Where Will the First Case of Child Abuse for Serving “Dangerous” Food Originate?
When I wrote about the case of parents suing Minnesota farmer Michael Hartmann in connection with their child’s alleged illness from raw milk, and the judge's suggestion the parents might bear some responsibility for their child’s illness, I assumed the judge's intent was to reduce the potential responsibility ascribed to Hartmann. But alas, as Ron Klein reminds us in comments following the previous post, our legal system doesn’t necessarily work in such logical ways. More often than not, the idea is to ascribe blame.
So while our legal system has always provided an opening for the state to intervene to “protect” children, it’s only in recent years that the system is being slanted so aggressively this way.
Increasingly, the tenor of interactions between public officials and parents is that the government is in charge, and that parents are “guilty until proven innocent” rather than the other way around. There is a very moving four-minute film about a Detroit mom who ran into the buzz saw of that tenor when she resisted allowing her daughter to be given psychotropic drugs, and the State brought in the troops.
As Ron Klein reports, there are reasonably intelligent people among the legal profession who say that mothers should be held accountable for possible abuse charges if they feed their children raw milk. But what if they feed them junk food? Interestingly, our legal and social systems may well be moving in a direction of holding parents accountable for that as well. Schools around the country are implementing strict rules prohibiting junk foods in school lunches and vending machines. The Massachusetts legislature just passed a special exemption to such strict rules to allow PTAs and other parent groups to be able to conduct bake sales in schools.
Some schools are even prohibiting sugary food in lunches and snacks children bring from home. I heard a story from someone I know of a child’s jelly sandwich being confiscated in a private school because it was considered to be a sweet dessert, and sweet desserts weren’t allowed in the school.
Confiscation of private food considered to be unsafe. Sound familiar? In such an atmosphere, charges of abuse aren’t that far down the road.
In the meantime, regulators continue to add new rules and regulations, presumably to ensnare more people as criminals. The latest is Wyoming, which is seeking to restrict cow shares, require licenses for even the smallest producers to sell eggs to restaurants, and make illegal sale of bagged leafy greens at farmers market.
It’s not that difficult to imagine parents being hauled in on abuse charges for two very different situations. In one, parents are serving raw milk and a child becomes ill. In another, parents are serving lots of sugary junk food and a child becomes obese and diabetic.
It’s such a slippery slope, so beyond the experience of most of us, that it’s difficult to know what to make of such possibilities. But in our current atmosphere of fear mongering, assigning blame, and State control, the visions may not be as bizarre as one would imagine.
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.
While it has been a privilege to engage in our discussions here, I am going to follow in Kristen's footsteps and say goodbye for now. I will probably continue to read but agree with her that if it consumes you because you actually care and affects your life in negative ways, it's not healthy regardless of your stance of raw milk.
Ora, sometimes a break is good. Will miss you, and Kristen. Hope you'll be back before long.
miss you,
http://www.bergenrefrigeration.com/designs.htm
This is not so much a raw milk or food issue as a child services issue (or whatever they're called in any given state). Once you get on the states radar they will use anything and everything against you and if they don't have anything they'll make something up and generally just railroad you in every way possible. There is not justice in that system.
Naturally your mileage will vary from state to state but this is the case in many many places. And in these economic times they often target the poor and helpless; frequently in violation of the law and the constitution.
If the lessons from the battle for homeschooling rights is any guide, the state will start using child services to dissuade parents from feeding raw milk to children. Expect that to kick in as they realize their scaremongering efforts are counter productive and their persecution of individual farmers can't keep up with the tide of new dairymen entering the fray.
In Missouri, child services dissuades foster parents from home schooling, and demand that they be vaccinated. They insist that newborns be fed soy formula that is over 50% sugar. If it is unhealthy the state requires it.
Ayn Rand was prophetic on the coming intrusions of government 2 generations into the future:
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. " ~(paraphrased: Page 406 of Ayn Rand's, Atlas Shrugged )
Great News!
http://www.naturalnews.com/035966_Rand_Paul_FDA_censorship.html
Best, Violet
This wasn't as unannounced as Mike Adams would like us to believe. We sent out action alerts to our mailing list on Wednesday about this amendment. I see it did no good. Our MN Senators voted NO.
But here is the bad news!
http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/24/here-are-the-15-senators-who-voted-to-st
So those other 78 need to explain or be voted out the next time they are up for reelection . . .
Best, Violet
Not sure if this was posted already, apologies if it's a repeat. Because I don't check the blog that frequently, I have some trouble following the discussion thread with the new format - requires clicking on each new comment preview to find it. Anyway, the editorial from Oregon fits the theme of this post.
Rx: Tighter limits on raw milk, a dangerous substance
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/05/rx_tighter_limits_on...
"Done right, new rules will make raw milk an adult choice for adult consumption -- like cigarettes or other dangerous substances."
Violet,
Great photo!
MW
Funny you should bring that up. When we were able to get our Raw Milk Bill introduced as an amendment of the Ag Omnibus Bill in the MN House of Representatives, Representative Tom Huntley, who seems to always oppose anything we introduce, got up and said that he thought the parents who gave their child raw milk (in the Hartmann case) should be "charged with child abuse!!!" (Add your own dramatic flair.) His background is that he is a retired professor of Biochemistry (I believe) from the University of Minnesota Duluth. So we get why he thinks the way he does.
Alas, we are used to it. The idea of homeopathy is really his Achille's heel. So the idea that something that might contain bacteria and NOT make you sick is perhaps a huge stretch for him. I fear he marginalizes himself if he continues to bring up such things.
Thanks Milky Way . . . that is Pumpkin . . . my beloved 7 year old Icelandic Leadersheep:)
My kids have been raised on raw milk for the last 6 years . . .my 13 year old son and my 4 year old daughter. My little girl has never been sick and has never been on antibiotics . . .my son has never had an ear infection or taken antibiotics either since drinking raw milk for six years . . .so I find your link quite disturbing to say the least . . .
Best, Violet
Pumpkin is beautiful! Off topic...how did you get into that breed?
MW
Hi Milky Way . . . The reason we picked this breed is that it has been genetically pure for over 1000 years and it has all the traits that I was looking for . . . great mothers, fine fleece, gourmet meat, dairy potential, intelligence, hardy in a cold maritime climate, can be raise on 100% grass and hay . . . and they really, really look cool on the pasture. They do perform as promised and are a great breed . . very smart . . . . much like goats and can be voiced trained to the shepherd . . . I can call them to the barn when they are about 1/2 mile away . . . it is amazing to see them turn and all come running just at the sound of my voice. The only downside with this breed is you have to get the minerals just right . . . they need more than most of the continental breeds . . . I supplement them with copper boluses and feed them straight kelp with Selenium and it may still not be enough for a few . . .this is understandable as they are survivors that have been bred on a highly volcanic island . . .It is a very rewarding breed . . . I love all of my ewes very much . . they reliably twin year after year. They are great for a small farm in the East and a larger farm in the cold upper west such as Montana (where there are fewer parasite problems). . . . Best, Violet
Dear Violet,
Thanks for sharing. Especially appreciate they look cool on the pasture :) Love driving the countryside and seeing the various farms and what they are raising. Met with someone that has an Irish Dexter family cow - another interesting breed. If Ron Klein is reading, I'm also curious how/why he picked water buffalo.
