The media have been taking their cues from press releases issued by public health departments that have been giving the advice to pasteurize all milk. However, the solution to avoid getting brucellosis is far different from what public health and the media are telling you. In the words of one healthcare professional, “For public health officials to issue public notices that the solution to this avoidable problem is to pasteurize all milk, is astonishing.”

First off, the three cases of brucellosis are the only known cases attributed to raw milk consumption over the past 20 years. Brucellosis is a systemic disease in cattle and humans that is caused by the bacteria Brucella abortus. At one time the disease in cows caused severe reductions in offspring and was a problem for the cattle industry. A national eradication campaign was launched in the 1950s and, according to USDA statistics, the number of cattle/bison herds affected by brucellosis in the U.S. has been less than 10 every year from 2003 onward.¹

The eradication program’s success has led to a huge decline in the number of brucellosis cases in humans; estimates are that there are about 100 cases of human brucellosis per year in this country.² In the U.S. this is mainly an occupational disease with most of the rare cases of brucellosis being in people who attended the birth of an infected cow and then became infected during handling of the birth tissues and fluids.^3,4

In an infected dairy cow, the Brucella abortus pathogen can proliferate in the mammary glands and then enter the milk. The pathogen can pass to humans when drinking the infected milk but, as mentioned, the cases of brucellosis (also known as undulant fever) attributed to drinking raw milk in the U.S. are extremely rare.

The “milk ring test” is the traditional and commonly used method to screen dairy herds to detect any cows with brucellosis; the test is performed on the herd’s milk to check for the rare presence of Brucella antibodies.

Two vaccines against brucellosis have been developed for calves: the S19 vaccine and the RB51 vaccine. The S19 vaccine is effective but it has the disadvantage of causing testing for antibodies to become positive. The vaccine can make it difficult to distinguish between a vaccinated cow and an infected cow. The RB51 vaccine does not cause the antibody testing of cows to become positive but another problem arises with its use.

The RB51 vaccine must be administered to calves before they become fertile; a side effect is that, if a cow is given the RB51 vaccine when pregnant, it may actually cause an infection with the vaccine strain of Brucella in the vaccinated cow. It is, therefore, possible that if the RB51 vaccine isn’t given strictly according to the protocol, the vaccinated cow may become infected and may shed the pathogen (i.e., the RB51 strain of Brucella) into the milk.

Public health officials have found in all three cases of illness from brucellosis attributed to raw milk consumption, the strain of Brucella abortus discovered in the three individuals was the RB51 vaccine strain. In fact, in November 2017, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture sent a letter to licensed raw milk producers in the state advising them to stop immunizing cows from brucellosis with the RB51 vaccine.⁵

So the solution to preventing brucellosis in raw milk is not for producers to pasteurize the milk but rather to either stop giving their herd the RB51 vaccine or to make sure their vets give the calves the vaccine before the calves become fertile. Worth noting, too, is that hundreds of people drank raw milk produced by the herds responsible for the three cases of brucellosis and, as far as is known, no one else became sick.

In the meantime, the media fear-mongering continues on. The latest case of brucellosis attributed to raw milk consumption dates back to November 2018, but to read the stories in the media, you would have thought it was just discovered. CDC press releases on this latest case dated January 23, 2019, and February 11, 2019, are providing the impetus for the flood of media reports.

Has an agenda ever gotten so much mileage over three illnesses?

A fear-inciting statement from the February 11 CDC press release that the media have parroted is, “the CDC and state health officials are investigating potential exposures, to Brucella strain RB51 in 19 states, connected to consuming raw (unpasteurized) milk from Miller’s Biodiversity Farm in Quarryville, Pennsylvania.”⁶ (The farm allegedly distributed raw milk to people in the 19 states listed later in the release.) Being exposed to a pathogen is far different than being sickened by it; we are exposed to various pathogenic bacteria such as listeria and e. coli in the environment every day.

One headline screamed, “Deadly Disease Caused by Raw Milk Has Already Put 19 U.S. States on High Alert.”⁷ There have been no deaths from brucellosis attributed to raw milk consumption since the eradication program succeeded in substantially eliminating the incidence of the disease and possibly even long before then.

The public health agencies and their allies in the press have been misleading the public long enough on raw milk and brucellosis. It’s time for fear and hysteria to give way to science and common sense.

——
¹ “Brucellosis Affected Cattle/Bison Herds by State, FY 1997-2018” graph [PDF]. USDA-APHIS National Brucellosis Eradication Program (September 10, 2018), https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-disease-information/cattle-disease-information/national-brucellosis-eradication/brucellosis-eradication-program

² “Facts About Brucellosis” [PDF]. USDA-APHIS National Brucellosis Eradication Program, Section “Resources” link (see question #21), https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/brucellosis/downloads/bruc-facts.pdf

³ “How Brucellosis is Spread” section. USDA-APHIS National Brucellosis Eradication Program (September 10, 2018) [PDF], https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-disease-information/cattle-disease-information/national-brucellosis-eradication/brucellosis-eradication-program

⁴ “Fast Facts: Brucellosis, Undulant Fever” [PDF]. Iowa State University, The Center for Food Security & Public Health. April 2008, http://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/FastFacts/pdfs/brucellosis_F.pdf

