real milk: not for human consumption

[babusyatanya]

На сей раз Гордон высказывается более-менее нейтрально, мои собственные подозрения однако небеспочвенны, преследует собственные цели, проповеднический раж, мания величия (все вокруг -овцы недоумки, один я знанием обладаю), в риторике отчетливая антикоммунистическая паранойя, религиозный фанатизм, расизм. Причем высказывается как самопровозглашенный голос народа... Надеюсь что Alice, будучи свидетелем нашего обмена мнениями и учтя сходные мнения других участников, найдет способ дистанцироваться от этого типа.

Помещаю копии здесь, как яркий пример демагогии (в лучшем случае), или сознательной провокации (вполне возможно, даже несмотря на скромные аналитические способности автора "речей"), т.к. тактика ведения полемики очень узнаваема: риторические приемы провокатора - уход от темы, персонализированные атаки из нетерпипости к инакомыслию, ксенофобия, апелляция к религиозным авторитетам, отказ от добросовестного анализа, подмена анализа ярлыками и эмоционально нагруженными штампами.

другая возможность - страх - может боится быть обвиненным в "пособничестве коммунистическим идеям", ведь от кооператива до коммунистической идеи коллективной собственности - один шаг.

Alice высказывается вне связи с вышеупомянутой риторикой, придерживаясь стратегии "выполнения договорных обязательств перед держателями акций".

текст Гордона March 21
The injunction was granted ordering Alice Jongerden to stop packaging and distributing raw milk for human consumption.

I am astonished that the Judge’ Reasons do not so much as mention the case of Western Forest Products and Sechelt Regional District, which is the last word on what constitutes a ‘health hazard’ … and which completely vindicated us.

Of course I shall appeal this ruling immediately.

Meanwhile, my response is to mark every package with the words “not for human consumption“, so as to comply with the letter of the law and keep the REAL MILK flowing

Gordon S Watson
Justice Critic, Party of Citizens

Today, Gordon has issued this more detailed summary of the situation:

“Paul Henderson of the Chilliwack Times newspaper asked me if we will cease and desist production of raw milk, after Fraser Health Authority got the injunction they asked for. This morning I went down to the New Westminster Court Registry to get a copy of it, so I could start the appeal right away, but the lady at the counter said that they’re three months behind processing civil Orders. At the moment I have not see a copy of the actual Order, so I don’t know what it says.

Following is my reply to him, with a few thoughts so far

Gordon S Watson

To Paul Henderson, Chilliwack Times newspaper,

We don’t have to cease and desist production … we have the right to use and enjoy our property = our milk from our cows = and we shall continue to do so.

what I presume the Order says is that Alice Jongerden and Jane Doe and John Doe, being people who work for her business Home on the Range, cannot package or distribute raw milk for human consumption. So we = meaning the shareholders not the Agister = will probably put a label on each and every package warning all-concerned that the law of British Columbia prohibits the material therein from being used for human consumption. Of course, people can still do what they want with their own property : they can feed it to their pets, they can put it on the garden as fertilizer, they can bathe in it, they can use it as a cosmetic and shampoo. They can make paint out of it. They can make glue out of it. Besides being one of the best foods in the world, REAL MILK has many uses.

When I get an entered copy of the actual Order, then I’ll be appealing it right away.

Alice Jongerden will be complying with the Order, to the best of her understanding. If and when she is served an entered copy of the Order, then she can figure out how to govern herself. At this point, what we = meaning her, and each of the shareholders = are allowed to do, or not do, is unclear. For instance : since I go out to the farm, and help in the milk room … does the Order prohibit me from putting my own property – that would be, the REAL MILK – into jars and taking it home with me?

