Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Government Protects "the Children" From Parents and Raw Milk

Natural News image
Karen De Coster, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

This dumbed-down piece on the website Real Raw Milk Facts is one of the most inept propaganda pieces I have ever seen making the case against raw milk. The author of the piece, Richard Raymond, invokes hyperbolic history and distorted facts to make the case that, under no instance, should any person be able to freely purchase raw milk. Among the many reasons he wants to see federal laws against the sale and purchase of raw milk: the CDC and the FDA do not endorse raw milk. He writes:
Laws are written for a reason, usually to help keep us safe. Parents who find ways to circumvent the laws should be held responsible when their children suffer because of their actions. 
But to buy this product and feed it to your children? Might as well lock them in your car on a 100 degree day while you stop by the casino to try and win the jackpot.
Mr. Raymond goes on to say that children don't have a choice whether or not to ingest raw milk because their parents make that decision for them. Mr. Raymond believes that since parents do not always make the "right choice for their kids," government needs to step in with laws and make those choices for them. And who gets to decide whose choice is "right?" Of course, government - the CDC and the FDA - is always "right" by default, and anything that goes against the health establishment's credo is "not right." Mr. Raymond thinks that the government should make the choice about the food your kids can eat, as well as the immunizations they must receive.

Raymond then breaks rhythm and he goes on to sneak in some strange comments promoting the irradiation of beef, a move that is opposed by consumer groups. He says that this irradiation will "save lives." Safe, safe, safe, safety, safety, safety. Government only tyrannizes the people to keep them safe. Can these shills for safety ever come up with a more imaginative line? Irradiation is just another ploy of the Food Safety Nazis and the government-endorsed Health Establishment to "keep us all safe." And consumer groups oppose this scheme because of the lack of requirements on the part of manufacturers to inform consumers that their products have received heavy doses of radiation.

Now let's follow the money. So who is Mr. Richard Raymond? He is "the former Undersecretary for Food Safety, U.S. Department of Agriculture (2005-2008) who works as a food safety and public health consultant." And what about the website RealRawMilkFacts.com, where this article appears? It is a propaganda website supported by MarlerClark, Attorneys at Law. This is a firm where lawyers get very wealthy promoting the industrial-food safety establishment, crushing food freedom, and taking away individual choice by partnering with government and its agencies.

Bill Marler, the managing partner, is recognized as one of the premier Food Safety Nazis on the planet. Several weeks ago, I tweeted a comment calling Bill Marler a Food Safety Nazi (among other things). He actually took the time to tweet back to me, and he engaged me over two days in a Tweet tit-for-tat. I give him credit for that, but, he actually tweeted to me: I just want to keep people safe. I do not make that up. Mr. Marler, we do not need or want you to keep us "safe," because your version of "safe" is influenced by special interests, a political agenda, and a money trail. On the other hand, each individual's own version of "safe" is unique to him, his family, his children, and whatnot. Our "safe" is our decision, based on our knowledge and experience, so leave us the hell alone.

I will make sure I tweet this post right to Mr. Marler's phone.

Karen De Coster, CPA is a libertarian accounting/finance professional and freelance writer covering food freedom, regulatory abuses and free market economics. Please visit and support her personal blog at KarenDeCoster.com and follow her on Twitter @karendecoster.


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

Great bit of research!

Anonymous said...

My daughter visited me in Russia a while back and drank raw milk, which was quite a feat because in North America, she's lactose intolerant. The result? No problem. Just a milk mustache from the cream that rose to the top of the glass.

What's next for North America? I predict concern over citizens breathing raw air. That will fit right in with people being exposed to raw sunshine without factory produced protection. C'mon people does this really make sense to you? Factory processed food causes the problem, not the natural stuff.

Of course by using the natural stuff, you've got to use some common sense like don't sit in the sun for 6 hours straight, or drink milk that is green or stinks. You know, stuff that humans did naturally for 1,000's of years without problems.

Given the choice of listening to the wisdom of infomercials and government/corporate advice or grandma, I'll put my faith in grandma's counsel, thank you

Anonymous said...

When you use the word, "raw", don't you mean "natural"? Why do I need protection from natural food? Is government telling me that nature's got it wrong and the politicians are here to get it right?

Can natural things be dangerous? Sure! If you don't pay attention and don't think for yourself, some natural things can hurt you, like certain mushrooms or natural food gone bad. If this hurts you or kills you, it's nature's way of getting rid of stupid.

With government's involvement, stupid can flourish. The result is what we have in North America right now!

Mrs Yoder said...

We've been feeding our children raw milk for about 5 years now (since we gained access to it) and it's worth it to us. Off of 1 gallon of milk, I can usually skim enough cream to make 4-8 oz of butter for us, or fresh cream cheese if that's what we want. And then we have the partially-skimmed milk to drink. My children thrive on it and are rarely sick. Heck, I'm the one who has been getting sick lately and I'm the only one who doesn't drink it regularly!

I'm sick of scientists over-analyzing everything that we do. Yes, science has produced some amazing achievements! But even Pasteur didn't mean for pasteurization to be a permanent solution to dirty, urban dairies that made people sick! He meant it to be a stop gap measure only and they used it in the dairy industry INSTEAD of cleaning things up and enforcing sanitation. Store bought milk is disgusting and makes people sick much more often than fresh farm milk does. Look it up, it's a fact.