MW
Oh and btw . . . I never, ever put sunscreen on my kids . . . t-shirts and hats are in order here once they get a good dose of vitamin D:) and they never burn either . . . Best, Violet
I've never used sunscreen either. Skin absorbs all those bad chemicals, maybe that is why there is so much skin cancer? and low vitamin D levels (as are other contributing factors)
Oh boy... here go the paranoid anti-government rants again... and surely from the most socially conservative and patriarchal elements of the movement.
To be perfectly honest, David, I find it completely understandable why public health and human services agencies would be concerned about parents feeding their children raw milk, given the dismissive attitudes about food safety and misinformation coming from this movement. Perhaps if the movement cleaned up its act, it would stop giving these government agencies a reason to target them.
And for the record, folks... my mom grew up drinking raw milk. But she grew up on a dairy farm, surrounded by dairy animals and their pathogens every day. That is very VERY different than feeding raw milk to some kid living in the city or suburbs with infrequent exposure to dairy animals.
Once again, I would recommend feeding raw milk CHEESE to kids over fluid raw milk. Cheese is a much safer product that fluid raw milk. It is both lower in moisture and lower in pH.
Also, I can't help but notice the rhetorical devices you use here, David, that only serve to feed the paranoid right-wingers and conspiracy theorists. Its as if we are entering some Brave New World, where the evil creeping government bureaucrats are increasing their control over our lives every week, and our John Galt superhero the raw milk moms. And of course, in this ideological narrative we conveniently ignore the actual history of our government and corporations when it comes to civil liberties --- McCarthyism, COINTELPRO, J Edgar Hoover, etc... which makes all this raw milk silliness seem like child's play (pun intended)
Note to all: "State control" is nothing new. Just ask any of the protesters who were beaten and arrested this last weekend in Chicago for daring to stand up to the NATO warmongers, or Seattle in 1999 for standing up to the WTO, etc... Or the innumerable striking workers throughout American history who have been on the receiving end of police bludgeons and/or tear gas for demanding a living wage and decent working conditions.
Child's play, indeed.
You're exactly the same thing as the Gordon Watson/Galt types, just the flip side of the coin. You both love the corporate/state truncheon except where it comes for your own kind, and hate those who want to get rid of it completely.
(One of the most hopeful signs is that the Occupy movement to which both of your kinds has tried to suck up and co-opt has, so far, rejected you both.)
Nevertheless you're typical of the endlessly self-contradictory view of the corporate state in these discussions. Is this blog ever going to even try to settle the question for itself once and for all:
Is the corporate state fascist-tending or not? Can it be appeased or not? Upon that answer depends the entire strategy which must follow.
Your vote here:
"Perhaps if the movement cleaned up its act, it would stop giving these government agencies a reason to target them."
is that the corporate state is the good guys, and for appeasement and collaboration.
Russ, if you want to try to overthrow the corporate state, be my guest. I'm no fan of it, I just understand how it works.
Also, Russ, not ALL people who work for the government are bad people. Yes, there is corruption. Yes there are problems. But taking everything to its extreme, as you and others here do, is not helping us. There is something to be said for good regulation and for vigilance about food safety when producing a high-risk product such as fluid raw milk for direct public consumption. (There's a reason I'm a cheese maker.)
Taking things to extremes? Like your gratuitous radical-chic rhetoric which seems calculated to deflect from actual issues and discussion?
(Radical-chic sounds about right, compared to your actual prescriptions. I know when I ask, "what would Rosa Luxemburg do?", the first thing I think of is neoliberal "public-private partnership" scams like RAWMI!)
OK, Russ, why don't you come to America's Dairyland and try to figure out a progressive solution to this problem.
Blaming everything on the public sector may be popular, but it doesn't work out too well as we recently learned.
Assuming you and Gordon are two different people, you seem to be walking caricatures embodying the scam of "public" vs. "private", when this phony distinction is purely nominal. In reality there's nothing but hierarchies and power concentrations. Who cares what the gangsters of the 1% call themselves in any given case? But there's always your kind of misdirection, meant to keep the 99% fighting among ourselves.
Meanwhile, I'll keep telling people to ignore "public vs. private" scams like yours, and focus on POWER.
http://attempter.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/raw-milk-decriminalizationlega...
Mister Russ - better you don't fold my name in to your non-sense.... so very-obviously, you don't comprehend what I post ; mis-representing my position 180 degrees dead wrong. I guess I have to cut you and that other socialist locked in perpetual adolescence, some slack though ... you're babes in the wood. I grew up in an America, half a century ago, that you've never experienced. when people my age talk about a 'free country', it's something you've never experienced, as you grew up in Soviet-ized Ham-merica. for instance, I come from the understanding of Sir Robt Peel who said "ultimately, the people are the police"... when I was a child, we thought of the police as our kinsmen, who ultimately cared for us, and we for them. You, by contrast, were brainwashed to assume the communist model of "diversity" ... in which the premise of a white man's loyalty to his race, for the greater good of the race, is a crime. Your mind shorts-out even as I raise concepts you've been taught are "thought-crime"
you and your ilk are quite comfortable with the concept of 'a policeman at every elbow', so as to enforce the Central Party line= "divesity is our strenght", when in fact, every experience in the real world proves the oppoosite. Seen the photos of downtown Detroit, lately? I rest my case
Your pal Anderson is filling the role of "flak catcher', with the classic apology 'oh, they're not all so bad"..... my experience over 40 years is : the fish rots from the head on down. The root problem is = anti-christ race traitors in high places.
I've seen lots of photos of and stories about Detroit's urban agriculture movement. Among the most inspiring things I've seen in recent years. Thanks for reminding me of it.
As for your epithet "adolescent" (which, so far as I can see, has no meaning in your usage), what could be more adolescent than your kind of "I've got mine, the rest of you can drop dead" hang-separately nonsense? The rest of your ranting, as well, is non-responsive to anything I've written here or anywhere else, and is, so far as I can see, just incoherent fulminating.
Meanwhile what I said stands - you and Bill want big, aggressive government, except for the ad hoc, self-serving contexts where you don't want it. Bill's subsequent comments here establish that.
Since you people are forgetting the history, milk was only ever pasteurized in the first place because the commingling of thousands of small milk sources for industrial distribution, which is something totally unnatural according to any "free" market (and unnecessary from any practical point of view), but is on the contrary the result of top-down command corporate/government policy, required it.