The Jongerden family owns shares in the herd, too. Is Alice precluded from taking her share of the day’s milking, and putting it into jars, then taking it home? You tell me

I expected that if the Judge were going to issue such an Order she would have called us in to Court in order to explain the application and implications. Since she didn’t, and being UNlearned in the law, I cannot be faulted for being in contempt of it, if I don’t understand it

Myself, I’ve been through 7 contempt of Court procedures, 3 of which I won, (on other topics). So I do know a bit about contempt of Court. I tell people ” whatever you do, don’t get caught up in contempt of Court’ …

One of the most interesting angles of appeal is that the Attorney General Act of BC, says that ONLY the AG of BC can conduct litigation on behalf of a Ministry. So what the hell is a non-government entity = Fraser Health = doing in Court pretending to wear the mantle of the Crown? I say they’re statute-barred from being there, in the first instance. I say that they may not bring on an application for a show cause hearing for contempt against me for bringing the milk to its owners if I’m not employed by Alice Jongerden / Home on the Range. ..

But if they do, then, one of the arguments I will be making will be as Michael Schmidt did – that he was doing something different than the Order said he couldn’t do.

In our case, the section of the Public Health Transition Act RSBC upon which the judge predicated her decision, relies upon the Milk Industry Act. RSBC If you go read the Milk Industry Act, you find that it applies to milk for sale. The Order made by Madame Justice Gropper only applies to the category of raw milk that our cowshare might – hypothetically – offer for sale. Since none of the milk from our dairy ever enters commerce, then the Order she made does not apply to the raw milk we produce and consume for ourselves.

What we’re doing is other than what she says we – Alice Jongerden ; Jane Doe ; John Doe – cannot do.

Tousands of people in British Columbia have a cow from which they get raw milk. Will Fraser Health go after each and every one of those people? There are hundreds of farm families who hold quota in the Milk Marketing scheme. Many of them get their household milk from the bulk tank, even though that milk is not their property… it belongs to the Milk Marketing board. Many of those quota holders sell, or give away, raw milk out of that bulk tank. That raw milk is one hell of a lot more of a risk to the public health than our milk. Do you think Fraser Health will go after them?

A major theme of my appeal of the Order will be that the law upon which it is predicated, unjustifiably interferes with my right to use and enjoy my property. Also, that it is an unreasonable inteference with my right to self-medicate, which arises out of section 7 of the so-called Charter of Rights and – ( yeah, right! ) – Freedoms. = security of the Person.

Heroin addicts are being handed heroin, payed for by your tax dollar, while REAL MILK is deemed a “health hazard”. Make sense? No, the law is an ass, and I will be treating it as such.

At the end of her Reasons, the Justice said that it was up to us to get the government to change the law. So we have a very good entree to form a single -issue political party, and do just that. Tell me this : do you think that when the Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think For Ourselves and Be Our Own Dairy, carries on the business of Agistment, as a component in that campaign, that Fraser Health will Petition for an injunction to suppress our political activity? Let’s find out

Praise God! the REAL MILK is flowing today in British Columbia

Gordon S Watson
Justice Critic, Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think For Ourselves and Be Our Own Dairy

http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/b-c-court-grants-injunction-ordering-home-on-the-range-to-cease-and-desist-gordon-watson-responds/#more-15518



частная полемика:

cowshare-ing embarrases the Stalinist milk marketing boards

In the last couple of weeks, members of our cowshare have been approached by people asking to buy raw milk. Some of the inquirers are honestly mistaken about how we must operate in order to stay within the law, but others gave themselves away as spies. There is no doubt in my mind but that attempts are being made to entrap us into offending against the Milk Industry Act so the tattletales can run back to court.

I warn cowsharers … look out for the tactic Secret Agent Atherton used as she gathered evidence with which to prosecute Glencolton Farm. Beware of someone cajoling you into ignoring the requirement to own a share in the herd. What they’re after is proof of a purchase of raw milk - no matter how small, dollarwise - as evidence the agister operates in commerce, rather than as a strictly private enterprise.

At the bottom of my comment is an article today’s Province newspaper. Finally, a reporter has raised the question of whether the “child which got sick from drinking raw milk” purported by Fraser Health Authority, really exists.

Ten years’ experience working on the topic has taught me that most of the propaganda shovelled by the Health Authorities concerning the risks of harm from raw milk, is BS. The hue and cry distracts people from thinking about the nature of the quota system.

The agreement each of our share members has with the Agister allows her to set the price for her services. Those who want it, can have REAL MILK, if they’re willing to abide-by the Biblical principle that “the workman is worthy of his hire”. As long as there’s freedom of association so that the flow of information is unhindered, the cash register will very quickly tell you what something is worth.