⁵ Letter dated November 30, 2017 [PDF]. Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal Health and Diagnostic Services, Dr. David Wolfgang (Director) and Dr. Lydia Johnson (Director, Bureau of Food Safety & Laboratory Services); accessed at https://www.yourfamilyfarmer.com/uploads/documents/RB51-Brucellosis-Letter-PDA-2017.pdf

⁶ Media Statement [PDF]. CDC (February 11, 2019),
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/s0211-brucellosis-raw-milk.html

⁷ “Deadly Disease Caused by Raw Milk Has Already Put 19 U.S. States on High Alert” [PDF]. ScienceAlert.com, Carly Cassella (February 15, 2019), https://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-dangerous-to-drink-raw-milk-the-cdc-warns-for-the-umpteenth-time

The post Cutting Through the Propaganda on Raw Milk and Brucellosis appeared first on Real Milk.

Controversial antibiotic test requirements imposed by the FDA will be going into effect next month in Pennsylvania. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA), Pennsylvania will be the last state to implement the testing requirements; FDA initially issued the regulations in 2011.¹ The requirements will especially impact raw milk farmers who sell part of their production to dairy cooperatives for pasteurization as well as selling raw milk direct to the consumer or through retail stores. The main reason that the FDA testing mandate has received much more attention in Pennsylvania than in any other state is that there are more producers in Pennsylvania than in any other state whose raw milk goes for both pasteurization and for direct consumption. Because of laws in neighboring states that either restrict or prohibit raw milk sales or distribution, consumers in both the northeastern and mid-Atlantic regions rely on Pennsylvania raw milk producers for their sustenance.

The antibiotic testing requirements stipulate that farmers producing either raw milk for pasteurization or raw milk to be manufactured into other dairy products (such as raw or pasteurized cheese) must test every batch of raw milk for antibiotic residue even if the producer’s dairy operation is certified organic. Producers who only produce raw milk for human consumption are not subject to the FDA testing requirement. Producers subject to the testing mandate will either have to do their own testing on equipment that could cost thousands of dollars to purchase, pay thousands each year for testing by a state-approved lab or, in the case of producers selling to a co-op, wait to get test results (milk haulers transporting milk for co-ops collect samples for testing of each batch of raw milk they pick up from a farm belonging to the co-op). Producers cannot commingle any milk from a subsequent batch until they get test results back from the co-op; further complicating matters is the fact that co-ops typically do not report test results to member farmers at all, much less on a timely basis. PDA has gotten reports of producers working with co-ops to create a process for timely reporting of test results but it remains to be seen how these efforts pan out.

Dairy Farmers of America, a co-op with a history of strong opposition to legalizing raw milk sales for human consumption, controls a substantial percentage of raw milk produced for pasteurization in Pennsylvania, possibly over one-half of the total. Trickling Springs Creamery, a well-known Pennsylvania co-op, has already notified its members that one hundred percent of their production must go to the co-op; members will not be able to retain any raw milk for retail sales or for manufacturing into any other dairy product. If a farmer selling raw milk to a co-op for pasteurization is found to violate the antibiotic testing requirements, FDA can not only stop the farmer’s shipments to the co-op, it can shut down the co-op from making any shipments in interstate commerce.

To its credit, PDA (with FDA’s approval) has established a variance process, whereby those dairies to which it grants a variance will be exempt from the antibiotic testing requirements.² Forty farmers have applied for the variance so far. Those eligible for the variance include farmers who pasteurize and bottle all the raw milk they produce and those manufacturing other dairy products only from raw milk produced on their farm. Producers selling any of their raw milk production to a co-op are not eligible for a variance per order of FDA.

A PDA official estimated that as many as one-half of the sixty-eight Pennsylvania dairies permitted to produce and sell raw milk for human consumption are Grade A dairies that sell some of their milk production to a co-op. If these dairies aren’t able to make a workable arrangement with their co-ops on reporting test results, the cost of antibiotic testing could drive many to drop their permits and get out of the raw milk business even though antibiotic residues in the milk was never a problem for any of them to begin with. The FDA testing requirement, in their cases, has nothing to do with protecting the public health.

1. Public Health Service/FDA, Appendix N Drug Residue Testing and Farm Surveillance, “Grade A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance 2015 Revision, Note: the PMO is a document governing the production, distribution and transportation of raw milk intended for pasteurization; Pennsylvania and nearly all other states have adopted the PMO and the other states must have standards at least as strict.

2. PDA Commissioner Russell Reddng, Letter to Pennsylvania Milk Permitholders, 4 October 2017.

This article first appeared in the Winter 2017 issue of Wise Traditions in Food, Farming, and the Healing Arts, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation.

[include content_id=663]

The post Pennsylvania: FDA Antibiotic Test Requirement Threatens to Cut Raw Milk Supply appeared first on Real Milk.

