List: Fresh From the Farm

Joel Salatin from the June 2008 issue

Joel Salatin is a self-proclaimed “Christian-conservative-libertarian-environmentalist-lunatic” and the proprietor of Polyface Farms in Charlottesville, Virginia, where he practices the kind of small-scale agriculture that baffles (and sometimes infuriates) regulators. He rose to national prominence with a cameo in Michael Pollan’s popular 2006 book The Omnivore’s Dilemma. In the spirit of his own recent book, Everything I Want to Do Is Illegal, we asked Salatin to list three things he would like to do on his land but can’t because of state and federal regulations.

1. Make and sell ready-to-eat foods on the farm: “Virginia just legalized homemade jams and jellies to sell. As ridiculous as that sounds, that’s a pretty important shot across the bow.”

2. Sell raw milk and other dairy products: “Officialdom believes that only pasteurized milk is safe. The fact that people have been drinking raw milk throughout human history, and still drink it all over the world and in 20-some states, means nothing to them.”

3. Sell custom-slaughtered meat by the piece: “My position is that if meat [slaughtered outside the normal factory processes] is OK for people to eat, give away, or feed their children—which indicates that it is not an inherently hazardous product—we should have freedom to also sell it. The restrictions are on the commerce of it. The attitude is: The only thing that is safe to eat is something with a government stamp on it, unless you get it free. Exchange money, and it’s somehow not safe.”

Comments

fyodor|5.8.08 @ 3:40PM|#

The fact that people have been drinking raw milk throughout human history, and still drink it all over the world and in 20-some states, means nothing to them.

I don't think that's a good argument for something being "safe" (which of course is a relative thing, anyway) unless you have accurate data to show what happened to all the people who have consumed milk this way! People "throughout human history" have not always had the same standards of safety we have now, would not always have known what was making them sick or killing them and haven't always had access to pasteurized milk to be able to choose that over raw milk.

All that said, I of course support the right of folks to consume and honestly sell the stuff. And for all I know, maybe it's as safe as pasteurized milk, I haven't done the research. I just don't think that particular argument is a good one (especially the "throughout history" part; what's happened in the 20 states where it's legal can be more easily researched, I presume, although that research would still be necessary for a meaningful argument).

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 3:41PM|#

Second Fyodor's objection.

Move to put it up to a floor vote.

|5.8.08 @ 3:42PM|#

1. Run a whore house.

2. Shoot fireworks.

3. Smoke weed.

|5.8.08 @ 3:44PM|#

Meh. The only illegal* thing I want to do is distill for my own consuption.


*Not technically illegal, but the tax and reporting requirements are prohibitive.

Paul|5.8.08 @ 3:45PM|#

With Fyodor on this one, too.

Just because we "did stuff" throughout human history, doesn't make it safe. I'm a big fan of pasteurization. Now, on the regulatory side, I don't really have a dog in the fight. I think that maybe there might be a good regulatory comprimise. Maybe raw milk can be sold, if it passes some sort of inspection.

Paul|5.8.08 @ 3:46PM|#

Erh, "compromise".

First Little Pig|5.8.08 @ 3:49PM|#

When I picked up Omnivore's Dilemma I assumed that it would have some prescription that would involve government pro-action. I was thrilled to find that it basically came out against many facets of government agro policy. The Salatin parts were among my favorites. Seriously, the FDA restrictions are making people sick!

Brandybuck|5.8.08 @ 3:51PM|#

Maybe raw milk can be sold, if it passes some sort of inspection.

I've got a slogan for you: "Gub'ment! 'Cuz we need police to inspect your milk!"

Zeb|5.8.08 @ 3:51PM|#

You should be able to sell anything you want to as long as the person buying knows what he is getting.