Not everyone who has a vested interest in the dairy cartel grasps the implications of it right away, but, intuitively, they know our tiny exception to the rule threatens their paycheques, because the way REAL MILK is produced exposes the inherent insanity of factory farming. The Berlin Wall was such a powerful symbol people assumed it would be there forever. But it came down in days. Similarly, the milk marketing boards are doomed because the free market is - ultimately - more powerful than the bunch of social engineers who pretend to be in charge


People who think for themselves and have decided to run their own dairies are the class enemies of the milk marketing boards and all the rest of the apparatchiks. A genuinely free market in milk is the antithesis of the centrally-controlled food supply system which Canada has suffered for half a century.

As an aside : for those who don’t agree with my use of the word “suffered” there, go look in the mirror at the fillings in your own teeth. Those cavities resulted from the milk you drank as a child having had factors essential for your optimum development, cooked out of it by pasteurization or destroyed by homogenization. For-instance : Vitamin K2, the catalyst for metabolizing minerals in growing bones and teeth. There we were last generation, in the richest country in the world in all history, yet our parents were kept poor, spending a big part of their income on dentist bills, because nutrition was being stolen out of our very mouths.

In California, Organic Pastures grosses about $6 million per annum wholesaling REAL MILK at around $10 per gallon ( last I heard). Meanwhile, farms all over the country are going bankrupt, being forced by “the system” to take less for their milk than it costs to produce. If there’s one thing the commies hate, it’s a real life side-by-side competition between genuine free enterprise versus “managed supply”

Self government belongs to people who can govern themselves ; dairies which we’ve organized our own sustenance, are self-regulating. We don’t need an army of bureaucrats at our elbow, overseeing the quality of the milk.

Our success in enabling people to get in touch with the vitality existing in REAL MILK deeply insults the communists. What‘s really sticking in their collective craw, is not the fact that we who own the cows get to enjoy the fat of the land, but that yeoman Agisters set their own price for services. Nothing scarier to the Stalinists than someone who doesn’t acknowledge a need to get permission from them to prosper and be in good health

Gordon S Watson

Hi Gordon,
In response to your recent text I've got several comments. I
appreciate very much your efforts in summarizing the process of
communication/struggle with the health authority and the important
details for us (the cooperative members – shareholders) you are doing
really good job! The issues I want to address are about some metaphors
which you use in your text. Please correct me if I misunderstood your
point.

When you say: “If there’s one thing the commies hate, it’s a real life
side-by-side competition between genuine free enterprise versus
“managed supply” – this “commie” sounds just inappropriate in this
context. This term was coined for the purposes of brainwashing, so the
populace would swallow easily the idea of enemy, demonizing the
“enemy”, creating an emotional image of the “enemy” to prevent people
from rational analysis and from acquiring knowledge. I’m sure you are
well aware about the differences between the Marxist idea of communism
as a condition for social justice for all people within society and
the practices of the despotic regimes like Soviet Union and other
countries of the former socialist camp. Using “commie” you just
uncritically ignore this difference and fall into the mass propaganda
trap. I would not pay so much attention to this rather minor remark in
your text, but for a critical author like you it is always better to
stay sensitive and anticipate your reader’s reaction. It is quite
possible that the shareholders represent the whole political spectrum
– from radical left to ultra right. I am sure it is not your purpose
to chase out or alienate anyone from the shareholders because of the
ideological differences. After all the case in question is not about
ideology, it is about the civil rights of citizens, who can be left,
or right or neutral/a-political.

I miss the meaning when you say: “Our success in enabling people to
get in touch with the vitality existing in REAL MILK deeply insults
the communists… Nothing scarier to the Stalinists than someone who
doesn’t acknowledge a need to get permission from them to prosper”
Do you imply that “bureaucrats”, “communists” and “stalinists” are the
synonyms, or do you mean that these groups are all the same? Lots of
people, who have immigrated to Canada from former soviet countries, know
from their own experience what stalinizm mean; it means mass murder. I
think using this term in the discussion of the rights of citizens is
inappropriate as minimum, and as maximum it is a contempt to the
memory of those millions murdered.

