New Yorker Profile of Rawesome Highlights Stresses of Raw Milk Producers in the Spotlight, As James Stewart Faces New Charges
It is painful to read some of the comments following my previous post, especially the back-and-forth accusations between Califarmer and Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures Dairy Co. about herdshares in California. (Please note, you need to go to the bottom of the first comment page, and click on one of the little squares to go to the second comment page, to find these particular comments; a new page starts up after 100 comments.)
Clearly, the dissension that regularly comes up here has been allowed to interfere with sensitive discussions and negotiations going on with the California Department of Food and Agriculture over standards and possible regulations of the hundreds of raw milk herdshares in that state.
Michael Schmidt captures some of the frustration many of us feel when he concludes, in exasperation, "We have the freedom to take measures to prevent disasters and to prove that guidelines and standards are helping to distinguish those who do want to understand the complexity of food safety. Currently it appears that we do support Marler in his mission to prove that raw milk should be banned. Not because it is more dangerous, but because we are more divided on the philosophical approach to freedom than united on the issue o understanding the current climate of food safety."
I would add that the frustration is compounded because I know that people like Califarmer and McAfee are serious well-meaning people. They desperately want to avoid a repeat of the Foundation Farm situation in Oregon, and its illnesses affecting children. They want to do what is right, for consumers and farmers alike.
Part of the problem certainly is that people have very strong opinions about where safety problems originate and what to do about them. But beyond differences of opinion, there seem to be difficulties getting organized, of working cooperatively in groups. We see that clearly in Califarmer's chronology of events in presenting guideline proposals to CDFA. There's a he-said-she-said quality between him and McAfee that is destructive in any number of ways, most immediately in the fact that it reduces the confidence of the regulators in the commitment of the people doing the negotiating.
It's tempting to want to stomp my feet and demand, "Let's get our act together!" I definitely think that Schmidt's suggestion to form a task force of raw dairy experts, outside of any existing organizational situation like the Raw Milk Institute, is a constructive one. Surely there must be a band of raw milk brothers (and sisters) who are willing to organize themselves to pioneer here.
It's not going to be easy. I get the sense that too many farmers and food providers have worked below the radar for so long, they are having trouble getting used to the fact that the bright lights of regulator. legal, and media attention are now focusing very directly on them. Many are accustomed to working informally, both in running their own operations and in their dealings with consumers. Beyond the sad situation in Oregon, it comes out in any number of other ways.
**
As for the heightened media and legal attention...
The New Yorker magazine, that intellectual bastion of culture, humor, and fiction, has just come out with a highly sympathetic profile of the Rawesome Food Club and its accused, the Rawesome Three (James Stewart, Sharon Palmer, and Victoria Bloch). Much of the focus is on Stewart, the likeable and committed manager of the private membership organization that was shut down last August in the aftermath of a mammoth nine-agency raid.
The profile should, in and of itself, be a breath of fresh air to the raw milk and food rights movement. The New Yorker has journalistic credibility from its nearly 90-year history, and it reaches more than 400,000 subscribers. (Unfortunately, The New Yorker is very protective of its content, and only makes most of its current issue available to subscribers, who must pay $60 annually, or individual articles can be accessed for $6, so I can't post the piece. Here is a link to a summary of the article. In addition, the Out Loud section of The New Yorker did a podcast about raw milk that features interviews with me and a scientist from the University of California, Davis, Michele Jay-Russell.)
The article use the Rawesome situation to examine the controversy over raw milk's history, benefits, and safety. It's curious in that author Dana Goodyear is one of the first to examine closely the culinary aspects of raw milk, portraying it as a gourmet food, with one prominent chef commenting, "When you take milk or cream and pasteurize it or homogenize it, you've killed the originality."
It praises the quality of Rawesome's food, quoting a former member: "Rawesome was a gourmet club par excellence of the best food you could get from anywhere in the world."
It traces the bizarre regulatory and legal history around Rawesome, which has been described in depth here. It points out that Rawesome members continue to quietly obtain and distribute raw milk and other good food, though much more secretly than they did at the old Rawesome site on Rose Street in Venice; Goodyear compares the new distribution of raw dairy and other nutrient-dense foods with that of marijuana. The Rawesome site has since been dismantled and leveled in the aftermath of the two multi-agency raids on the 2000-plus-member club in 2010 and 2011.
Amazingly, though, nearly simultaneously with this much-needed media boost, Stewart has been hit with yet a third set of criminal charges, and these could be the most serious of all : ten felony counts related to his alleged failure to file California income tax returns for five years between 2006 and 2010.
The first set of charges, filed last August, involved mostly offenses related to the distribution of raw milk, and involved potential penalties of five to ten years in jail. The second set of charges, earlier this year, related to Stewart's alleged role in encouraging a few Rawesome members to loan money to farm owner Sharon Palmer; penalties there could be more than thirty years in jail. This third set of charges could result in possibly nine years in jail, according to a prosecutor with the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office.
The only good news in the new charges is that the prosecutor's office didn't order Stewart arrested, as he had been in the previous two sets of charges, based on his having been cooperative in appearing for other court dates. He can now surrender himself at a May 17 arraignment on the new charges.
Stewart told me he considered the new charges "completely ridiculous, not true." He said the statutes he is accused of violating "have to do with a corporation. I have nothing to do with any corporation." He added that he had just received a copy of the complaint, and needed to study it further before providing more detail of his views.
The reason I say that this set of charges could be the most serious is that it is often difficult to refute charges associated with income tax violations. And the legal system tends not to be sympathetic to tax evaders. But given the circumstances of these charges, well, it's hard to know what to take seriously.
Goodyear in closing her New Yorker article quotes Sharon Palmer's lawyer about the second set of fraud-related charges: "The charges do not contend anything at all relative to the food produced at the farm. But it is my firm belief that the prosecution has everything to do with raw milk. There's too consistent an approach to the prosecution not to see it as a coordinated effort."
As I said, the light of media, legal, and regulatory attention is focusing ever brighter on farmers and food producers. It's in everyone's interests to get more organized.
This site's mission is to provide news and analysis about food rights and raw milk. Increasingly, our access to privately available food is under attack by government and industry forces that seek to impose their choices on us. The Complete Patient seeks to provide up-to-date information and encourage the development of community to maintain traditional food acquisition options.
what did I tell you? ... all this noise never really was about public health ... it's about sheer power of the state over the individual. The punctuation mark at the end of the chapter in which the genuine patriot movement was ascendant, came in Oklahoma ... what? .... 17 years ago. With one wicked stroke, a whole class of people was defined as "domestic terrorists" for the sake of them cleaving to the principles of the republic. How do you like fascism so far?
Getting a legal education the hard way (via the (so-called ) Pro-Life movement in the 90s) I had the advantage of being an 'early adapter" = seeing what was coming down, while the nation slept and John & Jane Q Citizen were happy to see us go off to gaol, for disturbing their slumbers
the good thing from this latest development is : the tyrant has over-stepped his-self, as always ... now, all the pew-warmers who fault us extremists for our 'wide-eyed conspiracy theories' must admit the actual nature of the enemy has been revealed. It ain't about milk
Regardless of what you think about Bill Marler personally, this is an excellent series on E.coli 0157:H7 & HUS. This is why raw milk needs to be produced in the safest way humanly possible. You don’t want raw milk to be associated with sick kids and kidney failure.
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/raw-milk-two-e-coli-o157h7-outbrea...
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/raw-milk-two-e-coli-o157h7-outbrea...
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/raw-milk-two-e-coli-o157h7-outbrea...
your comment proves once again that you are either monumentally "unclear on the concept" or - most likely - you're here for no good reason but to bother us. I respect Mister Marler like I respect rattlesnakes = for his ability in his calling = legal gunslinger/ one of the best garbage disposal men within the legal racketeer fraternity : every species has its place in the ecology. But what he puts out - linking e. coli to REAL MILK 'way out of proportion to its actual incidence - is unfair to the those of us who want to facilitate people getting the best food in the world. It's "puffery" for advertising his business, he is not sincerely interested in resolving the problem ... he makes a very good living at it!!
same wit' you .. Mary McGonnigle Martin, you're no friend of the Campaign for REAL MILK ... your schtick is, crying crockodile tears about the latest report of 'sick kids', as pretext for your eternal wail against OPD.
you seem not to want to know that raw milk most IS being produced in the safest way humanely possible, by those who are at it. Any day you post a photo of yourself actually muddying your boots, gathering information in an artisanal dairy, then you'll have something worth hearing about REAL MILK.
"Schmidt's suggestion to form a task force of raw dairy experts,"
What is the criteria for being an expert? An MS, MD or PHD? Or a dairy farmer that has been a dairy farmer for X number of years? How diverse would this group be? (Hopefully very diverse) If there is no honesty, openness and transparency between all parties, it will fail.
When it is known what went wrong in Oregon will anyone be posting what happened? Shared knowledge prevents further problems.