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 3:53PM|#

Here's some quick data:

1) Analysis of unpublished data about food-borne disease outbreaks, listeriosis excluded, collected by the coordinator of the French surveillance system from 1992 to 1997, revealed 69 documented outbreaks for which milk and milk products were confirmed as the vehicle by the isolation of the etiologic agent. The food vehicles were distributed as follows: milk, 10%; cheese, 87%; others, 3%. UHT milk accounted for 1.5%, raw milk and raw milk products for 48%, and milk and milk products from unspecified milk for 50.5% of the 69 outbreaks. S. aureus was by far the most frequent pathogen associated with these outbreaks (85.5% of the outbreaks), followed by Salmonella (10.1%).

International Journal of Food Microbiology
Volume 67, Issues 1-2, 20 July 2001, Pages 1-17

2)http://www.cdc.gov/Ncidod/eid/vol11no04/pdfs/04-0739.pdf

Gives a breakdown of food born illness and source... seems fast-food hamburgers are the largest culprit...4 of 7 dairy-food based outbreaks identified in the time period were attributed to raw milk or products made with raw milk

Andy|5.8.08 @ 3:54PM|#

Didn't Ron Paul try to pass a bill making raw milk legal to sell? I'm sure he was just pandering to Big-Raw Milk. Seriously, what a cool guy.

|5.8.08 @ 3:58PM|#

I have been drinking Raw milk for a few years now. We buy it from farmers, but we have to technically own shares of the cow.

It's a stupid regulatory hoop to jump through.

The problem is that people tend to be irrational.

There is nothing inherently unsafe about raw milk. Cleanliness and care when handling are issues with both Raw and Pasteurized milk.

But even if it were a higher risk, shouldn't I be allowed to take that risk for something that is clearly a superior product (both in taste and in nutrition. -- pasteurization changes the flavor / texture and the also changes the enzymes in the milk among other things -- raw milk does not have to be fortified with Vitamins A & D unlike pasteurized milk)

And even if we ignore what has in fact been consumed rather safely throughout history, Europe has been safely consuming raw milk and raw milk products for a long time and still currently does so.

There is no reason that sales of this should be forbidden nor should it have to be inspected. Mark it as NON-Pasteurized and let people decide what they want.

|5.8.08 @ 4:06PM|#

The attitude is: The only thing that is safe to eat is something with a government stamp on it, unless you get it free. Exchange money, and it's somehow not safe."

Sort of like sex...

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 4:06PM|#

ChicagoTom,

Got any citations on those claims regarding nutritional differences.

All the research I have seen on that issue indicates no nutritional difference or, at worst, very small differences.

eg,
Pasteurization is known not to affect the nutritive value of milk proteins (Milk
Nutrition Committee, 1937; Kay, 1939-40)....

SUMMARY
I. After acid hydrolysis, the amino-acid content of fresh and of heat-sterilized cow's
2. The milk was sterilized by autoclaving at 122-124' for 20 min.
3. Under these conditions the amino acids present in raw milk were all recovered
quantitatively from sterilized milk except for lysine, which suffered a 10% loss;
cystine was possibly also affected.
milk was estimated by the method of Moore & Stein (1951).
4. The significance of the loss in lysine is discussed.

d|5.8.08 @ 4:06PM|#

Let me be as smug and Fyodor and his e-cronies:

> There is no reason that sales of this should be
> forbidden nor should it have to be inspected.
> Mark it as NON-Pasteurized and let people
> decide what they want.
>
Second ChicagoTom's suggestion. Move to put it
up to a floor vote.

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 4:07PM|#

above post from
British Journal of Nutrition (1959), 13: 385-389 Cambridge University Press

|5.8.08 @ 4:07PM|#

It is possible, also, to pasteurize milk by holding it at a lower temperature for a longer time and preserve almost all of what the consumers of raw milk and the producers of raw milk cheeses like about the unpasteurized product. It's just cheaper to bring it to near-boiling temperatures quickly and under pressure, and then use the pressure to ultra-homogenize it.

|5.8.08 @ 4:09PM|#

I don't give a shit about raw milk. I want fresh raw milk cheeses, dammit.

|5.8.08 @ 4:09PM|#

Neu Mejican,

The milk was sterilized by autoclaving at 122-124' for 20 min.

