3,561,596 members
12,429,752 petition signatures
$19,571,785,510 diverted from Big Pharma
Only Crazy People Drink Raw Milk?
By contributing author, Jon Rappoport, The National Health Federation, August 12th
THE WIDER IMPLICATIONS
AUGUST 5, 2011. The federal raid on Rawesome Foods in Venice, California, is based on the insistence (with guns) that private citizens can’t make contracts with each other to buy and sell raw unpasteurized milk.
Some uninformed types believe the raid was solely focused on the fact that Rawesome doesn’t have a business license. But it is a private club, and the last time I looked, a club doesn’t need a license to carry on its activities.
Do private citizens have the right to form an association, by contract, and then engage in exchange of goods and services, among its members, regardless of the opinion of the State?
Well, if we return to the basic document, the Declaration of Independence, can we interpret the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without understanding that private contracts are fundamental to this pursuit?
In the case of Rawesome, the government believes it can garner wide public support, and therefore it feels confident its prosecution will make no one nervous. Whereas, if the product Rawesome club members were buying and selling was homemade oatmeal, the public might balk and see the intrusion on Rawesome as invasive and quite insane.
Speaking of which, the government is using what I call the The Crazy People Doctrine.
If more than, say, 60% of the American people believe Rawesome is crazy, the government is good to go in court. If that wide majority thinks raw-milk dealing would only be carried out by nutcases, then the whole issue of whether private contracts are inviolate can be set aside and dropped in the trash.
Well, we know government agencies have been warning the public about raw milk for at least 70 years, and claiming that pasteurized milk is wonderful and safe and scientific. So The Crazy People Doctrine seems like a slam-dunk here, regardless of how the specific charges against Rawesome’s owner are eventually worded.
“He’s crazy, who cares whether we (the prosecutors) say he was doing business without a license or was selling a dangerous product or was making a contract he had no right to make.”
And the public will say, “Find him guilty, he’s a whacko. Nobody in his right mind would sell raw milk.”
As usual, I’ll resort to one of my extreme bizarro analogies:
Let’s say eight of us form a private club, and we buy and sell, among ourselves, little gold balls of plant matter which, when ingested, have been shown, invariably, to cause severe one-hour headaches. The balls have been tested, over and over again, and amazingly, the verdict is precise across the board. Eat a gold ball of this plant substance, you get a one-hour headache.
And suppose the eight of us believe this activity of buying and selling and eating the gold balls is part of our pursuit of happiness. We’ll assume responsibility for the headache. Do we have the right to have our club and engage in our activity—or does the government have the legal power to destroy the club and prosecute us on a criminal charge?
The government says, “Gold balls are food products for sale. Therefore, they fall under our jurisdiction when it comes to the issue of safety. Period.”
The public says, “Put these crazies in jail, or in a mental institution, and drug them to the gills.”
Government says, “Citizens have no fundamental and overriding right to make private contracts among themselves. We can intercede at any moment we choose to. Any rule or law we make automatically trumps the so-called right to private contracts.”
If we accept this judgment, then we are admitting that private relationships are a thin illusion that can be swept away without notice.
If you and your friends own a piece of land and build a community vegetable garden there, and then exchange squashes and tomatoes and grapes and cucumbers with one another, from your individual plots, the government can send in a food safety inspector, he can walk on your land, and he can decide whether your vegetables are legal. Your contract with your friends is null and void and without meaning—and always was.
If I call in a friend to fix my car in my garage and he doesn’t have a license to do repairs, he could be arrested or cited with a fine.
If 50 of us form a health club, and buy and sell amino acids among ourselves, and if we happen to have printed a sheet, for internal distribution, claiming these products cure arthritis, the FDA could invade our office, confiscate the products, and charge us with practicing medicine without a license.
And if the public, by and large, believes we are “crazies,” the government feels confident it will escape blowback.
You now, perhaps, see one clear reason for government/media/science propaganda: “creating convenient crazies.”
Take, for instance, the arena of vaccines. If government succeeds in outlawing all claimed parental exemptions from the jabs, based on its own version of good science, how many people will rise up and revolt? Versus how many will say refusing vaccines was always just for Crazy People?
The Crazy People Doctrine, behind the scenes, is the standard of prediction that government employs—and propaganda is the tool it uses to manufacture perception about its targets…
So that the matter of private contracts is tossed into the garbage.