The idea of collective ownership, which we (the agisters, the
shareholders) put forward defending the case in the court does not
contradict to the ideology of communism, the author of which is Marx.
On the other side, the history of forced collective farming is part of
the history of every state of a soviet type. In my view there is no
absolute necessity to employ anti-communist rhetoric discussing this
case, because this rhetoric is outdated, and it is part of the old
brainwashing tactic. I think, in this case the notions of “control”,
domination, power of authority and experts’ power fit better and
explain the issue more clearly. Do we need the facts to be “framed”
and “pre-packaged” for us in terms of one or another ideology? I am
sure people (the shareholders in particular) are quite capable in
constructing their own meanings, and making their decisions
accordingly.

march 29
1
Gordon, if you want people consider your writing seriously, think
about avoiding these kind of statements: "What this issue is really
about is that, for half a century, North American agriculture has been
industrialized, as called-for in the Communist Manifesto. Every place
upon which the dark night of communism descends, is blighted", which
sounds as pure ignorance and baseless, provocative point in this
context.

response:
anti-communism.
Statements are based in the fact that that is what the Communist Manifesto does say and my own experience with Stalin-ism disguised as the Marketing Boards.

Even if you have read the Communist Manifesto, I recommend you read it again .. then tell me which of the Ten Planks Marx called-for in 1848, are NOT in place in America, today. The only place you can point to where communism was ever brought in by consent, was Chile. Notice that, there, the people repudiated it the first chance they got.
Every other place except Canada and the US of , communism has been brought in by armed force,

druring the Cold War, the CIA used in arguments what they called "the Gate Theory'. Germany being the best example : when the gate was opened between two regimes - when the Berlin wall fell - human beings flooded to the West, to the non-communist West with nothing but the clothes on their backs, in order to escape the workers' paradise of the Federal Republic of East Germany.

Today, thousands of people will step onto North American soil, after leaving Red China. For some reason, they prefer it here, than there.

Hundreds of thousands of people have risked their lives to escape from Cuba to the hated shores of Yankee Florida. Many died trying ... why would they leave Utopia?

Name a country which experimented with communism, and I'll introduce you to people who now live here, who give you first-hand explanations of why it fails every time

I wonder if you are aware of the work of Richard Wurmbrandt, who was tortured for his witnessing of Christianity? He wrote a book proving that Karl Marx was a Satan worshipper

Gordon S Watson
Curator, Museum of Caucasian Culture


march 29
2
Civil rights.
I'm not asking you to reconsider your own beliefs - it's your
choice. But in your text you speak on behalf of- and positioning
yourself as being together with the group of other people. And this is
different. I do not want to be associated with the statements like
that. As I said - these kind of statements indicate nothing but your
own obsessions. Other people may not share these.

We can discuss the meaning of the Manifesto in details - sure. The one
thing I would not do is to mix religion with social thought and
historical facts .

response:
I agree with you that I am not the spokesman for the Campaign for REAL MILK in British Columbia ... now you are = I just volunteered you!

the proposition that one can sever social thought and facts from religion, is laughable. Politics is the outworking of religion. The starting points are : 1 do you believe there is an objective reality? and 2 - can we know it?

Point being : one of the best examples is the tangible evidence to be found at the Gulf of Aquaba, where the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, miraculously. The chariot wheels are there to this day, submerged. With other artifacts of the Egyptian army. Another one is Noah's Ark ... there to this day, exactly where he parked it after the flood. Of course communist scholars scoff at such assertions ... whatever would they do if they were confronted with the evidenc?! Communism most certainly IS a religion ... Karl Marx boasted that "we shake our fist in the face of Heaven".... thus, even he acknowledged the Supreme Being
Gordon S Watson

March29
3
Your text makes us (the group of people - shareholders) look as a
bunch of anti-communist fanatics. and this is at least unfair in
respect to the diverse group of the shareholders. My point is: we can
be Christian or Muslim, or Buddhist, or communist, or anti-communist,
or anarchist, or anti-globalist, but still be informed citizens, and
stand for and defend ones' civil rights together. Your ideological
reference makes this "togetherness" problematic, as your reference
devides prople on those who are pro- and who are against- , and it
twists the whole case into a trivial propagandist's rattle.