This is exactly the low heat/long time method I've read about. Doesn't sound like they actually tested "store-bought" milk.

MK2|5.8.08 @ 4:16PM|#

Go ahead an fucking do 'em, Joel. Take a page from Martin Luther King's book and do a little jail time for your convictions. Beats whining like a baby. Be a fucking man.

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 4:16PM|#

Some support for ChicagoTom's assertion...

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2222.2007.02715.x

But only sorta...

Unexplained lower incidence of allergies among dairy farmer family's that consume more raw milk.

FWIW, heating foods changes the nutritional profile of the food. Overall it has a positive effect more often than negative as long as you don't overcook. Don't see why that general trend would be different for milk.

Now cheeses are cultured micro-organisms... you would expect that killing them prior to making the cheese might change the product quite significantly.

If you want good cheese, of course, the most important element is what the cow ate. Grass fed cows make much better cheese.

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 4:18PM|#

I will vote with the lobby pushing for information rather than prohibition.

|5.8.08 @ 4:19PM|#

I think that maybe there might be a good regulatory comprimise. Maybe raw milk can be sold, if it passes some sort of inspection.

How about if it's labelled as raw milk? I want my milk pasteurized so I wouldn't buy it, but other people are willing to take the risk and I'm OK with that.

|5.8.08 @ 4:20PM|#

You should be able to sell anything you want to as long as the person buying knows what he is getting.

Because pathogens are so easily identifiable from visual inspection of the food item.

|5.8.08 @ 4:28PM|#

Buy your own damned cow, screw the guv/mint. Oh, zoning laws you say? 'Scuse me.

Disclaimer: As a teenager I hated milking by hand. Not fun (with a cow). Loved the stuff out of the carton.

|5.8.08 @ 4:30PM|#

The problem is that people tend to be irrational. . . .

But even if it were a higher risk, shouldn't I be allowed to take that risk

Thus, R.C.s Fourth Iron Law:

You are not free unless you are free to be wrong.

|5.8.08 @ 4:30PM|#

TBone,


I think selling the product with a notice in plain sight in the vein of "this product has not been pasteurized and my contain pathogens" would suffice.

Episiarch|5.8.08 @ 4:36PM|#

Fuck this raw cow milk shit. Where's my human breast milk? Unpasteurized, of course.

Cosmotarian elitist|5.8.08 @ 4:38PM|#

As an unabashed elitist who has no faith in my fellow American's ability to make good choices about the relative risks of drinking raw milk, I oppose any weakening of the regulations until there is no chance that I am subsidizing their idiocy through tax dollars. Once we have reached a point where the risks fall fully on the heads of those who decide to drink raw milk (we should be working towards this point), then government laws/regulations on raw milk should be abolished.

Brandybuck|5.8.08 @ 4:38PM|#

"Gub'ment. Without it your children would be drinking raw milk!"

short, fat bastard|5.8.08 @ 4:40PM|#

From Wikipedia

Unlike sterilization, pasteurization is not intended to kill all micro-organisms (pathogenic) in the food or liquid. Instead, pasteurization aims to achieve a "logarithmic reduction" in the number of viable organisms, reducing their number so they are unlikely to cause disease (assuming the pasteurized product is refrigerated and consumed before its expiration date). Commercial-scale sterilization of food is not common because it adversely affects the taste and quality of the product.
.
.
.
The HTST pasteurization standard was designed to achieve a 5-log reduction (0.01% of the original) in the number of viable micro-organisms in milk. This is considered adequate for destroying almost all yeasts, mold, and common spoilage bacteria and also to ensure adequate destruction of common pathogenic heat-resistant organisms (inclunding Mycobacterium tuberculosis, which causes tuberculosis and Coxiella burnetii, which causes Q fever).

I remember one pasteurization thread where a nurse got involved and started listing all the diseases that are common (including life-threatening diseases) in people that consume raw milk.