The New Yorker is hot on the trail of the Raw Milk story.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/04/is-raw-milk-worth-...
The two guys acting like FDA agents ( New Yorker hired male models ) on a secret mission and the calf in this picture spent the morning with me getting those shots in our pastures at OPDC. That bull calf is now famous!!
I have left messages with the Salyers family at the Foundation Farm contact number. It took me a while but through a whole bunch of people working together including Bill Marler ( thank you Bill ), local press and digging arround, I was able to get a good number for the family. I have left messages. These messages are very thoughtful, gentle and kind. I know full well the emotional torment that this family is going through and respect them in this time of stress and illness.
I have tried to reach out to them and I have tried to get an invite for a RAWMI team to go visit them. There has been no response. The local health departments are looking for "who to blame in the liability link and the SMOKING GUN". RAWMI would not search for the Smoking Gun but rather....why there was a gun in the first place and why it went off.....Rations, conditions, SCC counts, milker training, age of milking equip rubber liners, where equipment was kept, udder cleaning practices, cold and hot temperatures, etc....
I am not an expert...there are literally no experts in this area. There are only tenacious students that have experience with investigations, safety plans, safety data and prevention of illness. When investigating the Oregon situation...all you need to do is apply the RAMP plan in mirror reverse order of checklist. What prevents illness....when missing... is exactly what causes it. Then add in the human element.
I guarantee you that the health departments do not approach an outbreak in this fashion. They are looking for liability....the search for the link. "Who dun it!!!"
RAWMI would not care so much about the link...but the cause behind the link. I know that the health departments do not look for the cause. When ever OPDC has been investigated.....the investigators never look for the cause or the origin...they are done when they find the link. The link tells us little. The underlying cause is what will prevent the next crash.
I hope that the family calls me back. I pray for the health of their children and those that are ill. I also pray that we all can learn from this event and evolve to a better place from the information collected.
Not sure this will happen soon.
All the best,
Mark McAfee
I f you can’t put a finger on the cause then their so-called link lacks credibility.
Ken
Mary is not wailing against OPDC anymore. I sense the slow evolution. I hear her wailing against resistance to change and ignorance.
I can see someday in the near future her and I standing on the same side together advocating for RAWMI and sensible food safety plans for raw milk! Hell...Bill Marler might even be standing someplace nearby.
Mark, I don’t know if it is possible that we could ever stand side by side, but we are on the same page about the need for raw milk to be produced as safely as possible. Anyone going into the raw milk business needs to be able to list all the pathogens and the illness that can result before going into this business. And under no circumstances can they ever be under the impression that raw milk kills pathogens and that loving the cow and feeding it grass is the safety plan.
Gordon, there is much I disagree with you about – your homophobic and racist rants being the ones that come to mind – but I do not disagree with you that what I do would be unnecessary if manufacturers cleaned up their own messes and took responsibilities for their bad decisions.
Mark, I will not stand by you until you stop saying as you did in the New Yorker: “Manure is the carrier of the beneficial bacteria found in raw milk.” Really? Cow shit should not be in raw milk.
As for the kids in Oregon – my understanding is that four are still hospitalized with HUS and two are having severe neurological symptoms. It is a sad day for the Sayler family, the parents and the kids.
Thanks Bill for the update on the kids. For those that don’t know what neurological symptoms means associated with HUS, it is twofold.
On a positive note, when kids are regaining the use of their kidneys, blood pressure is erratic and can be very high. This can cause seizures. Both Chris and Lauren experienced this. It is horrible to watch your child have a seizure, but unfortunately it is common during the kidney recovery process.
On a very negative note, Gb3 cells are located in the kidneys, pancreas and brain. The Shiga toxins are a moth to flame to Gb3 cells. This is why the damage is done to these organs with HUS. If these kids are having neurological issues due to HUS going to the brain, this is tragic. This is when strokes and the bad type of seizures not related to blood pressure occur. The end result is brain damage or death. It is theorized that the younger the child, the more Gb3 cells they have in their body. This is why there is a high death rate for children under 2 that get HUS.
Chris took serious hits to his kidneys and pancreas, but thank goodness his brain was spared.
Bill
If milk in the udder is sterile then where do you believe it acquires healthful bacteria such as lactobacillus brevis an organism commonly found in the environment especially in bovine feces?
L brevis is a recognized probiotic bacteria that improves the human immune system.
Ken
Who thinks milk in the udder is sterile?
Pete
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_milk_sterile_when_in_the_udder
http://www.uoguelph.ca/foodsafetynetwork/raw-milk
I have had this discussion before with Bill Anderson and others with respect to the bacterial environment of milk in the udder. I believe that milk although sterile when secreted into the udder is gradually inoculated with bacteria while in the udder and is therefore not sterile. The source for all bacteria in milk good and presumed bad is basically cow manure, soil or water and represents a natural process that nurtures good health.
For anyone who hasn’t seen a calf being born it is not unusual to see a cow push out a turd and deposit it on the calf’s nose. This is natural exposure at its best, and is how immunity is nurtured. It is no different in any other animal including humans and drinking raw milk is part of the same process.
The safety of our food supply has everything to do with extent to which we adulterate both our internal and external environments; it has little to do with the exclusion or manipulation of a microorganism. In fact the process by which we use to exclude and manipulate such organisms is causing more harm then good and the reason for all these dreaded illnesses people are desperately trying to avoid.
Bill Marler’s comment to Mark is a reflection of a narrow focus that inhibits his ability to truly understand natural process.
Ken
http://books.google.com/books?id=0-VqgLiCPFcC&pg=PA475&lpg=PA475&dq=lact...
(page 475) Backs up Ken's statement.
Sylvia-
The link states that "milk contains no lactobacilli when it leaves the udder", which corroborates my previous conversations with Ken.
I was skeptical of this claim too, when it was first told to me by a professor of dairy science at the University of Wisconsin. But all of the research I have read suggests it is true. Milk is virtually sterile until it it leaves the udder. There may be a few native bacteria in the teat canal, but they are non-motile (they cannot travel on their own).
When you think about it... If milk stored in the udder actually had lactobacilli as Ken seems to be suggesting, it would mean that it is being incubated for as much as 12 to 24 hours at body temperature with these lactic-acid producing bacteria, and so would be slightly sour when you milk the cow.
We know from experience that this is not the case. Milk straight out of the cow is very sweet, and lacks any lactic acid.
Sorry to burst your bubble Ken. Perhaps I misunderstood what you are saying... but milk in the udder should be sterile. When the milk in the udder isn't sterile, we call it mastitis.
Bill
Yes it it would depending as I understand it on the type of LAB involved as some are “Gram-positive facultative anaerobic or microaerophilic rod-shaped bacteria”, such as lactobacillus which require oxygen in order to survive and multiply,(~20% concentration).
Keep in mind that I stated it is a “gradual process of inoculation”, coupled with the fact that the udder is a complex organ as you well know and not a cheese vat.
http://www.anatomicalproducts.com/udder-of-the-cow.html
Please take note of my comment to you in the following article, “I consider the teat cistern, teat canal and teat apex as internal components of the udder. If one milks their animals by hand then in all likelihood milk is being forced up trough the annular ring and into the udder cistern, which can occur as well with milking machines if they are not functioning properly. Calves with an aggressive sucking technique can also stimulate the above action. The introduction of milk from the teat cistern into the udder cistern regularly occurs and will invariably inoculate the main udder with bacteria. As well the older the cow the more likely this will occur.
The internal flora of the udder, although variable in healthy animals, is natural and from my perspective necessary.”
http://www.thecompletepatient.com/article/2011/february/22/vermonts-raw-...
Ken
The following study comparing bovine teat canal swab samples a beef herd versus dairy heard is quite interesting.
Results from the study suggest that the microorganisms present in the bovine teat canal are more diverse than previously described.
It states, “the bovine teat canal is the first line of defence against pathogen invasion into the mammary gland. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to use culture- independent molecular methods to examine the total mi- croflora of this site. The two sampled herds each harbour a diverse, but divergent, array of bacterial species in their teat canals. Some of these species, such as the coagulase-negative staphylococci, are known members of the bovine skin microflora, whereas many others are probably of environ-
mental origin. Many of the recovered species are currently uncultured and may play unknown roles in the microbial ecology of the teat canal. This diversity may have implica- tions for future research on the use of beneficial bacteria in the prevention of mastitis. Bacteria associated with soil, water and the gastrointestinal tract were prevalent in both herd samples tested. This also suggests that the bovine teat canal contacts many different sources of bacteria, any of which could also serve as potential pathogen reservoirs.”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00091.x/as...
http://www.uoguelph.ca/foodsafetynetwork/raw-milk
"Milk when formed in a healthy udder of the cow, is sterile. However, the milk is contaminated by naturally occurring bacteria inhabiting the udder of the cow and is not sterile when it leaves the udder."