The antibiotic testing requirements are that farmers producing either raw milk for pasteurization or raw milk to be manufactured into other dairy products (such as raw or pasteurized cheese) must test every batch of raw milk produced for antibiotic residue even if the producer’s dairy operation is certified organic. Producers who only produce raw milk for human consumption are not subject to the FDA testing requirement. Producers subject to the testing mandate will either have to do their own testing on equipment that could cost thousands of dollars to purchase, pay thousands each year for testing by a state-approved lab or, in the case of producers selling to a co-op, wait to get test results (milk haulers transporting milk for co-ops collect samples for testing of each batch of raw milk they pick up from a farm belonging to the co-op). Producers cannot commingle any milk from a subsequent batch until they get test results back from the co-op; further complicating matters is the fact that co-ops typically do not report test results to member farmers at all, much less on a timely basis. PDA has gotten reports of producers working with co-ops to create a process for timely reporting of test results but it remains to be seen how these efforts pan out.

Dairy Farmers of America, a co-op with a history of strong opposition to legalizing raw milk sales for human consumption, controls a substantial percentage of raw milk produced for pasteurization in Pennsylvania, possibly over one-half of the total. Trickling Springs Creamery, a well-known Pennsylvania co-op, has already notified its members that one hundred percent of their production must go to the co-op; members will not be able to retain any raw milk for retail sales or for manufacturing into any other dairy product. If a farmer selling raw milk to a co-op for pasteurization is found to violate the antibiotic testing requirements, FDA can not only stop the farmer’s shipments to the co-op, it can shut down the co-op from making any shipments in interstate commerce.

To its credit, PDA (with FDA’s approval) has established a variance process, where those dairies it grants a variance will be exempt from the antibiotic testing requirements.² Forty farmers have applied for the variance so far; out of the sixteen applications PDA has reviewed, it has approved seven for a variance. Those eligible for the variance include those farmers that pasteurize and bottle all the raw milk they produce and those manufacturing other dairy products only from raw milk produced on their farm. Producers selling any of their raw milk production to a co-op are not eligible for a variance per order of FDA; the nine applications PDA rejected were all from those selling part of their production to a co-op.

A PDA official estimated that as many as one-half of the 68 Pennsylvania dairies permitted to produce and sell raw milk for human consumption are Grade A dairies that sell some of their milk production to a co-op. If these dairies aren’t able to make a workable arrangement with their co-ops on reporting test results, the cost of antibiotic testing could drive many to drop their permits and get out of the raw milk business when antibiotic residues in the milk was never a problem for any of them to begin with. The FDA testing requirement, in their cases, has nothing to do with protecting the public health.

———–
[1] Public Health Service/FDA, Appendix N Drug Residue Testing and Farm Surveillance, “Grade A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance 2015 Revision; pp. 374-379. Note: the PMO is a document governing the production distribution, and transportation of raw milk intended for pasteurization; Pennsylvania and nearly all other states have adopted the PMO and the other states must have standards at least as strict. Accessed 12/20/2017 at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/food/guidanceregulation/guidancedocumentsregulatoryinformation/milk/ucm513508.pdf
[2] PDA Commissioner Russell Redding, Letter to Pennsylvania Milk Permitholder, 4 October 2017. Subject: Update on Implementation of Drug Residue Testing Requirements of FDA’s Appendix N of the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance”

The post FDA Antibiotic Test Requirement Threatens to Cut Raw Milk Supply in Pennsylvania appeared first on Real Milk.

By Sylvia Onusic

Jeff Biddle with a beautiful Ayrshire cow.

It is near milking time at Bear Meadows Farm near Boalsburg, just under the Tussey Mountain in central Pennsylvania, and not far from Penn State. What a beautiful sight! The cows are coming down from the pasture to the paddock outside the parlor, occasionally bellowing a long moo, which says it’s milking time.

I stand outside with the owner of the place and tell him that the cows look beautiful, and that I especially like the white one. He says, “Yeah, it’s all pasture, and that’s Elsie May, an old girl.” In fact, he knows each cow by name, their personality and habits. Nearby three farm cats are lined up closely together in silhouette, along with Jeff’s two guinea hens, anticipating that something good is about to happen. The farm dogs, Beauty and Susie, won’t be ignored and wind their way around your legs looking for attention.

Jeff originally purchased five guinea hens at his wife’s request, who read that they are great tick eaters. The females were killed by predators who left only a pile of feathers, but the two males remain, now fixated on Jeff, following him wherever he goes—his constant companions, even accompanying his truck into the field.

When I first turned into the long driveway framed by fields and made my way down the farm road, it was like a step back in time—the spring house on the left, the farm house set on top of the hill with crisscross curtains gently blowing on the clothes lines below it. I had to creep along so that I wouldn’t take out a couple of Jeff’s prime layers, some plump Rhode Island Reds ambling along. But they picked up to a strut when the wheels of my car came too near and veered off sharply out of the way. The duck and her ducklings made for the pond on the right and nipped into the water. Then slowly I continued down to the barn, paddock and milking parlor. In the paddock a number of young cows stared curiously at me but soon went back to their business of wagging their tails to knock off the flies. Susie and Beauty gave me a barking escort all the way to the milking parlor.

Getting Into Raw Milk

The last time I saw Jeff, he was doing some custom carpentry at my house. We got to talking and he told me he was getting out of the carpentry business, and wanted to “hang out with cows.” He had farming in his soul. I didn’t know the story and also didn’t know whether he was pulling my leg. Jeff can be a great kidder. But imagine my surprise and delight to actually visit Jeff’s farm for the first time.