So it follows that here, just like everywhere else, the solution to the problem artificially created by the worthless and destructive corporate/government hierarchy, is to abolish that hierarchy. Food markets are naturally local/regional, with broader trade as an appendage. End government thuggery and corporate welfare, and it would be the end of the malevolent commodification of food, such as unnatural milk distribution networks.
But abolishing all coercive hierarchy would mean abolish the differing kinds of coercion you guys like.
Adolescent? I'm the one who thinks human beings can rule ourselves, and that we don't need Leaders and hierarchies of any sort to assume adult responsibilities. Forget adolescent - what could be more downright infantile than to still think we need such things, in defiance of all the evidence?
like I said : you are UNable to comprehend what I really do say, and have said over the last few years ... as long as the cheques keep coming from federal programs, those green spots will flourish in Detroit. did you miss the ones showing the remains of the American dream from half a century ago, going to wreck and ruin ... evidence of 40 per cent of the population deserting that place, as the wonders of "diversity" manifested? Which is directly on-point one of my main themes : the demographic of who actually produces REAL MILK, and who consumes it. The Campaign for REAL MILK is = "white flight" from the Marxist model of rearing cattle, some of whom are the human species
Bill
This past weekend in Canada was a long holiday weekend.
My grand children (1-3 years of age) came from Ottawa to visit for three days my sister and her husband came from Peterborough for several days with their two children (8-14 years of age) as well. All of the above children drank raw milk and to their parent’s amazement and despite all other options (water and fruit juice) they chose raw milk.
As previously stated I’ve had exchange students from around the world (Thailand, India, Africa and England stay and work on the farm for several months during the summer, none of them became ill. In fact most of the people who purchased milk form me for over 25 years were urbanites not farmers.
There is no appeasing these self-righteous cronies’ whose sole purpose is to dictate what parents aught or aught not feed their children.
Let me reword your statement above, To be perfectly honest, Bill, I find it completely understandable why parents are concerned about the dictates of health and human service agencies given the dismissive attitudes about food safety and misinformation coming from their rank and file. Perhaps if these agencies cleaned up their act, it would stop giving parents a reason to distrust them.
Ken
Ken, I do wish David had a like button. Your last paragraph is spot on.
Hi Ken,
I actually somewhat agree with you. There is incompetence and corruption at our regulatory agencies. The solution to this, though, is NOT to punish the rank-and-file workers at those agencies (the corruption is at the highest levels) by taking away their rights (wages, collective bargaining, etc...) as our right-wing Koch-brothers-backed governor and legislature are currently doing, (trying to capitalize on popular "libertarian" discontent).
The solution is to work to make these agencies competent. Likewise, we also need to work on the competency of our dairy farmers and cheese makers. Ensuring safe and quality dairy products is everyone's job in the dairy industry. If the raw milk movement was smart, rather than trying to take on the regulatory agencies head-on over raw milk (a battle you are sure to lose) it would be focusing on the untested anti-biotics which are making it into the conventional milk supply. The EU (with all their socialistic tendencies) are finding anti-biotic residues in imported American dairy products.
btw... argument by anecdote is a logical fallacy in my book. Just because there was one instance of a group of people who don't live or work on dairy farms, drank raw milk and didn't become sick, doesn't mean that all raw milk produced for raw consumption is inherently safe for all people to consume.
As we have seen in innumerable cases (the Hartman case being the most recent) those who usually suffer the most because of raw milk illnesses are children. If the farmer or the parents don't have insurance, then who is going to pay their hospital bills if they come down with a serious illness?
I think that David was correct in the previous thread, when he explained our need to be able to see "shades of grey" here. Taking an absolutist stand is not helpful to anyone.
"Perhaps if the movement cleaned up its act, it would stop giving these government agencies a reason to target them."
Tell me Bill, did Michael Schmidt need to clean up his act?
Right. We all know full well this has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with power. They are targeted because they won't bend the knee to worship the corporate state.
Competency and government bureaucracy are quite often mutually exclusive groups. The nature of the beast dictates it. And when it comes to child protective services the corruption and incompetence is systematic and thorough and untold thousands of innocent lives have been destroyed because of it.
Michael Schmidt takes food safety very seriously, Pete. He is also a supporter of the Raw Milk Institute.
I find it interesting that you conveniently blame "government bureaucracy" while ignoring the vast corporate bureaucracies (which are far more powerful and more pervasive than those of the government proper) and their "incompetence."
Yes Michael does, yet he was still targeted by the state. Which was my point.
Oh I am well aware of the vast corporate bureaucracies. But when it comes to raw milk and child services is is government bureaucrats holding the gun. Unlike you I equally oppose both forms or tyranny as well as other burgeoning forms of bureaucracy such as those groups who wish to control the reigns of the growing raw milk movement through certification.
You are right Pete. Children should be the private property of their parents, just as slaves were the private property of their masters. Never mind the occasional child whose health is destroyed for life because of irresponsible raw milk producers/consumers. Those cases don't matter. All that matters is your private property (aka your children) and your individualistic "freedom."
No Mr. Anderson, you're mistaken. Children are the property of the government and the "experts". At least, that is the message with which we are being constantly barraged.
Doubtless, if you observed my parenting you'd find plenty to disagree with, and if you have children I'd probably have my private opinions about your parenting. But in the end, you and I are the best people to make decisions about the trusting, dependent, vulnerable little people God gave us.
Mama - you make a very valid point there "Children are the property of the government and the "experts"". How many times has the state & "experts" barged in & taken decisions making away from the parents when the parents wanted to do something alternative, whether it was home-schooling, medical treatments, home birthing, etc. This has happened time over time...how about the situation with the parents whose young son's cancer went into complete remission, but the medical "experts" wanted to continue to pump in dangerous, poisonous chemotherapy drugs, even though it was no longer warranted. The parents said "no more", the son was taken over by the state & the parents were brought into court. Luckily, there was a very savvy attorney & other advocates that were able to put a temporary stay against the state & the medical "experts". I haven't checked into the case recently, so I am not up to date with recent happenings. But this kind of stuff goes on all over the U.S. & many of it is never reported about.
These are the kinds of incidents that we want to believe will always happen to somebody else, and that there's more to it than meets the eye. Having dealt with the Social Service robots a couple of times (the first time very naively, eager to please, believing they were actually sincere), I view them as they do parents: Guilty until proven innocent.
Really?
I was told by one "libertarian" that their children are the property of God.
Perhaps you can clarify? I would like to live in a Republic that actually valued the well-being of its families (and not just the well-being of its fetuses, thank you Rand Paul...)
What does this have to do with the subject of raw milk?
We don't need a fraudulent capital-R "Republic", like your corporate state, we need the restoration real, organic human communities. That's the only organic (and therefore legitimate and effective) basis for any group action or oversight where it comes to food, child-raising, or anything else.
"the restoration of real, organic human communities."