Anonymous said...

From the age of 15 until 50, I lived in South Africa, we kept our own cows and drank the milk straight out of the bucket. We made our own butter and cheese. We had a borehole and drank untreated water out of the ground. We also (horror of horrors), spent most of our life outside in the sun, with no shirt and just a pair of shorts and none of us have rickets or skin cancer!

We had a 'deal' with a local farmer and we used to kill a couple of his pigs twice a year, chop them up on his farm and cart them back to our freezer in bins. Along with a couple of neighbors we used to have the same 'deal' with a cow and we used to kill one every year and chop it up on the farm and share it out to be carted home in bins (plastic dustbins in fact).

We grew most of our own veggies and fruit and we never got sick.

We left SA in 1994 having voted with our feet for a terrorist government that would (and has) turned SA into a Third World shithole. When we got to the UK I had to drink this crap that is called 'safe' milk and we were all violently ill. We managed to find a farmer nearby who let us buy milk (illegally) from him, straight from the cow, until we could get our own piece of land and have our own cows again.

I'm now almost 80 and still very fit and active and we still drink our own milk, we still manage to kill our own pigs and we still have managed a deal for 'raw' beef once per year.

My grandfather drank and ate 'raw' everything and managed to live a healthy life to 106!

You can take your 'treated', 'safe' milk full of rat poison and shove it where the sun don't shine. Even today, I'm out in the sun with just a pair of shorts, whenever the sun happens to shine (rare occasions indeed in this era of "Global Warming" scams)!

Anonymous said...

I drank raw milk from when I was a very young child, right up to age 16 as my dad used to milk a jersey cow in the morning and evenings. We NEVER suffered any ill effects, it was natural and tasted good, we made our own butter, icecream etc. It makes me very angry that anyone who sells raw milk is treated like a criminal and prosecuted as such, because I KNOW its safe and healthy.
Daniel - Australia

Henry said...

"Pasteurization of beef carcasses would also save thousands of lives and we should be demanding we have that choice." This Richard Raymond character laments the fact that irradiated beef is opposed by certain groups, thus taking away his choice to buy irradiated beef, and he is saying we should be demanding to have that choice. Yet, when it comes to raw milk, he suddenly sings a different tune and wants to make sure that we DON'T have the choice to buy raw milk, but only pasteurised milk! Do I smell a hypocrite, Mr Raymond?

Anonymous said...

Somehow we survived thousands of years living on raw milk but now we must be afraid of it - for our safety? Please. Every move the NWO control freaks make is based on our safety - and lies.

mmpaints said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

The endless debate about the health benefits of raw versus processed is the red herring.

The issue is commerce. The FDA regulates COMMERCE and not health, the word health appears no where in the title. Factory farms originally demonized raw products so they could maintain non-local factories and have little issue with spoilage or health concerns over poor handling.

People aren't keen on being told what to do by those who want an extra buck, so PR was invented to mind control folks into accepting things the would not otherwise do. Women didn't smoke prior to the early 1900's because it was considered disgusting. The PR campaign was born, and lighting up was associated with the suffragettes and voila'.

A PR campaign was set up to demonize raw products as dangerous and a whole generation of experts in the danger were born. The all parroted back the made up PR facts, and designed studies to back up the PR facts and so on and so on.

This isn't about the quality, or health aspects - raw stuff is fine. This is about commerce. If you have doubt, anyone recall the furor over Oprah's efforts against the factor meat farms? Factories control the US, and they use deceitful tactics to maintain that, and those tactics include convincing you raw is bad because it helps them make an extra buck.

mmpaints said...

I just had the pleasure of speaking with Mr Marler, nice fellow doing wonderful work helping people who have become sick from raw milk. These people have been sickened by the same lax practices that frequently happen in commercial dairies and those responsible should be held accountable for their lack of proper handling. Even tho I don't agree completely with Raymonds opinion, I think that it is based on the desire to make people aware that improperly handled raw milk can and will make you just as ill as commercial products will. I drink raw milk every day from my own animals. I control how clean it is and I will continue to drink raw milk knowing MY milk is perfectly safe.

Anonymous said...

Although raw milk may not be for everyone, it maybe should be an available option for everyone, without a questioning of those people that want it.

From a point of view I have personally observed how raw milk has healed people in certain circumstances. If anyone is interested then look for books and study the real history of milk and it's uses to heal. Maybe include studies of other healing systems like Ayurveda or other cultures that have used raw milk.

Some of the farms where I obtain milk from, the animals have names and respond to them, they are not seduced by food in order that they are milked, they come by name, they roam about in the grasses. I do not know what the animals are thinking and why, I do know that not all farms are like this.

Raw milk may not be helpful to everybody. There are some who may benefit with such help from animals.

Maybe all people should make themselves informed and then make their choices, rather than be in protective custody by people who assume authority over others.

Anonymous said...

We get raw milk from a small local farm that is very, very transparent in their practices -- people are free to come visit the farm to see exactly where their food comes from and how the animals are treated, and they have independent testing done of their products to ensure safety. They consistently exceed quality and safety expectations. I trust them far more then I would ever trust a factory farm.

Anonymous said...

They have issues with raw milk but don't have issues with fruits and vegetables eaten raw which is deliberately sprayed with potentially harmful chemicals? Wow, these lawyers really are smart.

Post a Comment