CheeseForum.org » Forum

GENERAL CHEESE MAKING BOARDS (Specific Cheese Making in Boards above) => Problems - Questions - Problems - Questions? => Topic started by: Threelittlepiggiescheese on November 14, 2012, 02:07:39 PM

Title: Wonderful Information
Post by: Threelittlepiggiescheese on November 14, 2012, 02:07:39 PM
As I was reading about all these people in the states that want to succeed I tripped over to the white house petition site and found this tidbit of great info about raw milk.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/food-safety-and-raw-milk
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Boofer on November 14, 2012, 03:27:24 PM
Thank you for that. The time to legalize the sale and distribution of raw milk is NOW. If not, then the sale of raw spinach, raw tomatoes, and other raw foods that have been in the news over the past years because of e-coli or salmonella infection should also be outlawed.

-Boofer-
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Gobae on November 14, 2012, 03:43:57 PM
Yes, that's very interesting. I never knew that the FDA only had regulations on INTERstate raw milk.  I guess if these people want raw milk they need to petition their State legislatures.

Their stats are interesting too, but somewhat unhelpful if you want to know what your real risk is.  They say that "Since 1987, there have been 143 reported outbreaks of illness". But in order to make the statistic useful you need to know how many total people drank raw milk during those 25 years. Do those 143 people represent 100% illness rate? .000001%? Less? There is a .000229% chance of being killed in a car accident every year is raw milk more or less dangerous?

Anyway, in NY there are several legal raw milk vendors who are inspected regularly for contaminants so purchasing raw milk is a non-issue here.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 04:45:34 PM
I agree and disagree, the issue is you can not regulate stupid or greed effectively. The problem is when you alow something then that means you are approving it. So when some one abuses the system doesnt maintain the standards and makes people sick how is the general public going to protect themselves?
They believe that if they were able to buy it on the store shelf etc that its safe its clean its.... I am all for direct sales, where I get to go see where I am buying from and decide yeah I think you are selling a quality product, my concern comes with volume, and accountability. If you want raw milk that means raw, Spinch can be washed, Beef and chicken properly cooked, etc but other then maintaing the source there is no control over quality of the finished product with raw milk.
Stats on the sales volume of raw milk, vs illness would deffinatley make things make more sense. What is teh danger level, and where are we willing to put money to keep people safe? Higher dozens more of state inspectors to REGULARLY be able to inspect facilities and do testing? Pay wages pensions benifits etc so you can have the choice to buy a product that I as a tax pay may not want? Is your right to be able to maybe buy it on teh shelf beside the one I want worth all tax payers footing the bill?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: linuxboy on November 14, 2012, 05:20:07 PM
Quote
only had regulations on INTERstate raw milk.
Yes, technically, per the CFRs. But it's a bit more complex than that due to case law. FDA governs not only final product, but also any inputs into final product and packaging. Could be argued that packaging coming from another state or grain or hay is an ingredient. Or the animal.

Another issue is the FDAs mandate to protect public safety. Because Congress has ceded this authority to the FDA, it is conceivable that this argument would prevail if it wanted to make a seizure. It's a bit of a mess overall, no clear lines, and internal guidance is very murky on what constitutes inter-agency jurisdiction here.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 06:30:44 PM
I am one of those nasty people who believe in freedom, and not Big Brother dictating to me what I should/can do/buy in the interests of public safety.

How safe is fast food compared to raw milk? We all know the obesity issues related to fast food, so by all means, let's remove fast food in the interest of "public safety" and totally remove the decision process (and accountability) from the average citizen...after all...Average Joe is incapable of making decisions for himself, so we should abdicate that right to those who know better.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 07:28:17 PM
LOL Bbracken,
I agree and disagree! The obesity issue caused by fast food is an exellent example that the average Joe can not think and decide for himself!
The other issue is you want the right to eat/drink etc what you want, so it is your beliefe we should do a way with food inspection all together? Why close a restraunt due to health violations I have the Right to eat what I want?? Regardless of the practices going on?
Look at the debate on child hood imunization or, breast feeding, religion, cults etc! none of those would be a debate if average Joe could think for himself!
Then you add greed to the mix, what makes me money the fastest? where can I cut a corner and get more profit! Maybe thats not your mind set but you dont know any one who would? And deffinatley no one running a dairy would do something like that so... there is no issue no need for oversight or regulation?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 08:38:47 PM
I would like to add, I do not mean to be insulting or argumentative, I just don't think its a simple yes no decision.
I want the right to buy Raw milk, but taking away regulations is a pretty broad statement, so is asking for legalized raw milk sales.  I am willing to bet many of you are WAY more informed then I am, and that is the issue, I am not informed, and how do I get that information, where does the time etc come I rely on rules etc to help me when getting my car fixed, buying a cra seat for my children as well as buying my groceries, I also recognize that its not a perfect system and mistakes are made.
However I am againt blanket solutions that go either way! Both 100% free as well as 100% controlled. In Canada the sale of Raw milk is 100% illiegal, some people try and call it a beauty product or other loop holes, but simply put it is illegal. I happen to disagree with this rule. Not only because it impedes on my choice, but as much so that it interfeers with my ability to choose, It is my beliefe that people as a whole in a group are no different then cattle! They will get in line cuz that what the first person did, eat what is given and..... But I think that the safety of the group is as important as the safety and choice of the individual!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 09:04:00 PM
I could argue how meat inspections are ACTUALLY conducted (as opposed to what people think), I could argue that health inspections are ineffective in preventing food poisoning and I could also argue that any business that does not observe common sense cleanliness will not be in business for long.

Pasteurization was needed a century ago, but today's knowledge, availability of stainless equipment, and grading of milk amongst many factors, makes raw milk today much safer than that which was drunk by your great grandparents.

If you had read any of the many books about the modern meat, grain, fast food (just read fast food nation), processed food industries you would not be so trusting when it comes to putting your safety in the hands of a govt. Past and current policies, as well as the gov't's influence on the direction of these industries has had a direct affect on our country's obesity.

Inspections, as currently done, will not, cannot, prevent you from eating beef from a cow infected with mad cow's disease. If you buy a tube of ground beef you are likely eating beef from thousands of cows and all it takes is one....consider how often thousands of tons of beef are recalled periodically. Do you think it was caught by a federal inspector?  ha

IMHO if the govt had stayed out of it all we would be much better off now.

I have a problem when it comes to other's telling me how I should lead my life...something called freedom. Ben Franklin wrote: "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither".

Here in Texas when the raw milk issue came up (to legalize) guess who was against it....  The big Dairy producers...We won a small victory by making it legal to buy directly from a farm, but heaven forbid that raw milk be allowed to compete with the lesser quality milk that could not be sold raw, but can be once pasteurized (can you say, mastitis?). 
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 09:09:24 PM
LOL Bbracken,
I agree and disagree! The obesity issue caused by fast food is an exellent example that the average Joe can not think and decide for himself!

I see...so you are in favor of dictating what McDonald's menu should be?

You must also be in favor of removing choice from Average Joe...if so then he shouldn't be allowed to buy alcohol, tobacco, soft drinks, processed foods, fast food, cars, weapons, etc etc etc...and you might as well provide his daily food, the roof over his head, and then train him for the job you think he is capable of performing.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 14, 2012, 09:34:26 PM
I agree and disagree, the issue is you can not regulate stupid or greed effectively.
Few truer statements have been uttered.
The problem is when you alow something then that means you are approving it.
They believe that if they were able to buy it on the store shelf etc that its safe its clean its.... I am all for direct sales, where I get to go see where I am buying from and decide yeah I think you are selling a quality product, my concern comes with volume, and accountability.

In a literal sense, this is of course not true, but I think your point is more about the perception. At least here in the US, we tend to trust the products which are on the store shelves because we trust the oversight which governs their placement (whether that oversight is government or eventually market). Given that the government oversees food regulation, if raw milk is on the shelf consumers are probably more likely to assume it has passed appropriate safety inspections, etc...
 
