For those people expecting the upcoming trial of Vernon Hershberger to provide a jury verdict on the benefits of raw milk, theres been a glitch. The judge in the case, Guy Reynolds, said yesterday at a pretrial hearing that the words raw milk cant be uttered (uddered?) during the trial, scheduled to begin May 20 in Baraboo, WI.
As a result, indicated the judge, there can be no mention of adulterated products, or of raw milk being inherently dangerous–favorite government code.
Those hoping to see a jury vindicate raw milk as a healthy and nutritious product as part of Hershbergers acquittal may be disappointed. But could it be that removing the contentious matter of raw milk will work to the dairy farmers benefit?. To my un-legal mind, it seems as if the judges decision will allow the trial to focus on the issues of licensing, permits, and government regulation of food, possibly addressing the larger question of whether farmers and consumers can engage in private contractual transactions, outside the public regulatory system.
But then, the prosecution has worked hard to maneuver the upcoming trial so as to keep the trial narrowly focused on the question of whether Hershberger violated the law by failing to obtain dairy and retail food permits. And the judge seems to have helped the state by ruling yesterday that the state neednt prove that Hershberger demonstrated criminal intent by failing to obtain permits. That should theoretically make it easier for the prosecution to convince a jury of Hershbergers guilt.
But jury behavior can be difficult to predict, in any case, and especially in highly dramatic ones like the Hershberger case. Besides the prosecution energy given over to severely limiting what can be discussed at the trial, an indication of the trial’s likely contentiousness is the fact that the county has summoned about 130 prospective jurors to show up on the morning of May 20. That is more than the entire courtroom in Baraboo can hold. And the two sides have submitted witness lists totaling 75, also a very large number.
In expectations that the trial will attract much interest, the county has also set aside at least two overflow rooms for video streaming of the proceedings. There is a Facebook page with specifics about the trial.
**
Ed Shank, the owner of The Family Cow dairy in Pennsylvania, says he wasnt surprised that government scientists used an outbreak of illnesses from his dairy as supposed proof that raw milk cant be produced safely (via an article in the journal, Clinical Infectious Diseases, described in my previous post).
Its just further evidence of the regulators efforts to hold raw milk to different standards than other foods, he says. When dozens of people actually die (not just get diarrhea) from cantaloupe in both 2011 and 2012, I guess it proves that its an absolute impossibility to grow and produce raw cantaloupe. It just cannot be done. Might as well stop trying. This settles it. Those facilities also were all state inspected and passing at the time of the outbreaks. So yup…it is proven. All cantaloupe must be cooked from here on out.
His request: Just treat raw milk farmers like all other food producers is all I ask. No preferential treatment. No discrimination either. Our own government maliciously, boldly, intentionally, openly, unfairly discriminating against us is what creeps me out. Equally creepy is that so many of the academia consider this discrimination just and normal treatment of fellow Americans. So normal that they cant even see the discrimination.
He points out that he has already taken it upon himself to implement the studys main recommendation (aside from making raw milk illegal) to conduct more testing. The study noted: Although the [Family Cow] dairy had tested for Escherichia coli O157:H7 more frequently than required, testing for other pathogens, such as Campylobacter, was only performed biannually (per PDA requirements). State officials should consider additional regulations, such as monthly pathogen testing.
Shank says he has implemented a protocol whereby his dairy now holds all milk for a day and tests it in-house to confirm his milk meets the same standards as pasteurized milk. The advanced protocol didnt come from the state, however. Our advice and problem solving team during that time was almost entirely the raw milk farmer community. The regulators did nothing to help or educate. They had no ideas. Mark McAfee on the other hand was positively a rock of support and practical solutions. He instantly pin-pointed the possibility of our water heater failing. He gave us an action plan, and also mentored us in setting up our own on farm laboratory to do test and hold. We are forever grateful.
In fact, After being recipients of that kind of productive support, we feel inspired, even obligated to do the same for other raw milk farmers. Farmers come to us for advice since the recall. No one wants to go through what we went through to learn what we learned.