I insist, there is absolutely no necessity to preach anti-communism,
or Christianity in the case about civil rights.

I respect your beliefs and have no intention to defend the ideologists
of totalitarian regimes. But, as you volonteered to speak on my
behalf, I am made responsible for what is been said. I think it's fair
to let you know when what you say contradicts to the facts.

Here is the text of Manifesto,
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/
I would appreciate a citation about "a call for industrialization".

response:
I already said in a previous message, which you may not have received, that I am not going to speak for the Campaign for REAL MILK, again. So no worries there on your part that you have to be responsible for what I say.

I've been mouthing-off and lobbying the government for over a decade on this issue... yet all I managed to do was to get the raw milk flowing to over 400 households when it wasn't before. Not to mention being one of the people who brought the issue to the public consciousness. See the Wall Street Journal today, and the Vancouver Sun tomorrow
Obviously it's time someone else takes over and shows us how to do it properly. ... I hope you will step into the gap and say what needs to be said from now on ... nice and sweet and non-confrontational, as I'm sure your style is.
From my experience over 3 decades of political activism (on far more dangerous topics than this) the kindest way I can put it is : 'you have no idea of the measure of the opponent.'

when I get a moment to spare, I will give you the chapter and page #. from the Communist Manifesto. As well, I will find you a reference from the Soviet union's own records, which proves they deliberately starved to death over 6 million people in the Ukraine, during the winter of 1932-33 = the Holomordor = who had been identified as 'class enemies' because they were white Christians. One of the great genocides in history, yet seldom mentioned. Have your mentors ever apologized to the world for that crime against humanity? It is to laugh.
Don't think the same thing won't happen here. The communists call it "the food weapon" and they are unlimbering it right now

my comments are not a 'propagandists rattle'... they are wisdom distilled from the last 30 years' worth of first-hand experience. You are just a kitten who has yet to even get her eyes open as to the root cause of what's going on, on this issue. But as they say in Christian circles "God loves you and there's still time to change!"
Gordon S Watson

March29
4
I have no other mentor than my own consciousness and critical
analysis. How can you be a successful political activist if you can
not stand a slightest critique? I am not discussing yours or mine
beliefs here, or the totalitarian regimes. I informed you about the
demagogic point in your text and warned you that I'm not the only one
who may notice that. It's up to you whether to take this into account
or ignore.

response:
I can point to a few successes in my other political activities but I deliberately do not mention them to raw milk people, in order to keep the thing simple and on-point.

Explaining the root problem of why raw milk is outlawed, IS on-point. It's part of my job ... whether the herd is ready to hear it, or not
the role of the prophetic type is to tell people what they need to hear, rather than what they want to hear. I'm not here to win friends and influence people, I'm here to warn and inform people about what's going down. After I do, they can do what they want with it
Most people cannot 'think big' ... they have very limited imagination ... they have to see something demonstrated in front of them. I helped Alice and a few other cowsharers get going with practical demonstrations so the concept of food security is self-evident.... One of the core values of America was "self-reliance" The genesis of the Campaign for REAL MILK is Caucasian people remembering our heritage, which is the Law of God as set out in the bible, starting with the food laws and the Agricultural laws. Of course, you don't see that yet ... but you will, as this nation goes down to live through the Parable of the Prodigal Son. You ain't seen nothing yet for trouble

it's comical that you say I can't take cricism! you're talking about a guy who went through seven prosecutions - and won 3 of them - for criticizing the government. I've been led away in handcuffs more than once, and put in maximum security ... I'm a 'court-certified religious fanatic'... I've been vilified by people who had the guns on their side
from time to time, every politician is seen as "self-righteous" and "a demagogue" ... it's just part of the rough and tumble of the discourse
=In politics, one of the first lessons is that you make friends and you make enemies = it comes with the territory I can dish it out at the highest levels and I most certainly can 'take it'.
point being : the raw milk thing is a walk-in-the-park, compared to where I've been ... and where I'm headed after this thing gets squared-away
Gordon S Watson



Michael Schmidt's response to the ruling
I have been watching with real concerns the recent developments regarding the tactics Government and bureaucrats are using across this continent to enforce compliance amongst farmers and consumers, amongst health practitioners and patients, amongst those who want to live, who want to work and who deserve respect.

