July 29, 2014

Obama administration says: “No raw milk for you.”

pin it button Obama administration says: “No raw milk for you.”

Milking cow Obama administration says: “No raw milk for you.”

by John Moody
Food Clubs & Coops

Last week, the Obama administration gave its official response of “NO” to the 6,078 signors of a petition on WhiteHouse.gov who requested federal-level legalization of all raw milk sales.

Written by Doug McKalip, the White House senior policy adviser for rural affairs, the response is full of typical government double speak and sleight of hand with facts and figures.

For instance, the response starts off by saying, “We appreciate consumer concerns on food issues and understand the importance of letting consumers make their own food choices.”

But is there any evidence to support either of these claims? Zero. The Obama administration has continued the Bush administration policy of fast tracking GMOs and other dangerous foods while mercilessly targeting small producers of healthful things like Elderberry Juice (http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/fda-seizes-elderberry-juice-from-kansas-winery-to-protect-drugs/). They continue to oppose consumer choice by blocking GMO labeling, something Obama campaigned for in 2007.

The Obama FDA, with folks like former Monsanto executive Michael Taylor (who also served in both the FDA and USDA under Bush) at the helm of the “food safety division”, had the audacity to state that people have no inherent right to choose the food they eat or what they feed their children (http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/fda-you-have-no-natural-right-to-food-health-or-private-contracts/, http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/news/050610–FDA_Response.pdf).

Does this sound like understanding the importance of letting consumers make their own food choices? Of course, you are free to consume tainted cantaloupe, turkey, and ground beef from large, industrial farms in the FDA’s twisted universe. But don’t touch that milk!

The claim that “This administration believes that food safety policy should be based on science… In this case, we support pasteurization to protect the safety of the milk supply because the health risks associated with raw milk are well documented” is also spurious at best.

The CDC was recently forced to retract its long standing claim that two people died from raw milk consumption for the ten-year period between 1998 and 2008 (they, in fact, died from consuming “bath-tub” cheese…”, http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2011/2/18/the-power-of-numbers-in-the-war-over-raw-dairy-how-the-cdc-c.html and http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/politics-more-than-science-behind-government-attacks-against-raw-milk/).

Many of the “raw-milk” outbreaks the FDA and CDC use as evidence involve PMO (pasteurized milk ordinance) milk, not fit for human consumption, that either was improperly pasteurized or taken, as in a recent event in Wisconsin, without permission or the knowledge of the farmer or consumer and given raw.

Such milk isn’t real raw milk, milk produced by farms intending to provide it to the public as safe raw milk, often from small family farms that are grass or pasture-based and committed to good husbandry and sanitation practices.

PMO milk that merely missed the bulk tank truck or improperly handled raw milk turned into cheese in someone’s shower should not be counted among the raw milk outbreak statistics if the government was truly interested in either safety or science.

Ted Beals and numerous other scientists and individuals have shown that raw milk is far less dangerous than many other foods people consume on a weekly or daily basis, even when adjusted for estimated rates of consumption that are half of what is most likely happening each and every day across the US. You can see a full article on this data by Health Impact News here: http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/politics-more-than-science-behind-government-attacks-against-raw-milk/.

Even more main stream groups can no longer deny the relative safety of raw milk. In a recent Food Seminars International Webinar, distinguished professor and researcher on food safety David Warriner conceded that raw milk is certainly no more dangerous than many other foods people are allowed to consume or activities they are allowed to engage in (see: http://www.foodseminarsinternational.com/raw-milk).

Just don’t try to tell this to the FDA or Obama administration.

McKalip assertions that the nutritional and health benefits of raw milk have not been scientifically verified, along with the claim that the FDA is as a science-based regulatory agency, which “looks to the scientific literature” also lack credibility.

Two major European studies have shown that raw milk does indeed help with allergies, and even showed the various mechanisms as to how it accomplishes this amazing feat: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/13/us-kids-raw-milk-idUSTRE78C75O20110913.