Perhaps you could explain this to me, Russ? By using the term "restore" you are presupposing that there was some time period that we are trying to return to. To mean, this sounds awfully like an ahistorical romantic ideal. What makes some communities more "organic" than others, and what historical community would you point as an example of this ideal?
I only use the term "Republic" here in reference to the widespread "libertarian" adoration for the ideal of a Constitutional Republic -- the ultimate irony when you consider that Ron Paul has stated on several occasions his sympathy for the confederacy during the civil war.
Wisconsin is the birthplace of the Republican Party (it was founded in Ripon, WI in the 1850's by suffragists, socialists, and abolitionists... very different than the Republican Party of today). We also have a history of progressive Republicanism (i.e. Wisconsin governor W.D. Hoard who was largely responsible for making us America's Dairyland, and later "Fighting Bob" LaFollette the famous progressive Senator who opposed US entry into World War I and as governor made Wisconsin a "laboratory of democracy" by purging corruption from the halls of government).
Milwaukee, Wisconsin is also the only city in the US to have had two socialist mayors. They were "sewer socialists", responsible for their popular public works projects and for eliminating graft from city hall.
The legacy of struggling for a socialist Republic is part of my heritage as a Wisconsinite, just as is drinking raw milk and producing top-quality cheese. I am definitely not in favor of the corporate state. I am pro-civil liberties and anti-corporate. I just do not believe in the "libertarian" (read: right-wing) nonsense that passes for political ideology here. This style of "libertarianism" becomes an excuse for naval-gazing and ignorance of issues larger than oneself.
sorry, typo in second paragraph:
"To ME, this sounds awfully like an ahistorical romantic ideal"
Organic communities are those which have a natural logic, being based on a watershed or foodshed, and engaging only in demand-based economic activity. Only under these circumstances does there then arise human community in its richest sense.
Modern, fossil fuel-based, capitalist (which includes statist socialism) systems assault this in every way. They dissolve and/or forcibly destroy all aspects of culture and community, forcibly turn people into atomized individuals and then force them into mass "societies", while dividing them with arbitrary borders, turn politics and economies upside down by commanding them from the top down, forcing supply rather than responding to demand, and operating in every way in contemptuous, hubristic defiance of nature rather than in organic accord with it.
All this is made possible by fossil fuels. Contrary to your epithet, you're being typically ahistorical when you regard the pathologies of fossil fuels, a tiny blip in the timeline of history, as any sort of norm. It's just that modern people are especially devoid of any historical consciousness, and see whatever happened to today as an eternal verity. (That's the only meaningful definition of modernity - the period of ahistorically high energy consumption on account of the one-off drawdown of the fossil fuel principal.)
Meanwhile the evidence of anthropology, contrary to the pseudo-historical lies of capitalism you're implicitly siding with here, is that for the vast majority of humanity's natural history, most people lived cooperatively. Read Graeber's "Debt" for the best synthesis of the real historical facts. The only thing "romantic" is lies about competition, barter, invisible hands, and that there's anything natural or historically normal about oil's and industrialization's command economy.
Hi Russ,
I just finished Graeber's "Debt: 5,000 years" a few weeks ago. In fact, I sent a copy of the book to David Gumpert, as well as to another leading raw milk "libertarian", to show them the fallacy of the free-market fundamentalism that is pushed so aggressively in this movement.
Graeber also has a short book "Towards an Anarchist Anthropology", that you should read, in which he demolishes the romanticization of "primitive" societies. Although its true that these pre-agricultural gather-hunter societies often had more leisure time and less disease than their agrarian counterparts, they were not all inherently egalitarian or entirely peaceful societies.
I don't know what "pseudo-historical lies of capitalism" I am implicitly siding with here. Could you please clarify, Russ? Are you questioning the undoubtedly capitalist development of milk hygiene technology over the last 100 years? (i.e. sanitation, bacterial testing, refrigeration, etc...)
Sorry, I reject any necessity for a commingling of thousands of sources of milk in the first place, because I see no need for the industrialization of milk. Pasteurization was first of all a requirement capitalism imposed upon itself. It's circular reasoning to claim the necessity of anything which does nothing but add to the unnecessary Tower of Babel. I reject the whole thing. Milk wasn't a safety problem in natural (local) markets.
As for natural societies and human economies, of course neither Graeber nor any other believer in democracy "romanticizes" them. We point out that they were far less vicious and destructive than Hobbesian state/corporate "societies". (There was a recent scam book from Steven Pinker which was all about using fraudulent accounting to "prove" that the world of Wall Street, Walmart, BP and Monsanto is "less violent" than the pre-industrial world. That's the kind of pseudo-historical lie that any statist, and especially any believer in the "progress" of political and economic hierarchies, sides with.)
I'm not talking about commingling of milk from thousands of sources, Russ. I'm talking about single-source raw milk for raw milk cheese making.
Also, milk did have safety problems prior to municipal milk hygiene laws passed in the early 20th century. Most often the problem was adulteration with preservatives or chalk. The push for milk purity laws was often led by urban women's leagues concerned about the welfare of their children.
Wisconsin had an entire "filled cheese" crises in the late 1800s, where cheese makers were skimming their milk, making butter on the side, and replacing the butterfat with lard or vegetable oil. The crises destroyed the reputation of Wisconsin cheese for over a decade.
I agree with you, however, that many of those problems were associated with capitalist industrialization and the economic pressures of commercialism, but its never that simple and one-dimensional. Human-scale economies also had issues, and it would be a huge mistake to try and romanticize them, as you are doing. Commerce is not going away. The industrial revolution is not going to be undone, although some of its excess baggage may be jettisoned. We need to learn to adapt to these new realities, rather than clinging onto the past. As Darwin said, “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”
Bill - where in Wisconsin are you located? I will be in the Milwaukee area during the week of Jun 4th thru the 15th. While I am there, I will be visiting Will Allen of Growing Power and his farm/facilities. I didn't realize that it was so close to our education center for my company, so now I want to take advantage & visit him on this next trip. Hopefully, you are not too far from Milwaukee as it would be great to visit you, too, but with my luck you are much further away.
Deb-
I live in Madison, which is a little over an hour's drive from Milwaukee.
Growing power is very cool, btw. Also, the owner of the cheese factory where I did my apprenticeship is opening another cheese factory in downtown Milwaukee -- clock shadow creamery.
Oh cool, I still have a number of relatives living in Madison. Haven't been there in some time, though. Do you know when Clock Shadow Creamery will be open? If it is during my stay, I will definitely have to check them out & bring back some cheese! Thanks, for the info.
I don't know when Clock Shadow Creamery is supposed to open. It is still a work in progress.
A few other foodie places to check out in the Milwaukee area: Outpost Natural Foods co-op, Milwaukee Public Market, and Larry's Market.
"The industrial revolution is not going to be undone."
Well, if you're simply going to continue asserting that cheap oil is infinite (or that it's going to be replaced by magic), then I guess there's no point going on with that topic.