JON RAPPOPORT
Source:
A jury should exercise its right and pay all restitution for the illegal raid on Rawsome Foods through all those who ordered and participated in the seizure. Attach their homes, drivce the bastards into bankruptcy; I don’t care, but sooner or later these uniformed social miscreants will get it through their sloped heads that it just doesn’t pay to “enforce” illegal orders.
I think you should be very careful about drawing analogies between raw milk and vaccines. While those who drink raw milk may be wary of vaccines, resistance to the government practices have very different effects on others. If you drink raw milk and get sick, me and my children who do not drink raw milk will not get sick. The only cost to me is the small cost of your health care in our crazy system. But maybe you won’t even go to a western doctor. If you and your family do not get vaccinated against, say, measles, my family can get sick. Babies can not get the MMR vaccine and if unvaccinated children get measles and are out in the community before they show symptoms they are very likely to infect others. Before vaccines the leading cause of childhood death was communicable disease. When you drink raw milk, I think you are taking a calculated risk with your own health. Which I believe we all have a right to do. When families don’t vacinate they are taking a risk on others health. Perhaps you should have a right to make that choice, but it is a very different one.
My question is: why do we not see the government shut down every food that has caused illness if that is their big concern with raw milk? If that is their stance, to protect the public, than all sprouts should be banned, as well as ground beef, turkey and things like spinach, for all of these have cause illness and death. How many times hase someone died from raw milk anyway?! This is ridiculous! They don’t keep us safe, they take money from Big Agra lobbyists; and the Dairy Council must be afraid the truth will come out about them, so they get Big Brother to try and shut down the raw milk farmers. Shame on them all!
Contractually, via founding documents, government laws are prohibited from breaking private contract, so government is authorized to govern what is public. We the people in our private capacity must judge what is our private pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Only when our acts impinge on others in their equally sacred capacity and an injured party brings forth a claim in a court with a valid claim of authority is there joinder for the public interest to contemplate private matters. The founding fathers would have been in revolt by 1873 when the Supreme Court improperly gave all the rights of the people to the corporations, the public offspring of the government. By now government only wants to see the people and their private contracts as corporations within it’s jurisdiction even if they have not registered as such.
People and animals have been drinking this dangerous raw milk for millions of years with no ill side effects. so should nursing mothers be forced to pasteurize breast milk to make it safe for there baby? Do dairy farmers have to pasteurize milk before feeding it to the calves? When anyone looks at the total track record of out government there should be a law against listening to anything they say.
Raw milk is safe… for calves who, as ruminants, have rather more robust digestive systems. Human breast milk is safe for babies. I absolutely believe people have the right to drink raw milk or arsenic if they want to, but the risk to infants (who, you’ll remember, have still-developing immune systems) is too great. That doesn’t mean that I support the raid, just that a blanket ban on raw milk is dictatorial and a ban on giving raw milk to kids would be better.
For Mamasca:
Why are you worried about a kid with measels giving your kid the measels if your kid has been vaccinated??? Huh?
The headline is right, only crazy people drink raw milk. As someone who got TB from drinking unpasteurized milk, I know it is not safe. Quit playing Russian Roulette. BTW, I don’t drink any kind of milk.
I spent almost 3 years in hospitals and sanitariums. To add insult to injury, the doctors accidentally cut a ligament, so I now have a bum shoulder too.
As a raw milk drinker myself, I have to disagree with many of the comments because they are ridiculous and ill-informed, in my opinion. If you read about the benefits of raw milk, you will see they are numerous, and I for one (and my kids, too) have never been healthier. I used to have digestive issues with pasteurized milk, so I switched to soy. Then a friend introduced us to raw milk (which I used to drink as a kid, too) and all its benefits and I don’t have any digestive issues with it. I drank it while pregnant with my two youngest children and all my kids drink it as well. We are rarely sick at all, and if we happen to get a cold or something, it doesn’t last long. For the government to intervene and try to say we can’t make our own decisions about what we eat, put into our bodies, etc. is utterly preposterous and completely out of bounds. Pasteurized milk is far worse for you then raw milk.
On June 16 2011 the US Supreme Court issued a decision in Bond v United States. In this decision the Supreme Court redefines the tenth amendment of the Constition as a right of the individual. They also state that the federal government is limited to those powers enumerated to it in the Constitution and that treaty which infringes upon an individuals tenth amendment rights in unenforcible against the individual. This extremely important legislation has been largely ignored in the media other than its effect on health care. I believe that the content and intent of Bond v United States, as expressed in the unanimous opinions, is in direct conflict with the 1942 Supreme Court case of wilkin v filburn. This is the case in which the interstate commerce clause was upheld against an individual growing food for himself and his stock which was never transported anywhere and by which the federal government has exercised authority far beyond those granted and enumerated to it in the Constitution. In this case the federal government was granted the right to tax and regulate what an individual grows and consumes. This case has been used as precedent to allow federal control of individual conduct for nearly 60 years. Can wilkin v filburn be constitutional under the new definition of the tenth amendment? I think not. either prove I’m a fool and completely wrong or join my quest to enforce our personal tenth amendment rights. We may have differing focus concerns but we share common cause. Captn Blynd on facebook.