Also, why would anyone expect mainstream researchers, who have nothing to gain by showing the healthfulness of raw milk and benefits of real food, but so much to lose if such benefits were more widely publicized and believed, since by nature these foods cannot be patented, protected, and pilled for sale, to conduct useful or fair research on the subject?

McKalip goes on to say that the FDA’s position on raw milk is shared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American Academy of Pediatrics —  that raw milk is comparable in nutritional quality to pasteurized milk, while the health risks of raw milk “are clear.”

These folks also say and force farmers to say that all eggs are just the same (which numerous studies have now shown to be false: http://www.motherearthnews.com/uploadedFiles/EggGraphic.pdf), a carrot is a carrot is a carrot, and all beef is the same (http://www.eatwild.com/healthbenefits.htm).

Isn’t it instead time to say to these folks, “Three strikes, you’re out!”

At the end of the day, this response is unsurprising from a government long bought out by and little more than a spokesperson for big ag, big pharma, and big government.

If people were healthy, health care deform, labeling laws, and so many other government power grabs wouldn’t have the appeal that they do now.

Read the Full Article Here: http://www.foodclubsandcoops.com/obama-administration-says-no-raw-milk-for-you/496/

See Also:

Ron Paul stands up for raw milk in New Hampshire

 

Raw Milk Revolution book cover Obama administration says: “No raw milk for you.”

FREE Shipping Available!
More Info

0 commentsback to post

Other articlesgo to homepage

Salt is Good for You

Salt is Good for You

One of the most pervasive and stupid things that we are currently told to do is to reduce salt intake. This advice has never been based on controlled clinical studies, ever. Yet, as with the cholesterol myth, the dogma that we should all reduce salt intake has become impervious to facts.

Large Study Adds to Evidence that Organic Food Is Superior

Large Study Adds to Evidence that Organic Food Is Superior

A comprehensive new study published this week in the prestigious British Journal of Nutrition shows very clearly that how we grow our food has a huge impact. Organic food is superior to its conventional counterparts and is higher in antioxidants and lower in pesticide residues.

Processed Foods Hurt Your Immune System and Gut Health

Processed Foods Hurt Your Immune System and Gut Health

Diets loaded with processed foods are leading to increased inflammation, reduced control of infection, increased rates of cancer, and increased risk of allergic and auto-inflammatory diseases.

A poor diet causes shifts in your body’s microbiome that have lasting effects on your own health and the health of future generations. A mother’s diet may shape her child’s taste preferences in utero, skewing them toward vegetables or sweets, for instance.

There’s evidence that children inherit their microbiome from their mother, and part of this may be “seeded into the unborn fetus while still in the womb;” a father’s diet may also impact his child’s future health. Replacing processed foods with whole and fermented foods is crucial for optimal health.

U.S. Congress: Americans Are Too Stupid For GMO Labeling

U.S. Congress: Americans Are Too Stupid For GMO Labeling

The U.S. continues to be isolated around the world regarding their lax GMO labeling policy. We are losing millions of dollars in exports because countries such as China, Russian, Japan, Korea, and most of Europe will not buy our products if they are contaminated with GMOs.

A recent Congressional meeting, however, concluded that the push to label GMO products in the U.S. was due to the ignorance of the American consumer. One has to wonder where the ignorance actually resides?

Is the Best Honey Really “Local” Honey?

Is the Best Honey Really “Local” Honey?

John Thomas does an excellent job of addressing the common belief that healthy honey has to be “local” honey produced nearby where you live. Considering the fact that most honey bees in the United States today are transported all over the country to pollinate commercial agricultural crops dependent on the use of toxic herbicides and pesticides, it is obvious that simply being “local” is not a guarantee of a higher quality product. John investigates the current science on this topic of “local honey,” and discusses what issues are far more important in selecting a high quality honey.

read more


Get the news right in your inbox!