Canada's raw milk police contradict themselves.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030268869188
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3221248
Seems there isn't much agreement on whether the udder milk is sterile or not.
Ken,
There are a number of papers describing the indigenous raw milk flora beneficial for cheesemaking. They generally show a diversity of Lactobacillus species (LAB), which probably colonize the teat canal then enter the milk. Poor hygiene and fecal material in the milk allows entry of bacteria (pathogenic and non-pathogenic) undesirable to the cheesemaking process (Bill A. I'm sure could expand on this). From the third reference below (study of French farms):
"Contrasting with other bacterial and fungal species, useful cheese-making bacteria--lactobacilli and PAB--were frequently identified in the milk and on the teat surface but were rarely found in other environments. In conclusion, milk contamination by the stable environment is considerable, even if it is lower in farms with a milking parlour. Besides this environmental contamination, the teat surface remains the main source of useful cheese-making bacteria."
The question is whether this translates to raw milk being a "probiotic." Not all LAB are probiotic strains, and some have even been identified as emerging pathogens. The probiotic research shows that specific strains and concentrations are need to concur the beneficial effects. The initial levels of LAB are probably too low to be considered probiotic (and too low to reliably inhibit pathogens as shown by outbreaks and isolation of Campylobacter, Salmonella, E. coli O157 from raw milk). Lastly, there would be so much variability from day-to-day, cow-to-cow, and farm-to-farm in the levels of LAB, it's unlikely raw milk would meet the definition of a probiotic.
Some links:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1472-765X.2006.01935.x/pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20630205
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21429612
MW
Thanks for posting that, MilkyWay. As soon as I read Mark's quote about probiotics in the milkcoming from cow poop, I knew it didn't ring true. My breast milk contains beneficial bacteria, and in cases of mastitis, bad bacteria. My breasts are no where near my anus.
What qualifies a food or liquid to be labeled "probiotic"?
And don't people make probiotic milk by culturing it? Isn't it safer to culture pasteurized milk, as was discussed here after OPDC "kefigate"?
KEFIR-GATE
Breast milk does not contain "bad bacteria" in a case of mastitis. The bacteria causing the mastitis infection is normally found in the baby's mouth or on the woman's nipple. If the mastitis-infected breast contained "bad bacteria" the treatment for the infection would not include the continuation of breastfeeding. Antibiotics are sometimes prescribed, but still it is highly recommended that the woman continue to breastfeed her baby. Keeping the milk flowing is the best way to clear the infection, and hand-expressing or pumping cannot compare to the sucking action of a baby.
Right. So my breast milk is inoculated with the bacteria that is present on my skin.
It's not inoculated with the poop from my anus. How does poop in raw milk confer beneficial bacteria? Can someone please explain that to me?
the Milk Book by Dr William Campbell Douglass, would be a good place to start ... jump right to the part about the "diathelic phenomenon" by which "immune milk" is produced within the cow, then delivered back to the calf.... same with human mothers breastfeeding. Whether or not you can handle the concept, there most likely is bacteria from within your intestine, on your skin.
Kristin P
You may find this article interesting. Note that table 1 only lists a fraction of the bacterial species that occur as normal flora in humans, with only 1% of the total species found ever having been cultivated. This scenario is similar to the above article/study I shared with Bill with respect to organisms found in the bovine teat canal.
http://textbookofbacteriology.net/normalflora.html
It may surprise you that many of the organisms commonly found on your skin are also common in your nose, pharynx, mouth, lower gi tract, urethra and vagina.
Ken
MW-
My experience with clabbering or lacto-fermenting milk (with no added bacterial culture) suggests that it is somewhat unpredictable. I'm not certain of the causes for this. The farm whose milk I was clabbering had very low bacteria counts (typically under 1000 CFU/mL SPC and coliform under 1/mL).
Perhaps this is a case where the milk may be "too clean." Old-school swiss cheese makers said there had to be a little dirt in the milk for the cheese to turn out right. The key here is a "little" dirt (NOT alot), and the fact that Swiss cheese is typically aged for between 4 and 12 months before it is sold to the consumer.
For this reason, I would not advise "a little dirt" for cowshares. Cheese making has a strong selective effect against pathogenic bacteria, and preservative value for the crucial milk nutrients. Raw milk sold directly to the consumer for fluid consumption is a totally different ball game than raw milk for making artisan cheese, and the goal should absolutely be to have as low of bacteria counts as possible. The best indicator of this is the refrigerated shelf-life of the milk... if you are selling raw milk for fluid consumption directly to consumers, it should last a least 2 weeks in the fridge before it starts to turn rancid. If it lasts less than that, you have some hygene issues which should be addressed.
Bill: my OPDC milk always soured before the date on the bottle. Claravale, rarely. Interesting...
Sounds like OPDC needs stop using chlorine to sanitize their pipeline. and start using peroxyacetic acid instead. They should also be religiously monitoring each batch's shelf-life, if they were smart.
A little chlorine goes a long way during the CIP alkaline caustic wash, but I think it makes a second-rate sanitizer... good enough for cheese (its the most effective sanitizer against bacterio-phage), but for fluid drinking milk, even food-grade hydrogen peroxide would be better than chlorine.
And, while I am here, for goodness sake, deal directly with the issue that the more you promote raw milk consumption, the more marginal producers are going to get in on the $ action and the more people will be sickened - http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/outbreak-tables.
Bill,
The problem here is not that we are promoting raw milk. The problem is that consumers are losing faith in the conventional food supply.
The mainstream American food supply is full of toxic GMOs, devoid of nutrients, and is responsible for increasing environmental degradation. Our food supply is devoid of human character, replaced by commercial slogans and advertisements. No matter how "green" Land O Lakes purports to be, it is just a pack of lies. We all know this.
The supposed "food safety" authorities are unwilling to take responsibility for the Johnes/Crohnes mycobacterium and untested anti-biotics in the conventional milk supply, the cancer-causing effects of Posilac aka rBGH (still officially denied by FDA), and the other by-products of corporate capitalist industrial food production. So why should very small-scale raw milk producer expect to submit to basic hygiene and food safety protocols?
Let me know when you successfully sue Monsanto for cancer caused by GMO's. Then folks here might take you more seriously. Until that time... you need to leave the work of raw milk safety to those of us who actually consume and produce raw milk.
Good point young Bill. I agree that consumers have given up on the food supply - However, I am not a fan of mass manufactured, GMO foods. I am happy to sue the shit out of Monsanto if the legal link between GMO's and illness can be shown. To date, that is not the case. It is all about legal causation.
Monsanto will see to it that this causation is never made on a legal level... although it has already been well-established on a scientific level.
Off topic, I like this video... on the history of agriculture and civilization:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yocja_N5s1I
In a non-socialist world you need an actual injured person who consumed the product and proof that the product caused harm to make it into the courthouse. Ask Mark - he knows.
You're right, Bill. That's the problem. In a socialist world, Monsanto would not be allowed to exist. Its just a fictional corporate person, after all. Even right-wing fundamentalist Christians don't like Monsanto.
I'm on the second in the series. You should check this out. Its great stuff... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=n7ndRwqJYDM&NR=1
See, we agree again. Problem, with you, Gordon, David and Mark, is that you seek agreement 100% of the time - that is never, ever going to happen. I am tired. I had a long day of dealing with Listeria and cantaloupe - makes all the raw milk BS, seem, well, like BS.
Lame, Bill. Don't you want to know about ancient Mesopotamia and their primitive "socialism", which eventually led to modern Abrahamic monotheistic religions (i.e. Judiasm, Christianity, Islam...)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=sohXPx_XZ6Y&NR=1
Personally, I like the Indus Valley better. That's where Buddhism originates.
To echo the font of all wisdom - 16-year-olds - Bill, "whatever"
I do not believe in a fate that falls on men however they act; but I do believe in a fate that falls on them unless they act.
-Buddha
when's the last time Marler Clark took on a claim of someone getting poisoned from eating sushi? 93 people - so far- across 19 states, reported today with classic symptoms of poisoning from bad sushi ... do we see the national media go dog-balls, comparable to a case of raw milk? SWAT teams invading suspect restaurants the way they do food buying clubs? Rather, not so much as a 'ho-hum' ... all that "outbreak" rates is an internal memo with FDA.
How come sushi = one of the most delicate foodstuffs of all, properly eaten literally in front of the chef = is being mass-produced then shipped across the country like dog-food, yet the so-called "authorities" don't outlaw it? The raw egg ingredient in some sushi rolls is PROVABLY far more dangerous than artisanal raw milk : where's the Lone Ranger of Food Safety ? Is it the case that little local mom+pop sushi palaces don't have big pieces of real estate to lien-up?
I love Sushi. Its one of the wonders of modern civilization that I can buy it even though I live thousands of miles from the sea.
Fortunately, the ocean has not yet been privatized. That's not far off on the agenda of the bourgeois ruling class, though. They have already been trying to privatize seeds and the human genome.