So when some one abuses the system doesnt maintain the standards and makes people sick how is the general public going to protect themselves?
I would argue that appropriate penalties should be in place. Heck, with as sue happy our culture is- why not? I would suspect that some labeling requirements would need to be in place.

If you want raw milk that means raw, Spinch can be washed, Beef and chicken properly cooked, etc but other then maintaing the source there is no control over quality of the finished product with raw milk.
A very valid distinction. Afterall, I wash my spinach- don't know about others...

Stats on the sales volume of raw milk, vs illness would deffinatley make things make more sense. What is teh danger level, and where are we willing to put money to keep people safe? Higher dozens more of state inspectors to REGULARLY be able to inspect facilities and do testing? Pay wages pensions benifits etc so you can have the choice to buy a product that I as a tax pay may not want? Is your right to be able to maybe buy it on teh shelf beside the one I want worth all tax payers footing the bill?
Well.... I am not sure I agree that something should be banned because it costs to much to make sure it is allowed correctly. When something is banned, the government is restricting personal freedom (in this case the freedom to buy raw milk). I think that is a decision which has deep implications with our culture where freedom is basically sacred. If the government if going to restrict freedom, there better be a dang good reason for it like public safety. If that is the case, the question then becomes "Does raw milk pose a significant enough danger to public safety to warrant it's being banned." I am not really convinced either way personally but I am not familiar enough with the issue.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 14, 2012, 09:42:49 PM
I am one of those nasty people who believe in freedom, and not Big Brother dictating to me what I should/can do/buy in the interests of public safety.
I would agree with you until kids start dying because some idiot school administrator makes a stupid decision regarding the lunch program on the grounds that it was "allowed". I do think the government should stay out of my personal business, but it also has a very high level view of things and as such I believe has a responsibility to define "reasonable" parameters of operation (IE laws, regulations, naming conventions, etc...) which ensure both "fair" distribution of resources and protect public safety.

How safe is fast food compared to raw milk? We all know the obesity issues related to fast food, so by all means, let's remove fast food in the interest of "public safety" and totally remove the decision process (and accountability) from the average citizen...after all...Average Joe is incapable of making decisions for himself, so we should abdicate that right to those who know better.
Eh.... I think there is a pretty big difference here. You can control a lot the safety associated with fast food. The "Unhealthy" aspect of fast food is more in the choice to eat it than it is in the potential for pathogens (theoretically). With raw milk, it is harder to control those things in a reasonable way.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 09:46:07 PM
With regards to raw milk, I think the 2 biggest problems are:

1) Education/knowledge.  People do not know it is available. People do not know what the benefits/risks are (but are full of misperceptions)

2) Big Dairy producers are against it and use their political power (lobbying, donations) to influence legislation against raw milk availability. This is huge and quite suspicious.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 14, 2012, 09:46:24 PM

I see...so you are in favor of dictating what McDonald's menu should be?

You must also be in favor of removing choice from Average Joe...if so then he shouldn't be allowed to buy alcohol, tobacco, soft drinks, processed foods, fast food, cars, weapons, etc etc etc...and you might as well provide his daily food, the roof over his head, and then train him for the job you think he is capable of performing.

That's kind of a big leap.....
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 14, 2012, 09:50:59 PM
With regards to raw milk, I think the 2 biggest problems are:

1) Education/knowledge.  People do not know it is available. People do not know what the benefits/risks are (but are full of misperceptions)
I suspect you are correct here!

2) Big Dairy producers are against it and use their political power (lobbying, donations) to influence legislation against raw milk availability. This is huge and quite suspicious.
Why? I would tend to think they would be more in favor of it? What would the problem be if it was allowed? They would save money on processing costs because they could release product that does not require homogenization and pasteurization. I am not intimately familiar with the industry but I suspect "little guys" would assume any particular significant advantage because of it. Big dairy will still be big dairy and will still have all of its advertising and buying power. So whats the problem from their end?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 09:52:53 PM
 ^-^
Yes I would have regulations control alot of those things!
Ben Franklin was drinking my granparents milk and as you pointed out things have changed since his time.

Is the food industry run perfectly no, is gun control perfect no, is the fast food industry run perfect no.

But leaving the decision to the masses is first of all socialism, but STUPID and dangerous! I dont know why its impossible to have a government with common sense, but its even more impossible for the masses to have common sense.
Because this is a Cheese forum I will stay focused on the milk and not my political views beyond that, but the end result is the abscence of rules does not make things 'safer', You have a succesful farm but operat with out rules? you raised children? without rules? are there issues Now with dairy products? Yes, Again i am in Canada which has a very different approach on Dairy then the US, But the end result is I believe lives are saved because of the rules, We both get to hide behind the fact that they will always be there so neither you nor I can be proven wrong but at what point would you even take my side how many lives are worth your freedom and who would you be suing if your choice was not the best?
I agree with farm direct sales I beleive it gives me the opportunity to be informed, But when I oopen the cooler at the grocery store and reach in to grab a gallon of milk I can ONLY assume all the milk is produced and treated the same, that there has been some measure (perfect or not) of accountability and quality assurance.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 10:03:46 PM

How safe is fast food compared to raw milk? We all know the obesity issues related to fast food, so by all means, let's remove fast food in the interest of "public safety" and totally remove the decision process (and accountability) from the average citizen...after all...Average Joe is incapable of making decisions for himself, so we should abdicate that right to those who know better.
Eh.... I think there is a pretty big difference here. You can control a lot the safety associated with fast food. The "Unhealthy" aspect of fast food is more in the choice to eat it than it is in the potential for pathogens (theoretically). With raw milk, it is harder to control those things in a reasonable way.

Total disagreement with your statement. The "unhealthy aspect" of raw milk is relatively easy to monitor and control.

If raw milk is such a public health hazard then we would see the effects as it has become more accepted during the last decade with a correspondingly huge increase in illness and deaths...instead what we DO see is an epidemic of obesity due to fast foods and processed foods during the last decade.

How many people die because of auto collisions and yet vehicles are not being banned.....public safety is an excuse.

The dairy I buy raw milk at has been in business ever since the sale became legalized (couple/3 years ago) and yet they are not getting their pants sued off because someone got sick...that is some public health hazard eh? More like the public health hazard has been blown out of proportion to a point of hysteria...naa...that doesn't happen in the good ole USA.
After all, what our politicians and big business tell us has to be true..I read that on the internet and so it has to be true!

"WASHINGTON, DC: Data gleaned from U.S. government websites and government-sanctioned reports on foodborne illnesses show that the risk of contracting foodborne illness by consuming raw milk is much smaller than the risk of becoming ill from other foods, according to research by Dr. Ted Beals, MD, appearing in the Summer, 2011 issue of Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation."
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 10:07:03 PM
Mighty mouse! Good job!
While I am sure we differ on a few details I agree strongly with you!

We dont live in the little isolated world of ben franklin or..... Your example of school lunches ect is exaclty where my fears cumulate to! Buy a farm raise your family and stay isolated there doing what you want, have the freedom you want in that space, the second you step out into the world and impact my life my safety I think I have a right to speak up!
I can not Speak for Franklin, but his qoute "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither" speaks to teh individual, not the group. Why does your Freedom get to influence my freedom and safety?
Criminals have more rights then honest law abiding citizens because of the attitude that your FREEDOM is more important then my security!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 10:08:33 PM

Why? I would tend to think they would be more in favor of it? What would the problem be if it was allowed? They would save money on processing costs because they could release product that does not require homogenization and pasteurization. I am not intimately familiar with the industry but I suspect "little guys" would assume any particular significant advantage because of it. Big dairy will still be big dairy and will still have all of its advertising and buying power. So whats the problem from their end?


http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/industry-ads-attack-raw-milk.htm (http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/industry-ads-attack-raw-milk.htm)

"Industry Ads Attack Raw Milk,
But Texas Bill Going Strong
By Judith McGeary, Esq. | February 5, 2011
The Big Dairy opposition to raw milk took a new turn recently when an industry group began running radio ads, across the state of Texas, warning the public away from raw milk. Not only did the ads include false and misleading information, but the campaign was being funded with farmers’ dollars, including fees levied on raw milk farmers."

