Feds raid Amish dairy and threaten action over raw milk sales

[FastTadpole]

Interesting Study:

Raw vs Pasteurized
Glencolton Farms starts its own study of Raw Milk vs Pasteurized
http://thebovine.wordpress.com/raw-vs-pasteurized/

Interesting site all around too.

The Bovine
http://thebovine.wordpress.com/

[kevlar]

what is apparently wrong with raw milk ? hurting the profits of the big farm industry ?

[nik]

(08-03-2010 12:10 AM)kevlar Wrote:  what is apparently wrong with raw milk ? hurting the profits of the big farm industry ?

probably not so much, maybe as it is not standardised or in the hands of big farm industry

---

edit)

if you compare and contrast with the residents on the Isle of Muck off Scotland who have recently been told it is illegal for them to drink from the natural springs on the island any longer unless filtrated by equipment provided by the state, as the spring water doesn't meet the standard quality tests - one is easily able to discern that there is a moving agenda within which national boundaries are irrelevant. A standardised world run by an elite and their experts.

[FastTadpole]

The government is over regulating the meat and dairy industry giving it's cronies (or their masters depending on how you see it) the tools and selective enforcement to leverage themselves against their competitors legally and economically. Lucky for us there are still judges who advocate justice but many are handcuffed by their oath to the law. They employ all sort of disruptive tactics as well like sending in police to raid dairy farms, getting the FDA / Health Canada to do a disproportionate amount of inspections on smaller farms etc..

The danger of RAW milk, to the public, is that it needs to be stored and transported in clean sterile environments since it serves as a growth medium due to it being so rich in nutrients. That hand is being far overplayed though. Stores won't buy bad milk or meat, at least not after a few bad batches, the consumers won't buy sour milk either. There really doesn't have to be much regulation, maybe fair regular inspections like in a restaurant. A producer is backed by their reputation so they'll be careful to ship a top notch product.

It would be most efficient if the supermarkets to do this for the end product. They could do all the testing onsite or have the inspectors go to the supermarket, then follow up on any infringements non-attributable to the distribution chain to the producer.

If regulation was employed at the stage where it was put out for sale (before the Point of Sale) the supermarkets and restaurants would be accountable rather than have us pay for the regulators and inspection checkpoints. Then if the supermarket / restaurant would simply not buy from the producer if they had issues with the product.

[mexika]

raw milk is good for you as long as a healthy cow is eating off the earth. Grass, the natural stuff. Not like you have a cow tied to bars and feeding it remains or some sprayed grass. They are disconnecting all animals humans tend to consume from the natural as all humans are being disconnected from the natural. If we become disconnected from the natural, we can pretty much say, WE ARE DEATH, WE ARE EATING DEATH AND LIVING ON BORROWED TIME.

[hilly7]

Agreed

[Deathaniel]

yep, i spend more to buy organic, and am the only person in my 100 house community that has a veg garden. I use no pesticides other then stale beer and natural fertilizers (eggshells, foliage, and cow manure ,[bought from organic farm with meet], Dairy is one of the few possible contaminates that gets in my house as I'm in the city and can't have my own cow or make my own cheese, but in the summer We do go into the country and buy from smaller producers, mostly curds and block cheese.

My kids r very tall and broad for there age and smart, and i do claim beyond good genetics it's healthy diet, none of them have ever eaten McDonalds, or used tap water for anything but brushing there teeth and showering.

THough i do do a lot of canned fish... local water ways r very polluted but Health Canada is very strict on toxins in fish products 4 sale so my concern is out weighed by the health benefits for the developing mind as fish/ sea food is very good for brain development.

[FastTadpole]

(08-03-2010 07:23 PM)Deathanyl Wrote:  yep, i spend more to buy organic, and am the only person in my 100 house community that has a veg garden. I use no pesticides other then stale beer and natural fertilizers (eggshells, foliage, and cow manure ,[bought from organic farm with meet], Dairy is one of the few possible contaminates that gets in my house as I'm in the city and can't have my own cow or make my own cheese, but in the summer We do go into the country and buy from smaller producers, mostly curds and block cheese.

My kids r very tall and broad for there age and smart, and i do claim beyond good genetics it's healthy diet, none of them have ever eaten McDonalds, or used tap water for anything but brushing there teeth and showering.

THough i do do a lot of canned fish... local water ways r very polluted but Health Canada is very strict on toxins in fish products 4 sale so my concern is out weighed by the health benefits for the developing mind as fish/ sea food is very good for brain development.

Good on you to do all that. Good common sense advice. Do use a spring fed well, water > air osmosis?