Gordon, I'm going to guess that no one wants to buy your land, because of its racist toxins. If you make someone sick, you will probably become a capitalist debt-slave. This ain't socialism. This is capitalism. Get used to it. Welcome to reality.
Maybe the pockets aren't deep enough or corporate bedfellows?
I believe it had been a concern for many over the years, on this blog and others, as the request for raw dairy increases, people need to know what to ask and what to look for if they are able to visit the farm. It has been voiced that there is the potential for many shysters coming out of the woodwork. Education for everyone is imperative.
I could not agree with you more, Sylvia.
the absolute number of people sickened, is miniscule compared with the millions of people who are re-gaining their health as they consume REAL MILK. These are just as much real individuals, as those who are lying in intensive care units, with HUS. Millions of children who drink fresh, pure life-giving raw milk today, are getting what they need to have perfect teeth and properly strong bones. Another proveable benefit is ; reproductive capacity. Drinking REAL MILK enables women who weren't conceiving because they did not have the necessary nutrients, to do so. since the CDC et al. like to use epidemialogical tables, then let's do so = on net ; the nation benefits, dollar-wi$e. And we haven't even started-in on the harms prove-able from "homo milk".
I suggest that Marler Clark take the lead in prosecuting the mother-of-all-class-actions, holding the Dairy Cartel to account for knowing ( for at least 30 years) that Johnes disease in dairy cattle, is THE cause of Crohne's disease in human beings, meanwhile it profitted from denying / obfuscating that hard science.
Bill and everyone,
The recent increases in C-Diff therapy successes tell the story very effectively about how fecal transplants save lives. It is the manure that imparts some of the benefits of raw milk. The manure bacterial sources colonize the teat canals....that is one of the reasons that evolution has positioned the birth canal right next to the anus and udders near both of them. This is the major means of transfer of the immune system. It is also one of the major reasons that with C-Sections, and lack of breast feeding and use of antibiotics....that we humans and especially the young ones are in real immune trouble.
The death rates from C-Diff infections are raging and exceed 30%. But...with fecal transplant the cure rate is 90% plus. The gifting of Feces are critical care miracles!!!!
Yes....healthy fecal matter (a reflection of the colonies in the GUT or Rumen ) is the basis of the majority of immunity for cows and humans both. It is not a sweet comfortable thought especially when we are all taught that fecal matter and manure is filth. It is filth....but it is also critical to life and to be appreciated for its value and virtue.
Cleanliness is next to Godliness....but sterility is a prelude to death.
The next trick for humans to figuer out is...how do we create strong immune systems and avoid bad bugs. The answer is as old as the earth....work with the good bacteria and support, feed and grow more of them...then stop creating Superbugs by antibiotic abuse etc...!!!
UC Davis Dr. Bruce German found that the Oligosaccharide sugars found in raw breast and raw cows milk serve a critical function. This special sugar does one thing...protects bacteria in the stomach and feeds bacteria in the GUT. Hence colonizing the bacteria that form our immunity.
When scientists that work for yogurt companies look for the next best bacteria for commercially produced cultured milk....they look to manure to find it.
I take a shower every day and wash my hands...but I do not use triclosan or antibiotics...I drink raw milk and fermented raw milk and eat a whole food diet 99% of the time. I am never sick. None of my family is ever sick.
It is a balance...manure is not the enemy. Ignorance and lack of information is the enemy.
Not not confuse this opinion....I demand extremly clean udders. But it does not matter how clean the udder, the bacteria found in trace amounts near the teats and inside of them are many of the same bacteria found in the cows manure.
Mark,
You are incorrect. The microbial community colonizing the teat canal is different from the microbial community in the feces. See the links I sent Ken this morning.
MW
MW
“The microbial community colonizing the teat canal is different from the microbial community in the feces”
I didn’t get that implication from the above articles you referenced. Personal experience along with the various literatures I’ve read tells me otherwise. Could you explain the process that exists in the teat canal that enables it to distinguish and selectively exclude specific types of bacteria?
Ken
Ken et al. There is no active selection by the teat canal. The internal microenvironment favors the colonization and growth of select microbial populations adapted to the particular environmental habitat-including but not limited to moisture, temperature, pH and available nutrients (and what select nutrients would one expect in a teat canal???). Sanitary protocols used in milking including udder wash, predip, striping, the act of milking and post dipping favor- resident bacterial colonization by limiting exposure to extraneous bacteria-in this case enteric bacterial from manure. The use of post dips to “plug” the teat orifice is important to maintain an internal environment favorable to resident bacteria by excluding post milking entrance of fecal organisms: one of the reasons that proper sanitation procedures and protocols are so important in producing quality milk. The “resident” fecal seeding theory-or whatever it is called-is a misunderstanding of fundamental microbial ecology that could lead people along a dangerous path regarding fundamental dairy practices.
Several postings on the Blog also seem to confuse microbial-gut-biology/ecology (mouth to anus….. avoiding the reverse…..) with “dairy” microbiology, these are very distinct microbial communities.
MW is correct.
Ron
My apologies for a poorly worded question. I was not referring to active selection but rather the process that exists in the teat canal which results in the selective exclusion of specific types of bacteria.
I am aware that there is a natural process that limits the presence of undesirable bacteria in the teat canal, Mark touched on it below. That being said however there are various factors including stress aggressive milking practices and infusion of antibiotics etc. that can compromise the microbial community in the teat canal including the udder.
Post and pre dipping is a recent practice that was introduced in my lifetime and as far as I am concerned its effectiveness is questionable and may in fact due to its antibacterial qualities interfere with the natural ecology in the teat canal.
The following article is interesting.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9050275
“The results indicate that a sour-milk teat-dip preparation can inhibit new intra mammary infections (IMI).”
Ken
Thanks Ken. That's an interesting study.
I would be curious what lactic acid strains they were using to sour the milk. Of particular interest is the bacteriocin compound nisin, which is produced by lactococcus lactis (the standard mesophillic starter culture for most varieties of cheese, and also the official state bacteria of Wisconsin).
Nisin inhibits both Staph and Listeria. This is one of the critical reasons why raw milk cheese is much safer than fluid raw milk.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nisin
Ken-understood sorry to jump in. I do not know how relevant this is but with our dairy water buffao we have observed a few things. (We have 30 buffs-18 cows, and milk 45 dairy goats). They differ from dairy cattle. They do not have a cistern, have elongated and narrow teats and need to be coaxed to let down-either by having their calf near by until they get the idea, or trained to let down via low stress handling. My sense is that there is little residual milk. These are large animals, 1,200 to 1,800 pounds, and like to wallow-lots of surface area. They get dirty. I must rise them off-and be aware that washing more than the lower part of an udder posses problems with dirty water running down the sides of an animal-drying is important. This dripping water, even from washing the upper udder-can place an undectable monolayer of dirt on the exterior of the treat. I take care with prewash and dipping. In our state and private testing results we have not had any detectable bacteria, very low SCC. I had attributed our low numbers to my handling, but I now believe that the difference in anatonomy in not having a cistern and longer teats plays a significant role in low bacteria and SCC. The introduction of bacteria, in my opinion, mostly comes from exterior sources. Dealing with the buffs has forced me to rethink just about everything I do to a higher standard.
I understand you know all of this--but I am meeting an incredible number of newbies to dairy that slush down their goats or cows, do a dry wipe and call it good-with out stepping back and considering the dynamics of what they are doing--it is not all microbiology.
I also did something different on our farm-I installed 4 4x8 flat plate solar panels to preheat my parlor and milkhouse water. When my hot water heater runs out the tank draws water from the solar tank (which can get to 170F in a few house with a 120 gallon tank). My cleaning procedures and results have vastly improved using hotter water in most steps...the dairy inspector dropped by for a surprize inspection last week and aside from using the miniflash light to check all of my hoses and inflations--tested the water at 145F------since the solar tank had kicked in. Sanitary procedures (not sterile) have helped me get my numbers down. with a small investment and less chemicals.
Regarding dipping. My maternal great+grandparents, though Catholic, operated the only kosher dairy in Eastern Michigan for many decades prior to 1952. They washed and did not dip, animals were on pasture at a very low animal density. Mastitis, according to family lore was unheard of. Their dairy parlor was one of the first to use steamhot water cleaning. Clean cows and care produced high quality milk.
Ron-
I love your insights.
Water Buffalo milk is a very interesting creature in the cheese vat. For obvious reasons, It forms the thickest curd I have ever worked with. The milk has a "gamey" flavor, but the cheese (once aged) seemed to balance this flavor nicely.
I've only worked with Buffie milk once... I made three cheeses in one evening. It was a fascinating experience. I'd love to do it again.
