Raw Milk Rights


In an exposé nearly worthy of true crime, Michelle Gienow reveals the machinations of Baltimore’s clandestine raw-milk networks.  “It’s been two weeks since I last hooked up with my supplier,” she begins, “and my stash is completely gone.  My four-year-old is also stressing, since his addiction is even more pronounced than my own.” 

 

People all over the country are scheming for ways to get their hands on the white stuff, from co-owning a cow with neighbors (since the law allows the drinking raw milk from one’s own animal, a share in the cow is all you need), to buying raw milk labeled as ‘pet food,’ to joining ‘speakeasies’ that dole out milk instead of moonshine. 

Why do we struggle so much over control of our milk supply?  Neither sushi nor oysters are regulated, and we know we’re taking (some) risks when we eat them, but the government leaves it up to us.  Why is milk any different?  I’m not sure it is, but according to Ted Elkin, chief of the Division of Milk Control, a part of the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, “You’re talking about palates vs. immune systems.  Giving this to children, that is a huge concern of ours.”  Next thing you know, they’ll be pasteurizing breast milk.

No one ever talks, however, about the outbreaks of salmonella or e. coli associated with pasteurized milk.  Sure, pasteurization nukes any bacteria present in the milk while it’s being zapped, but what if a smidgen of dirt gets in before the bottles get capped?  It’s hit upon a blank canvas, where it can literally run free.  Raw milk, on the other hand, potentially has the muscle to fight the criminal.  The article cites a dairy owner who introduced salmonella, e. coli, listeria and tuberculosis into various batches of his own raw milk.  “In every case, the pathogen levels either did not increase, or disappeared entirely,” says Kaleigh McAfee, spokeswoman. 

What we see in cheesemaking is that farmers making milk destined for pasteurization have far less reason to practice hygienically than farmers whose end product is raw milk.  Why should they?  No matter how scrupulous they are, the milk’s going to get zapped anyway—whereas raw-milk farmers have a huge vested interest in keeping their animals, equipment and selves clean.  They’re also scrutinized far more closely than their pasteurized counterparts.  Their milk often comes from a medley of farms practicing in very different ways, whereas all traceability would vanish were a raw-milk farmer to blend milks together—guaranteeing a product that most reflects the specific land and animals from which it originates.  As a comment at the bottom of the article states, “If farmers are selling clean milk, they should not be forced to utilize a technology preferred by the big dairies because it corrects for the carelessness of other farmers.”

I’m not saying that everyone should drink raw milk—that’s a personal choice.  But the choice should be ours, not the government’s, to make. 

Nathalie Jordi's appetites keep her bouncing between between County Cork, New York, London and the French Alps.  When not slinging curd or interviewing farmers, she writes for Travel&Leisure, Conde Nast Traveler, Gastronomica, and her blog at www.autobiogeography.com.  Her dreams of a life spent baking, drinking margaritas, and sitting in the sun are gathering steam during her current stint as a waitress in New York City.

 

 

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.plentymag.com/blog-mt1/mt-tb.cgi/1306


Comments

No one ever tells the public that they can test their own food for E.coli/Salmonella.

Consumers are sick of waiting to be told of a recall.

Instead of promoting raw milk, Plenty should be encouraging the consumption and promotion of non-dairy alternatives to milk, such as soy or nut milks.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) detailed the widespread and significant environmental problems posed by animal agribusiness in a 2006 report, Livestock’s Long Shadow –Environmental Issues and Options. The report examined how animal agribusiness is a major contributor to global climate change—generating even more greenhouse gases than cars—and causes massive land and water degradation on a global scale. You can read the report at:
http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/library/key_pub/longshad/a0701e/A0701E00.pdf

I'd drink soy milk if I liked the way it tastes. Presumably, no animals are harmed in the making of it, but if you buy your cow's milk from a good source, that shouldn't be concern.

Raw milk from grass fed cows is a healing food, that's why the gov't doesn't want it around. Fortunately I live in California where you can buy it easily. Check out www.raw-milk-facts.com for great info.
As for the afformentioned comment suggesting soy or nut milk... if you sprout your raw almonds and remove the skins, then you have a healthy product - soy milk? I put that on par with sodas and drinks containing aspartame... not to be consumed. It is an estrogen mimic for starters and can alter the hormonal balance of a person. Giving a child soy milk is liking feeding them birth controls. You shouldn't consume soy unless it is fermented and then consume it as a condiment and not as a protein source.

Ms. Jordi -

Breast milk is actually pasteurized. There are 11 non-profit milk banks in North America who accept, pasteurize and dispense donor human milk by prescription to premature and ill infants across the US, Canada and overseas. This is a life saving measure, where pasteurization is absolutely necessary to treat the most fragile lives with the best nutrition minus bacteria and disease that can be harmful to their immature systems. For more information, please visit www.milkbank.org or www.hmbana.org.

Thank you,
Megan L. Hartman, Outreach Director
Mothers' Milk Bank at Austin, TX

Post a comment

Issue 25



Sign up for Plenty's Weekly Newsletter