It is not hard to understand why the public sector keeps expanding beyond control. It certainly pays well.

People who just try to get food on the table are getting bombarded with regulations, limitations and threats.

We have two very different worlds evolving currently in this country:

We have an ever increasing size of Government and bureaucracy.

We have people living in fear under the control of Government and bureaucracy.

The recent development in BC, where the Supreme Court ruled against the Home on the Range cow share operation by approving the injunction against them, is just one of many examples. Here are two paragraphs out of

the ruling:



[26] The question of whether the milk or milk products are distributed to the public or to members of the cow share is of no relevance in British Columbia. Raw milk is deemed to be a health hazard by regulation, and s. 15 of the Public Health Act “prohibits a person from willingly causing a health hazard”.

How does this measure up to the sale of cigarettes, alcohol and government approved drugs????????

[27] Further, the B.C. legislation does not provide the court with the opportunity to consider whether or not raw milk is a health hazard. It does not require that samples of the raw milk be taken or tested or provided to the court. Raw milk is presumed to be a health hazard under s. 7 of the Transitional Regulation.

The Transitional Regulation was passed last November just before the raw milk ruling in Ontario.

The judge in BC clearly makes a difference between Ontario and BC on technical arguments and not on legal principles.

What choice do they have in BC now?

Keep going and defy the unjust and unfounded laws.



I myself have been subject to these “legal” manoeuvres by the York Regional Health Unit, where they acted jointly with the Ministry and filed and prosecuted me on contempt charges for 55.000.- dollars even so the court had not yet ruled if in fact we did break the law.

Times will be not easy in the future if we are forced into actions of civil disobedience. However it is for the greater good to keep exposing the current crack down on farmers all in the name of safety.

We will resist, we will defy, and we will win.

It is important to start thinking about how to help and protect your farmer against these attacks so that you can still have a choice what to eat in the future.



Michael



Farmer hopes to sidestep raw-milk law with warning label (март 30)

Chilliwack's Home on the Range Farm is continuing to distribute unpasteurized milk to its members although the Supreme Court of B.C. has granted an injunction to stop the practice sought by the Fraser Health Authority.

The cow-share cooperative run by dairy farmer Alice Jongerdon hopes to sidestep the ruling by labelling its milk "Not for Human Consumption."

"We still have the same private agreement with our share members and that private agreement states that I will take care of their cows and get their milk ready for pickup," said Jongerdon. "It's their property and what they do with their property is not up to me."

A court in Ontario recently upheld the right of a farmer there to distribute milk to members of his raw milk cooperative, a scheme in which members pay to buy a share of a cow and a regular fee to the farmer to care for the animal and provide them with a share of the milk it produces.

But Madame Justice Miriam Gropper found that while Ontario law simply prohibits the commercial sale of raw milk to the public, B.C. prohibits anyone from willingly creating a health hazard. The Ontario ruling that gave hope to B.C.'s raw milk advocates does not apply, she wrote in her reasons for judgment.

"Raw milk is deemed to be a health hazard by regulation," wrote Gropper. "There is no dispute that Ms. Jongerdon, doing business as Home on the Range, has breached the Public Health Act and its regulations. It is not my role to excuse the respondents from the application of the law or to grant them the remedy which they seek. The remedy for the respondents is to convince the government to change the legislation."

Advocates of raw milk say it contains friendly bacteria, minerals and enzymes that are destroyed by germ-killing heat treatments. Raw milk, however, is also a rich medium for the growth of salmonella, E. coli, campylobacter and listeria.

People who own their own cow are permitted to drink the raw milk it produces. About 400 people own shares in Jongerdon's 20 cows.

Home on the Range milk products are distributed to shareholders through a handful of delis and health food stores around Metro Vancouver, but cease and desist orders issued to the owners of some distribution points by Vancouver Coastal Health and Fraser Health have "disrupted the supply chain," said co-op member Gordon Watson, who was waiting for his Monday delivery of products from the farm. "A lot of people are going straight to the farm to pick up their property [milk and milk products]."