Let's just say I'm not the one being, forget "romantic", I'd say downright mystical.
In the meantime I'll continue pointing out that since industrial agriculture is unsustainable, for that as well as environmental reasons, we have a practical imperative to relocalize it on a truly organic basis, in addition to the socioeconomic, moral, and public health imperatives to do so.
We must do it if we're to redeem our humanity, and we must do it if we merely want to eat as hominids.
Thanks for the Darwin quote. Although you're really making a Might Makes Right argument about corporatism and industrialization, in fact their temporal might is merely temporary, precisely on account of how unable their system is to adapt to change. Industrial ag is one big hothouse flower.
technological progress is always seen as "magic" til it's normal-ized. Thomas Malthus sailed on the Beagle with Chs Darwin. A century + half on, one thing we are sure of, is, Malthus was wrong then, and he's still wrong. For instance : Malthus had never seen a refrigerator. If anything ; the more people there are, the more talent and innovation and ability there is available to solve problems. A planet with its nuclear reactor at the perfect distance = 93 million miles = away, isn't going to 'run out of energy"
as for "redeeming our humanity" ....there's only one Person who can, and already did, accomplish that.
Russ, you are putting words in my mouth.
Unlike Watson, I do not believe that there are infinite supplies of oil. I am fully supportive of renewable energy and re-localization of all economic functions, including the food system.
My point is simply that the advances in hygiene and microbiology of the last 100 years are not going away. Russ, how much do you actually know about the history of the American dairy industry?
Most parents do value the well-being of their families (certainly more than a bureaucratic machine does)although their practices may not always be what we would have them. A great many of the problems we see now are the result of an interruption in the normal function of family and community life.
Also, here is a question I've been wanting to ask for some time now:
Can you explain why the 4-month-old being inside my body is always referred to as a "baby" by all my acquaintances (even those who support abortion)? Nobody has ever talked to me about my fetus. If it dies accidentally, people will express sadness. Therefore, my conclusion is that a baby becomes a fetus/inviable mass when it is not wanted. A mere word change, and ending its life is still,um-killing it.
Which bodes ill for other unwanted people...
Does someone have a better answer?
Sorry Sylvia, but I did not start this discussion and that's all I intend to say on this topic!
Mama, I agree, most parents do care greatly for their children and try their best to do what is 'right' with what they know. Everyone has their own belief system. (That belief system encompasses more than just religion).
Did you know that the correct medical term for 'miscarriage' is spontaneous abortion? Lay people and some medical people (to not offend others) may use the incorrect term. When someone has a miscarriage, it does not 'sound' nice to say, " She had a spontaneous abortion". The meanings of words change over time: being gay doesn't mean 'happy' as it did when I was a child.
The term 'fetus' refers to a developing mammal, which begins after the the embryonic stage and before its birth. For humans the stage begins around the 12th week of gestation. Before the fetus stage the correct term is an embryo,a developing fertilized egg. At 6 months gestation the unborn has maybe a 50% chance of survival (with unknown life-time medical/mental deficiencies). As for abortions, the majority are before the 8th week gestation, it is an embryo that is being aborted. For 2003; per the CDC 26% of abortions in the US were known to have been obtained at less than 6 weeks' gestation, 18% at 7 weeks, 15% at 8 weeks, 4.1% at 16 through 20 weeks and 1.4% at more than 21 weeks.
When people express sadness in a death of an unborn child, many times it isn't sadness for the child it is for the parents loss. The earlier the mother is in the gestational stage, the less sympathy she receives for her loss.
Why do some people say to the grieving mother, "Don't worry, you can have another one." ? or "At least you have other children" or "At least you weren't attached to it".... Callous responses for sure, even though they may mean well.
true, private property matters immensely. : the use and enjoyment of it is a right given to us by our God, with consequent response-ability of stewardship. It is the right upon which all the others depend, which is why it's essential we defend it against the predatory state. Assertion of private property is the anti-dote to communism. Like self-government, it belongs to those who actually do it.
Onus is on anyone who argues that state intervention results in less casualties than children cared-for by natural parents, to produce actuarial tables. In fact, the body count is about a million to one = children damaged by officious overbearing meddlesome statists versus parental neglect / mis-judgment. And that's before I trot-out the hard evidence of deaths and damage from the science falsely-called ... mandatory "vaccination"
ironically, the knee-jerk response of his ilk, whenever the "A" word comes up will be : that the fetus in the womb is the property of the pregnant woman ( known to us native-spearkers of the English language as, the "mother" ) to do with as she wants. Bring it to term / Kill it / carve it up and sell the parts = whatever.
believe it or not, to this day, feminist socialists use the Dred Scott case from the US Supreme Court in 1858, in support of their position that the fetus in the womb is the property of the one inside whom it resides, rather than another human being. They relentlessly use the argument that humans ought not to be property, as a blunt instrument for perpetuating their white guilt trip about something that stopped happening in America 150 years ago, but when it comes to artificial abortion ... they take the opposite position. In Dred Scott versus Kansas, 7 judges of the US Supreme Court ruled UNANIMOUSLY that Scott did not qualify as a citizen of Kansas because, being a Negro, he was only 3/5 a human being. The War between the States depropertied individuals who owned slaves, and converted that property to the federal govt., wholesale. ... no suprise when you understand the basic premise of communism ie., human beings are only animals, ultimately owned by the state. Mister Anderson has staked-out his position : the state Baal-god owns children. Versus the claim of Our God ( namely Jesus Christ) telling us that every child He gives us is a gift. Choose you this day which god you'll serve
I stand with Sylvia, Ken...you hit the nail square on the head on that last post!
Hear, hear, Ken!
I think David is quite right to observe that "Increasingly, the tenor of interactions between public officials and parents is that the government is in charge, and that parents are “guilty until proven innocent” rather than the other way around. "
This is a disturbing trend. How much better it would be for government advisers to recognize that NO ONE knows how to achieve best nutrition right now (and that it probably varies for each person) and that there is so much work to do. I would be pretty upset if I had followed the recommendations for a lowfat diet for my kids. Now we're finding out how crucial dietary fat is for brain function (among other body functions). I'm relieved that I followed my gut and my kids have always eaten plenty of fat. I, their mother, will decide what's best for them.
Let's Audit the FDA!!! I am new to commenting on this blog. But I have been reading it for at least a year or more. Don't know if anybody is interested in this idea but I just called Senator Mike Lee's office (I am from Utah) and asked them to pass on the message that I am interested in him co-sponsoring a bill with Rand Paul to rein in the FDA, a bill along the lines of the amendment from Rand Paul that got tabled yesterday. I also called Rand Paul's office and asked the same thing. Ron Paul has done this with auditing the federal reserve. Although the audit the fed bill has not yet passed, parts of it have been included in federal legislation. And acceptance of the idea is now the majority if Americans. And legislators are accepting it. It would be great that the majority of Americans awareness could be raised about the shenanigans of the FDA as well!