Bill-
Thank you for the comments. I know the taste you mention. Clean wb milk that is quickly chilled does not have the gamey flavor-though it is rich testing 8.3-8.9% butter fat through out the season-including when animals are only on marginal first cutting hay. The quality of our cheese (Monchego type and camembert-type) is directly proportional to SCC levels. I have been greatly humbled in my husbandry practices working with these animals (aside from their superior intelligence and tractability) and have changed my views on my dairy procedures and protocols.
That said-and I'll mention this here-the increased availability of references on home dairy procedures-such as Tim's video "Chore Time"-is important. This year we had 70 does kid and saw a demand for doelings and does in milk that exceeded anything I have seen in the past-almost all going to home dairies. Careful, practical and thoughtful education are extremely important. And I wish for many of us on this blog-one of the few that has addressed fundamental issues-keep focusing on access to foods of our choice and issues of safety and health, as well as producer/consumer educationincluding our own.
Many--I mean many-farms are really being hammered now by economic forces -shifts in weather patterns- and are one town job and a supplemental paycheck away from closing the barn doors. We need to make tough decisions and sharing our stories, practical insights and experience are important--
Thank you Ron for all of your very valuable insights, knowledge and experience.
Supporters of regulations and testing presume they can create health by testing for and raiding “pathogens,” but that presumption is only partially true at best, as experience shows. Tested foods have caused illness. “Pathogens” have passed apparently harmlessly into some humans while making others sick. Why? Obviously there is more here than meets the microscope, but there’s precious little interest in exploring what is going on, and those who wish to live outside the paradigm of narrowly defined pathogenicity are therefore belittled, even held up as uncaring, or stupid, or reckless. The truth is far, far from that. (In fact, it is the opposite.)
David finds it painful to hear the arguing over raw milk, and indeed it is painful when spitting overwhelms kindness. It is the mark of humankind, I suppose. Self über alles. The physician promotes medicine as health, the lawyer promotes lawsuits, self promotes self, and nobody sees fit to give quarter. That is the pain that I and others feel who ask simply to be left alone to build health outside the western medical/legal paradigm. We find ourselves harangued and shoved about by the State, by “experts,” and by countless process-control supporters. Well, what if the current paradigm is wrong? What if the logical end point of microscope-driven health is really poor health, and the endless pushing of the paradigm buries the spark of truth that might produce optimal health?
I'm going to get down to the REAL "Nitty-Gritty".
Look at the "Mark-Up" for the 2012 Farm Bill. It's being done by Kansas Conservative Republican Pat "We-Don't-Need-Small_Farmers-Local-Markets-Or-Rural-Development" Roberts and from Michigan, the "We're-Going-To-Bring-The-Final-Solution-To-Non-GMO-Pigs-&-The-Farmers-Who-Dare-Raise-Them" State, Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow. They've been praised for working together-so well-and why not? They are both serving the Big Ag Companies. They're happily shaving $28 Billion Dollars from the only demographic that has any real chance of sparking a REAL Economic Recovery, while friends on other Budget Committees sign on to reduction in Social Security and Medicare, but raise an already bloated Defense Budget, including a long term (and how long we wonder?) $1 Trillion Plane, PLUS tack on $28 Billion (interesting number) for that Epic Fail, "The War on Drugs". all of which line the pockets of Big Business Special Interests.
We saw how the Big Banks rewarded "Us Folks" for the multi-billion dollar bail-out that allegedly saved their bacon. Do you like your new rates and fees?
Whether you're a COFA Meat Producer or "Free Range", Organic or Commodity, Big or Small, Corporate or Family, you ARE ALL FARMERS. As such, like it or not, you're part of the 99%.
So, serve Big Ag if you want, but remember, when they're done with you and have gotten everything they want from you, you might find yourselves on the boxcar journey to "Share-Cropper" Land.
Try to remember the Fable about the Turtle and the Scorpion...it's just their nature.
Dr Rex, I had forgotten that fable. http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type0278.html
I rest my case.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21465768
To quote "The microbial colonization ( of the teat canal )can be influenced by the environment of the animals.
Cows live in an environment covered in manure.
Certainly...I do agree that the concentrations and populations are different in every ecosphere based on location of the body of the cow, but many of the same types of bacteria share different ecolocations. Based on diet these types of bacteria also change. The same goes for humans. Itis interesting to note that the canal bacteria fight pathogenic bacteria. Did I hear that right???
Good bacteria protect and kill off bad bacteria in cows teats....hence their raw milk contains bacteria that kills off pathogens. This is PUBMED, NIH... FDA stuff.
It is time for us to all listen to Dr. Bassler PhD MIT Biologist Genome researcher extrordianaire again.
http://www.ted.com/talks/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate.html
We are Bacteriosapiens!!!! Not a damn thing you can do about it. If you kill off bacteria in and on your body you get sick and die.
Modern Medicine now uses fecal transplants to save lives!! Shit Rocks!!!
http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/20/8419332-sounds-gross-works-...
We all know about Spousal Intercourse...but now Spousal PooperCourse is saving lives. Fecal transplants save lives and has a cure rate of 92%!!! Antibiotics C-Diff is killing more than 32% of those effected.
Get over the fecal paranoia.
Spousal PooperCourse? You should win some type of award for that one. Coprophilia Rocks!
Kirsten,
I did not come up with "Spousal PooperCourse"...that was the writter of the Medical Story about saving 92% of medical patients with C-Diff through the use of a spouses fecal transplant.
All invited to Ramona Family Naturals ( an organic store in Ramona CA ) for a presentation put on by a biologist and hospital based epidimeologist that works closely with the CDC. She will "go off" on emerging pathogens and the critical need to consume raw milk as a simple means of immune rebuilding!!! She has a husband that is an ex asthmatic all becuase of Raw Milk. She sees people die every day due to emerging antibiotic resistant bacteria and pathogens. She is a huge supporter of Raw Milk.
The tipping point is tipping.
Thanks for mentioning this, Mark, this was a great presentation! I am glad that I did not miss out on it. Holly had wonderful information to share & I can really relate to her hospital experiences as they echo many of mine. The other great perk about this is that I never knew about this store & what an incredible store it is. Well from now on, no more going to Whole Foods & Sprouts, since this store is about the same distance, I'll be going there instead!! Have a great weekend :->
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/26/taking-liberties-buy-local-grow-where/
Seems like more than over regulation. 139 acres and verboten to have 8 pigs.
I agree, David, that the New Yorker RAW DEAL article was so far more favorable to our right to have the foods we want in a major magazine, including raw milk but the details of the article are not so favorable. Everyone continues to argue bacteria. Bacteria is not the problem.
I do not understand why the author reiterated the fraudulent disease-“statistics” from CDC, health department, university and processed-food employees and investors as if the statistics were based on science and fact, especially since they possess such a superstitious prejudice against raw milk. I gave her research that proved calling bacteria the food problem is an intentional misdirection and a way for government/industry to gain control of our food.
The misinformation starts with the Pasteur info, was stated as if it were case history. The Sorbonne's Pasteur Institute of the time was hot on the heals of Pasteur's heat-process that stopped the molding of his friend's wine grapes, thereby saving his friend's land that he would have lost if his grapes were not made into wine and sold. The Sorbonne jumped on Pasteur's coat tails at the time to ride the notoriety as if they had helped Pasteur with his idea. However, they gave credibility to each other, captured the ears and lips of Europe with the publicity that pasteurization arrested the mold in picked grapes. The medical community jumped on the band wagon stating that Pasteur's process proved that germs caused disease as well as molds, and that they could be stopped.
However, it was not widely publicized that the wine was abominable to the connoisseur, not sold at posh markets and restaurants but sold to the impoverished who normally could not afford wine. The grower nor Pasteur would drink it. The pasteurized wine was of tainted quality mainly because of pasteurization. It was sold cheap, but it sold.
The affluent class that experienced failed wine crops in their past, now had a market for a processed cheap and inferior food in case mold grew in their grapes. They would never suffer a complete loss again. The market was the trusting poor public in Paris that thought they were getting a drink from the rich man's table. It was sold and marketed as such. There were many reports of illness from consumption of the pasteurized wine, including irrational behavior, increased home and job accidents and violence. Pasteurization alters enzymes, minerals and trace fats that would normally restrict the quickest absorption of radical sugars and alcohol that often cause undesirable personality alterations.
While being interviewed for almost 2 hours for this article, I explained to the author how the CDC and health departments base their statistics about raw-milk borne disease on surveys not science. That should have been obvious when it could have been verified that Organic Pasture's milk did not cause those children's illnesses because there was none of that bacteria in the milk. Bacteria in a calf that does not produce milk, and the fact that that bacteria does not survive airborne, should be enough facts to demonstrate that the illnesses were not caused by the raw milk they consumed but something else.
Also, the girls who were obviously sick and hospitalized in San Diego – whose sicknesses were caused by something other than Organic Pastures' raw milk - received massive amounts of antibiotics such as Ciprofloxacin that caused kidney disorders exactly like those of HUS in laboratory animals. Therefore, it was likely the antibiotics in such massive concentrations that caused the kidney damage, not the bacteria for which the suffering girls were being treated, and wrongly blamed on raw milk. The article misleads every reader to believe that raw milk caused and causes illnesses because it falsely presumes that raw milk is innately prone to "bad" bacteria. It seems that even David and Mark believe it.