Consider that if you had cows that had mastitis and you sold raw milk....your milk would be coming back as fast as it went out. However, if you pasteurize it, you can sell it and no one's the wiser.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 10:13:04 PM
Mighty mouse! Good job!
While I am sure we differ on a few details I agree strongly with you!

We dont live in the little isolated world of ben franklin or..... Your example of school lunches ect is exaclty where my fears cumulate to! Buy a farm raise your family and stay isolated there doing what you want, have the freedom you want in that space, the second you step out into the world and impact my life my safety I think I have a right to speak up!
I can not Speak for Franklin, but his qoute "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither" speaks to teh individual, not the group. Why does your Freedom get to influence my freedom and safety?
Criminals have more rights then honest law abiding citizens because of the attitude that your FREEDOM is more important then my security!

So, by definition, your world is safe from foodborne illness? I think not. Your children are safe from school lunches? I think not. Does hysteria and misinformation rule the day? I think so.

Oh...by your thinking it must be extremely safe to live in NYC because of their gun control laws...I think not.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 10:15:03 PM
If raw milk is such a public health hazard then we would see the effects as it has become more accepted during the last decade with a correspondingly huge increase in illness and deaths...instead what we DO see is an epidemic of obesity due to fast foods and processed foods during the last decade.

The epidemic of obesity is a control issue and a matter of personal choice and freedom!
There are regulations in place on the dairy industry that could be loosened with safety still considered I am not against Raw milk, however they are in place and as such no there are NO MASS illness and deaths, but just throughing the doors of freedom open will not maintain that.
As migghty mouse noted how many kids and people would need to die before it matters? You get to buy your raw milk with out you or the producer being a criminal! where would you like to see things? You have what you want and yet it is not enough what will be? I want what you have I think that gives choice and safety. The market can dictate howmany farmer take up raw milk and who deoesnt.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 10:17:27 PM
LOL texans and there guns!!
I should have the right to own build manufacture and sell nuclear weapons?
Do not interfeer with my freedoms!
I want it so i should have it!
What a pleasant world! Please run for president!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 10:22:15 PM
You try to distinguish a difference between an actual and statistically proven health hazard (fast food) and a perceived one (raw milk...one which is fostered by big business) and then try to equate a right guaranteed by our constitution with nuclear weapons?  Really?   

I have no words.... 

btw...it's their, not there...there is a place.

Also...while you are making a broad sweeping generalization...I just moved to Texas a year ago. I am originally from California.

And...govt regulation does not assure safety, far from it. What has been the increase in size of govt, the number of regulations and laws over the last 50 years? 50 years ago people often didn't even lock their doors at night. They didn't suffer from obesity at anything close to what we see today. They didn't suffer hysterical attacks of fear regarding the safety of their food. Need I go on?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 10:43:55 PM

As migghty mouse noted how many kids and people would need to die before it matters? You get to buy your raw milk with out you or the producer being a criminal! where would you like to see things? You have what you want and yet it is not enough what will be? I want what you have I think that gives choice and safety. The market can dictate howmany farmer take up raw milk and who deoesnt.

Is the assumption here that raw milk would not be subject to the same inspection/certification processes other dairy products are?

Your remark regarding "The market can dictate howmany farmer take up raw milk and who deoesnt." is wrong due to the fact that the market isn't being allowed to decide that due to legislation.

OH...and just to make sure we are all clear: I do not support govt intervention regarding fast food...they are the reason it is what it is. Read a little..educate yourself.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 10:48:23 PM
bbracken Yes you are right on both my spelling,
but more importnatly my generalization of texans it is sweeping.
I would ask why you dis agree with owning nuclear weapons but not automatic weapons, and a generalization that an industry that is controlled that has no majour health risks should be significantly un regulated would continue to offer the same safety standards! is about the same generalization, but more so to say that My individual freedoms on everything are more important then group security I think is even more sweeping, (I dont) do you know where and in what context Franklin even made that statement? I have a feeling it wasnt Raw milk or Automatic weapons.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 10:55:40 PM

Is the assumption here that raw milk would not be subject to the same inspection/certification processes other dairy products are?


Okay but correct me here you have freedoms! inspections and there for rules impose on those. I am NOT against Raw milk and never thought you were for regulating fast food. As for educating-  how I am un educated for being moderate in the middle liking some of both sides freedom and control security and choice. While an extrem veiw that disregards any good that has come from regulations (inspections and certifications) is more educated on the true meaning and issues and facts.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 14, 2012, 11:23:04 PM
bbracken Yes you are right on both my spelling,
but more importnatly my generalization of texans it is sweeping.
Funny...I saw more weapons being carried in Tennessee than in Texas (only weapons being carried here, that I have seen, are by police and private security) So unless you live here, you are making sweeping generalized statements based on perception... specially when you were referring to me, a Californian. 

I would ask why you dis agree with owning nuclear weapons but not automatic weapons, and a generalization that an industry that is controlled that has no majour health risks should be significantly un regulated would continue to offer the same safety standards! is about the same generalization, but more so to say that My individual freedoms on everything are more important then group security I think is even more sweeping, (I dont) do you know where and in what context Franklin even made that statement? I have a feeling it wasnt Raw milk or Automatic weapons.

This is the first time automatic weapons have been mentioned...reaching a bit? I will field it anyway...one could make a case regarding personal defense with a hand held weapon...kinda hard to make the same argument regarding nukes.  Also...the constitution guarantees the right to own and bear arms...somehow I don't think the Supreme Court would rule that nukes count as "arms".

The rest of the statement I am not sure I understand, but I will give it a shot anyway....No where did I even imply that dairy shouldn't be regulated. I would expect that the same regulations that apply today (ie: safe to consume) would continue to apply. The dairy farmer selling raw milk would be responsible for the cleanliness of his operation and the health of his cows and would also be responsible should "bad milk" be sold and all that implies.

With regards to the Franklin quote....I do not know the exact context of the statement (I am old, but not that old...I wasn't there), however in today's world it doesn't take much intelligence to see that we are losing liberties and freedoms once considered sacred by our forefathers while at the same time our gov't exerts more and more control over it's citizens and those same citizens become ever more dependent on govt.. It also doesn't take much imagination to see how legislation such as the Patriot Act can be abused to a degree only seen in totalitarian countries.

To disregard such a philosophy is to do so at one's own risk...to disregard history is to be doomed to repeating the errors of the past. Ben Franklin was a highly intelligent fellow who contributed much to the founding of our country. Our forefathers put much thought into the constitution and in particular to limiting the powers of the govt. We see this changing...not good.

Just because he wasn't referring to "automatic weapons" doesn't demean the basic meaning of the quote.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 14, 2012, 11:39:28 PM
 ^-^

You said earlier that the gov should have no say on your ability to.............
they are called nuclear arms not my word choice, weather the supreme court rules or not, why do they have a say on that but not what you eat
The whole owning a gun for personal safety is a joke and stretch too.

Compare gun crime in our two countries. (Hint its higher in yours, yet higher gun control in mine)

I dont disregard franklins idea, I put it in context! Your Freedoms should not superceede my safety or freedoms!

You cant say no gove but ther will be gove doing...

Look what deregulattion of your banking system did.

My point since the beginning was Modereation and control!

It is far from a Black and white world!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Jabber on November 15, 2012, 12:42:51 AM
Its a pretty tough call on the raw milk issue.  I'd like the option but at the same time there is a bigger picture to consider also.  Personal freedoms are important to maintain but at the same time some personal actions have far more wide reaching ramifications on others.