Let's Rein in the FDA! That's a better name it.
Bill: It's not AS IF we're in a Brave New World. It IS--we are. Read the book. We are there and digging in deeper...the main difference is how we got here.
I find it interesting that for every govt intervention, the right interprets it as Nanny State and the left interprets it as Police State. Yet, neither considers that since none of us wants this intervention, we could work together. Nope, each side just argues louder, often in violent agreement.
It is a fact of life that conspiracies happen every day. We see them with our own eyes. No, they don't all involve Roswell or grassy knolls. To lump all conspiracies into one bucket is disingenuous and to label people conspiracy theorists is an attempt to silence those with whom you disagree. Unless you are privy to every secret conversation that ever occurred, you cannot claim with any certainty whether something is a conspiracy theory or not. Sometimes events are the result of a couple of wealthy guys tilting the system in their favor with no collusion and sometimes there's a deliberate plan to subvert some situation.
I find the Pauls to be contradictory at best. Let's see--I am smart enough to decide to drink raw milk without government intervention. The govt is too stupid to run any federal program. BUT, the govt is better informed than me when it comes to matters of women's reproductive freedom! Go figure. Perhaps there's merit to the charge that the Randians are an adolescent boys club.
For context, I've mentioned here before that politically, I lean left. (Left as in Peace, Love, and Understanding not Left as in "pay for my student loans.") I've also mentioned that since I got involved with real food that there are folks of all stripes and who for a variety of reasons want real, fresh, nutrient dense food. It has astonished me how often I agree with my counter-parties on the other side of the aisle in these issues. Perhaps we don't all fit neatly on left/right sides. Unfortunately, out in the "real world," folks don't seem to want to let anyone have a hybrid opinion. We are a two party country for better or worse, and in the last decade, my opinion is that it's worse.
Bill, you might think more of capitalism if we still practiced actual industrial capitalism and not financial capitalism and if corporate charters still meant more than only return on shareholder value.
"Taking an absolutist stand is not helpful to anyone."
ROFL!!! As the saying goes, Physician, heal thyself.
Hi Sophie,
I am in favor forgiving all individual debts. Not just student debts, but also farmer debts and consumer debts. Personally, I am virtually debt-free because I make an effort to avoid the capitalist system whenever possible, but I would gladly stand in solidarity with such a movement to forgive individual debts.
Also, I am definitely not a Democrat or Obama supporter. I just think that those who claim that "the consumers is my inspector" are playing on consumer naivete for their own pecuniary profit. A professional system of dairy farm inspection and certification is needed if raw milk is to be sold to the general public. I say this as an artisan raw milk cheese maker who is very concerned that outbreaks from irresponsibly produced fluid raw milk will harm the market for all raw dairy products.
I think you make a great point about the labelling of people. Not only as conspiracy theorists, but as Communists, unpatriotic, etc. It's a sure way of ending any kind of discussion or attempts to provoke thought.
Doesn't it also seem as though when you really look at most people's behavior, they're not actually as different as their talk would lead one to believe?
For those of us here in California, the movement towards labeling of GM (genetically modified) foods is gaining momentum, but there is still much more that needs to be done to keep this moving forward. What I fear is something similar to what happened in Vermont, we need to make sure that does not happen here in California. There is a great article by The New York Times that just came out, you can read it here:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/science/dispute-over-labeling-of-genet...
I loved the reference to a woman who places warning labels on items that are known to have GM ingredients when she is out shopping!! There's also a great App for your iPad/iPhone with guidelines when shopping or eating out, it is available in the Apps Store and you can find their website here: http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/
It just astounds me that there are those who insist that there are no ill effects from GM ingredients when there is increasing evidence to the contrary coming out of the labs. For those of us in the medical field, we need to be promoting more public information. Of great concern is the strong evidence of: damaged immune systems, smaller brains, livers & other organs, odd shaped cell nuclei, compromised pregnancies, alterations of DNA, and many more problems. Recently, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine released its position paper regarding GM foods and they also contend that "GM foods pose a serious health risk". I would like to encourage those on this blog, especially those that live here in California, to help with this movement, to educate not only your family, friends and relatives, but your elected officials as well. Help to make a major change with regards to this issue. Find out how you can help support this movement, what groups that are in your area, find the websites, spread the word...whatever that it takes, please help with this issue.
If you have problems with the above link, try this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/science/dispute-over-labeling-of-genet...
Yes, this initiative is very important I believe for the rest of the country. I have donated to the cause. If we can beat back Monsanto in CA, I believe it might turn the tide in other states which are currently getting beaten down by Monsanto and their threat of lawsuits. Vermont was poised to pass a law to label GMO foods and then got beaten back by Monsanto threatening to sue them for violating Monsanto's "freedom of speech" I believe. If another $100,000 more or less can be raised by end of May 26, tomorrow, Saturday, they will get a matching $1,000,000. Please donate. You can donate a number of places but one place is here: http://www.organicconsumersfund.org/donate/moneybomb.cfm to drop the money bomb on Monsanto.
Thanks for your post Jan, yes, I am hoping & praying that we can get all the funds needed. It is a shame that a mega corporation can lord it over everyone else unless you have the funds to retaliate. Interesting that Vermont do not go back and threaten to sue Monsanto on the same grounds...."freedom of speech"!!
Yes Deborah, California is important because it's the 8th largest economy in the world I believe they said. And if a GMO labeling law passes in California, Monsanto will have to sue the people of California themselves and I don't know if they have figured out a way to do that. To me, Monsanto and the FDA are nearly synomymous. This would be a huge win against TPTB if this gets pulled off IMHO.
It would still sue the state, which would be in charge of enforcement.
Of course, any state who really wanted to fight Monsanto (which would become a paper tiger the second the government thug arm and welfare sack are withdrawn) could easily make it back off. Any state could easily make things very hard for the GMO rackets if it wanted to. The state governments of Vermont and Connecticut were simply using Monsanto's threat as the pretext to kill laws they really didn't want, but were too cowardly to vote down, given the overwhelming public support for food transparency. Monsanto's threat was the briar patch they begged not to be thrown into.
Yes, Russ, the problem is the "welfare sack", right? Not the fact that Monsanto has its own private mercenary army that could easily overwhelm any state national guard.
Paper tiger... what? I think you underestimate the true military and police power of our ruling class in America.
Whose the "chic-radical" and whose the real radical here?
Now you're just being silly, if you think Monsanto, or any other big corporation, can exist at all other than as the dependent of corporate welfare. (Including through fictions like "intellectual property", which is the very basis of Monsanto's business plan; do you even know anything about Monsanto's history, and its strategy developed in the 1980s?) And you also believe "corporations" have any existence at all other than as artifices of government and extensions of government? That's quite a bizarre metaphysics, and in line with your call for corporate control of real milk via RAWMI-type corporatization.