The dairys openness and commitment to reducing risk has played well with its customers, to the extent that business has expanded 50 per cent since last years illness episode, according to Shank. Our current monthly raw milk sales is 110,000 servings (16 servings per gallon). So if you extrapolate backwards (use 80,000 as the average month since we have been growing all along) in the last 15 months since the recall, The Family Cow safely supplied an estimated 1,200,000 servings of raw milk to our growing tribe of ecstatic East Coast moms. Maybe those who say it cannot be done need to get their heads out of the sand and come for an interview!
**
That effort by Illinois public health officials to do an end run around existing state law allowing raw milk sales, and clamp limits that would effectively end raw milk sales in the state, is being promoted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA works extremely hard to remain in the background of the various state campaigns to limit and ban raw milk, trying to project the image that such efforts are random efforts of individual states. But behind the scenes, it hands out grants and cooperative agreements to state public health and agriculture departments in desperate need of budget dollars.
The web site Prairie Advocate captured a piece of this FDA maneuvering via a lengthy report, including video segments, of a May 1 hearing by the Dairy Working Group organized by the Illinois Department of Public Health. It turns out that the FDA is not only funding the states Dairy Working Group, but it had a representative on hand at the hearing. Its rep was caught off guard, as you will appreciate from this report of an exchange by a questioner on the DWG with the FDAs representative:
|
The Food Safety Modernization Act was explained by Larry Trandel of the FDA. The Act is legislated by Congress and directs FDA to further enhance their program to supply a safe food supply to our nation. This was a point of contention with several of the DWG committee members, especially Kevin Reid, board member from Chicago. I understand that the FDA has not approved the interstate sale of raw milk, which begs the question: Why are you here? The question caught Trandel a bit off guard, but he responded that he was an advisor under the Food Safety Committee for 2 or 3 years. Reid again questioned that since this was a states rights issue; why are you advising the states? Trandel stated that one of the reasons for his advisory role was that Raw Milk is considered by FDA as potentially hazardous food, and recognized that most of the audience would object to that statement, since most were raw milk advocates and lived to tell the tale. Reid said that he sees a conflict of interest with the FDA granting operating funds to the IDPH, when this is not a federal issue, as the role of the FDA is only in an advisory role, confirmed previously by the FDAs Trandel. It is a federal issue, in that the FDA is very much concerned about public health, Trandel said. Many times, our authority is involved with Interstate Commerce, Trandel replied. We try to work with the states where possible. But hasnt the federal government taken themselves out of the raw milk game by banning the interstate commerce of raw milk? Reid asked. Can you have it both ways? We do not consider raw milk safe for human consumption. All raw milk is considered potentially adulterated, Trandel claimed. |
When I come to Pennsylvania next week, I will presenting two presentations….one in the evening with our standard consumer outreach educational piece called Share the Secret and the other presentation will be the RAWMI basic training for a couple of hours the next morning.
All are invited to attend. if you know anyone in the regulatory circles…drag them over. We would love to edcuate them.
Ed is one of the brightest and he has one of the most compelling raw milk stories. A story to be emmulated. A true pioneer.
All the best,
Mark
I don’t believe it is just one issue on why they are so against raw dairy. Part of it is because the big dairy feed lots cannot produce raw milk for consumption and the raw milk consumers are growing larger all the time. This is or will make a huge dent into the factory dairy producers,(aren’t boiled milk sales down?)
I’ve never heard of a big dairy being even partially as open as Mr. Shank. Conflict of interest indeed.
“All raw milk is considered potentially adulterated,”
MW dictionary: :” to corrupt, debase, or make impure by the addition of a foreign or inferior substance or element; especially : to prepare for sale by replacing more valuable with less valuable or inert ingredients ”
Appears raw milk is UNadulterated and boiled milk is adulterated.