The difference between fast food and raw milk pathogen issues is that fast food caused obesity isn't contagious.  You choose to eat that food and you deal with the result.  There is no risk that your obesity is going to be caught by someone else.  Let raw milk production and use run rampant and a serious disease could very well return and affect masses of innocent people.  One decision only affects YOU the other could have huge implications for the entire country.  The gov't should not be in the business of protecting us from ourselves BUT it is an important player in protecting us from others actions that may negatively affect a whole lot of other people.  Its the reason we have any health codes.  Don't wash your hands at home after taking a dump have at 'er and fix that burger.  Do the same thing when several unsuspecting lives are put at risk of disease and its a whole other ball game.

Its much like the vaccine debate.  Many people freak out about vaccines and their evils and use todays benign conditions as an excuse not to get vaccined and why they are a conspiracy without considering the fact that they once did run rampant and kill millions and without continued use of vaccines they would eventually rise again and kill millions more.  It sucks but that is life.   Darn bugs.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 15, 2012, 12:54:53 AM
Great point Jabber.

bbracken677, If i have come across as attacking you personally I am sorry. I do agree with certain points you have, and would like to see freedoms in the ability to purchase and distribute raw milk, but I want rules and oversight.
What does the laws in texas allow in regards to raw milk now, how would you like them changed?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 15, 2012, 12:57:42 AM

The difference between fast food and raw milk pathogen issues is that fast food caused obesity isn't contagious.  You choose to eat that food and you deal with the result.  There is no risk that your obesity is going to be caught by someone else.  Let raw milk production and use run rampant and a serious disease could very well return and affect masses of innocent people.  One decision only affects YOU the other could have huge implications for the entire country. 



Exactly what diseases are implied here? I am aware of no communicable diseases that would me likely to be started or conveyed by milk...
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 15, 2012, 01:19:22 AM
Tuberculosis can be transmitted, as well as numerous food born illnesses. I am not saying there is an issue, my concern is the potential! and so yes I would like to see raw milk options but the idea of large production and distribution scares me, keeping a herd of a dozen cows clean the equipment the process is manageable, but a herd of 50, 100.... and then it being packaged and distrubted in a equaly clean and sanitized format in a timely manner? As you have lready said we have enough food issues with out adding IMO
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 15, 2012, 01:24:28 AM
^-^

You said earlier that the gov should have no say on your ability to.............

As long as I threaten no harm, nor do harm to another's person, or property...do not misrepresent what I say.


they are called nuclear arms not my word choice, weather the supreme court rules or not, why do they have a say on that but not what you eat
The whole owning a gun for personal safety is a joke and stretch too.

Compare gun crime in our two countries. (Hint its higher in yours, yet higher gun control in mine)


umm..now you are just playing at semantics, and your argument is ludicrous.

Regarding gun crime...Canada has very few cities the size of Dallas, Detroit, NYC ....gun crime in rural america virtually doesn't exist, yet everyone owns one at least. In the larger US cities where guns are controlled only the law abiding citizens don't have guns. Criminals do....after all, gun control works oh so very well in NYC, right?



I dont disregard franklins idea, I put it in context! Your Freedoms should not superceede my safety or freedoms!


You made light of it, the implication being it was an outdated thought...I am pretty sure that the quote says nothing (nor did I) regarding my freedom superseding your right to security. If you took that implication, then I apologize.

 

You cant say no gove but ther will be gove doing...


ROFL I never suggested anarchy, nor am I an anarchist...where did that come from? I am, however, all about sticking to the constitution which limits the power of govt and guarantees me certain rights and freedoms which have been lost in recent years. I can provide specific examples of violations of the constitution in the form of legislation passed this century. I am also against big business exercising an inordinate amount of control over what legislation is passed by virtue of their lobbying power.

 

Look what deregulattion of your banking system did.


Look at what regulation did. For every example of the ills of deregulation I can provide examples of frankensteinian regulation. Look at Enron during the regulation era of Clinton's admin. You cannot legislate morality. Period. You can punish the lack of...the problem with our judicial system is often money creates ways for people to escape justice.

 

My point since the beginning was Modereation and control!

It is far from a Black and white world!

Never implied it was (black and white). However you suggest that the ability to buy raw milk would threaten others against their will. I disagree... I do not even agree that raw milk is, by definition, less healthy than pasteurized milk. After all, this is the 21st century, not the turn of the 20th century.....

Perhaps you should do some research on the subject...why is it that yogurt, with its' active bacteria is viewed so positively, yet milk is not?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 15, 2012, 01:27:53 AM
Tuberculosis can be transmitted, as well as numerous food born illnesses. I am not saying there is an issue, my concern is the potential! and so yes I would like to see raw milk options but the idea of large production and distribution scares me, keeping a herd of a dozen cows clean the equipment the process is manageable, but a herd of 50, 100.... and then it being packaged and distrubted in a equaly clean and sanitized format in a timely manner? As you have lready said we have enough food issues with out adding IMO

"Bovine tuberculosis has been specifically and conclusively diagnosed in humans. It is decidedly uncommon in a world in which human tuberculosis is common. The spread of bovine tuberculosis in humans is clouded by historic misinformation and imperfect science. In The Untold Story of Milk, Ron Schmid does a thorough job of debunking the huge store of medical dogma on this subject.6 During the 1800s, when tuberculosis was widespread in the US, the complexity of the disease was unknown. A few people had intestinal tuberculosis presumably from ingesting, rather than inhaling, the bacteria. Since it was known that many dairy cows were infected with tuberculosis it was presumed—and reinforced by those pushing for pasteurization—that milk was the vehicle of contagion. When it was found that cows had a distinct form of tuberculosis, the dogma expanded, generalizing that all human infections with the bovine form of the bacteria were transmitted through milk (even though the vast majority had lung infections caused by inhalation not ingestion).
In his book, Ron Schmid further details the lack of any association of human infection with bovine tuberculosis within communities that regularly consumed raw milk."
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 04:22:42 AM
Its a pretty tough call on the raw milk issue.  I'd like the option but at the same time there is a bigger picture to consider also.  Personal freedoms are important to maintain but at the same time some personal actions have far more wide reaching ramifications on others.

The difference between fast food and raw milk pathogen issues is that fast food caused obesity isn't contagious.  You choose to eat that food and you deal with the result.  There is no risk that your obesity is going to be caught by someone else.  Let raw milk production and use run rampant and a serious disease could very well return and affect masses of innocent people.  One decision only affects YOU the other could have huge implications for the entire country.  The gov't should not be in the business of protecting us from ourselves BUT it is an important player in protecting us from others actions that may negatively affect a whole lot of other people.  Its the reason we have any health codes.  Don't wash your hands at home after taking a dump have at 'er and fix that burger.  Do the same thing when several unsuspecting lives are put at risk of disease and its a whole other ball game.

Its much like the vaccine debate.  Many people freak out about vaccines and their evils and use todays benign conditions as an excuse not to get vaccined and why they are a conspiracy without considering the fact that they once did run rampant and kill millions and without continued use of vaccines they would eventually rise again and kill millions more.  It sucks but that is life.   Darn bugs.

The force is strong with this one. (First post? New member?)
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 04:46:16 AM
Tuberculosis can be transmitted, as well as numerous food born illnesses. I am not saying there is an issue, my concern is the potential! and so yes I would like to see raw milk options but the idea of large production and distribution scares me, keeping a herd of a dozen cows clean the equipment the process is manageable, but a herd of 50, 100.... and then it being packaged and distrubted in a equaly clean and sanitized format in a timely manner? As you have lready said we have enough food issues with out adding IMO

Agreed. A small dairy (or even a large one with good sanitation and testing procedures) selling on a small scale to individuals (assuming they are properly informed of any significant risks) does not bother me. I am not opposed to raw milk being available. Large scale distribution makes me nervous, but I can't say that I have an opposition to that either (concerns yes, but not opposition). I will admit, I am not as informed about this issue as I am with others. I have read some statistics which suggest to me that there are some serious considerations out there. I doubt any solution is black and white. As I mentioned before, you are balancing safety here with personal freedom. You are not only thinking about the direct consumers but also the secondary consumers as well. Perhaps the dairy industry does a spot on job and keeps everything sparkling clean. Raw milk is more likely to contain pathogens (Do you disagree with this claim?). If a less than squeaky clean restaurant slips up on its health standards and they serve a dish using improperly stored raw milk- the customer is the one who gets sick (possibly without their own knowledge of having consumed raw milk).