Inside, Jeff maintains a consumer bulletin board in his milking parlor anteroom, which educates his customers about the types of bacteria in milk and the testing procedures required by various state and federal agencies. He pointed out his laboratory test papers, which were displayed with explanations on the customers’ bulletin board. The scores were good, in fact exceptional—some of the best scores in the state it seems. Copies of some of these scores were sent to Dr. Ted Beals for his collection of raw milk testing data.

Until 1948, farm fresh milk (raw milk) and pasteurized milk coexisted legally. But in that year a federal mandatory pasteurization law ended national access to fresh milk. Now it is up to the individual states to determine whether fresh milk is legal. In Pennsylvania we are fortunate to be able to purchase raw milk at the farmgate and in specific shops.

In most European countries, especially member states of the European Union, raw milk is legal. It can even be purchased in automatic raw milk vending machines stationed in farmers markets and shopping centers, which are owned by the farmer and inspected by the local health authorities. The milk is changed every 24 hours and any changes in temperature are reported to the farmer’s mobile phone. Over 2,000 raw milk machines are now in operation in Italy alone.

It’s All About Taste

Estimates of the number of raw milk drinkers in the U.S. vary from ten to fifteen million, and the number continues to grow. When people are asked why they drink raw milk, the majority proclaim, “the taste.” And Jeff’s milk is creamy, its distinctive taste is determined ultimately by the soil and what is growing in it, something that the French call terroir. The plants and grasses growing on Jeff’s fields and nourishing his animals are the product of this terroir, which ultimately translate into tasty milk.

Another major contributor to the taste of raw milk is the amount of butterfat which it contains. Cow breeds vary in the amount of butterfat in their milk with Jerseys being high fat producers. Jeff’s herd is a variety of breeds, among them Ayrshires, Jerseys, Guernseys and Holsteins, which contribute to the ultimate taste of the milk product in Jeff’s bulk milk tank, but he tends to favor Guernseys.

The types and number of bacteria it contains also influences the taste of the milk. We know that bacteria can be friendly and good for digestive health, as well as useful, helping us prepare fermented dairy products like yogurt and kefir (probiotic); or, they can be unfriendly (pathogenic), which can make us ill. Pasteurization destroys some pathogens but more so the friendly probiotic lactobacillus bacteria, enzymes and healthful substances that raw milk contains. The beneficial bacteria in milk produce lactase, the enzyme that enables digestion of the lactose in milk. Pasteurization renders the lactase-producing bacteria inoperable. Many people who are lactose intolerant and cannot drink pasteurized milk, can drink raw milk without problem, says raw milk safety expert, Ted Beals, MD.

Successful Souring

The only raw milk that I could successfully clabber is Jeff’s. Clabbering is my test of a positive bacterial milieu in raw milk. Clabbering was done in Grandma’s day by putting a covered container of raw milk in a warm place, such as on the back of a counter or in a cupboard, for a few days depending on the time of year and temperature of the room. After the souring process was finished, the thickened milk was used to produce outstanding pancakes and other baked goods. This milk product is still a popular traditional beverage in eastern and central European as well as Middle Eastern countries, especially during summer months. It has a refreshing smooth rich taste with an acid finish.

“Sour” is not the same as “spoil.” Pasteurized milk will not sour but it spoils because undesirable bacteria in the milk continue to grow during the refrigeration process. Pasteurization does not kill all bacteria, molds and fungus. But in raw milk, the probiotic bacteria multiply to retard spoilage and give the milk a smooth, rich taste with a tangy, refreshing flavor, which means that the probiotic bacteria are of high quality and intact. Jeff said that off-flavors in the milk are caused by the ”wrong kind of bacteria present where it shouldn’t be.”

Health Benefits

The second reason people give for drinking raw milk is it offers many health benefits. In the early 1900s, the “raw milk cure” was successfully used at the Mayo Clinic to cure a host of diseases. Up until World War II, a number of studies compared the effects of raw versus pasteurized milk on animals and children, and most results favored the use of raw milk. After mandatory pasteurization began, these studies ceased.

Raw milk contains many nutritional and immune-enhancing properties. Pasteurization affects the nutritional quality of vitamins A, B6, B12, C, and D in the milk by reducing, inactivating, degrading or destroying them or their carrier proteins. In fact, artificial forms of A and D are added to pasteurized milk to make up the loss. Heat also denatures the protein in the milk and deactivates the minerals and the lactoferrin, which is necessary for absorption of iron. Lack of iron causes anemia in children, a serious condition that affects growth and mental ability. Lactoferrin also kills a wide range of pathogens.

Raw Milk for Athletes

Tim Argiriadi, general manager of
Victory Sports and Fitness in State
College, Pennsylvania recommends raw
milk to his clients, “across the board.”