Unfortunately the Canadian Government has been sued for its use of high standards in food. Under the terms of NAFTA it is considered unfair not to allow the shipment of toxic goods. Certain pesticide use was nary even ruled upon, given an apology and a bag of money as condolence. Bovine Growth Hormone was another one of the cases, thankfully we won that one - asserting at least a bit of what remains of Canadian sovereignty.

[FastTadpole]

Quote:Clone farm's milk is on sale: Food watchdog investigates after dairy farmer's astonishing admission

By Sean Poulter
Last updated at 12:24 PM on 2nd August 2010

Milk from the offspring of cloned cows is secretly - and illegally - going into high street shops.

Despite deep unease among consumers, the milk is not being labelled or identified in any way, leaving shoppers in the dark about what they are drinking.

The dairy farmer involved said he wanted to remain anonymous because the British public regards cloning as so distasteful that buyers would stop taking his milk.

Last night the Food Standards Agency said it would investigate. It told the Mail that it believes the sale of milk from such cows is illegal under food regulations.

Research has identified serious concerns for the health and well-being of animals produced as a result of cloning. There is evidence of premature births, deformities and early death.

The cows being used to produce the controversial milk start life in the U.S. as embryos created from the eggs of cloned prize-winning Holstein cows and the sperm of normal bulls.

The embryos are frozen and flown to the UK, where they are implanted into host cows.

The resulting supersize animals can be used to produce massive quantities of milk and for breeding purposes.

The Mail blew the whistle on this trade in 'clone farm' cows more than three years ago following the birth of Dundee Paradise on a farm in Shropshire.

Subsequently, we revealed that a total of eight such calves were born on British farms.

It now appears that milk from at least one of these animals, and possibly many more, is being sold for human consumption.
Graphic: How cattle are cloned

The Mail revelations in 2007 were a complete surprise to the Government's food and farming department, Defra, and the FSA, which had no knowledge of the births.

Subsequently, the EU and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) launched a major investigation in order to decide on how to handle the controversial technology.

As a result, earlier this month, Euro MPs voted in favour of a ban on meat and milk from clones and their offspring going into human food without approval. However, the regime has not yet been passed into law.

Details of the claims that clone farm milk is reaching the public appeared in the respected International Herald Tribune.

It said a British dairy farmer had admitted using milk from a cow bred from a clone as part of his daily production.

The man said he was also selling embryos from the same cow to breeders in Canada.

He said part of the reason he was staying anonymous was that he did not want to be required to get rid of a valuable cow.

An FSA spokesman said: 'Since 2007 the FSA interpretation of the law has been that meat and products from clones and their offspring are considered novel foods and would therefore need to be authorised before being placed on the market.

'As the UK authority responsible for accepting novel food applications, the agency has not received any applications relating to cloning and no authorisations have been made.

'The agency will, of course, investigate any reports of unauthorised novel foods entering the food chain.' European experts have not identified a food safety risk associated with cloning.

But some campaigners claim it could allow new diseases to pass from farm animals to humans.

The RSPCA and Compassion in World Farming (CiWF) are among a number of groups opposed to farm animal cloning for food. The chief policy adviser to CiWF, Peter Stevenson, said: ' I would be appalled if milk from a clone offspring cow is coming into the food chain in the UK.
Pugh

'As the farmer has acknowledged, the public is deeply concerned about this and does not want it.

'If this is happening, it demonstrates that there are very serious loopholes in the way food production is policed in this country.

'The Government has known these animals were in the country for at least three years, but it appears to have done nothing to ensure any milk or meat is not reaching the public.'

A study conducted by the FSA found widespread opposition to clone farming and food. Dr Steve Griggs, who led the research, said: 'The majority of people came to the conclusion that they would not want to eat such food. The overwhelming majority either did not want it or were unsure.

'They struggled to identify any convincing benefits for them as consumers.

'There were concerns about the ethical side of animal cloning, indeed whether we have the moral right to go down this road.'

http://digg.com/food_drink/Cloned_cows_m...n_Watchdog
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ssion.html

[FastTadpole]

The title got me

Quote:Another Victory for the Sustainable Food 'Moo-vement'
Aug 2 09:26 AM US/Eastern

CHARLOTTE, N.C. and PALO ALTO, Calif., Aug. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- As part of their collective commitment to health and wellness, Bon Appetit Management Company and Compass Group USA will contract to buy only yogurt from cows not treated with rBGH (also known as rBST) effective today.

Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility (OPSR), which facilitates a nationwide coalition opposing rBGH, commended today's announcement from the two companies. According to Rick North, Oregon PSR's Project Director, "Artificial growth hormone is known to cause harm to cows and may very well cause harm to humans. Congratulations to Bon Appetit Management Company and Compass Group for taking a stand on this issue. This change sends a clear signal to milk product manufacturers that major players in the food service industry want to serve products produced without rBGH, including yogurt. We applaud both companies for leading the industry another step in the right direction, making changes that support both animal welfare and human health."