You quote the fast food industry a lot here as being an example of poor health standards and example of why we should not trust the health standards themselves. Tell me- would you trust those same guys with raw milk? I sure as heck would not.

Last point- I am sorry, but I have just heard too many stories about "well meaning" parents giving their kids x, y and z and the kids ending up sick or dead (usually because said well meaning parents heard about x, y and z on some health show or read it on mercola.com and did not seek a full understanding of it...). Its one thing (as Tobiasrer and Jabber seemed to me to have suggested in their words) when a decision, or the execution of a right or privledge, only effects me and only I assume the consequences. It is a totally different matter when said action effects others.

Now, before my head gets bit off. This is not a black and white issue. This is not a dichotomoy. It is not "regulate everything or regulate nothing" respectfully, that is just silly. Should fast food be banned on the grounds that it leads to obesity? Well, I know some that would say so- I personally do not think so. I do not propose to have the solution. But I do propose that lifting all regulation on the grounds of a general mistrust of the government is NOT the solution.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 05:09:31 AM
Ok, I removed a bunch of stuff from the quote because it got confusing. If I messed up something you said, I apologize.

Total disagreement with your statement. The "unhealthy aspect" of raw milk is relatively easy to monitor and control.

I need to follow up on this one.

If raw milk is such a public health hazard then we would see the effects as it has become more accepted during the last decade with a correspondingly huge increase in illness and deaths...instead what we DO see is an epidemic of obesity due to fast foods and processed foods during the last decade.

Hmmmm.... dont have any numbers in front of me.... but as I recall last time I looked into it.... raw milk was banned because of bad statistics. Can't say too much more as I do not have data in front of me- do you have any you would like to share?

How many people die because of auto collisions and yet vehicles are not being banned.....public safety is an excuse.

Really?

The dairy I buy raw milk at has been in business ever since the sale became legalized (couple/3 years ago) and yet they are not getting their pants sued off because someone got sick...that is some public health hazard eh? More like the public health hazard has been blown out of proportion to a point of hysteria...naa...that doesn't happen in the good ole USA.
After all, what our politicians and big business tell us has to be true..I read that on the internet and so it has to be true!

Oh, well clearly if you have been buying raw milk at this one single farm for 3 years and nothing has happened to you- clearly raw milk is safe! Well, that solves that one- call the President!

"WASHINGTON, DC: Data gleaned from U.S. government websites and government-sanctioned reports on foodborne illnesses show that the risk of contracting foodborne illness by consuming raw milk is much smaller than the risk of becoming ill from other foods, according to research by Dr. Ted Beals, MD, appearing in the Summer, 2011 issue of Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation."


Really? The Weston A. Price Foundation? No disrespect intended, but I do not consider them any kind of authority. They are not scientists they are a political think tank (which happens to have as a board people with MDs, NDs and Ph.D.s and a best selling author who is popular right now because she pulled the "common sense" card). Of course their published material is pro-deregulating raw milk- that is basically their main campaign!

Any organization who's co-founders publish "authoritative" articles on the evils of soy in a magazine that runs news on UFOs and Big Foot and then cite those articles as scientific sources in their books an web articles, lose my scientific respect. Call me snooty but I like some kind of peer review- and I would prefer it to come from experts, not Art Bell fans!

http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&category_id=68&product_id=602&Itemid=44 (http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&category_id=68&product_id=602&Itemid=44)
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&category_id=115&product_id=940&Itemid=44 (http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&category_id=115&product_id=940&Itemid=44)

and an example of UFO whoo-haa:

http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&category_id=137&product_id=1330&Itemid=44 (http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&category_id=137&product_id=1330&Itemid=44)

I have to think a little more about your other arguments and post back in a little bit.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 05:28:06 AM
Look at what regulation did. For every example of the ills of deregulation I can provide examples of frankensteinian regulation. Look at Enron during the regulation era of Clinton's admin. You cannot legislate morality. Period. You can punish the lack of...the problem with our judicial system is often money creates ways for people to escape justice.
Uhhhh.... You are supporting an argument for DE-regulation with an isolated incident in which a corporations' board VIOLATED the law and screwed a bunch of people over?  Do you mean to suggest that had the system been deregulated everything would have been ok? IE Enron's executives would have chosen NOT to take the actions they did?

Crap! We better legalize murder before someone gets killed!

Never implied it was (black and white). However you suggest that the ability to buy raw milk would threaten others against their will. I disagree... I do not even agree that raw milk is, by definition, less healthy than pasteurized milk. After all, this is the 21st century, not the turn of the 20th century....

What does the century have to do with it? Yeah ok, if someone gets sick because some milk has an infection in it sure, medicine today is more likely to save their life. I agree with that. Do you mean to suggest that our sanitation standards have improved? Well that seems plausible to me, and likely will help, but I think the greater concern with raw milk is with the potential for pathogens in the milk a priori. Clean pipes can only help you so much when your cow starts off sick.

Perhaps you should do some research on the subject...why is it that yogurt, with its' active bacteria is viewed so positively, yet milk is not?
Because that "active bacteria" is not pathogenic- in fact it is beneficial to us. By the way, last time I checked that yogurt you reference is PASTURIZED prior to innoculation!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 05:46:20 AM
Tuberculosis can be transmitted, as well as numerous food born illnesses. I am not saying there is an issue, my concern is the potential! and so yes I would like to see raw milk options but the idea of large production and distribution scares me, keeping a herd of a dozen cows clean the equipment the process is manageable, but a herd of 50, 100.... and then it being packaged and distrubted in a equaly clean and sanitized format in a timely manner? As you have lready said we have enough food issues with out adding IMO

I can respect those concerns- my big concern is not so much what happens at the Dairy itself, its what happens once the milk leaves the Dairy. The handling at the Dairy is concerning enough.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Threelittlepiggiescheese on November 15, 2012, 01:41:23 PM
wow, I didn't expect this, next time ill keep my mouth shut and not post helpful information for fear of people trying to one up each other over the sharing of information
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Boofer on November 15, 2012, 02:12:43 PM
No, don't be afraid to post, please. Thank you for the original post.

I thought for a minute there we were going to have to turn the hoses on the group. :o

Now, back to cheese.

-Boofer-
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: H-K-J on November 15, 2012, 03:03:48 PM
Thank you Boofer ::)
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 15, 2012, 03:27:23 PM

Uhhhh.... You are supporting an argument for DE-regulation with an isolated incident in which a corporations' board VIOLATED the law and screwed a bunch of people over?  Do you mean to suggest that had the system been deregulated everything would have been ok? IE Enron's executives would have chosen NOT to take the actions they did?

Crap! We better legalize murder before someone gets killed!


Now you are being obtuse. I am not supporting deregulation, unless allowing a product to be sold which undergoes the same certification and inspection process as other dairy products is deregulation. My illustration was simple: Regulation does not guarantee anything...in fact I said that you "cannot legislate morality". Putting it simply, no matter what the laws people will find ways to break them regardless of the consequences if they think they can get away with it. Can you understand that?
To equate that with legalizing murder is asinine and does nothing to help your argument. Might as well compare nukes with handguns.....lol


What does the century have to do with it? Yeah ok, if someone gets sick because some milk has an infection in it sure, medicine today is more likely to save their life. I agree with that. Do you mean to suggest that our sanitation standards have improved? Well that seems plausible to me, and likely will help, but I think the greater concern with raw milk is with the potential for pathogens in the milk a priori. Clean pipes can only help you so much when your cow starts off sick.


I was putting the time when pasteurization became the law of the land (and was needed) in context. It has nothing to do with curing people who are sick, but rather that technology and dairy science have progresses significantly during the last 100 years and to maintain the same frame of mind as though farmers do not have access to to those resources is facile at best.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 15, 2012, 03:40:30 PM
I am pretty much done arguing the point...this will be my last post.

