Fight for Raw Milk Heats Up in
Wisconsin and Illinois
October 21, 2014
-
The Illinois Department of Public Health is presently pushing
for burdensome and restrictive rules on raw milk sales that
would affect producers with even just one cow or goat. An
estimated 400,000 Illinois residents drink raw milk, and may be
adversely impacted should the new restrictions be put in place
-
Raw milk supporters in Wisconsin are petitioning the state’s
Supreme Court to rule on whether obtaining and consuming raw
milk is a constitutional right
-
Raw milk bans have nothing to do with public safety, and
everything to do with controlling the dairy market and
eliminating competitive threats
-
Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie plans to introduce a series
of “food freedom” bills. The first two, HR 4307 and HR 4308,
could be a major step forward for the raw milk movement. Sign
the petition now
By Dr. Mercola
Raw milk dairy products from organically raised pasture-fed cows
rank among some of the healthiest foods you can consume. It’s far
superior in terms of health benefits compared to pasteurized milk,
and if statistics are any indication, it’s safer, too.
While many believe that milk must be pasteurized before
it can be safely consumed, it’s worth remembering that raw milk was
consumed for eons before the invention of pasteurization.
It’s also important to realize that pasteurization is only really
required for certain kinds of milk; specifically that from cows
raised in crowded and unsanitary conditions, which is what you find
in confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs). It really needs to be
pasture-raised, NOT pasteurized.
Organically raised cows that are allowed to roam free on pasture
where they can graze for their natural food source produce very
different milk. Their living conditions promote and maintain their
health and optimize their milk in terms of the nutrients and
beneficial bacteria it contains.
The Case Against Pasteurization
Pasteurization destroys enzymes, diminishes vitamins, damages
milk proteins, destroys vitamin B12 and vitamin B6, kills beneficial
bacteria, and actually promotes the growth of disease-causing
pathogens.
Normally, healthy microbes help keep pathogens in check, but
since pasteurization kills everything, a massive void is left and it
is very easy for disease-causing microbes to contaminate the great
culture media in a pasteurized product.
Pasteurization also destroys many of the enzymes that are needed
for digestion. As a result, drinking pasteurized milk can tax your
pancreas, contribute to leaky gut or holes in the lining of your
intestine, and promote disease—particularly allergies.
All of this makes the war on raw milk all the more disconcerting.
There are many raw foods sold, yet raw dairy is being singled out
for elimination.
Could you imagine if raw oysters, for example, suddenly became a
“forbidden” food? Everyone knows there are risks to eating raw
oysters. Yet people do it all the time and feed them to
their children.
The fact is, ANY food, if poorly handled, carries the risk for
disease. Ironically enough, the vast majority of foodborne illness
is actually caused by highly processed foods, including
pasteurized milk.
Raw Milk Access Threatened in Illinois
At present, my home state of Illinois is pushing to restrict raw
milk sales. According to WGEM news:1
“The FDA estimates up to 400,000 Illinois residents drink
raw milk and local dairy farmers say those consumers will lose
out if new restrictions are put in place...”
For over 30 years, the unlicensed on-farm sale of raw milk has
been legal by government policy in Illinois. It’s a policy that has
worked well and with no reports of foodborne illness attributed to
Illinois raw milk producers going back at least as far back as 1998,
if not further back.
The Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) issued proposed
regulations on September 5 that a number of raw milk producers
believe would put them out of business. The burdensome, restrictive
rules include provisions that would require a producer with even
just one cow or goat to have a permit and would be subject to
regular inspections and testing; the rules would also prohibit
unlicensed dairy farmers from giving raw milk to guests at their
home.
A workgroup consisting mostly of IDPH officials and dairy
industry reps drafted the proposed rules; raw milk producers and
consumers were also part of the workgroup but their input was
ignored. The group wasn’t funded by the legislature but rather by a
grant from FDA, the most anti-raw milk government agency in the
country. An FDA official who was part of that workgroup stated that
FDA considers all raw milk potentially adulterated.
Opposition by raw milk producers and consumers to the rules is
also understandable when you consider that the proposed rules would
place regulation with an agency (IDPH) that was complicit in an
attempt to ban raw milk in the state legislature earlier this year.
In March, a consortium of county health departments tacked on an
amendment to ban raw milk sales in a bogus bill to amend the Access
to Restrooms Act (i.e., changing the word “the” to “the”). IDPH knew
of the effort but did nothing to stop the consortium when it had the
chance to do so. This happened just a few months after raw milk
producers and consumers worked in good faith with IDPH to draft
reasonable regulations governing raw milk sales and production in
Illinois.
An official with IDPH has admitted that the regulations the
department wants to become law would not be passed by the Illinois
legislature if submitted as a bill. If it wouldn’t pass through the
people’s branch of government, why should the agency adopt it as
law?