Personally, I feel people should be free to screw themselves up in anyway they want. So raw milk should be available to those that want it. But I get frustrated with raw milk advocates that reject any benefits that come from pasteurization.

|5.8.08 @ 4:42PM|#

Epi,

Steve, Don't Eat It: The Breast Milk Edition

|5.8.08 @ 4:43PM|#

Got any citations on those claims regarding nutritional differences.

Neu,

Yes. The Weston A Price foundation is a good source of info on Raw Milk.

Check out this page and see 3rd section down. And see more here and here

There is also the fact that most pasteurized milk (even VAT pasteurized) has to be re-fortified with Vitamins A&D because the pasteurization process diminishes the vitamin content.

|5.8.08 @ 4:43PM|#

I agree with Mo. I want cheese made from raw milk too, but am too lazy to smuggle it in from Canada.

Episiarch|5.8.08 @ 4:52PM|#

NutraSweet, that made me hungry.

|5.8.08 @ 5:00PM|#

Epi,

This will kill your appetite.

Episiarch|5.8.08 @ 5:12PM|#

I don't think you have any idea what it takes to gross me out, NutraSweet. I'm a person who considers Lucio Fulci movies to be lighthearted fare and Herschell Gordon Lewis movies to be laugh riots.

Brandon as the Paleotarian Str|5.8.08 @ 5:40PM|#

Hi! As an unabashed paleotarian-that is, a botched form of libertarianism that embodies all the worst parts of Fusionism in order to suck the sweaty, salty teat of the GOP-I've decided to come to troll this blog! Despite the fact that cosmotarianism doesn't, in fact, exist, and is merely made-up put down set forth by us paleo's in an absurd attempt to pretend to be libertarianer-than-thou, I've invented a set of positions I've decided to pretend all writers and readers at reason hold. Namely, that you're all pinko-neocon-socialist-totalitarian-drug-abusing goat-lickers. Well, I disagree with those positions! I've had it with you libertines! And I'm hereby cancelling my subscription to your RSS feed.

|5.8.08 @ 6:32PM|#

Matthew, I'm good with that.

Thirsty|5.8.08 @ 6:39PM|#

And I'm hereby cancelling my subscription to your RSS feed.

Drink?

Elemenope|5.8.08 @ 6:47PM|#

Shit, I saw go for it. As long as it's homogenized.

Unmixed milk is fucking gross.

Paul|5.8.08 @ 6:59PM|#

There is no reason that sales of this should be forbidden nor should it have to be inspected. Mark it as NON-Pasteurized and let people decide what they want.

I would agree wholeheartedly... in a perfect world Until a batch of people got sick or died from raw milk. Then there would be lawsuits, and an entire segment on NPR about the lack of oversight and regulation with raw milk sales. Then we'd be right back to where we are now.

Paul|5.8.08 @ 7:10PM|#

And don't mistake my post above for what I want to happen, that's just my prediction about what would happen.

|5.8.08 @ 7:20PM|#

Shit, I saw go for it. As long as it's homogenized.

Unmixed milk is fucking gross.

Raw milk doesn't usually need to be homogenized.
Our milk at home is Raw and un-homogenized and it doesn't have any fat globules.

I *THINK* the process of pasteurization causes some of the fat in the milk to coagulate.

When I am out of Raw milk, I buy a boutique brand of milk at the store that is VAT pasteurized and non-homogenized. It has fat clusters that need to be vigorously shaken to break them apart before each service (and sometimes I run through a strainer if the fat chunks seem too big) -- I have never seen this happen to my Raw Milk.

|5.8.08 @ 7:54PM|#

As a rancher, and long time Ag producer, raw milk is the most superior food ever created byu God. When Frito Lay introduced their non-absorbable-fat chips, Olestra, they were attemtping to mimic the fat moelcule inherent to un-homogenized cows milk. The fat molecule in un-homgenized milk is so large it cannot pass the intestinal barrier. In short, drinking 2% means you're consuming 200% more fat than if you drank un-homogenized milk. We drink our own milk, never sell it and love it. It's FOOD. It's not some dang watery-thin, watered down version of the real thing. Pasteurization and homogenization are only there for the big producers, nig marketers, big transporters and big retailers. Who can all go to H eee double hockey sticks.