BTW regarding the link etc...I apologize for not researching that quote better. The wife was ready to go out to eat at our favorite mexican restaurant (Desperados) so I did a quick google and cut and paste.  Perhaps a better link would be http://www.realmilk.com/ (http://www.realmilk.com/).

My main point being that the main opponent to the raw milk movement has been the Dairy Council, and their reasons are highly suspect. That regulation guarantees nothing, that USDA inspections (used in an example) are a joke. A few more points made, but those were the mains ones.

My personal anecdote related to the local dairy selling raw milk was not meant to imply (as it was so sarcastically portrayed) that all dairies are safe (that's just dumb), but rather that they can be safe, and apparently most, if not all, are producing safe milk or they would be being sued into oblivion....and rest assured, the Dairy Council would make sure that it would be highly publicized.

I am done...As Boofer put it,  "Now, back to cheese."  I am making Forme d'Ambert today! Will post (probably tomorrow) how the make went.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 04:01:25 PM
wow, I didn't expect this, next time ill keep my mouth shut and not post helpful information for fear of people trying to one up each other over the sharing of information

[edit/repost] I had originally posted a reply to this comment as well as a comment directed to bbracken677 but decided that it made more sense to repost them as one general comment.

ThreeLittlePigs et all,
Speaking from my own perspective, this is not about one upping anyone. We are just having a friendly debate. Everyone who has participated has make some good points. Its all in respect (IMO). It has gotten a tad heated at times but not flat out disrespectful (I don't think so at least). (Originally directed to bbraken667, but to all involved) If I have been a little aggresive at times (which sometimes I do unintentionally) then I do apologize. I do enjoy debating so long as it remains impersonal and I kind of get into it. I think this is a very interesting topic and very relevant to all of us.

Personally, I am of the mindset that the purpose of debate is not to advance one's ego (at least in theory- sometimes the practice works out a little differently than that) but rather debate is an opportunity for discovery/learning or refinement of ones understanding and reflection on one's own beliefs. I think it has been an interesting topic and I now have some new things to read up on.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 15, 2012, 04:27:55 PM
"Look at what regulation did. For every example of the ills of deregulation I can provide examples of frankensteinian regulation. Look at Enron during the regulation era of Clinton's admin. You cannot legislate morality. Period. You can punish the lack of...the problem with our judicial system is often money creates ways for people to escape justice."

Now you are being obtuse. I am not supporting deregulation, unless allowing a product to be sold which undergoes the same certification and inspection process as other dairy products is deregulation. My illustration was simple: Regulation does not guarantee anything...in fact I said that you "cannot legislate morality". Putting it simply, no matter what the laws people will find ways to break them regardless of the consequences if they think they can get away with it. Can you understand that?

To equate that with legalizing murder is asinine and does nothing to help your argument. Might as well compare nukes with handguns.....lol

Alright, since you called me Obtuse,
Did I ever once equate deregulating milk with murder? Nope. Did I ever once equate: "Regulation does not guarantee anything...in fact I said that you "cannot legislate morality". Putting it simply, no matter what the laws people will find ways to break them regardless of the consequences if they think they can get away with it. Can you understand that? " with murder? Nope.

My point was to blast a hole in your faulty logic and to point out that your example was very ironic and "does nothing to help your argument.[...] lol". Why don't you go back and read your one point: "Look at Enron during the regulation era of Clinton's admin. You cannot legislate morality." and then try to figure out the point I am really trying to make. While you are at it, google search "reductio ad absurdum" before accusing me of being obtuse again. Also while you are at it- ask yourself how the argument you are making actually comes across- cause it sounds like an attack on regulation and a defense of de-regulation (the opposite of regulation). Once you have finished that, consider how obtuse I am really being.

Regulation does not guarantee anything- agreed and never disputed here. In fact nothing really guarantees anything in this universe- there is always a dice roll. But regarding regulation, that does not mean it is futile or unhelpful. I agree, USDA inspection likely miss a lot- but does that mean they are worthless or do not accomplish some good? I don't think so- it simply means the process needs to be fix.

Enjoy your lunch.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: botanist on November 26, 2012, 10:12:50 PM
"Bovine tuberculosis has been specifically and conclusively diagnosed in humans. It is decidedly uncommon in a world in which human tuberculosis is common. The spread of bovine tuberculosis in humans is clouded by historic misinformation and imperfect science. In The Untold Story of Milk, Ron Schmid does a thorough job of debunking the huge store of medical dogma on this subject.6 During the 1800s, when tuberculosis was widespread in the US, the complexity of the disease was unknown. A few people had intestinal tuberculosis presumably from ingesting, rather than inhaling, the bacteria. Since it was known that many dairy cows were infected with tuberculosis it was presumed—and reinforced by those pushing for pasteurization—that milk was the vehicle of contagion. When it was found that cows had a distinct form of tuberculosis, the dogma expanded, generalizing that all human infections with the bovine form of the bacteria were transmitted through milk (even though the vast majority had lung infections caused by inhalation not ingestion).
In his book, Ron Schmid further details the lack of any association of human infection with bovine tuberculosis within communities that regularly consumed raw milk."
[/quote]

Please read the article attached on bovine and human tuberculosis from the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine.   Further, the safety of raw milk cheese is well-covered at http://drinc.ucdavis.edu/dfoods5_new.htm (http://drinc.ucdavis.edu/dfoods5_new.htm)
The intervention of governments for public health and safety in dairy products and their production is not for the purpose of wanton control, but for the benefit of ALL of us, not just those who choose to use raw milk products (remember that all the rest of us can 'catch' these diseases without choosing how others live their lives). 

California is the #1 dairy producing state.  'Big Bad California' started mandatory brucellosis vaccination in cattle in 1948 http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/repositoryfiles/ca201p9-71165.pdf (http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/repositoryfiles/ca201p9-71165.pdf)

I am using California and UC Davis, specifically, as examples for what is done nationwide.  Naturally, food safety is not limited to dairy products.  I believe it was Boofer who said something about sterilizing fruits and vegetables.  This is not a fair comparison to sterilizing milk, as fruits and vegetables need only be SURFACE sterilized.  An analogy is that of cuts of beef--steak is 'surface sterilized' from E. coli by outside searing.  The inside is intact and is not subject to contact with E. coli.  Ground beef, on the other hand, is inherently subject to contact contamination with E. coli through the process of grinding and mixing, thus must be cooked to a safe internal temperature.  Consider fruits and vegs like steak, and milk and cheese like ground beef.

The Western Center for Food Safety http://wcfs.ucdavis.edu/ (http://wcfs.ucdavis.edu/)  shows extensive work done for public safety in food production

Because I am a scientist involved in the production of fruits and nuts (UC Davis), and my husband is a retired professor of ruminant physiology from the UC Davis Vet School, we have a strong bias toward science-based factual information.  People get very invested in their views one way or another on raw milk and similar issues, such as vaccination.  I can say from my experience, that organically raised produce is easier to produce when conventional growers control pests in the same general areas that organic growers operate, because the conventional growers are doing much of the 'work' of reducing those pests.  Likewise, all those who vaccinate their kids are greatly reducing the likelihood that kids from families that don't vaccinate won't contract communicable diseases that are prevented by vaccination.  The World Health Organization states: In 1980, before widespread vaccination, measles caused an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.

Who would like to live in a world without vaccination, antibiotics, or pasteurization?  How many of us would enjoy going back to a world where most people were subsistence farmers?  I have a friend who was 1 of 13 children in her family in rural Mexico--she never went to school past age 8 because everyone had to work just to raise enough food to feed themselves.  There was no dental care and very little medical care.  She is only in her 40's--and much of the world still lives that way.  How many of us want to give up all that technological advances have given us?  How many who advocate raw milk for themselves and their children would not seek conventional medical help if one of their children were severely ill as a result?  I lived in Mexico for 5 years and have also done consulting work on food production in Afghanistan and Morocco--and seen how people live where much of what we take for granted is not available to them.