Not just radical chic, but pro-corporate radical chic.
(And your fantasy about Monsanto's "army", i.e. a handful of cowardly thugs completely dependent on the police, certainly reaches new heights of "internet gossip and conspiracy theories". I hear they train at Area 51.)
You obviously don't know me very well if you think I'm pro-corporate, Russ. Merely because I embrace some of the scientific and technological advances in milk hygiene and quality developed over the last 100 years does not mean that I am pro-corporate. It means that I know what I am talking about when it comes to raw milk quality. That's my job -- I'm a cheese maker.
For the record, I support putting massive public resources into converting our current petro-centered agricultural-industrial-complex into sustainable perennial polycultures, which should necessarily include pastoral grazing systems for milk and meat animals. But this requires a public commitment to sustainable agriculture, not the individualistic "libertarian" solutions advocated by the Joel Salatins of the world, which fail to directly challenge the underlying structural issues with the American food system.
If you think that corporations are merely artifices of the government, then how do you explain the modern multi-national corporation which is above and beyond sovereign governments, along with the World Trade Organization, IMF, World Bank, etc... that have the power to dictate public policy to sovereign governments?
Corporations are more than mere artifices or extensions of the government. They are governments unto themselves. The American Republic could collapse, but many of our most powerful corporations would live on despite its collapse.
The real centers of political power do not rest in the body politics. Our ruling class would never be so foolish to allow their power to be put up for a vote. The most important institution of power in today's America is the corporation, NOT the government.
How many divisions does the WTO have? The world would laugh at and reject it, the World Bank, the IMF, etc., if the whole structure wasn't enforced by US military and economic muscle. And who's going to enforce the evil plans of the African Wannsee Conference just completed in Chicago? We see one of the real reasons for Africom. (I notice you quietly abandoned the notion that Monsanto has divisions the second I challenged it. Ever wonder why Monsanto hasn't yet tried to penetrate Iraq in spite of extremely favorable Bremer-imposed laws?)
The fact is that around the world nobody wants the US corporate state, and within the US more and more people are recognizing that we don't need it, would be much better off without it, and can in fact get rid of it. The first steps are to reject it in our minds and start, as much as possible, refusing to cooperate with it. The Food Sovereignty movement is the best ground of all for the combination of rejection, civil disobedience, systematic resistance, political education and organization.
RAWMI's great sin was that, instead of trying to help strengthen this democratic movement, it sought to hijack it in order to corporatize real milk, in the same way various liberal front groups try to hijack Occupy for the Democratic Party.
Russ, Monsanto doesn't need the US gov't to carry out its business, when there are mercenary paramilitaries it can hire to do the job instead. For example:
http://digitaljournal.com/article/297701
My point here, once again, is that our problem is NOT the section of capitalism over which the public has direct control (in other words, the government proper, which is the favorite scapegoat for the "libertarians" who dominate this movement). The problem we face is the huge sections of capitalism over which the public has little or no control. Many of these private corporate tyrannies can and will stand on their own, if the publicly elected government were to implode.
I could talk to you more about the issues with RawMI, Russ (and I'd agree with you that there are some serious issues with it) but first we'd both need to agree that raw milk which is going to be sold for direct fluid consumption (other than sales to those who live or work on dairy farms) needs to meet higher quality and hygiene standards than raw milk for pasteurization. If you can't agree on this simple point, then there is no purpose in continuing the conversation.
Who on earth, other than the US government, would for a second have any response other than laughter to Monsanto's "intellectual property" pretensions, let alone enforce them? I think you fail to understand what kind of corporation could, in theory, directly sustain itself (perhaps the kind which actually controls and delivers a physical product), as opposed to PURELY fictive ones like Monsanto, who control nothing but ideological concepts.
Of course, command money is another such ideological reification, and it's hard to see how any corporation, purely mercenary in principle as well as practice, could continue if the US government, and therefore the fictive dollar, were to cease to exist.
You also seem ignorant of the fact that Blackwater, like all such outfits, is a pure dependent of corporate welfare, government contracts. The few "private" contracts it got were incidental to its government-kept essence. Indeed, the original business model for Blackwater was that this thug Eric Prince would serve as a Bush campaign "Pioneer", then leverage that connection into fat government contracts once Bush was in office.
So your example reinforces my point. Blackwater would never have existed other than as an extension of the government.
As for raw milk, I'm willing to talk about safety standards, but only once the discussion really is about food safety, not Orwellian "food safety". Certainly anyone like McAfee who throws around the term "safety" but does so in a context which wants to render state appeasement and industrial organic corporatization normative, is really talking about the latter. I say again, let's see the safety discussion which assumes the opposite, Food Sovereignty outside and in opposition to all such hierarchy, as normative.
(Also, why should "sales" to "those who live and work on dairy farms" be different from any other sales? How are you going to prove with sufficient rigor the theory of their greater ability to drink raw milk? Who's going to "certify" such people? Once again, all the problems you see are problems of a malevolent and irrational overall structure, but rather than look to transcend the structure, you want kludges within it. No such course has ever worked or will ever work.)
Alright, Russ, you read Graeber's "Debt", so surely you have to realize that coined "hard" money (as opposed to the "fictive dollar" you rail against) was an Axial-age creation that coincided with the rise of plundering mercenary armies. Since an armed soldier is a bad credit risk, they needed to be paid in something that didn't require the web of social obligations necessary for debt-based currency. Thus the rise of hard money.
It seems to me that you are playing into the Austrian/neo-classical economic narrative there ("fictive money") that fetishizes money as a commodity unto itself, rather than as a representation of social obligation and measurement of value. What is money anyways, except a social symbol? You sure as hell can't eat money, and since it will never be more than a "fiction", what is the point in fetishizing this issue?
re: safety. Let's talk Standard Plate Count, Coliform Counts, SSOP, HACCP, etc...
I'm a cheese maker. I think that cheese makes way more sense (for both economic and food safety reasons) as a medium for the delivery of the nutrients in raw milk. But as a cheese maker, I still want to know that the milk I am using to make raw milk cheese meets certain hygienic standards.
Like I said Russ... its easy for you to criticize. Try coming to America's Dairyland and help with a constructive and progressive solution to this issue. Its not as simple as you think.
Where did I indicate anything other than that all money is fictive? Specie even more than fiat, which at least in principle could be compatible with pro-farmer policy like Macune's subtreasury system. But in practice no government would do such a thing (the evidence record of history proves it), so there's no point fetishizing money at all. You're the one who keeps wanting to pick one side of a counterfeit coin.
I'd say the same thing in Wisconsin I'd say anywhere else - either you want concentrated power hierarchies or you don't. But if you want them (certainly nobody except the 1% NEEDS them), in order to import cheap stolen sushi or whatever (I'd bet anything you'd never be willing to pay the actual value of it, with no externalities on any people or the environment), you lose the moral and practical ability to complain about becoming their slaves.