Local athletes in the area are interested in Jeff’s milk because of its health benefits. Tim Argiriadi, general manager of Victory Sports and Fitness in State College, Pennsylvania recommends raw milk to his clients, “across the board.” Tim has been at Victory Sports for about five years. His sports career includes playing football at Penn State, professional football in the NFL Europe Draft 04, the CFL (Canadian Football League), and the AFL (American Football League). At Victory Sports, he says they see a variety of athletes from professional to high school. Tim explains that “nutritional protein is pivotal in the body’s ability to perform, and a great source of protein is raw milk. The pasteurization and homogenization processes denature the protein and it loses its constituent nutritional quality, making the protein no longer as effective or bioavailable.”

He says that he has been drinking raw milk for about three years, since one of his trainees brought some to the gym. He is lactose intolerant, but tried raw milk and now views it as “a good staple in a nutritional regimen.” It “ brings a lot of value and packs a nutritional punch.” His motto is, “If your body is your business,  get plugged into raw milk.”

Tim is especially interested in the CLA (conjugated linoleic acid) content of the milk. CLA is helpful for athletes because it plays a role in protein synthesis and muscle repair. “Unless the trainee has a food allergy, there is no reason that raw milk couldn’t be a part of a daily beneficial routine.”

Milk that is produced from cows on pasture is much higher in CLA than milk produced from grain- and corn-fed cows, says Dr. Ton Bars, an organic dairy expert in Austria. Research from Europe shows that CLA and omega-3 fatty acids are high in raw milk from cows on pasture and alpine grasses.

Raw Milk Safety

The government requires frequent testing of raw milk to ensure that it is safe for human consumption, which means that it does not contain organisms which are harmful to health. Milk safety is an ultimate goal in raw milk production.

In connection with milk safety, Penn State researchers are currently conducting a study funded by USDA of licensed raw milk dairies in Pennsylvania. Veterinarian Ernest Hovingh, PhD, from the Veterinary and Biosciences Department in the College of Agricultural Sciences, is heading the raw milk part of the study.  About forty of the ninety Pennsylvania raw milk dairies with permits, including Jeff’s Bear Meadows Farm, were recruited to participate in the study, which is part of a larger project entitled “Milk Safety Improvements for Milking Equipment and Raw Milk Production.”

Researchers take samples of the raw milk from the participating dairies over a set time period for analysis. Dr. Hovingh explained, “We are looking at the efficiency and effectiveness of bulk milk cooling,  and monitoring the milk fat, milk protein, somatic cell count, standard plate count, preliminary incubation count, lab pasteurization count, Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, and E. coli. Although not directly related to the objectives of the project, we are also providing participants with a ‘bulk milk mastitis pathogen analysis’ every month. This consists of culturing for, and reporting on, common  mastitis pathogens such as Strep agalactiae, coagulase-negative staphylococci, and others.”

A Return to the Farm

Jeff’s barn and sheds are immaculate, white and clean, with just a faint scent of “eau de cow.” As he filled my containers from the bulk tank, Jeff told me a little about how he came back to the farm. When Jeff and his parents made an agreement that he could farm the land and raise cows on it, he started using conventional methods. But then came the milk glut and Jeff and many other farmers were in serious trouble. He came to raw milk production for financial reasons and admits that he was very hesitant to start, maybe fearful even, but after three months, there was no turning back.

When he decided to produce raw milk in 2005, one of his first tasks was to rehabilitate the pastures, which were damaged from conventional farming. He has about one hundred seventy-seven acres, forty-four of those in pasture. He had seen farms where the damaged pastures could not be rehabilitated in a lifetime because they were destroyed by pesticide use. Jeff used cow manure, chicken manure and planted Italian ryegrass, three different kinds of orchard grass, two kinds of clover and four kinds of chicory to start the process. In fact his “salad bar” pasture today is home to about twenty-eight milking cows, and alive with many different plants. In periods of dry weather he has a pasture planted with sorghum and sudan grass, which is extremely high in energy and grows fairly well during those times.

But sometimes, he says, his cows just prefer dandelion or leaves from his chestnut trees, seeking out the special minerals these plants provide. Jeff observes his cows, and he says, “unlike humans, they know what they should eat.” He told me that they are selective and sample many plants. One day Elsie May will eat clover while the next day she prefers orchard grass. There are trees bordering the pastures and sometimes a cow will wander over and munch on some of the leaves.

When he first started the cows on pasture, he gave them a bale of hay every day. But gradually he noticed that they weren’t finishing the hay and preferred the pasture. Now they eat only grass during most of the year, from mid-April through mid-December. His cows love the snow, he says. Last year they were on pasture most of the year. He pastures them in the winter in the field where he will grow corn the next spring. Daily he supplements them with a round bale of hay. What they don’t eat, they stomp into the ground and what they do eat comes out as manure to fertilize the field.

Jeff milks his cows twice a day. But, he says, cows like to be milked 2.4 times a day, according to dairy studies. He averages one hundred sixty gallons a month, and sells about forty gallons of raw milk weekly for three dollars a half gallon. The remainder of the milk is sold through a local co-op. Raw milk represents about 13 percent of his milk sales, which provides about one-third of the farm income.

Considering the price of his feed (pasture), the health of his cows, the price paid for the milk, and the satisfaction he and his family get from producing an excellent product, selling raw milk is a “no brainer,” he says.