Home on the Range added the "Not For Human Consumption" warning label last week in order to remain in compliance with the Fraser Health injunction, which states that Jongerdon must "cease and desist the distribution of raw milk for human consumption," Watson said. "When the government has nothing intelligent to say on an issue they set up a situation where they can argue the law rather than the issue. It's called a collateral attack." Their problem is that they can't prove that our milk is unsafe."

Provincial health officer Perry Kendall said the investigation of Home on the Range was sparked by a case of campylobacter in an infant, but he admits it is difficult to know how many people are sickened by raw milk products as most cases are not severe enough to require medical attention and are not reported to the government. "It just isn't known," he said. "We tend not to know unless there is a substantial outbreak."

In recent years several outbreaks of E. coli were attributed to raw milk products in Ontario, Washington state and California, he said.

Farmers in many American states can be licensed to distribute raw milk. Most of them are limited to farm-gate sales, though Washington allows a few producers to sell through grocery stores. The state's health department reports that about 100 people are believed to be sickened by raw milk products each year.

Kendall said he would initiate an investigation of any farm distributing raw milk products in B.C.

Legislative change to allow dairies to certify for raw milk production might improve the safety of products the farms produce, "but my comfort with that would not be absolute," Kendall said. Even then raw milk products should not be given to children, who are more at risk from serious illness, he said. "Each of those outbreaks I mentioned was traced to certified farms."

rshore@vancouversun.com

комментарии:
1:30 PM on March 30, 2010

I don't think the intention of the farmer is to "sidestep" the law as the title of the article says. The cows are the property of the shareholders, and she was hired to care for them, boarding, feeding, milking, etc.. The milk that comes from those cows then also belongs to the shareholders, and if she isn't allowed to give it to them for human consumption, then she is actually trying to COMPLY with the law by labeling it as such, not sidestep it. The fact is, there are many things that raw milk can be used for other than consuming it, including bathing, making soaps and lotions, etc.


anonymous

12:44 PM on March 30, 2010

My cousins grew up on raw milk, I grew up on pasteurized (City) milk. As kids, they never had a cavity, at 50 they don't take osteoperosis drugs......I did, and I do.


anonymous

12:35 PM on March 30, 2010

What I choose to put in my body is a right. If the health authorities are so concerned about 'health hazards', why do they allow pop and chips and other junk food to be sold in schools and ciggarettes to be sold at all?


anonymous

12:14 PM on March 30, 2010

lots of crazies on this talkback. nice to see how the fanatics managed to bring the h1n1 vaccine into the conversation.


anonymous

12:09 PM on March 30, 2010

When are the journalists going to be responsible in their reporting and get down to the facts regarding this 'sick child'. First it's a 'child', then a 'toddler', now an 'infant'. Each report describes a different illness. I guess whatever sounds the most sensational fits.
If BC 'prohibits anyone from willingly creating a health hazard' then why are cigarettes sold freely?


anonymous

11:56 AM on March 30, 2010

My son, sick to the point of near death, in and out of hospitals, unable to hold down food or drink, wheezing and weak, lost 6 of 25 pounds, I traced it all back to his vancouver coastal health authority-approved vaccinations ONLY benefited from drinking raw milk. In fact, it still remains the key in his continued health. But what do I know? I only got top marks in my human anatomy, pathology and physiology courses and as a parent continue to read and study. I can keep up with any doctor cause I intimately know the lingo and I know better than most the mechanism of disease. Have you ever heard the phrase content ratio? That is the key to health, everything exists within us, but in what ratio to everything else? That is the key. Really dumb article rshore has written for all of us to read.