Neu Mejican|5.8.08 @ 7:59PM|#

ChicagoTom,

Thanks, I'll look at those sources.

Although I must admit I was looking for something a bit more objective...even the suggested readings page has no peer-reviewed research.

The reason I am skeptical is that as important as enzymes are in your diet, cows milk is hardly a "nature" part of the human diet. It seems like the important enzymes can be had from many other sources, particularly raw fruits and veggies...

I remain skeptical.
Vitamin D supplementation of milk is not, btw, due to the loss of vitamins...it is just a good way to get vitamin D into the diet.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/77/6/1478

Vitamin D is difficult to obtain from the diet because it is not naturally present in many foods. In the 1930s, food and beverage manufacturers began to fortify milk, breads, hot dogs, sodas, and even beer with vitamin D (4). However, the outbreak of vitamin D intoxication in Europe in the 1950s and the strict regulations issued by the US Food and Drug Administration limited fortification to only milk and cereals in the 1950s; these policies have persisted to this day (4, 31). In most European countries, fortification of dairy products is forbidden. However, fortified milk is not suitable for preventing vitamin D insufficiency in the general population because of the high prevalence of lactose intolerance in Asians, blacks, and Native Americans (32) and because of milk allergies (33). In addition, the vitamin D content of fortified milk is highly variable; some tested samples contained < 50% of the amounts stated on the containers (34-36).

I'm not sure about the vitamin A.

BakedPenguin|5.8.08 @ 8:02PM|#

I suspect the problem with milk might come from the fact that cows often lay down on their own flops. IIRC, one of the jobs dairy farmers have is cleaning cowsh*t off the teats. If not done correctly, it's easy to see how this could lead to bacteria in milk.

Episiarch you shouldn't have this problemn. Therefore, I would endorse your plan.

hANOVER fIST|5.8.08 @ 8:35PM|#

MONSANTO is ushering in the end of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Please - pressure your elected officials to call for the labeling of Genetically Modified /Genetically Engineered foods.

Here's some info, if you don't wish to travel outside of this forum:

1. GM/GE foods yield less than their natural counterparts.

2. GM/GE crops catastrophically infect natural organisms...and the scientists cannot control the effects.

3. Farmers have lost farms due to the genetic signature being introduced into their natural crops.

4. Scientists ahd actually not proven that GM/GE foods were safe for consumption; yet the media had announced that it was!

5. Last, but DEFINITELY NOT LEAST...the GM/GE crops are killing the bees and butterflies that pollinate our crops. Simply put:

IN FOUR YEARS, AFTER THE BEES AND BUTTERFLIES ARE EXTINCT...WE FOLLOW.

|5.8.08 @ 9:11PM|#

Let's barter and not use money; then the Feds can go play by themselves.


: )

Dirty Frank|5.8.08 @ 9:41PM|#

I think that maybe there might be a good regulatory comprimise. Maybe raw milk can be sold, but only if you suck it straight from the cow's teet.

|5.8.08 @ 10:01PM|#

There is nothing wrong with raw milk. I drink it all the time. However, my cow and goat are healthy.

The man is right. The Nanny State is B.S.!

Just follow the money, if you pay them somewhere, you can play.