We are so very lucky to have the choices we have--despite those who think 'big business' or 'government' is out to control our lives.  We have the luxury of health!  So drink raw milk if you choose--if you happen to be one of the few who contracts a life-threatening disease, please ensure that all of the expenses you incur are paid only by you, and not by any taxpayer who should not be affected by your personal choice!  If you contract an infectious disease as a result of consuming raw dairy products, I hope no one else suffers as a result.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 26, 2012, 10:28:07 PM
I have an open mind when presented with balanced and accurate data.

Ergo: What are the incident rates (OR death rates) with regards to contaminated veggies, ground beef (or meats in general, however you wish to present it) as opposed to raw milk consumption?

We have to compare apples to apples and not oranges.

With regards to your friend who was case #67...67 cases over what period of time? Was it proven that she contracted it from raw milk or was that the conclusion based on probability?
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 26, 2012, 10:41:38 PM
I just took a look at recent (last 3 months) FDA food recalls and I see lots of nutrition/energy bars, lots of ice cream (salmonella) entries...3 cheese entries that apparently all involve Whole Foods and Kenny's Farmhouse cheese. No milk, raw or otherwise (not counting the above cheese issues).

I also see the following companies listed: Nestle, General Mills, Newman's Own, Sara Lee, Jimmy Dean, Frito Lay, Dole, Sunland, Kraft Foods, Del Monte and so on.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: botanist on November 26, 2012, 11:10:32 PM
CDC statistics on raw milk-related illnesses and deaths, as of Feb, 2012
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/p0221_raw_milk_outbreak.html (http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/p0221_raw_milk_outbreak.html)

CDC statistics for food-borne diseases
http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/facts.html#mostcommon (http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/facts.html#mostcommon)

CDC outbreaks by year and by pathogen
http://www.cdc.gov/outbreaknet/outbreaks.html (http://www.cdc.gov/outbreaknet/outbreaks.html)

http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-index.html (http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-index.html)

Brucellosis case #67 was NOT contracted from raw milk--she contracted brucellosis from blood spatter from an infected patient who had consumed raw milk cheese produced locally in his home country, Mexico.  When the infected individual returned to the US (already infected, the CDC had to assume from the facts of the case), he then spread brucellosis to this health worker.

One's choices often result in a ripple effect for others who did not make the original choice, yet suffer for it.

I am not trying to make a case for only raw milk being a food safety risk, rather that specifically, since this is the main topic of discussion.  It is easier to bring fruits and veggies home from the market and clean them before consumption.  How does one 'clean' cheese brought home?  The biggest food stores in this country no longer will accept fruit grown in orchards where there is evidence of workers using the orchard as a garbage dump for their food refuse, or as a latrine--for food safety reasons.  Those businesses send representatives for inspection periodically, and growers are therefore much more vigilant and applying these restrictions.  I have to assume the same is true for field crops.  Commercial dairies and creameries are subject to strict regulation of sanitation practices and periodic inspections--as are meat packing plants, etc.  Testing and inspecting each and every product, however, is not possible--and I'm not 'picking on' raw milk products alone.  If I make my own cheese from my own milk, I can choose the handling.  If I make my own cookies, I can manage contamination more readily than if I buy something prepackaged.  We are talking about choices here.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 26, 2012, 11:30:42 PM
Botanist I agree! as I believe does Mighty Mouse and several others!
My issue is not BBrackens choice or want. It's the efferct he will have (Or COULD have on my safety etc or the community on the whole)
But it is my beilefe that he will never conceede the middle never mind your point! People fight for the sake or fighting! Has nothing to do with Raw milk or.... But the simple fact that its something to fight against, and rules are always the easiest! I want what I want AND THEN I EXPECT YOU TO PAY WHEN MY DECISION WAS WRONG!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 26, 2012, 11:55:51 PM
Botanist I agree! as I believe does Mighty Mouse and several others!
My issue is not BBrackens choice or want. It's the efferct he will have (Or COULD have on my safety etc or the community on the whole)
But it is my beilefe that he will never conceede the middle never mind your point! People fight for the sake or fighting! Has nothing to do with Raw milk or.... But the simple fact that its something to fight against, and rules are always the easiest! I want what I want AND THEN I EXPECT YOU TO PAY WHEN MY DECISION WAS WRONG!

Actually, no. From what I have read (and I have not followed the links provided above...Thank you Botanist!) in the past it seemed to me that it (the raw milk question) was both being blown out of proportion and was not given the same consideration as other health issues.

Above all, I AM indeed a combination of a conservative and libertarian...a position I have migrated to from the extreme opposite positions held when I was younger and a bit more of an Idealist. Since those days, I have seen the ideals and promise and potential continually fail due to human nature (another story altogether, but I can provide details should anyone be interested...privately)...so, slowly over the last 38 years I have migrated to my current views.
 
HOWEVER one of the basic tenants of my libertarian view is that I should be allowed to do as I please provided I do NOT harm or threaten harm to another or another's property. That should apply to all, and I believe our society would be the better ...but again, human nature would negate a universal application of that ideal.

I will digest the information linked above and if that alters my view, not only will I admit it here, but I will also thank Botanist for providing hard facts as opposed to opinion and perception and incorrect allegory.

I do love a good debate   :)
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Boofer on November 27, 2012, 02:04:46 AM
I believe it was Boofer who said something about sterilizing fruits and vegetables.
Please don't misquote me.

My reference was to the reports in the past of tainted green farm crops, including spinach & tomatoes. Let me also include tainted pasteurized milk to that caution. I don't believe that pasteurization is a cure-all solution to microbial infections in our foodstuffs. Raw milk producers, producers of farm vegetables, the meat industry, and industrial milk producers need to be policed and scrutinized to ensure they are following safety guidelines in the public's best interest.

Some of the material by folks who have tried to clarify the need for this scrutiny:

My inclusion of meat producers above is to demonstrate that there are corners cut in other foodstuffs to the detriment of the consumer. Greed and the desire to maximize profits over human health are a priority for some food producers.

I believe that choice should be an option. Choice to consume raw milk products from reputable producers.

Mark McAfee is the founder and owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Company (http://organicpastures.com/index.html) in Fresno, California.

-Boofer-
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 27, 2012, 04:03:49 PM
I realy thought this thread had gone by the way side a while ago lol. Obviously its a big issue!
Which in it self says there is no easy answer. No matter what happens there will be a large group of unhappy people.
 
HOWEVER one of the basic tenants of my libertarian view is that I should be allowed to do as I please provided I do NOT harm or threaten harm to another or another's property. That should apply to all, and I believe our society would be the better ...but again, human nature would negate a universal application of that ideal.

The problem is you DO threaten and harm others. I am not saying that we should be MADE to immunize our children, but i beleive we should. Not immunizing is leading to more and more issues in society. Your ability to own a hand gun or weapon does threaten me, if not in your hands then in the hands of the burglar or the people he sells it too. Its never as simple as WHAT I WANT!  or that because I dont CONSCIOUSLY plan to hurt some one means I wont. I think there is comprimise that can be made all around. You DO have a choice! If RAW milk is that important to you get a cow! Fight for your basic right to own that cow! You want it, its your yard/patio/condo so you have a liberal right to own it so YOU can milk it and enjoy raw milk. i know some will think I am being obtuse or extremist with that, but its no more obtuse or extrem then saying that the short comings in the system we have do not offer any safety and so why have rules at all as implied even if not directly stated.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 27, 2012, 04:27:45 PM

The problem is you DO threaten and harm others. I am not saying that we should be MADE to immunize our children, but i beleive we should. Not immunizing is leading to more and more issues in society. Your ability to own a hand gun or weapon does threaten me, if not in your hands then in the hands of the burglar or the people he sells it too. Its never as simple as WHAT I WANT!  or that because I dont CONSCIOUSLY plan to hurt some one means I wont. I think there is comprimise that can be made all around. You DO have a choice! If RAW milk is that important to you get a cow! Fight for your basic right to own that cow! You want it, its your yard/patio/condo so you have a liberal right to own it so YOU can milk it and enjoy raw milk. i know some will think I am being obtuse or extremist with that, but its no more obtuse or extrem then saying that the short comings in the system we have do not offer any safety and so why have rules at all as implied even if not directly stated.

lol   First of all, I do believe in immunizations, provided they are proven safe and have legitimately passed FDA testing and approval. I have had all the usual ones, as have my children. The likelihood of someone communicating measles or polio, or smallpox (if contracted) is a bit more of a worry than issues that exist from raw milk. Are you one of those who would fire employees for not getting a flu shot?