He does not advertise but “word gets around” and gradually the customers come. One family buys eleven half gallons a week. Being near a college town, many of his customers are of foreign origin. To show his appreciation, Jeff hosts a “customer appreciation day” every September with live music, down-home food, great company (including the farm dogs, cats, and guinea hens) and raw milk to kick off a farm tour.

It was clear that Jeff was in awe, pleased with the complexity yet simplicity of the master  plan. It was plain to see that his cows were healthy and so was the milk, according to the lab reports he gets every month. He told me that he works very hard to produce great milk, and his customers are pleased. They bring him gifts that they make with his milk to show their appreciation. One customer uses lactose from the milk to make beer.

Jeff is happy with the way things are going, and never plans to go back to conventional dairy farming. He says that grass farming and producing raw milk is “just fantastic.”

He has succeeded in hanging out with cows. His website is bear-meadows-farm.com/ Why_Raw_Milk_.html where he has information about raw milk and also a photo gallery of “The Girls,” his milking cows.

About the Author

[include content_id=6195]

This article first appeared in the Spring 2016 issue of Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation.

Save

Save

Save

Save

The post Farmer Flips for Raw Milk appeared first on Real Milk.

CDC accuses Millers Organic Farm of causing raw milk illness

A Pennsylvania Raw Milk Dairy Under Investigation by government agencies?

The raw milk dairy under investigation is Miller’s Organic Farm in Pennsylvania, which we wrote about several weeks ago when the CDC accused them of causing illness in 2 people.

David Gumpert has been uncovering additional facts in the case agains this raw milk dairy and reporting about it on his blog.

In his most recent article, he states

“If owner Amos Miller fails to allow inspection of his facilities by the deadline, the U.S. Justice Department “will be forced to initiate enforcement proceedings,” it said in a recent letter to the Pennsylvania farmer. While the Justice Department didn’t say exactly what it plans, presumably it will seek either an injunction of some kind, or a similar action, which would ostensibly restrict sales of Miller’s food and impose severe fines or raids for violation of a court order.”

“Regardless of which agency takes the legal lead, the government’s intent is to challenge Miller’s on the basis of safety rather than the legitimacy of private food distribution. Government lawyers know that it will be much easier to convince a judge to enforce an injunction or similar legal device based on fear-mongering than on the legal aspects of private membership associations.”

Since Miller’s Organic Farm operates as a private membership association so that others can enjoy the raw milk and other raw dairy products, this is an important case to watch. When the FDA, USDA or state level agencies target one farm for “enforcement,” they are effectively targeting all who want access to nutrient dense and healing foods. Including and most especially fresh raw milk from grassfed cows.

An email address is set up to collect testimonials about products from Miller’s Organic Farm and all letters of support. Send emails to WriteToMillers@gmail.com

For a virtual tour of the farm and the family who operates it, see the recent post on Nourishing Liberty about Miller’s Organic Farm

We will continue to update this situation as it changes.

To learn more about raw milk and other nutrient dense foods, visit westonaprice.org

The post Raw Milk Dairy Under Investigation appeared first on Real Milk.

CDC accuses Millers Organic Farm of causing raw milk illness

In a recent announcement from the Centers For Disease Control (CDC), they stated that a Multistate Outbreak of Listeriosis was linked to raw milk from Millers Organic Farm in Pennsylvania.

The statement declared, in part, that an elderly woman in Florida had died as a result of Listeria from raw dairy

at Millers Organic Farm. Shortly after this claim from the CDC came out, investigative journalist David Gumpert reported on his blog questioning whether the CDC was engaged in misconduct in issuing that premature release and that the woman who died was being treated for advanced cancer—not listeria.

The Weston A. Price Foundation issued a release vindicating Millers Organic Farm as the source of the problem, showing the lack of real evidence from the CDC and that the family’s story did not support the CDC claims.

When stories like the CDC’s claim are issued, it gives a distortion of the facts that leads to manipulation of the data. Rather than seeking scientific results that prove what was behind the illness, the CDC reported on it as fact, giving false data to the statistics surrounding raw milk—statistics that will likely not be set right by the CDC.

Meanwhile, thousands of people continue to consume raw milk, including milk from Millers Organic Farm, will no ill effect. According to the WAPF press release,

“The FDA has spent years aggressively warning people against drinking raw milk with the claim that it causes hundreds more foodborne illness outbreaks than pasteurized milk. Yet, there have been no cases of listeriosis attributed to raw milk consumption going back forty years, or more. Unlike raw milk, pasteurized dairy has been linked to several deaths in the past ten years.

Prior to the false claim from the CDC, there have been no reported illnesses associated with Miller’s Organic Farm in Bird-in-Hand, Pennsylvania.

“This recent release from the CDC is a deliberate attempt to tarnish raw milk and present false and defamatory information,” says Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, a nutrition education non-profit based in Washington, DC. “This is a witch-hunt against raw milk. This is clearly not a case of illness associated with raw milk, but rather an agency with an agenda.”

The CDC recommends that people “drink and eat only pasteurized dairy products (including soft cheese, ice cream, and yogurt).”

“This is a weak attempt to shut down people’s choices,” says Pete Kennedy, president of the Farm-to-consumer Legal Defense Fund. “It shows this bureaucracy is getting more desperate in trying to stop the growing demand for raw milk.”