Leah|5.8.08 @ 11:20PM|#

Actually, breastmilk does get pasturized when it donated to milk banks for use by preemies and other sick babies. It still works far better than formula in preventing illnesses (especially intestinal issues like necrotizing enterocolitis, as breastmilk is so much easier on a premature GI tract than formula), but it does remove the live antibodies that keep breastfed babies so healthy. So it doesn't really surprise me that raw milk would have some legitimate health claims, though personally the thought of ingesting live cow antibodies is a bit gross - and also seems unnecessary. Human milk has antibodies that allow women to pass immunities to their babies - immunities to specific diseases that the mother/child pair exposed. It's a very specific and very cool thing. I'm not sure what antibodies I'd be getting from a cow that would help me in any way.

|5.9.08 @ 12:12AM|#

The fat molecule in un-homgenized milk is so large it cannot pass the intestinal barrier. In short, drinking 2% means you're consuming 200% more fat than if you drank un-homogenized milk.

Uh, the human body does this thing called digestion, where fat if broken down into monoglycerides and fatty acids. That's what gets absorbed, not the fat molecules. It doesn't matter how big it is, it will get broken down, at least partially.

arh|5.9.08 @ 2:09AM|#

Joel Salatin combines two of my pet peeves, alternative health hippie stuff and Christian conservatism; the man is still a hero of mine.

But I guess that is how it works among libertarians: we differ in our opinions, but still agree on policy.

Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|5.9.08 @ 2:52AM|#

I grew up milking the damn things and drank raw milk for the first 18 years of my life. My whole family did. Stuff tastes much better.

Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|5.9.08 @ 2:54AM|#

IIRC, one of the jobs dairy farmers have is cleaning cowsh*t off the teats. If not done correctly,

It's ALWAYS done correctly. If the milk truck shows up and your bacteria tests are off - you gotta dump two thousand gallons of milk and forego income for a few days. It's their livelihood - they don't fuck it up.

|5.9.08 @ 3:45AM|#

Neu Mejican's stats said 69 cases over 5 years. Living in Europe, I have access to fresh raw milk and raw milk cheeses. They're such a quantum leap over what I used to eat that I go well out of my way to get them.

I'm aware of the (miniscule) risk involved and buy it anyways. I always buy village slaughtered and made bacon for the same reason.

I think it's a shame that I know so little about Salatin and this article was so short, time to go do some research.

|5.9.08 @ 6:20AM|#

I don't give a shit about raw milk. I want fresh raw milk cheeses, dammit.

Fuck this raw cow milk shit. Where's my human breast milk? Unpasteurized, of course.

I want raw breast milk cheese, but Bob Barr bogarting it.

|5.9.08 @ 6:21AM|#

Dammit! ...Bob Barr is bogarting it.

|5.9.08 @ 8:40AM|#

Well, interestingly enough, I actually get all of my meat from Joel. In fact, I'm a HUGE proselytizer for his stuff. I buy chicken, eggs, pork, and beef from Joel (soon he'll be adding lamb!). I've been out to the farm on numerous occasions, and am friendly with Joel and the family. (This is all just to let you know that I've clearly made my decision already!)

Here's the thing. Joel's done independent nutritional analysis of his meat, and the nutritional profile is superior to conventional meat across the board (the beef is about twice as high in iron and minerals as conventional, the pork has less saturated fat, more minerals, and the chicken has higher nutrients- including Omega 3 and 6 - you can email them and they'll happily provide the nutritional info). There are no hormones, and that is really important to me because I've been paying attention to the most recent studies linking hormones in beef (particularly) with early onset of puberty in children.

I'd LOVE to be able to get milk and cheese from Joel. I'd LOVE to be able to trust the slaughter of the beef and pork the same way I do the chickens [for those who don't know, the chickens are processed on the farm- the way that works is that I technically buy the chicken BEFORE he kills it, then he kills and dresses it as a courtesy to me, thereby avoiding those pesky regulators]. Unfortunately, I can't do that because of the regulations. It irritates the heck out of me that the regulations are set up this way.

Why? Let's review - does anyone recall a MASSIVE ground beef recall recently? that contamination was traced back to the processing facilities, which were - theoretically - being overseen by the Feds.

That's exactly the kind of thing I can avoid by getting my meat directly from Joel - without the government middle-man slaughterhouse.