Bovine growth hormone occurs naturally in dairy cows and is present in all raw milk. Recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) is a genetically engineered animal drug injected in to cows to increase milk production.

First approved by the FDA in 1993, the use of rBGH is highly controversial. rBGH is banned in most industrial nations including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and all 27 nations of the European Union. Cows that receive rBGH injections experience higher rates of mastitis, an infection of the udder that leads to swelling and inflammation. Not only is this painful for the cow, it often forces dairy farmers to rely on antibiotics to treat these infections, creating a cycle of unnecessary medical intervention and possibly contributing to the growing problem of antibiotic resistance. The pharmaceutical labels on packages of rBGH list 16 toxic side effects, including hoof problems, increased pus in milk, heat stress, diarrhea and other gastrointestinal problems.

The medical community has expressed deep concern that the use of these artificial hormones may also be harmful to human health. A significant body of scientific data has linked rBGH to possible increases in cancer and antibiotic resistance in humans. Although further study is needed, Bon Appetit and Compass Group prefer to take a precautionary approach, offering milk, and now yogurt, from cows not treated with rBGH to their customers and clients.

Bon Appetit Management Company

Back in 2002, Bon Appetit Management Company led the food service industry with a policy to purchase only milk from cows not treated with artificial bovine growth hormones. In 2010, Bon Appetit is expanding their commitment to include yogurt. This will impact over 400 locations in 30 states.

The newly expanded policy integrates perfectly with Bon Appetit's ten-year-old Farm to Fork program, which supports farms and producers that are small-scale, owner-operated, and sit within a 150 mile radius of the cafes they serve. According to Food and Water Watch, while 54% of large herd farmers use rBGH, only 8% of small herd farmers – the kind supported by Farm to Fork – use the artificial hormone.

Says CEO Fedele Bauccio, "At Bon Appetit Management Company, we believe it is imperative that restaurant companies take an active role in promoting sustainable food systems. Buying our yogurt from manufacturers that ban artificial growth hormones is a triple win – for concerned consumers, conscientious dairy farmers, and committed businesses that are passionate about the importance of healthy animals and healthy foods."

Compass Group USA

Following the lead of Bon Appetit Management Company, Compass Group USA decided in 2009 to serve only fresh milk from cows not treated with rBGH where available, and has committed to a 100% implementation by 2010. In 2009, Compass purchased approximately 294 million pounds (approximately 35 million gallons) of milk from cows not treated with rBGH.

Along with Bon Appetit, Compass Group is also committing to solely contracting to buy yogurt products from cows not treated with rBGH.

Marc Zammit, Vice President of Corporate Sustainability Initiatives and Culinary, Compass Group USA, concludes, "This type of initiative continues to be an example of Compass Group's commitment to influence the supply chain. By making this pledge, we can address the needs and concerns of our guests."

About Bon Appetit Management Company

Bon Appetit Management Company is an onsite restaurant company offering full foodservice management to corporations, universities and specialty venues. Bon Appetit is committed to sourcing sustainable, local foods for all cafes throughout the country. A pioneer in environmentally-sound sourcing policies, Bon Appetit has developed programs addressing local purchasing, the overuse of antibiotics, sustainable seafood, cage-free eggs, the connection between food and climate change, and most recently, farmworkers' rights. The company has received numerous awards for its work from organizations like the Natural Resources Defense Council, Seafood Choices Alliance, The Humane Society of the United States, and Food Alliance. Based in Palo Alto, CA, Bon Appetit has more than 400 cafes in 31 states, including eBay, the University of Pennsylvania and the Getty Center.

About Compass Group USA

Based in Charlotte NC, Compass Group USA is the leading foodservice and support services company with $9.2 billion in revenues in 2009. Compass Group is proud to lead the foodservice industry with groundbreaking policies that champion local farmers and fair trade; reduce the use of antibiotics in chicken, turkey and pork; commit to healthier oceans by purchasing sustainable seafood; focus on social justice; support sustainable agriculture and healthy rural economies; and promote farm animal welfare through 100 percent use of cage free shell eggs. With 386,000 associates worldwide, its parent company, UK-based Compass Group PLC had revenues of 13.4 billion pounds Sterling in the year to September 30, 2009.

SOURCE Compass Group

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=..._article=1

No really who is the Compass Group? $9.2B?! Never heard of these guys.

[icosaface]

I have never heard of the compass group either.
The title is funny though, everybody should begin wry-ting like that IMO.