To learn more about raw milk and other nutrient dense foods, visit westonaprice.org

Raw milk produced on Millers Organic Farm is not the cause of illness in a Florida victim

The post Millers Organic Farm Falsely Linked to Listeria Illness? appeared first on Real Milk.

The state ordered The Family Cow to cease the sales of raw milk on August 5, and the farm’s owner quickly sent out an email to his customers that he was working with the state and several experts to identify and correct the source of the problem. The farm ended up removing one cow from the herd and using a pipeline sanitizer that protects against Campylobacter. Following these corrections and additional tests of the raw milk and the premises by an independent expert, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture determined that the farm was clear to resume its sales of raw milk.

This incident is an encouraging example of how, in some states, health officials do work with farmers to allow the sales of raw milk while ensuring that the product is safe for consumption – rather than banning raw milk forever because of a few episodes of contamination, which also occurs with poultry, vegetables and fruits every year throughout the nation. As with these foods, consumers purchasing raw milk understand that they are assuming a small risk – a risk many are willing to take in order to reap the health benefits from this nutritious, natural food.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2013/08/raw_milk_the_family_cow_pennsy.html

The Campaign for Real Milk is a project of the nutrition education non-profit, The Weston A. Price Foundation. Donate to help fund research into the benefits of nutrient dense foods.  http://www.westonaprice.org/lab

The post Pennsylvania Exemplifies How Department of Agriculture Can Work with Farms to Ensure Raw Milk Safety appeared first on Real Milk.

“I was raised on raw milk from the time I was taken off my mother’s breast milk. I am 75 years old now. So, raw milk can’t be all that dangerous,” Chester concludes.

Chester, who now resides in Pennsylvania where it is legal for consumers to purchase raw milk directly from the farm, continued to drink raw milk even after leaving his childhood home and becoming a self-described “city slicker.” Chester found a nearby farm that milks over 800 Jersey cows in clean and sanitary conditions, got to know the owner and has become a regular customer. He fervently believes that raw milk is not dangerous so long as the cows are kept under sanitary conditions and fed the right foods.

“I would never touch that pasteurized stuff,” he says. “It’s no good after it’s been pasteurized; it’s worthless.”

Chester credits his consumption of raw milk with giving him the strong bones and good health to get through numerous back surgeries. After his most recent operation, Chester spent two weeks recovering in the hospital and says the most difficult part about his stay was being unable to get raw milk.

“Every day, the nurses brought me those little cartons of pasteurized milk. They would come in and say, ‘You didn’t drink your milk’ and I would respond, ‘You didn’t bring me any!’” he says with a laugh.

The Campaign for Real Milk is a project of the nutrition education non-profit, The Weston A. Price Foundation. Donate to help fund research into the benefits of nutrient dense foods.  http://www.westonaprice.org/lab

The post Lifelong Raw Milk Drinker “Would Never Touch that Pasteurized Stuff” appeared first on Real Milk.

Update, Winter 2008

Hendricks Farm and Dairy (HFD) is a grass-based organic raw milk dairy in Telford. The dairy boasts a state-of-the-art facility and has an impeccable track record with not a single positive pathogen test during its seven years of being licensed to sell raw milk. The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) has even sent people wanting to start a raw milk dairy to HFD to learn how to set one up the proper way. In addition to selling around 500 gallons of milk each week, the dairy also produces and sells raw milk cheese. HFD’s cheeses have won several American Cheese Society awards.

What HFD owners, Trent and Rachel Hendricks, found out this past summer was that all of this meant nothing when the dairy came under suspicion by the Pennsylvania Department of Health and PDA as being the cause of a foodborne illness outbreak. Between September 1st and the 12th, 2008, the Pennsylvania Department of Health identified a total of seven confirmed cases of campylobacter infection among raw milk drinkers “in seven unrelated households in Pennsylvania and a neighboring state.”

On September 11, the PDA came to obtain samples of milk from HFD. On that day the agency asked Trent to voluntarily suspend sales of raw milk; Trent refused and requested that the state not issue any press release until the test results were known. Ultimately, the agency took ten milk samples from the farm. To verify the accuracy of PDA’s testing, Trent took a split sample of each sample taken by PDA and sent them to an independent lab for testing. On September 12, PDA delivered a letter to Trent officially suspending his sales. The permit suspension letter stated, “The presence of the disease-producing organism Campylobacter in raw milk from Hendricks Farms and Dairy operation renders that milk unsafe, and is a violation of the requirement of the Milk Sanitation Law….”

According to a guidance document issued by PDA, the agency must give a raw milk licensee at least five days advanced written notice of a raw milk permit suspension. The only way the agency can legally suspend a licensee’s sales before that time, other than the farmer agreeing to a voluntary suspension, is through a court order. PDA’s suspension letter to HFD on September 12 violated its own guidelines. [This was a busy day for the agency—that morning Bill Chirdon, Director of PDA’s Bureau of Food Safety and Laboratory Services, and other agency employees raided Newville farmer Mark Nolt for a third time, once again confiscating thousands of dollars worth of food.]