Ever notice how this blog consists of Mark, Bill, and Gordon, against all the rest of us??? But you never hear from anyone from the Fall Through the Cracks Legal Defense Fund, unless it is something safe and non committing!!!
I guess it's all a matter of opinion, Barney....I could say the same about the likes of you against the rest of us!!!!
Deborah,
What part are you having a problem with???
No problem what so ever....like I said...it's all a matter of opinion!!
Today we all attended another Small Herd Working Group meeting in Sacramento with CDFA and DPH. I was impressed with Dr. Ann Whiteford our state vet...she held her own, kept the peace made real progress and really did a great job! It was also very interesting to hear Cristin Dahl comment on behalf of CDFA that CA was a Raw Milk State and that CDFA supports raw milk if it is done legally. This really took me by surprise. I think this is our governor coming through in his staff.
I was blown away to hear the stories from Two female owners of Conventional CA CAFO dairies. They had attended the meeting for the first time. Neither of them cared very much about raw milk ( either way it was not an issue for them ) ,...they were more concerned about rights and regulatory oppression of access to food. When ever they began to speak....their words became choked up and tears welled up.
They were deeply injured by the travesty of regulatory oppression and the financial damage that market disconnection and scars of the RAPE by processing industry had left on them. They loved their animals and their farms...they were so injured.... so financially and emotionally bankrupted. It was a true American story of trauma. I just wanted to share some of the abundance of love and sustained health I have from my experience with consumer connected raw milk. Such a huge difference.
None of the raw milk Cow Share operators or Family Cow Operators has had this damage or injury.
It was a course in American brutality brought by processors.
What was most curious to me was the complete lack of appreciation that they had on how to get out from under the oppression. They just worked harder and harder...they had not spent any time coordinating a strategic plan with other dairies to cooperate and over rule the processors.
So sad. Sounds like the Family Cow is finally nearing its discussion period and it will now go on the legislative process in the next few months.
Great partnerships and good understandings being had by all at this historic common ground meeting at CDFA. There is a bright future for raw milk in CA!! and it is happening because of engagement.
Also...CDFA pleaded with all of us to not listen to internet garbage....they regret the miss information that is going on that makes them look bad. They denied most of the junk that was being rumored and asked us all to look at the facts. They are not at all what the rumors are saying.
I think I have to agree. What might be a simple visit by an inspector...is internet rumored as a SWAT RAID.
When emotions and fear get involved the stories get bigger, longer and grander.
"I think I have to agree. What might be a simple visit by an inspector...is internet rumored as a SWAT RAID."
Mark, from this blog, aren't you are the one who put it on the Internet and rumored a swat raid when the state investigated a recent campylobacter outbreak :)
MW
That's right MW. I'm tired of the conspiracy theories and internet gossip.
As an artisan cheese maker, I just want the resources and support to make safe and quality dairy products. Unfortunately, the current emphasize on maximizing corporate profits, at the expense of quality artisan cheese, makes this exceptionally difficult. True craftsmanship is replaced by marketing gimmicks, and those who best play the corporate game are rewarded over those who are truly the best artisans.
We should not be forced to choose between quality and safety, but that is what our corporate masters demand. What shall we do to fight back? You tell me?
simple, you market your product direct to consumer. The internet makes that magically simple and profitable. Those who adapt, prosper. The monster food processors know this better than anyone, they're terrified, so they're using their bought+payedfor puppets in legislatures, to frame mischievous laws, to hinder and outlaw a genuine free market. In BC it's comical : the current Premier is frantically trying to stay in power. Every third sentence she says, repeats the words "free enterprise party", meanwhile this is one of the most restrictive markets you'll find in N America. The opposition being encountered by the Campaign for REAL MILK, is the dinosaurs resenting innovators with which they cannot compete ... fairly, that is. This is the age when the artisan can, and ought to, thrive
"What shall we do to fight back? You tell me?"
Don't buy it, or buy the least amount possible. Teach people to grow what they can, teach them how to cook, prepare, store various foods, barter with each other..... money (in many forms) talks. Educate the people of what really is in the processed foods, how it is grown and with what. People can't change without knowledge... I'd bet many really think that 'pink slime' is rare in ground beef.... a rose by any other name....
"CDFA supports raw milk if it is done legally."
Pattie was following the law and she still got a cease and desist letter from the state.... I haven't read anywhere where they "support" raw milk. Where is the proof? LOLOL misinformation that makes them look bad?? That would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. Fact: Pattie was within the law and she received a cease and desist letter....cdfa has proven the words on the internet are true.
"the judge's suggestion the parents might bear some responsibility for their child’s illness, "
David,
If the judge et al were to state that the parents bear some responsibility, then wouldn't they also bear that same responsibility if the kid is over weight? or injured playing sports? riding their bike? roller skating? Or if they became sick eating lunch meat or a hotdog? Or how about if the child gets a cold or flu? an allergic reaction to something? Where would it all end? maybe the parents aren't teaching the child the 'correct' morals, or religion? Will they stop at just children? What about adults that are obese? or ill? or non compliant with the physician ordered medicines? What will happen to them?
Sylvia, I think you have hit on the crux of this issue. But I would expand this beyond the narrow relationship between individual parents and children, and look at the issue on a societal level: What kind of society and environment does each generation leave for the next?
I like the Native American saying that "We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children." There is also the seventh generation rule, that every decision must take into account the affects on the seventh generation.
In other words, we are looking at this issue in completely the wrong way. Rather than seeing this as a breach or imposition on parental responsibility, we need to see how our own approach to raw milk is going to harm or help the next generations.
Again... I would point to the French approach, where they feed brie to babies (rather than fluid raw milk) to get them used to the flavor of raw milk cheese.
http://www.insitelawmagazine.com/Family3children.htm
I would expect 'parental responsibility' to mean, food, clothing, education and shelter for a child. i also wouldn't expect the govt to interfere with how I raise my child or with what I feed them.
All the chemicals in infant formula is toxic, yet it is pushed on mothers and babies.
http://www.dairyherd.com/dairy-news/Mother-warns-against-feeding-raw-mil...
"there’s always a slim chance that there’s going to be bacteria in that......"
Well hell, this is true of any foods...
"The only way to make sure there’s not that chance is by pasteurization. "
Another misconception, wonder why they didn't point out those recent deaths from pasteurized milk?
Back to the same statement, if you don't want to consume raw dairy, then don't.
6 decades on this mortal coil, have taught me one thing : we're being farmed. Unless you participate in the breeding program run by the Great Shepherd, all your anti-christ social-ist claptrap is irrelevant .... Mister Anderson ; before you go on with all the book-larnt verbiage about 'ethics of actions in light of consequence to the next generation ( and 6 more after that)' - please tell me how many children you've had, and raised, so as to bring any of that about? If your personal production at this point is "Zero", what the hell do you know about anything?
Pages