Utilizing the statement from a health "authority" that pasteurization makes milk safe was a blatant falsehood. The word "claim" did not appear before that statement. In the history of pasteurized milk, there have been over 500,000 cases of scientifically-proved incidences of food-poisoning, literally epidemics, one involving 197,000 people. Raw milk is condemned by accusations - not science but surveys and statistics.
When a doctor or hospital reports bloody vomit or diarrhea, usually it is 2-12 weeks after the incident that a health-department clerk calls the person who suffered and asks what they ate when they got sick. Who remembers all that they ate yesterday much less weeks after an intense illness? If the person states that they drank raw milk, raw milk is automatically determined to be the cause. That is not science but prejudicial survey-spinnable false statistics. CDC and others certainly spin it, creating misleading statistics.
Technically, we should not call vomit and diarrhea sicknesses. We should call them what they are. A person's body rejects something that is toxic with vomit or diarrhea. Those is not sicknesses but detoxification of something poisonous. If the tests were done to detect industrial chemicals in the vomit and diarrhea instead of the microbes, we would have a proper answer of their causes.
I have seen literally thousands of very sick individuals recover from disease by drinking raw dairy and eating raw meats. I do not know how "investigative" journalists sleep at night with their poor research. Seems nothing is very thoroughly investigated and the status-quo concepts continue to be regurgitated and accepted as unquestionable truth. A proper investigation would entail a study of the children and elderly who completely recovered from their illnesses while drinking raw milk. A good comparative study would entail children and elderly who remained trapped in their diseases while not drinking raw milk but taking medical drugs that offer no cure or proper healing.
Take for example Walker Kerhrer who was an asthmatic boy on medication. At 7 years old, he stopped taking his medical and began consuming raw milk. At 8 years old in 2001, he testified before the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors that before he drank raw milk he suffered terrible asthma and that when he did not have his raw milk, he suffered terrible asthma. In 2009, Walker was the top high school tennis champion in the USA. From asthma to tennis champion; will that fact be filed away in the minds of the medical- and university-indoctrinated minds as anecdotal information? How will you file it?
Notice that the the New Yorker article stated that my recovery from blood, bone, lymphatic and stomach cancers were merely my personal claims. She could have easily researched the truth by seeking the records at the hospitals where I was treated. She didn't ask for proof. I could have shown her and given her photos of my surgical scars to verify but she did not ask and I did not think to offer. I have a letter written by one of my doctors 44 years ago that berated me for discontinuing chemo-treatments with a 1% chance of living miserably for one more month. In the letter, the doctor tried to emotionally manipulate me into continuing a process that caused me to vomit, defecate and urinate all over myself 5-20 times daily. Such doctors are insane. From medical treatments, I was a hairless worm on the floor in excruciating pain 24 hours daily, only able to sleep 6-10 minutes before I would awaken in greater excruciating pain. I suffered other severe side effects from all of the medical treatments.
However, when I began drinking raw milk and raw carrot juice, my symptoms immediately began to diminish little by little. After awhile, I notice that when I drank more raw milk than carrot juice, I experienced less pain. When I drank more carrot juice than raw milk, I suffered more. I was able to achieve a measurable balance. The correlation between foods and health became very apparent to me even though doctors were in complete denial about it. To them, only pharmaceuticals - industrial chemicals - favorably altered health.
ALL health departments and universities are controlled by medically indoctrinated propaganda instituted by the money and power of the pharmaceutical industry. They have only drops of objectivity when it comes to their brainwashed bacteria-phobic thought processes.
Every bodily process occurs by the interaction of numerous species of bacteria, inter-cellularly, extra-cellularly, and bodily fluids, including all of the activities in and of the body. We are 150 bacteria genes to every 1 human gene. We are about 1/2% human and 99.5% bacteria. The concept that bacteria cause diseases is called the germ-theory. It entails the ludicrous notion that a tiny colony of certain terrorist bacteria can willy-nilly overwhelm the the body, even cause the body to attack itself. That is as accurate as a small village of 200 natives with primitive weapons arresting and annihilating all of the people in the United States of America. That sort of phenomenon only happens in fictional movies. It is an absurdity. Why do people believe it? Because our minds are literally turned against natural fact.
The bacteria that is being accused of causing diseases (so-called "pathogenic") are actually cellular janitors. They cleanup organic waste. We all have varieties of bacteria that digest (disassemble), construct (reassemble) and cleanse (collect waste, neutralize toxins, and select reusable waste and discard waste that is not reusable).
When laboratory technicians put live animal cells in an unnatural industrial chemical fluid environment that sustains cellular life it also denigrates the cells simultaneously. Cells that are not in their natural biological fluids degenerate and/or transmogrify.
The bacteria that are naturally part of the cleansing of such degeneration are propagated within the cells, coming out of hibernation so-to-speak to eat and/or transform the chemically damaged tissue of the cells. In cases wherein the chemical environment causes mutations, bacterial genes are transmogrified and resultantly so are the cells. In laboratories, Petri-dish observers see that the cells are being eaten, dissolved or transmogrified by the cleansing (janitorial) bacteria and say, "See, those cells are causing cellular disruption and dissolution. They cause disease." The naturally occurring followup-thinking becomes, " How can we make money off of this? Let's create millions of weapons of mass destruction that we will call antibiotics, antiseptics and antimicrobials. We'll make a fortune."
Do we blame the janitors for the waste they clean in our homes and offices? Do we blame the janitors who clean the pollution that mutates our janitors and gives them diseases? Some day soon, I hope that people will awaken and realize that industrial chemicals, including those formed by cooking and processing, cause all diseases. We must stop blaming bacteria or we will never understand our bodies. Bacteria are never the problem.
However, bacterial waste can be highly toxic when bacteria are fed foods containing industrial chemicals. Take for instance, intestinal bacteria that are supposed to be 90% of digestion. They eat the food we eat. Their waste is our food that we absorb. Their feces, urine and perspiration are our foods. When the bacteria eat foods with gross toxins, they release those toxins as a natural product of the toxic food.
Bacteria are not to blame for our diseases. The chemical farmers and processors are to blame. If people acknowledge those facts, who would they find to buy non-organic and processed food, and medical drugs? Our politicians and business people say the economy is at stake so to hell with health, let's keep up the economy. Is the economy more important than living in a healthy body? That is a question each of us must answer.
The drugs that cause most disease are vaccines. Every ingredient is toxic in every vaccine. There are not exceptions. Together, the ingredients are a soup of toxins that have no proof of effectiveness for preventing the disease for which they are given. However, there are volumes of science that prove those toxins cause illness and disease in laboratory animals.
The reason that those toxins in vaccines may seem to work in some people is that the body stops the janitorial bacteria from cleaning old organic waste and accumulated toxins. Instead, most bodies focus on the immediate toxins from vaccines. It will take a body many years to handle, neutralize, eliminate or store those toxins from a direct injection of toxic fluids. So the normal diseases that result from toxic living are temporarily subdued but increasing.
The body responds to most drugs the same way, temporary cessation of disease symptoms but increased toxicity that leads to greater disease. The people who benefit are all of those who invest and work in medically-related fields while decaying the health of people. If everyone were healthy, medical-related businesses and employees would be out of business and work.
Only if you are sick, do they profit. Do you really think they want you healthy? Those who want people to be healthy yet continue to work in the medical fields are in total denial and ignorant of the results of what they really do.
I want to return to the article Raw Deal. The author and/or editors failed to investigate the validity of Sharon Palmer's response that all of the thousands of dollars of commercial food she bought were sold to restaurants, inferring that they were not sold or distributed at farmers' markets or Rawesome. Did the author contact the restaurants and verify Palmer's statement? Did the author and fact checkers fail to contact the employees who testified that the commercial food Palmer bought were sold at farmers' markets and Rawesome. They testified that Palmer sold those commercial foods as being truly organic and/or Grass-fed food.
When I speak of organic, I do not refer to the USDA's corrupt version of organic that allows hundreds of industrial chemicals to enter the grounds that grow plants and animals for food as long as it does not exceed 15%. Fifteen percent chemicals can and does cause massive harm to animal cells, most often gradually but sometimes immediately. Those are the chemically-laced commercial foods that Palmer peddled as truly organically and/or grass-fed raised-on-her-farm products. Go to: www.UnhealthyFamilyFarms.com to see much of the facts in this case.