Beyond that, I have a major problem with the government thinking it needs to coddle me, condescend to me. I'm highly educated, and I can read the information and make an informed decision. You want a compromise - here you go. Let Joel (and others like him) sell their products without government intervention, but make the consumers read and sign a release detailing the possible risks of consuming raw milk/cheese and meat slaughtered in a non-FDA regulated slaughterhouse. I'm happy with that. I think that as long as the people making the decision are making an informed decision, it's OUR decision. Not Uncle Sam's.

N

bubba|5.9.08 @ 10:35AM|#

Texas issues permits for the sale of raw milk and cheese. It's not my fault if some of you live in nanny states.

Example: http://www.texascheese.com/milk.htm

arho|5.9.08 @ 11:18AM|#

(hope this hasn't been covered)

The latest weapon in the War on Milk: undercover buys.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/18681214.html

|5.13.08 @ 4:40AM|#

Hm. This is anecdotal evidence, but first hand.

It didn't kill me on trips to farms as a kid (presumably with a much less robust immune system than my current one which has weathered several decades of later dissipation).

Pretty much right out of the cow. A little warm for my taste,but that didn't kill me either.

Monica|5.13.08 @ 7:35PM|#

I suggest you take a click on this link: realmilk.com and read the powerpoint rebuttal the FDA's pseudoscientific case.

As a medical writer, I know that there is accumulating evidence that the pasteurization laws that have been in place for up to 100 years are partly to blame for increasing levels of atopic diseases (allergies, eczema, asthma), as well as anaphylactic reactions and general intolerances to milk. Asthma rates alone have doubled in the past 20 years. Raw milk, when sanitarily prepared, may actually provide significant health benefits in comparison to pasteurized milk. But my main purpose is not to argue for or against the benefits of raw milk.

Rather, my main objection is that licensing and regulatory laws have violated individuals' rights to buy food products according to their own rational judgment. For the past several decades, the onerous regulation of our food supply has increased substantially. For too long now, a government official has been responsible for deciding what is healthy -- often based on outdated, biased, or completely wrong evidence. The current regulatory scheme drastically decreases choices available to consumers and forces them to buy food products as the government sees fit -- regardless of their own judgment or unique circumstances. Someone above mentions they'd like to see the consequences of raw milk drinking fall on the consumer. Well, who else's head would it fall on? Honestly!

I am a consumer of raw milk. In fact, this product has largely resolved one of my family members' lactose intolerance. It is delicious and healthful and I have every right to buy this product directly from a seller according to my own judgment. Even if it was poison and I wanted to commit suicide, I should still have the right to buy it. It's no skin off your back. I have researched my local farm, spoken with the owners, and am convinced of their sanitation practices. I am an informed consumer, aware of the risks involved in drinking raw milk -- not one of the sheeple who knows and cares not what junk I put into my body as long as there are "regulations" in place to "keep me safe". Recent history shows that there are no total guarantees of the safety from food-borne illness of even pasteurized milk, let alone beef, chicken, or alfalfa sprouts!! -- despite what the PDA or the FDA would like us to believe. Americans should be allowed to to make their own decisions about what they put into their bodies without any government interference whatsoever.

People must have the right to eat the food they choose. Should situations of food contamination arise, and I'm sure they will, in food that is pasteurized or unpasteurized, irradiated or not irradiated, Americans will always have a recourse: the courts.

Down with the nanny state. Unless I'm violating someone ELSE's rights, keep your darn laws off me.

Lajaw|5.15.08 @ 1:30PM|#

Everyone keeps getting hung up on the raw milk issue. What of the meat? I can butcher and process a pig and give it away. I can't sell it though. How does selling the meat make it unsafe, but when given away, it is safe? Is this a libertarian website? It sounds more and more like corporate fascists. Do you want to be responsible for your own well being? Or do you prefer the loving arms of government? if you come out to my farm, you can see how I do things. If you think I'm dirty, don't buy from me. You can always go buy a chicken from one of the corporations where they use south of the border labor who are infected with TB to process and cut your chicken. Hey, it's your choice.