all of us, really do want to do the right thing, but when the discussion turns personal, petty and strays off topic, it sours the whole thing. …hmmm

  • Dog Doctor

    I wonder if we could split the issue into each part and limit the debate and use the rules that Bill M proposed so many months ago.
    1) Discussion of what is in the milk that comes from the cow – Defining the risk
    2) Chemical composition of milk raw vs pasteurized – Is there any potential benefit
    3) The environment of the human digestive track – do whole, active proteins get absorbed in GI tract – benefit issue.
    4) Discussion of what food safety processes that out there that are not being used.
    Each discussion would be limited to referenced, reliable, and repeatable studies.

  • Jim Ignikowski

    We deal with this raw milk issue in the dairy state. I grew up drinking raw milk. I buy raw milk from a local small farm. It took me a while through friends to find a farmer that would sell to me. I like raw milk, taste better than store bought, I also make my own butter and cheese. I recently bid on a small farm, only 7 acres, didn’t get it, but still trying so I can eat, drink what the hell I want. Screw the FDA. They are making criminals out of decent hardworking Americans. Piss on the FDA, and anyone else who wants to tread on me and my rights. Its like that other fallacy, more initials, DEA. Bunch of morons and there war on drugs. What a joke.

  • Theresa Kentner

    Jim Ignikowski–isn’t that the same name as a Taxi driver from NY?

  • Joni Aarden

    This is so ridiculous. If the FDA was so concerned with protecting the health of Americans, it would simply need to walk down the aisles of any typical American grocery store where they would find THOUSANDS of ingredients that are undoubtedly inflicting disease and sickness on our citizens. People are dying everyday from cancers, heart disease, obesity and many other afflictions that can be directly related to all the chemicals in our everyday products. But why are they still being sold? How can that even be tolerated by our helpful FDA? The FDA needs to stop lying to everyone and pretending they are protecting the health of Americans. This is so OBVIOUSLY untrue and anyone who hasnt been hypnotized by mainstream media would see it.