James Stewart was complicit in distributing that commercial toxic food to all Rawesome's trusting members. I am witness to that for the many times he lied to me for 2 years. James went off track many years ago and let's hope he gets back on track, at least with his own foods. I will never trust him again to handle my foods. For 2 years, he told me repeatedly that Sharon's products were completely organic by my standards and completely raised on Sharon's farm. He stated I was being irrational and ridiculous to question the quality of those foods. Often he screamed at me at Rawesome in front of many members. The investigators that were hired and the Los Angeles City investigators found that Sharon had peddled the commercial foods for at least 2 years to Rawesome members and people at farmer's markets.
James Stewart and Sharon Palmer robbed, cheated and stole from all Rawesome members. The worst of their actions was that they harmed the health of people who consumed those chemically tainted foods. They harmed the people with the very products that members joined Rawesome to avoid.
I have been criticized and ostracized for reporting Stewart's and Palmer's criminal behavior to law enforcement. Stewart and Palmer left me no choice. I approached them about the quality of foods produced at Sharon's farm numerous times in 2 years but most often they yelled at me. If I hadn't arranged for the independent investigation and stopped them, members would still be defrauded into consuming the poison members thought they were avoiding at very high prices FOR 2 YEARS - not some isolated incident.
Furthermore, James Stewart does not have any significant experience in farming. His experience involved acquiring food and food sales. He is not the protector that he purports to be. He simply peddles the food for which others establish quality.
I worked very hard to achieve the best quality of food possible by working with our Amish farmers who supplied Rawesome. I visited the farms in Pennsylvania. They changed their farming habits to accommodate exactly what I found was best because it was common sense farming. However, it is only common sense when you extricate your mind from agricultural-brainwashing produced by the food and chemical industries. Under Right To Choose Healthy Food, I contracted the farmers to grow and deliver our food in the safest manner possible for our times with the most nutrition.
People need to realize that Stewart has harmed our food-movement immeasurably. He did not leave me a choice but to stop him the way I did. If he had truly been about our right-to-food-choices movement, he would not have supplied toxic commercial food and sold it a high prices to people he had contracted with to not supply those industrial foods for 2 YEARS. Additionally, he did not take the brave approach as the farmers Vernon Hershberger and Micheal Schmidt did. Vernon and Michael were ready to go to jail for the well-fare of their food-club members and all of our rights to healthy food. Michael was ready to die for them.
James, however, opted to take actions to save himself, resulting in the closing of our club, depriving us of Rawesome and put all other raw food clubs in the country in jeopardy. For other people's sake, I hope that James Stewart has changed for the better if ever in the future he supplies food to people who care for their health. I will not trust him to handle my food. How could I trust a supposed friend who knowingly defrauded and poisoned my patients and other Rawesome members, including me, for 2 years with the chemically tainted commercial foods Sharon fraudulently peddled as grown on her tiny "family" farm? If people earn trust, have Stewart and Palmer earned our trust?
In closing, our food safety should not be predicated on the notion of bacteria, species of bacteria or bacterial behavior. The safety and quality of our food should be solely based on absence of industrial chemicals in food that causes diseases, even if those chemicals do there damage ever so slowly for the purpose of growing fast, pretty food with long shelve lives. What is more important?
healthfully,
aajonus vonderplanitz, ph.d nutrition
Aajonus, I agree there are assertions to question and debate in The New Yorker article. Where I have difficulty is with your explanation in your comment here of your actions with regard to James Stewart and Sharon Palmer, especially your suggestion that you had no choice but to take the extreme actions you took. You state:
"I have been criticized and ostracized for reporting Stewart's and Palmer's criminal behavior to law enforcement. Stewart and Palmer left me no choice. I approached them about the quality of foods produced at Sharon's farm numerous times in 2 years but most often they yelled at me...People need to realize that Stewart has harmed our food-movement immeasurably. He did not leave me a choice but to stop him the way I did."
I wonder if you really had "no choice," that there weren't some less extreme measures you could have taken. Perhaps asked the Rawesome members to vote on changing the situation. If that wasn't practical, how about simply having invited Rawesome members who didn't like what Stewart-Palmer were allegedly doing to move with you to establish a new food club? Or if you wanted to take legal action, I'm sure there was some kind of civil action you might have filed, like sought an injunction against them supplying the food you thought was dangerous.
I suspect that the hostility you say you have encountered stems not only from your decision to publicly air your complaints via a web site, but also from your decision to take your Rawesome food complaints to criminal prosecutors. Those complaints did nothing to affect Rawesome's food supply--the prosecutors cared not a whit that Palmer might have been substituting conventional eggs and meat for her farm's produce--but did result in loan fraud charges against the two that could send them to jail for more than 30 years each. In effect, you opened the door for prosecutors to exact revenge on Stewart for running a private food club.
I for one cannot thank Aajanus enough for coming forward publicly like he did. It was not only Rawesome members who bought and continue to buy her "grass-fed, soy free" products, but hundreds of farmers market consumers. What is one to do when one suspects a person of fraud and they continually lie to you? Aajanus is not the only one who has repeated such accusations atold old me they hatoasted their complaints to the DAs office. If it wasn't him, someone else would have gotten their attention eventually.
I cannot speak to the validity of his arguements about raw milk and the bacteria world. But it seems anti-progress to turn your back completely away from modern science and medicine.
Kristen
Its easy to say what should have been in hindsight. The fact that the commercail grade meat and eggs were being sold at rawsome was fraud. Her loan fraud is no different than her food fraud. If James and Sharon had upheld the high food standards that rawsome was all about then maybe rawsome would still be there. Put the blame where its due.
"The safety and quality of our food should be solely based on absence of industrial chemicals"
It is precisely this attitude that is the problem in the raw milk movement.
Yes, industrial chemicals are a problem. I would not understate the importance of that issue. But they are by no means the only measure of food safety or quality.
Aajonus - I, too, have a major problem in the way you chose to "deal" with James & Sharon. I agree whole-heartedly with the points that David makes below with regards to better approaches that would not have brought about a total shut-down of Rawesome Foods. The extreme method you resorted to has brought about a much more devastating outcome to real foods procurement, right-to-food choices, as well as, the local farmers markets. Remember, Sharon was just one vendor out of many, many more vendors for the Club. By bringing about what you did & the method that you did it, you put all the other vendors out of business for that Club, not to mention, bringing to a stop for ALL the Club members to be able to obtain all the wholesome foods that they got there. Your actions also caused the destruction of thousand dollars worth of valuable, healthy, nutrient rich foods. You also have now jeopardized, big time, those investors that had invested in the farm & Rawesome Foods, how will they get their investments back now? As David points out below, you could have approached this in a much more proactive manner that would have brought about a more beneficial outcome for Rawesome Foods. "Killing" the whole Club just because of one or even two people that you had a problem with was not in the best interests of everyone involved in Rawesome Foods. Now please understand me, I do applaud your work in promoting better health via better choices of foods for all the people that you do. I know that you have your heart in the right place with advocating the right-to-chose healthy food choices, but I do have a problem with the way you went about handling your disagreements with James & Sharon. If anything, what you ended up doing caused more harm than good.
Addendum - I should say...."with the points that David makes above" not "below". I think there is something going on with the blog that is not allowing the replies to remain directly under the original post that a person is replying to. Sorry about that.
The teat-microbial distinctions are the jargon of the medical/chemical industries that terrorize people into believing it has validity. Common sense observation will tell you what is truth. Observe how many creatures on this planet lick their rectums 5-100 times daily without getting diseases. How many lick others rectums daily and do not get diseases from it? How many infant creatures suck mother's milk without teat-dips and washes and do not get diseases from that? How many creatures eat the feces of other animals when they eat another creature?
No, I am not saying that those are desirable activities for humans but they are not innately dangerous. I would never suggest that anyone eat their own feces or any human feces. There is no more toxic animal than human on this planet, except domesticated dogs and cats fed foods that are fed the worst commercial foods of all. Their feces are contaminated with toxic pathogenic industrial chemicals.
Bacteria is not our problem of disease.
aajonus vonderplanitz
Aajonus, what was your point in an animal’s ability to lick their anus? Last time I checked, most humans are not flexible enough to bend over for a lick. I’m sure there is a good reason we were designed this way. Animals don’t get ill from their own fecal matter because that is the way their bodies were designed. They don’t take showers or baths, they lick themselves clean.
We may be mammals, but WE ARE NOT ANIMALS, THEREFORE ANIMAL POOP AND HUMAN POOP WILL MAKE US SICK. This is not complicated to figure out. When babies are first born, we don’t rub the mother’s fecal matter all over the baby or advise a woman to rub fecal matter all over her breasts before she breastfed too insure a healthy immune system. I’ve watched cats give birth many times. They eat the placenta for energy and if a kitten is born dead, they eat that also. Humans don’t eat the placenta or eat dead babies. See, we are not animals.
If you would like to eat your own poop, drink your urine and eat raw animal meat, go for it, but don’t encourage anyone with children to include feces or raw animal meat as an immune boosting staple in the diet they consume.