You will have to address the gun issue with our constitution, which guarantees us the right to own weapons (please do not go into mass destruction types...thats just ridiculous). As far as gun control goes...works great in New York, doesn't it? ohh...no it doesn't... Only the criminals and police have guns there.... Now that's reassuring.

If you want to take things to that extreme, then your use of a vehicle threatens my person and property, therefore you should not be allowed to drive. You can take anything to ridiculous lengths...

You do seem to believe that the consumption of raw milk will likely lead to all sorts of diseases being communicated to people who do not consume it.... What is the likelihood of that happening in real statistics? Let's deal with real numbers by legitimate studies and not anecdotes, gut feel, and/or pseudo-science.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 27, 2012, 06:00:14 PM
Reading what you want in things doesnt make you any more correct then ' gut feel, and/or pseudo-science'

I said I believe we SHOULD immunize not be MADE too! I am not advocating against your RIGHT to bear arms! So would I fire people who dont get immunized, depends what the company policy and our industry is.
 I am saying that even though the right is there, there are still rules made to limit and control there use etc. YOUR GUT reaction to limit or ignore mass destruction weapons is as ridicoulous as asking for studies on something that cant be studied with out it being too late! To get the numbers in the quantaties you want would mean allowing the sale, and IF/WHEN the studies show what the current system fears its a little late no?
Or would you also be for testing the ability for a condom to prevent the transfer of aids? Hmm be great if it works but if it doesnt, well sorry was a good idea too bad didnt work for you!

And if you want to qoute me thwen dont take the parts that just show your point, I have been consistent in my beliefe that CERTAIN sales of raw milk should be allowed, an ability for choice should be permitted, with checks in place!
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 27, 2012, 06:17:57 PM
The ability to conduct studies does exist as raw milk is drunk daily throughout the world. Raw milk sales in Texas, for example, strains the available supply. The dairy I get my milk from for cheese making sets a limit of 2 gallons per person because they often run out.
The information is already out there...raw milk is used and available today in many locales throughout the US as well as the world. There are also publications related to that...see Boofer's links above regarding a couple of books related to milk. Read what is available at the link, even if you choose not to buy the books.

I plan on reading the links provided by Botanist this weekend when I can sit and spend some time digesting the information.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 27, 2012, 06:55:41 PM
Thats my point though BBracken! You have access to raw milk. I would live to see Canada open the door alittle, make it at least a provincial choice, here there is no choice at all, beyond buying a cow and milking myself, but even then it would be illegal to share that milk whithin my own house hold!
So while I believe there should be some choice allowed I dont think that its as simple as I want so I should Have! I think that we expect the government to have check s balances rules and limitations in place, and NOT make it a free for all of what the INDIVIDUAL WANTS! From what you have in Texas what do you want to see changed?
A discussion on actual realistic changes and how they can be implemented rather then "The Gove has no right to... I want to do what I want.... I think would be more advantageous. sailor on another thread has some alternatives to pasturization listed. As I have said I see value in small farm sales, where the buyer has access to make an informed decision, not simply reacing into the cooler and randomly grabbing a gallon of milk on a shelf without being aware of the differences. Ag co-ops etc may be an idea.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 27, 2012, 07:23:00 PM
Ah...ok, that is simple. I would like to see raw milk available in grocery or specialty stores in town (illegal in the state of Texas)...and yes, they should be subject to the same quality standards as any other food source, as ineffective as that is/can be.

As it is now, by law, you have to buy raw milk from the dairy itself, which in my case involves a 40 minute drive (or more depending on traffic) to get the milk and then another 40 or so back...so raw milk is available, but they (the law) intentionally make it a pain to acquire. Even then, the relatively small dairy I purchase at places a limit of 2 gallons per purchase because they sell out...they are the only dairy within reasonable distance to offer it.

If I gave the impression that it was as simple as "I want it, so I should get it" then I apologize...nothing is ever as simple as that. However, I do fail to see why the Dairy Council is so against it that they have flooded the state govt with lobbying efforts (big money) to outlaw it altogether...or rather, I fail to see why they should want to do so. Due to price (organic, grass fed etc etc) this raw milk would not be purchased by the mainstream, but rather by a smaller percentage of the population. I am thankful that this dairy has a great reputation (they sell drinkable yogurt at Whole Foods and Central Market) and that I can trust that they are doing their best to make a good product. If not, I would not be a customer of theirs.

The irony is: the Dairy Council uses money provided by the dairies that want to sell raw milk to lobby against it.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Tobiasrer on November 27, 2012, 07:37:39 PM
Well why they are against it is obvious.
First profits, second creating an image to differentiate and third- the easies way to get a following is to be AGAINST something!
The second and third go together to insure the first!
And ultimatley bad publicity that COULD/MAY happen if raw milk leads to issues would be cast on DAIRY PRODUCTS!
As an example Canadian BEEF was not an issue, certain beef through NORMAL procedures was found to have BSE, this was BEFORE it was sold to consumers (happened the way defects should be found). This stopped the export on ALL beef. Again a small issue becomes bigger, one farmers choice to send a bad cow to market and the industry on the whole suffered, as well the consumer was potentialy endangered.
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: bbracken677 on November 27, 2012, 07:51:57 PM
According to one source I read, one of the reasons is that they would prefer people not find out what "real" milk tastes like. Not to mention, there are various health advantages to drinking safe raw milk that are not available once the product has been pasteurized.
Also...the industry (food) trend has been to move towards foods that have longer a shelf life (can you say ultra-pasteurized) and would prefer that something like raw milk not confuse the trend lol
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 27, 2012, 10:16:52 PM
third- the easies way to get a following is to be AGAINST something!


Hmmmm....
http://www.amazon.com/Nourishing-Traditions-Challenges-Politically-Dictocrats/dp/0967089735/ (http://www.amazon.com/Nourishing-Traditions-Challenges-Politically-Dictocrats/dp/0967089735/)

Hmmmm....
http://www.amazon.com/Whole-Soy-Story-Americas-Favorite/dp/0967089751 (http://www.amazon.com/Whole-Soy-Story-Americas-Favorite/dp/0967089751)

Hmmmm....
http://www.westonaprice.org/about-the-foundation/about-the-foundation (http://www.westonaprice.org/about-the-foundation/about-the-foundation)

Hmmmm...
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert (http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert)

and, hmmmm....
http://www.realmilk.com/ (http://www.realmilk.com/)

And.... it looks like Stephen Barrett has some interesting stuff to say
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/rawmilk.html (http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/rawmilk.html)
Title: Re: Wonderful Information
Post by: Mighty Mouse on November 28, 2012, 12:26:13 AM
Based on a private message I recieved (a follow up question to my last post), I thought I should probably clarify my post. Simply put, I did not intend to get back into this discussion but did appreciate Tobiasrer's comment:

the easies way to get a following is to be AGAINST something!

I think this is a very good point which transcends this discussion and really applies to multiple facets of society. I am not sure how hard and fast of a rule it is per se, but we do see this phenomena all over the place(although just because you are against something does not mean you are against it specifically to garner a following).
So... I decided that it was a good excuse to take a little playful poke at the Weston A. Price Foundation who, in my personal (and admittedly slightly biased) opinion, use this tactic to their advantage. My comments and links were not necessarily meant to be in response to a particular post/argument/contribution and were not mean to represent the point that Tobiasrer (or anyone else) was making. It was my personal knee-jerk reaction to the quote above.