Protest against feds focuses on raw-milk rules

Protesters distributed an estimated 100 gallons of raw milk in front of the offices of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration today during a rally that prompted the federal agency to issue a statement defending its crackdown on the product.

The event was organized by the Farm Food Freedom Coalition and a spokesman for the rally, Max Kane, told WND that a caravan of vehicles collected the supplies of raw milk, then traveled to Silver Springs, Md., to the FDA offices for the protest.

The distribution there was in violation of the federal law that prevents people from moving raw milk across state lines for delivery to others, and the rally participants were met by officers from the Department of Homeland Security and others.

But Kane said there were no conflicts, no arrests and no violence.

The FDA's statement said that the dangers from raw milk make it necessary for the agency to impose restrictions.

"While the perceived nutritional and health benefits of raw milk consumption have not been scientifically substantiated, the health risks are clear," the statement said. "Since 1987, there have been 143 reported outbreaks of illness – some involving miscarriages, still births, kidney failure and deaths – associated with consumption of raw milk and raw milk products that were contaminated with pathogenic bacteria such as Listeria, Campylobacter, Salmonella, and E. Coli."

However, a report from the Weston A. Price Foundation revealed that from 1980 to 2005 there were 10 times more illnesses from pasteurized milk than from raw milk.

That's the preferred process by the federal government.

"Pasteurization of milk was adopted decades ago as a basic public health measure to kill dangerous bacteria and largely eliminate the risk of getting sick from one of the most important staples of the American diet. In 1987, the agency issued a regulation prohibiting the interstate sale of raw milk," said the FDA.

Today, 30 states allow the sale of raw milk and 20 forbid it, but the federal government forbids it in interstate business.

The dispute over access to raw milk and related products has grown more volatile in recent months. In California, three people are facing trial following an investigation of the Rawesome buying club.

In that case, one of the defense lawyers was stunned by the militancy of the prosecutor, declaring, "She doesn't want raw milk. … She wants blood."

The federal government has a long history of cracking down on those who produce raw milk and make it available to consumers – even when the consumers are the ones who own the cows and milk.

In a recent case in Wisconsin, a judge ruled that Americans do not have a right to choose their food, not even when they own the cows and the milk.

Further, a Canadian farmer cleared at trial of raw milk charges but convicted by an appellate court is in his second month of a hunger strike in which he is demanding a reasonable way for consumers who choose raw milk to obtain it without an accompanying criminal record.

Shiv Chopra, who operates a Canadian website on health food and related issues, said in a statement, "People have the right to eat and feed their families natural foods, including fresh, unpasteurized, milk. They have the right to obtain raw milk, provided the cows are certified to be disease free. Non-homogenized, unpasteurized, raw milk is safer and more nutritious than the homogenized, fortified, and pasteurized milk."

Kimberly Hartke of the Campaign for Real Milk, a project of The Weston A. Price Foundation, contended the government's "heavy-handed" tactics simply have gone too far.

"As more consumers seek greater access to local farm fresh milk to feed their families, our federal government is working overtime to curtail freedom to feed your family the way you deem necessary. Since most seek raw dairy for health reasons, this is a serious concern," she said.

Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Price Foundation, said the issue really isn't complicated.

"The Raw Milk Freedom Riders protest at the FDA pits food freedoms for ordinary citizens against agribusiness in league with government agencies," she said.

The issue is gaining widespread attention on the Internet, where a campaign called LetsLegalizeIt has posted a song about its goals:

The farmer who is staging the hunger strike is Michael Schmidt.

WND reported that Schmidt has been battling since 1994 for the right to drink raw milk.

It was only a few days earlier when a judge in Wisconsin decided in a fight over families' access to milk from cows they own that Americans "do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow."

In that case, Circuit Court Judge Patrick J. Fiedler said the families who reported they were boarding their cows for a fee and then getting the milk instead were running a "dairy farm."

"It's always a surprise when a judge says you don't have the fundamental right to consume the foods of your choice," said Pete Kennedy, president of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, which worked on the case on behalf of the farmers and the owners of the milk-producing cows.

The judge's original ruling came in a consolidation of two cases that presented similar situations: cows being maintained and milked on farms for the benefit of non-resident owners. He refused to grant a summary judgment declaring such arrangements legitimate, deciding instead to favor the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, which opposed them.

"Plaintiffs argue that they have a fundamental right to possess, use and enjoy their property and therefore have a fundamental right to own a cow, or a heard (sic) of cows, and to use their cow(s) in a manner that does not cause harm to third parties. They argue that they have a fundamental right to privacy to consume the food of their choice for themselves and their families and therefore have a fundamental right to consume unpasteurized milk from their cows," the judge wrote.

Bunk, he concluded.

"They do not simply own a cow that they board at a farm. Instead, plaintiffs operate a dairy farm. If plaintiffs want to continue to operate their dairy farm then they must do so in a way that complies with the laws of Wisconsin."

He cited an earlier consent decree involving one of the farm locations, which had been accused of being the source of a "Campylobachter jejuni infection" and said there are state reasons to require standards and licenses.

Identifying the cases as the "Grassway plaintiffs" and the "Zinniker plaintiffs," the judge said both were in violation of state rules and regulations.

It was, however, when the plaintiffs petitioned the judge for a "clarification" of his order that he let fly his judicial temperament.

"The court denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, which means the following:

"(1) no, plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a diary (sic) herd;
"(2) no, plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;
"(3) no, plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer;
"(4) no, the Zinniker plaintiffs' private contract does not fall outside the scope of the state's police power;
"(5) no, plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice; and
"(6) no, the DATCP did not act in an ultra vires manner because it had jurisdiction to regulate the Zinniker plaintiffs' conduct."

Kennedy called the ruling outlandish.

"Here you have a situation where a group of people, a couple of individuals, boarded their cows which they wholly owned, with Zinniker farms, and paid them a fee for the boarding."

He continued, "The judge said people have no fundamental right to acquire, possess and use your own property."

The dispute is part of a larger battle between private interests and state and federal regulators over who makes the decision on the difference between a privately held asset and a commercial producer.

The Los Angeles Times recently profiled the case in which prosecutors arrested the owner of the Rawesome health food market and two others on charges of allegedly illegally producing unpasteurized dairy products.

The arrests of James Cecil Stewart, Sharon Ann Palmer and Eugenie Bloch just a few weeks ago advanced the government's crackdown on the sale of so-called raw dairy products.

WND has reported several times on fed crackdowns on producers of raw milk for friends and neighbors, including when agents arrived to inspect a private property belonging to Dan Allgyer in Pennsylvania at 5 a.m.

Special offers:

SCARY MEDICINE: Exposing the dark side of vaccines

'Vaccines: the risks, the benefits, the choices': Must-see DVD for parents on the fence about whether to vaccinate

Reclaim your health!