Mary - you show that you truly do not understand any of this. Your statement of "ANIMAL POOP AND HUMAN POOP WILL MAKE US SICK" is incorrect. If your statement is true, then explain why Fecal Implants works in curing people of C-diff infections (which, by the way, is more deadly than MRSA) 93% of the time???? Explain why children through out their growing up time on a farm (of which, I am one) that ran around barefooted, running through all kinds of "poop", playing with "poop" (ever made cow pies?? all of my siblings, cousins and I did so) never, ever got sick from it??? You think you know about this stuff, but you really don't. There is so much more to this than you think or have been led to believe. I am living proof that your statement is not true!
Deborah,
You are oversimplifying the science behind fecal transplants. This treatment mode does not change years of medical and common sense evidence that fecal-oral transmission of pathogens are health risks. For example, having human or CAFO sewage contaminating the water supply is a clear health risk. Is that debatable, even if you don't believe the "germ theory?"
Aajonus' argument about raw vs. pasteurized milk makes no sense. He wants "proof" for raw milk outbreaks, yet cites pasteurized outbreaks where the outbreak strain was never isolated from the milk. Can't have it both ways, Dude...
And, if Stewart and Palmer evaded taxes and did real estate fraud, what does that have to do with the raw milk discussion? David, are you saying that if those alleged charges are true, they should be let off because they were victims of raw milk production? If the charges are not true, let them off. If the charges are true and they happened to be caught because of raw milk, well...
MW
Milky Way,
To repeat what I've said before, the felony charges (about milk, loans, taxes) brought against various of the Rawesome Three were brought mainly as a way to shut down Rawesome Food Club, and to intimidate others either running food clubs or considering launching food clubs. There was no issue of illness from pathogens (and the illnesses Aajonus Vonderplanitz alleged didn't raise any concerns from public health officials). The prosecutors (in my view) are piling on as many charges as they can come up with, likely in the expectation that they'll settle with the Rawesome Three for much less, but anything to avoid having these cases come before a jury. That is where they will crumble.
Mary Martin,
We are, indeed, animals. Mammals, if you remember from your high school biology. We are different from other animals in that we have brains that allow for advanced thinking--a trait that gets us into no end of trouble.
So, if they did no tax and real estate fraud, they have no problem. Clearly, that can be worked out in the courts and with documents.
Whether Stewart and Palmer paid their taxes isn't subtle like DNA fingerprints and bacterial populations. Did they pay their taxes? I paid mine and it's not debatable except a huge resentment toward those who suck off the system while I pay into it. Is there a way to kick them off the roads?
MW
Milky Way,
I don't know if Stewart paid his taxes (Palmer hasn't been charged with anything regarding taxes). That presumably needs to be decided in a court of law. I agree that people should pay their taxes. I said in my post that most people would agree, and that courts tend not be be sympathetic toward people who don't pay their taxes. That being said, I think it's important to not forget that the cases against Stewart/Palmer/Bloch are political cases, not tax or fraud cases. You and others in your camp are trying your mightiest to distract the public from that fundamental point. In political persecutions, the government will dredge everything but the kitchen sink to get its way.
if the Tax Honesty Movement accomplished one thing, for all the years of banging our heads against the Castle door, it was : differentiating "filing" a return of income, versus "paying" the tax. In fact, the majority of citizens in the US of A do NOT pay a net amount towards income tax. Part of their earnings are withheld at source, then Big Brother returns a portion of the person's property, about a year later. It may well be that James Stewart - living as a "minimalist", at a very low level of income that he did not owe any tax for the years at issue - had'nt bothered to file. To some, that'd be a trivial matter. But not to the IRS. As one of the tenets of the Communist Manifesto, "a heavy graduated tax on income" is not in place because the govt. needs the $$ to run the country ; rather, it's a method of people control.
Tell me this, you goody-2-shoes who've been brainwashed to presume all "tax protesters" are felons ; how does it sit with you that, once entangled in the coils of the income tax monster, onus is on the Defendant to discharge the presumption of guilt? Is that the way your country was supposed to be run? The commies perfected the smear tactic : with not much more to go on that a few lines of type on a computer screen, your kneejerk reaction is : "if the govt. says so then James Stewart must be guilty of .... well, we don't know, but it must be something!"
Tupper F Saussy went through such a Stalin-ist show trial ... his masterpiece, Rulers of Evil, explains what's really going on
Yep, this story has nothing to do with fraud or outsourcing.
"yet cites pasteurized outbreaks where the outbreak strain was never isolated from the milk. "
http://www.cheeseslave.com/drinking-pasteurized-milk-is-dangerous/
Here is that list:
1945—1,492 cases for the year in the US
1945—1 outbreak, 300 cases in Phoenix, Arizona.
1945—Several outbreaks, 468 cases of gastroenteritis, 9 deaths, in Great Bend, Kansas
1976—Outbreak of Yersinia enterocolitica in 36 children, 16 of whom had appendectomies, due to pasteurized chocolate milk
1978—1 outbreak, 68 cases in Arizona
1982—over 17,000 cases of Yersinia enterocolitica in Memphis, TN
1982—172 cases, with over 100 hospitalized from a three-Southern-state area.
1983—1 outbreak, 49 cases of Listeriosis in Massachusetts
1984—August, 1 outbreak S. typhimurium, approximately 200 cases, at one plant in Melrose Park, IL
1984—November, 1 outbreak S. typhimurium, at same plant in Melrose Park, IL
1985—March, 1 outbreak, 16,284 confirmed cases, at same plant in Melrose Park, IL
1985—197,000 cases of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella infections from one dairy in California
1985—1,500+ cases, Salmonella culture confirmed, in Northern Illinois
1987—Massive outbreak of over 16,000 culture-confirmed cases of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella typhimurium traced to pasteurized milk in Georgia
1993—2 outbreaks statewide, 28 cases Salmonella infection
1994—3 outbreaks, 105 cases, E. Coli & Listeria in California
1993-1994—outbreak of Salmonella enteritidis in over 200 due to pasteurized ice cream in Minnesota, South Dakota and Wisconsin
1995—1 outbreak, 3 cases in California
1995—outbreak of Yersinia enterocolitica in 10 children, 3 hospitalized due to post-pasteurization contamination
1996—2 outbreaks Campylobactor and Salmonella, 48 cases in California
1997—2 outbreaks, 28 cases Salmonella in California
2007- 135 people ill from pasteurized cheese contaminated with e. coli
2007or8 pasteurized milk killed people
The list is long...
This breaks my heart because I know the herdshares are trying to do the best for their farm and their members. Sylvia, I don't think we can learn much from your list. Ideas on how we can fix the problem to help farmers and consumers?
http://www.marlerblog.com/case-news/outbreaks-and-illnesses-linked-to-ra...
MW
Of course I am oversimplifying this Milky Way because I was responding to Mary's incorrect statement. I wasn't planning on going into all the details about Fecal Implants, my main point was in pointing out that if her statement was true, then everyone who received those Fecal Implants would have died rather than be saved! You gotta admit a 93% success rate is very, very impressive against all other conventional medical treatments. And in my 30+ years of medicine, that is an amazing accomplishment.
Yes, its very positive! But, it doesn't relate to going out and putting the teat cup on the cow or goat, mixing and bottling the milk, and then selling it to the public in jars or glass or plastic bottles. That's where the rubber meets the road, and there are experienced farms, and then there are amateur farms (and then there is that tiny % of frauds). My point is that it's not simple to be a raw dairy farmer, or even a pasteurized dairy farmer.
MW
Deborah, did you eat the animal shit when you lived on the farm?
Oh come on Mary...no one deliberately eats it!!!!! But, it definitely got into our mouths, noses, etc, it would have been very, very difficult to have avoided it. Obviously you are not aware of how farm children play in the farm, pig, sheep & cow fields. Yes, it was very common to throw our freshly made cow pies at each other & yes, it was very, very common to get a mouthful of it!! You are also missing the main point of the fact that we were always bare-footed...what's that got to do with anything you are probably saying?! Again, you do not have the knowledge of this. Do you know that the fast entry point of anything to get into the body is through the bottom of your feet? Try this test, it will teach you a bit about this, take a piece of garlic, cut it in half & rub the cut side into the bottom of your foot, within a matter of minutes you will taste garlic in your mouth. You see, there is so much more to all of this than you think you know.
Oh and I am forgetting about all the times we pushed each others faces into cow plops!!! Hmmmmm, so, yes, in actuality I guess we did eat it!!!
We had cow chip fights as kids, sometimes the chips weren't totally dry. We were barefoot most of the time. I made my younger brother eat a mud pie made in the fields. We had to clean the chicken coop, help with the butchering. We didn't get sick.
You are so right, Sylvia, my point exactly!
We only visited my grandmothers little farm in Oklahoma every 3 - 5 yrs. we weren't there constantly. We did go barefoot at home in Ca and we did play in the dirt. I remember building roads in the dirt with my brothers tonka trucks. Wash hands? Only when we went in to eat, if mom was watching.
Pages