IDPH will be holding a hearing on the proposed rules on Thursday,
November 6, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.at the Illinois Building on the
Illinois State Fairgrounds in Springfield. Shortly after the
hearing, the state legislature’s Joint Committee on Administrative
Rules (JCAR) will begin its review of the proposed regulations. JCAR
has the power to reject the regulations. Illinois residents are
encouraged to attend the November 6 hearing and to contact JCAR,
asking its members to reject the proposed rules.
Click
here for details.
Raw Milk Issue Goes to Wisconsin Supreme Court
Meanwhile, parties to three different cases in Wisconsin are
petitioning the state’s Supreme Court to decide, among other
matters, whether obtaining and consuming raw milk is in fact a
constitutional right. As reported by the Green Bay Press Gazette:2
“The plaintiffs ‘believe they have a fundamental
constitutional right to choose what they eat and to choose where
that food comes from,’ food rights activist Gayle Loiselle said.
‘We have constitutional rights to conduct business directly
between farmers and citizens without government interference and
without middlemen like food processors or distributors.’"
At present, Wisconsin allows “incidental” sales of raw milk;
however, the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer
Protection (DATCP) interprets “incidental sales” in such a way as to
limit the availability of raw milk to the consumer as much as it
possibly can (e.g., one-time purchase at a given farm).
In one of the cases, a suit brought by members of the Nourished
By Nature food buyers club (NBN) and farmers Mark and Petra Zinniker
to get a court order upholding an agreement in which the Zinnikers
boarded cows wholly owned by NBN and provided raw milk to club
members, Dane County Circuit Court Judge Patrick J. Fiedler declared
that
- Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to own and use a
dairy cow or a dairy herd.
- Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the
milk from their own cow.
- Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to board their
cow at the farm of a farmer.
- The Zinniker Plaintiffs' private contract does not fall
outside the scope of the States' police power.
- Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and
consume the foods of their choice.
In another of the cases, dairy farmer Vernon Hershberger was
acquitted on three of four criminal charges for violations of the
state Food and Dairy code, but was convicted on a fourth charge for
violating a holding order when he removed food from refrigerators in
his farm store that had been sealed by DATCP during a farm raid.
Jurors later complained that the judge presiding over the trial, Guy
Reynolds, prevented them from hearing evidence that would have
changed their verdict on the hold order.
The judge’s conduct was biased against Hershberger throughout the
trial; at one point, the judge admonished attorneys and witnesses
for Hershberger that they were not to say the words “raw milk” and
“liberty” before the jury.
The Wisconsin court cases typify what is happening elsewhere in
the country where judges rubber-stamp the actions of overreaching
government agencies interfering with people trying to obtain the
foods they want to eat.
Raw Milk Bans Are Not Really About Food Safety; They’re About Market
Control...
While the US government, public health, and dairy industry
officials say they want to restrict the sale and distribution of raw
milk because of safety concerns, it’s quite clear that safety isn't
the motivating factor.
The REAL issue is control of the dairy market.
You might think that, should raw dairy become the norm, the dairy
industry would simply follow suit and
switch over to producing raw products. But it’s not that simple. In
fact, it would be virtually impossible for a CAFO operation
to start producing safe raw milk.
CAFO cows tend to produce milk that is unhealthy and unsafe to
drink raw because grains, antibiotics, and growth hormones, are
necessary since the animals live in such unsanitary conditions. This
changes the pH balance and the natural bacteria present in the cow's
gut. This in turn affects the natural beneficial bacteria and
pathogens can widely contaminate the milk.
The fact of the matter is that Big Dairy depends on
pasteurization, and this is why dairy lobbyists will stop at nothing
to persuade government agencies to restrict or outright ban raw milk
produced by much smaller organic or pastured dairy farms.
It’s really about eliminating competition, not about eliminating
a major safety hazard. If it were, raw seafood and uncooked meats
would surely be outlawed as well. Another control factor relates to
the processing industry itself. He who controls the processing
controls the market, including pricing.
Data Shows Superior Safety of Raw Milk Compared to Other Foods
Three years ago, Wise Traditions published research by
Dr. Ted Beals MD,3,
4 which reveals that you are 35,000 times more likely to
get sick from other foods (most of which are processed) than you are
from raw milk. If those aren’t reasonable odds for choosing raw
milk, I don’t know what is. In his 2011 presentation given at the
3rd International Raw Milk Symposium, Dr. Beals also noted that:5
- The CDC estimates more than 845,000 Americans acquire
diarrhea caused by contaminated food, but only an average of 34
of those cases are attributed to drinking raw milk
- CDC estimates an annual average of more than 63,150
Americans acquire diarrhea caused by food contaminated with
E. coli. On average, just five of those are
attributed to drinking raw milk
- CDC estimates an annual average of more than 1 million
Americans acquire diarrhea caused by food contaminated with
Salmonella. On average, three of those are attributed to
drinking raw milk
Furthermore, “those who wish to ban all milk that is not
pasteurized use the horrors of Listeria monocytogenes’ systemic
diseases to support their cause,” he says. “They
consistently broadcast the high mortality and focus on the
susceptibility of women who might be pregnant, fetuses, newborns and
the elderly. However, Listeria
monocytogenes has never been a significant public health risk from
drinking fresh raw milk.”