CA Farmers that have almonds or walnuts are making tons of money in CA right now. It is also very interesting to note that sales of almond milks are rising….perhaps an exodus from cows milk to almond milk is the new conventional fluid milk. No more cowsfor pasteurized fluid milk….it will be milking the trees instead. Trees do not kick and they sure do not crap…Pasteurized milk is dead and almonds will be replacing it for the mainstream…raw milk will be reserved for the true believers and those that are in the know and demand a whole nutrient dense bioactive immune system food…it will not be cheap like almond tree milk. http://www.google.com/imgres?q=growth+of+sales+of+almond+milk&start=260&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=572&tbm=isch&tbnid=IsmfBoPc5JPbgM:&imgrefurl=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/29/graph-of-the-day-americans-are-drinking-less-and-less-milk/&docid=4ce5lVE3FNEctM&imgurl=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/12/fluid-dairy.png&w=367&h=474&ei=2xGLUbWpLoHkyAHHmIHIAQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=70&vpy=41&dur=24437&hovh=255&hovw=197&tx=141&ty=125&page=10&tbnh=134&tbnw=103&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:61,s:200,i:187
Almond milk sales up 500% in one year in one market and soy is dropping just like pasteurized cows milk consumption.
All the while….raw milk sales rocket skyward!!!!
I know the article at the link isn’t about raw milk, it’s about fda censorship of health claims and advertising (for supplements and the like), but insert raw milk in all the right places and it fits the definition. So if raw fresh milk were being sold just because it’s raw fresh milk and it tastes great, would the fda be trying to stop people from having access to it?
http://emord.com/blawg/fda-presumes-itself-omniscient-and-consumers-ignorant/
All almonds sold commercially are pasteurized in the US, so they’ve adulterated the almond before it gets further processed.
http://www.bluediamond.com/?navid=52
http://www.wegmans.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?productId=716749&storeId=10052&langId=-1
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/02/usda-develops-new-more-efficient-method-of-almond-pasteurization/#.UYuN58oZT_o
OMG 29 people out of the whole US became ill…so now we all must avoid the tainted commercial almonds. These so called “experts” are killing people.
http://foodidentitytheft.com/trying-to-avoid-almonds-that-are-gassed-heres-a-little-guide/
Oh we can all get ahead of the game and trade mark our own “raw milk flavor”. (said with sarcasm) It’s only a matter of time before someone comes up with it.
1. You can say the Hershberger trial is not about food safety or the benefits of raw milk but you can’t say it is not about raw milk.
2. Judge Reynolds said he didn’t want to talk about the benefits of raw milk or the problems with pasteurization and assumed that the state was only concerned with food safety. OK than, lets talk about the states definition of food safety.
This is what the CDC
passes off as an out break of
foodborne illness:
1. Illness; diarrhea and not cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, lactose intolerance etc. Aren’t these what the public would naturally assume the state is referring to.
2. Food; only agricultural commodities and not canned food, cakes, cookies, candy, soda, chocolate milk etc. Again, not what the public would natural assume.
3. Outbreak; 73 cases in 3 months, while the nearly 300 million other cases of diarrhea in this country are not even acknowledged.
4. Association; cucumbers, because 67% of the 45 ill interviewed ate cucumbers while only 44% of the well people surveyed ate cucumbers and not because of any actual Salmonella contamination found.
5. Blame; 2 Mexican producers because 6 of the 45 ill interviewed eat their cucumbers and not because of any actual Salmonella contamination found.
Posted April 25, 2013 12:30 PM ET
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/saintpaul-04-13/index.html
4. These judges and lawyers need to stop laughing. 300,000,000 Americans suffering from malnutrition while paying $1000 a month for medical insurance just to die of cancer at age 60 when they could be dying in their sleep at 120, isn’t funny. They need to think about their children before they give up their right to healthy food. CAPTCHA I can’t tell the 9’s from g’s.
5. Judge Reynolds Said he doesn’t what the jury to hear any talk of why there was a hold order in the first place because he didn’t want to open the discussion of pasteurization. Acknowledging that the state had no legal reason to be at Vernon’s farm doesn’t mean we want to talk about pasteurization. I think the judge may be protecting DATCP from some bad press and possibly even some legal repercussions. I was at another trial were a judge had to tell an attorney three times he may want to rephrase what he was admitting to because it would put him in contempt of court before the attorney finally got it and actually did rephrase. When I looked at the transcript the attorneys admission wasn’t there. Only his excuse for it was left. Judge Reynolds is concerned with public opinion because he reprimanded the district attorney for his interpretation of the judges ruling on Vernon’s religious beliefs because it made the judge look bad in the newspaper.