anonymous

11:28 AM on March 30, 2010

Louis Pasteur was not wrong he studied bacteria, he was interested in how they worked, he did not fear them. His bigger contribution was getting Doctors to wash their hands between patients. It was industry, that found it easier to transport milk to city dwellers if it was pasteurized, not Louis. Not a bad way to feed ever expanding population of urbanites. All the dairy farmers would tell you that they never boiled their milk, drank it raw at home, if they weren't so mad that Alice doesn't have to wait for Quota to sell her milk.
What an absurd world we live in when people don't trust nature, outlaw it. Urban populations so dependent on resources from somewhere else that they no longer recognize real food. Shameful really

anonymous

11:23 AM on March 30, 2010

3:04 am what a fool. These guys are like drug dealers selling death? You are like a person but with no brain. Even Kendall had to say the cases were mild. I guess its ok to have all the fat in processed food but god forbid anyone try anything different. What do you think people used to do with their milk before pasteurization? They drank it raw you silly bugger. If you are to stupid to understand the issue then please keep your comments to yourself.

anonymous

10:47 AM on March 30, 2010

Will big brother also come to my garden this year and tell me I can't eat my own tomatoes or spinach? Both are known to carry e-coli, right? Both are deadly and dangerous - and (wow) it's extremely risky to try to grow it myself! Heavens!
What if I want to pick blackberries from the forests in the area? Holy cow - I've seen bugs walk over wild berries! What if I accidentally ingest a bug?
Give me a break.
Clearly, in this democratic society, free thinkers who drink raw milk are dangerous individuals and should be controlled and stopped from their subversive consuming behavior - otherwise, we just might avoid becoming fat and unhealthy like the rest of society - and that's just blatantly not fair.

anonymous

10:17 AM on March 30, 2010

The government never shut down Maple Leaf Foods after its listeria-infested deli meat killed people. It is completely hypocritical for our government to take away my natural, unprocessed, organic raw dairy products while Maple Leaf Foods continues to reap huge profits. I can freely inject heroin in a taxpayer-funded setting here in BC. I can buy cigarettes which are proven to cause lung cancer, but | can't drink the milk from my own cow. How is this allowed to happen in a democratic society?

anonymous

10:17 AM on March 30, 2010

Perry Kendal is the same goof pushing the H1N1 vaccine without knowing the correct dosage (1 or 2 shots needed) and hyped it as a killer flu when in fact it was a mild flu. We need to get some people with some intelligence into these positions. This guy doesnt know his back side from a whole in the ground

anonymous

9:30 AM on March 30, 2010

"In recent years several outbreaks of E. coli were attributed to raw milk products in Ontario, Washington state and California,"

Oh yeah? Well in recent years several outbreaks of E. coli were attributed to fast food outlets in Ontario, Washington state and California.

If the government is truly interested in our well being, why are fast food restaurants allowed to exist? I'll bet you if McDonalds wanted to sell raw milk it would be legalized in about five minutes!

anonymous

9:30 AM on March 30, 2010

Who gave the court power to decide on scientific/medical issue on milk? Aren't they supposed to ensure what's written in the law?

anonymous

9:04 AM on March 30, 2010

It is time for government to get out of our private lives.
We make our choices of what to eat or drink.
The largest ever recalls of meat and produce have been from the large corporate farms. It is they that are the largest threat to our health.
Being raised on a small farm and eating and drinking all our own produce and meat has given me and my family a long and healthy life.

anonymous

3:41 AM on March 30, 2010

I can just see the lawsuits flying the first time one of his "customers" dies.... .

anonymous

3:20 AM on March 30, 2010

These laws are made to protect the corporations who poison the masses through processed foods. FYI. Cows are biologically made to eat GRASS NOT CORN! Hence the corn diet, the bacteria gets out of control in the digestive process. This is why they administer antibiotics to the cows as this is where E-Coli is produced because of the corn diet! Logically and naturally speaking, when the cow is fed its natural diet of GRASS NOT CORN, E-Coli does not exist therefore antibiotics are not needed and RAW milk is safe to drink. People need to stop watching television, absolutely everything is a lie and people never receive the truth!!!

anonymous

3:04 AM on March 30, 2010

this POS should be arrested NOW! there's already been a few cases of poisoned custumers of an organic raw milk supplier in the lower mainland, these people who supply this are like drug dealers selling death. Louis Pasteur wasn't wrong.

http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Farmer+hopes+sidestep+milk+with+warning+label/2741899/story.html



другая статья + comments
http://communities.canada.com/VANCOUVERSUN/blogs/greenman/archive/2010/03/29/raw-milk-producers-beware.aspx