Citing health concerns make absolutely no sense whatsoever when
statistics are reviewed. As of 2010, there were well over 9.3
million consumers of raw milk in the US, yet only an average of 42
illnesses annually could be traced back to raw milk consumption.
Meanwhile, there are an estimated total of 48 million cases of
foodborne illness occurring each year in the US—from foods other
than raw milk! As noted by Dr. Beals in his 2011 presentation:
“It is irresponsible
for a senior national government administrator to testify that
because of those 42 people, raw milk is inherently hazardous,
parents should not be allowed to decide which foods they serve
their children and milk should be banned across the nation
unless it has been pasteurized.”
If you’re curious, you can check the CDC’s Foodborne Outbreak
Database6
for yourself to see which foods, and which pathogens or
contaminants, have reportedly caused illness over the past decades.
At present, the database contains reports from 1998 up until 2012.
All sorts of foods are represented, from salads to breads, pastas,
various meat dishes, potatoes, and even beer... So while raw milk is
featured as a cause of illness, if we use 2012 as an example,
coleslaw, chicken, fish, and salad were still more common sources of
illness that year. Yet no one is suggesting we ban the sale of any
of those foods “to protect human health.”
The Benefits Clearly Outweigh the Potential Risks of Drinking
Grass-Fed Raw Milk
While pasteurized milk have few if any redeeming qualities
besides being readily available at every convenience store, raw milk
from grass-fed cows has a number of health benefits you simply will
not obtain from drinking pasteurized and homogenized CAFO milk. For
example, raw grass-fed milk is:
Loaded with healthy bacteria that are good for your
gastrointestinal tract |
High in omega-3 and low in omega-6, which is the
beneficial ratio between these two essential fats |
Full of more than 60 digestive enzymes, growth factors,
and immunoglobulins (antibodies). These enzymes are
destroyed during pasteurization, making pasteurized milk
much harder to digest |
Loaded with vitamins (A, B, C, D, E, and K) in highly
bioavailable forms, and a very balanced blend of minerals
(calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, and iron) whose absorption
is enhanced by live Lactobacilli |
Rich in conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), which fights
cancer and boosts metabolism |
Rich in healthy unoxidized cholesterol
|
Rich in beneficial raw fats, amino acids, and proteins
in a highly bioavailable form, all 100 percent digestible |
It also contains phosphatase, an enzyme that aids and
assists in the absorption of calcium in your bones, and
lipase enzyme, which helps to hydrolyze and absorb fats |
Where to Find Raw Milk
There are several resources out there to help you locate raw milk
and other dairy products, and the
Farm-to-Consumer Legal
Defense Fund provides a state-by-state review of raw milk laws,
in case you don’t already know what your state’s rules are.
One alternative to raw milk that is now available in some US food
stores is lightly pasteurized and non-homogenized organic milk. If
your local store doesn’t carry it yet, you can ask them to do so. As
a last resort, if you cannot obtain raw milk, or for whatever reason
choose not to, you could opt for organic pasteurized milk. At least
you’ll avoid many of the detriments of CAFO dairy that way—including
antibiotics, recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), and other
drugs. You’ll also avoid a source of genetically engineered
organisms (GMOs) and
glyphosate, as CAFO cattle are typically fed
genetically engineered grains.
Important Raw Milk Bills That Could Usher in More Food Freedom
Raw milk is the only food banned in interstate commerce.
This makes it challenging for small farmers to share their raw milk
products with people living across state lines. Such nonsensical
bans have resulted in an increasing number of violent
crack-downs on peaceful dairy farmers who want nothing more than
to provide their customers with high-quality food.
Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky has plans to introduce a
series of “food freedom” bills; he introduced the first two of those
bills this spring, legislation that could be a big step forward for
the raw milk movement. According to Massie, these bills are intended
to improve consumer food choices while protecting local farmers from
federal interference:
- The Milk Freedom Act of 2014 (HR 4307): The
bill would prohibit the federal government from interfering with
the interstate traffic of raw milk products, offering relief for
small farmers who have been harassed, fined, or prosecuted for
distributing raw milk.
- The Interstate Milk Freedom Act of 2014 (HR 4308):
This bill would prevent the federal government from interfering
with trade of unpasteurized natural milk or milk products
between states where distribution or sale of such products is
already legal.
To protect food freedom and freedom of choice for all Americans,
I urge you to contact your government representatives, and ask them
to vote YES on both HB 4307 and HB 4308. The Farm-to-Consumer
Defense Fund has created an online petition to FAX your
message to your U.S. Representative and both Senators.
Please take a moment to sign the petition right now.
Copyright 1997- 2014 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/10/21/wisconsin-illinois-raw-milk-fight.aspx
|