6. The district attorney made it a point that the state has not charged Vernon with selling raw milk but he didn’t say why they haven’t. The only possible reason is that they can’t because raw milk is not illegal and they can’t require a permit that does permit the sale of raw milk which is the primary function of Vernon’s food club and the only reason many of it’s members joined.
7. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Consumer+Protection …substantial injury of consumers is the most heavily weighed element, and it alone may constitute an unfair practice. Such an unfair practice is illegal pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission Act… the judge can’t say Vernon is not protecting his club members without saying that pasteurization doesn’t hurt them. Didn’t Judge Reynolds say he didn’t want to talk about pasteurization?
8. The goal of consumer protection laws is to place consumers, who are average citizens engaging in business deals such as buying goods or borrowing money, on an even par with companies or citizens who regularly engage in business. Historically, consumer transactionspurchases of goods or services for personal, family, or household usewere presumed fair because it was assumed that buyers and sellers bargained from equal positions. Starting in the 1960s, legislatures began to respond to complaints by consumer advocates that consumers were inherently disadvantaged, particularly when bargaining with large corporations and industries. Several types of agencies and statutes, both state and federal, now work to protect consumers from unfair business practices. In Wisconsin it is DATCP and the district attorneys office.
these days, with leave of the Court, people before the bar are allowed to record the proceedings strictly for their own use. As well, we can purchase a CD of the proceedings, supposedly, un-edited
I recommend that Vernon Hershberger, and others, make a pre-liminary application for someone to record the proceedings on video from the gallery
RMMike, thanks for taking the time and notes to keep us informed much more than we ever can depend on corporate media to do. We could be so happy if I knew how, I’d own the place but that might not make me happy anyways so who knows.
6. The district attorney made it a point that the state has not charged Vernon with selling raw milk but he didn’t say why they haven’t. The only possible reason is that they can’t because raw milk is not illegal and they can’t require a permit that doesn’t permit the sale of raw milk which is the primary function of Vernon’s food club and the only reason many of it’s members joined.
Back in 2002, we did got a camera in Court, for a DeTax trial in Port Coquitlam. Upon a Motion by the Accused Wm Kennay, Judge Angelomatis approved the proceedings being videotaped from the back of the Courtroom, with a copy delivered to the Crown Counsel, afterwards.
Now a decade later, it would be very important to have the Court in Hershberger’s case, address the question of whether or not the trial would be allowed to be ‘narrow-cast’ in real time, over the internet.
Regardless of what your position is on whether a Court is “open to the Public”, a Justice will take a very dim view of anyone who tries to record the proceedings from the gallery. In one instance here in BC, back in 1994, the Judge warned people that he had been notified by the Sheriffs that there was sureptitous recording going on, interfering with the Court’s equipment. Before the day was done, little Elizabeth Aird, was found in contempt of Court, for continuing to run her tape recorder after I’d warned her I’d cite her for contempt. Which I did.
Point being : you don’t want the thing to “go sideways” on some unrelated issue.
I did make application to the court, and the judge, Guy Reynolds, turned me down. He said only video allowed will be by the local television station, Madison’s Channel 3, which serves as a “pool video” for other stations, and a court closed-circuit TV. Problem with the “pool” is that tv stations only interested in a few segments they think will be newsworthy, and closed-circuit tv can’t easily be streamed via wireless. Other option is to broadcast a video of the closed-circuit video, and that is being explored now.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/10/us/disease-threatens-floridas-citrus-industry.html?hp&_r=2&
http://bangordailynews.com/2013/05/08/news/augusta/raw-milk-poultry-and-produce-bills-easing-small-farm-oversight-clear-big-legislative-hurdle/
I like scale appropriate. CA came up with scale appropriate standards last year with the Small Herd Working Group. Now a dairy with three cows can sell to the public. Standards will only be checked if you make someone sick. The standards are very much like RAWMI RAMP. Cause….RAWMI wrote the draft. Taking responsibility and transparency is how you seize back freedom.
The last paragraph of that article is fear mongering at its finest – the “risk” of listeria – it doesn’t say there IS/WAS listeria found, nor does it say why the foods were suspected. It simply implies a “risk” but fails to really say why.
Lynn