****************************
Here you go the facts Masmasca & Jake!
GOVERNMENT DATA PROVES RAW MILK SAFE
Raw Milk Risk Extremely Small Compared to Risk of Other Foods
WASHINGTON, DC June 22, 2011: 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.
At last we have access to the numbers we need to determine the risk of consuming raw milk on a per-person basis, says Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, a non-profit nutrition education foundation that provides information on the health benefits of raw, whole milk from pastured cows.
The key figure that permits a calculation of raw milk illnesses on a per-person basis comes from a 2007 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) FoodNet survey, which found that 3.04 percent of the population consumes raw milk, or about 9.4 million people, based on the 2010 census. This number may in fact be larger in 2011 as raw milk is growing in popularity. For example, sales of raw milk increased 25 percent in California in 2010, while sales of pasteurized milk declined 3 percent.
In addition, Dr. Beals has compiled published reports of illness attributed to raw milk from 1999 to 2010. During the eleven-year period, illnesses attributed to raw milk averaged 42 per year.
Using government figures for foodborne illness for the entire population, Dr. Beals has shown that you are about thirty-five thousand times more likely to get sick from other foods than you are from raw milk, says Fallon Morell. And with good management practices in small grass-based dairies offering fresh unprocessed whole milk for direct human consumption, we may be able to reduce the risk even further.
It is irresponsible for senior national government officials to oppose raw milk, claiming that it is inherently hazardous, says Dr. Beals. There is no justification for opposing the sale of raw milk or warning against its inclusion in the diets of children and adults.
According to Pete Kennedy, president of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, FDA has an agenda that has nothing to do with protecting the public health. The agency wants to deny freedom of choice and impose its views on what foods the people should and should not be consuming.
Every time there is a possible connection between illness and raw milk, government officials issue dire press releases and call for bans on raw milk sales, says Fallon Morell. However these numbers make a laughing stock of government opposition and prove what weve known all along, that raw milk is a safe and healthy food.
FOR MORE INFORMATION: http://www.realmilk.com/real-milk-pathogens.html.
CONTACT: Kimberly Hartke, press@westonaprice.org , 703-860-2711, cell 703-675-5557.
The Weston A. Price Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nutrition education foundation with the mission of disseminating accurate, science-based information on diet and health. Named after nutrition pioneer Weston A. Price, DDS, author of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, the Washington, DC-based Foundation publishes a quarterly journal for its 13,000 members, supports 450 local chapters worldwide and hosts a yearly international conference. The Foundation phone number is (202) 363-4394, http://www.westonaprice.org, info@westonaprice.org .
Raw milk is the elixir of life, period. How much mammallian life depends on it at birth is unfathomable. So what is the problem with a person or group of people who want to contract and provide it for each other.
The problem is in the government regulations that have been slanted to protect the Dairy Association’s stranglehold on the market. Perhaps many years ago when refrigeration was not that great, pasteurization made some sense.
However, if you have ever experimented and left raw milk closed in a container on the counter, you would be surprised how seldom or how little it does spoil at room temperature.
Whoah is me if I leave pasteurized milk on the counter at room temps in the same situation and it spoils in a very short period of time. The same applies to longevity even in the fridge. The higher the milkfat content, the less it spoils.
If it didn’t cost so darn much or could raise my own, that’s all I would drink. As Iloverawmilk said, she and her kids are healthier and have less digestive issues.
Like 1 egg with salmonella in it out of 10′s of thousands from the largest egg producer in America; to raw milk — again and again — since the 50′s its been a target of regulators of the Federal ilk!
All that is different now? “Newspeak” with group-minded, government-force and defined action against ‘any group of Americans’ taking their own life, liberty, and happiness practice….without government’s “Right to opinion without interference (UN-WSIS 12/2006)” as the complete, socially-politically correct method of dictatorship with distortion of fact and manipulation of fact to suit government’s concepts. Socialist America has arrived on the Backs of Rev. Wright – Obama – Soros – et.al with Saul Lucifer Alinsky.