The afternoon of September 12, the Pennsylvania Department of Health issued a press release advising consumers “who purchased raw milk from Hendricks Farm & Dairy of Telford, Montgomery County, to immediately discard the raw milk and any items made with the raw milk due to potential bacterial contamination.” Even though there was no record of anyone getting sick from “any items made with the raw milk,” the advisory warned consumers to get rid of the farm’s raw milk cheeses as well. PDA lifted the suspension on September 19.

All ten milk samples taken from the farm tested negative for campylobacter; an eleventh sample taken from an open container of milk purchased from HFD on August 30 tested positive for campylobacter. This was the only milk tested from which Trent was unable to get a split sample. Given the various possible ways it could have been contaminated, this sample would not have held up as evidence in a court of law. There was never any link established between the milk from the dairy and the campylobacter infection suffered by those who became ill.

The suspension hurt HFD tremendously. Retail sales at the dairy were down by at least 20 percent compared to sales levels before the suspension. At the present time, Trent has not yet decided whether to sue PDA for the damage done to the farm’s reputation and business.

[include content_id=663]

The post Hendricks Farm & Dairy, Pennsylvania appeared first on Real Milk.

Update, Summer 2013

Another example of regulator bias against raw milk occurred on May 29 when the Pennsylvania Departments of Agriculture (PDA) and Health (PDH) issued a joint press release advising consumers to discard milk produced by the Family Cow dairy in Chambersburg, “because of potential bacterial contamination.” The press release notes, “The Department of Health has confirmed five cases of confirmed Campylobacter infection in people who consumed milk from the farm [Family Cow] . . . .”

The release reported that raw milk samples the PDA took on the May 17 were confirmed positive for campylobacter. After the positive test results, PDA ordered the dairy to suspend sales until further notice.

The Family Cow is one of the largest raw milk dairies in the country, milking over two hundred cows. According to Edwin Shank, the dairy sells an average of 110,000 servings of raw milk per month. With that much milk sold, there typically would have been many more cases of campylobacter among consumers of Family Cow raw milk if the dairy were actually responsible for the illnesses. Shank said that out of the five people with confirmed cases of campylobacter who drank raw milk produced by the dairy, one was in Pittsburgh, one in Philadelphia, one in Shippensburg and two in York; typically in a raw milk outbreak, even with a dairy the size of the Family cow, the illnesses would be more clustered.

The alleged outbreak occurred only about a month after the release of a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report on a February 2012 campylobacter outbreak blamed on the Family Cow, an outbreak Shank has taken responsibility for. The CDC report claimed that raw milk could not be safely produced, a statement that Shank publicly challenged. One noticeable difference between the 2012 outbreak and the latest one was that the PDH and PDA communicated very little with Shank during their investigation of the 2013 outbreak—something that usually doesn’t happen during a foodborne illness outbreak investigation. The state was never able to match the raw milk samples testing positive for campylobacter with the stool samples of the confirmed cases.

PDA reinstated the Family Cow to sell raw milk during the first week of June. The lack of evidence against the dairy pointed to it being blamed for the five illnesses not because it actually caused the outbreak but because it was the raw milk producer that was the easiest to target given its presence and visibility in the Pennsylvania market.

Update, Spring 2012

On January 27 the Pennsylvania Department of Health (PDH) issued a press release advising consumers who purchased raw milk produced by the Family Cow dairy in Chambersburg that “the department confirmed three cases in Maryland, all of whom consumed raw milk from this farm.” Three weeks later the number of confirmed campylobacter infections had increased to seventy-seven. Shortly after PDH’s announcement, Edwin Shank, the owner of the Family Cow, voluntarily suspended all sales of raw milk even though recent test results from the farm’s milk had all been negative for campylobacter, mentioning on his website that several customers had called to tell him that they were sick.

On February 2 the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene reported it had found campylobacter in two unopened jugs of Family Cow raw milk. In a post on his website, Shank stated, “… it was us. Food from our farm has made people sick.” The bottling date on the milk was January 16.

On February 6 the Family Cow resumed sales of raw milk; during the time, Shank made major renovations to the dairy operation. His handling of the situation and willingness to accept responsibility drew praise even from opponents of raw milk.

Media coverage of the Family Cow was constant and extensive from the time PDH issued their January 27 release in both the local and national media. The media double standard in reporting raw milk foodborne illness compared to outbreaks caused by pasteurized milk was easy to notice again. In October 2011 PDH issued a health advisory that Brunton Dairy in Aliquippa had been found responsible for sixteen illnesses that it attributed to the consumption of pasteurized milk produced by the dairy between March and August 2011. Two lawsuits had been filed against the dairy by people who claimed they had become sick from the dairy’s milk with one of the litigants stating in his complaint that he suffered septic shock and kidney failure as a result of consuming the farm’s pasteurized milk, requiring dialysis three times a week. Media coverage on the Brunton Dairy outbreak was nonexistent compared to the reporting on the Family Cow—further evidence of the media bias against raw milk.

You can read about this case from the farmer’s perspective, as it unfolded in real life, on their website here: http://www.yourfamilycow.com/the-heart-of-your-farmer.

[include content_id=663]

The post The Family Cow, Pennsylvania appeared first on Real Milk.