It is surprising that the People's Republic of Illinois didn't already regulate raw milk. Guess what they are trying to do now.....
http://www.dailyamericannews.com/article/20141007/NEWS/141009493
Click here if you wish to comment on the proposed rulemaking. bit.ly/Raw_Milk
Raw milk and fracking have something in common in Illinois.
The state Department of Public Health has been flooded with comments as the agency considers regulations on the processing and sale of unpasteurized milk products. There’s still a little more than two weeks to go in the comment period.
“We have received hundreds of comments,” department spokeswoman Melaney Arnold said.
The comment period ends Oct. 20, and comments must be addressed by the department before final rules are approved.
“It is probably going to take some time,” Arnold said.
Even pinning down the number of producers and consumers affected by the proposed new rules is difficult. The best estimate, based on U.S. Food and Drug Administration data, is that there are 300,000 to 400,000 Illinoisans who drink raw milk.
The number of producers is even less certain.
But much like the outpouring of comments on proposed state regulation of hydraulic fracturing, the raw milk debate brings out strong opinions on the issues of health versus risk and whether the state proposes to do too much or too little.
“I noticed a definite difference,” said Springfield retiree Tim Kelly, 57, who switched to raw milk products about 25 years ago. “I felt better. I was stronger. I sleep better. It really worked for me and never caused me any problems.”
Permits, inspections
Final rules likely are months away. But regulators generally propose to set up a two-tiered system of permits and inspections. Tier 1 would allow sales and distribution of raw milk products to consumers on the farm where the herd is. Tier II would apply to wider sales through “herd sharing” and other agreements.
The rules would apply to milk from cows, goats, sheep, water buffalo and other hoofed animals.
Arnold said the department proposed the rules as part of periodic reviews of state regulations, adding that the unwritten rule for decades in Illinois has been that consumers could buy raw milk if they brought their own container to the farm.
Awareness also has increased of the threat from foodborne illnesses, Arnold said. She said permits and inspections would allow the department to better track the source in the event of foodborne illnesses linked to raw milk.
“When it comes to raw milk, without rules, it basically makes it illegal,” Arnold said. “By developing rules on where it can be sold, how it can be sold and to whom it can be sold ... we’re making it a safer product.”
The proposed rules, said Wes King, executive director of the Illinois Stewardship Alliance in Springfield, are a solution in search of a problem. The not-for-profit alliance promotes sustainable food production.
Initial rules, King said, would force small producers out of business or underground by requiring them to invest in the same kind of expensive equipment and processing required of large commercial dairies.
“These farms aren’t going to stop doing this. They’re just going to do this outside the law,” King said. “Is IDPH going to send out inspectors to check every home with a couple of cows? It’s left me scratching my head.”
King said opponents of the new rules have offered concessions such as registration, on-site warning signs about the risks of raw milk, and consumer lists in the event of an outbreak. But small family farms, he said, should not be treated the same as commercial operators.
“The economics don’t work. We’re talking about farms that have one or two cows and sell a couple of gallons a week,” King said. “My hope is we can get them to stand down and restart the process.”
Conflicting studies
Sean and Danielle Londrigan are raising their five children, ages 3 to 10, on unpasteurized goat milk at Red Gate Farm near Petersburg. Three of the children are adopted.
The couple only produces milk and related products for family use. Danielle Londrigan said they decided to try raw milk about six years ago as a result of allergies and repeated ear infections for some of their children.
“After doing some research, we switched the kids,” she said. “The allergies totally went away, and we’ve never had another ear infection.”
Sean Londrigan, who retired from the U.S. Air Force after 23 years, said unpasteurized milk is part of a self-sustaining lifestyle for the family that includes home-schooling their children and producing their own food.
He said the couple has delayed commercial sales of goat milk and related products because of the uncertainty over state regulations.
“We don’t want to invest in setting up and advertising and realize we are in violation,” he said.
The pasteurized versus unpasteurized debate is not limited to Illinois. An online appeal by The State Journal-Register for consumers of raw milk brought responses from as far as way as New Jersey and the state of Washington.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta added to the debate last year by releasing a study of dairy-related foodborne illnesses from 1993 to 2006. Unpasteurized products accounted for 60 percent of 121 outbreaks, resulting in 1,517 illnesses, 202 hospitalizations and two deaths, according to the CDC.
Illnesses resulting from unpasteurized products were more severe and mostly affected consumers 20 years old and younger, the CDC reported. Some of the CDC’s strongest criticism was aimed at claims that raw milk is a healthier alternative to pasteurized products.
“There are no health benefits from drinking raw milk,” the CDC report stated, “that cannot be obtained from drinking pasteurized milk that is free of disease-causing bacteria.”
Raw milk proponents see the self-interested hand of big dairy and the food-processing industry in such conclusions and in proposals for tougher regulation. They point to recent outbreaks resulting from highly regulated restaurant and supermarket foods, including pasteurized dairy products, as evidence of the risks versus benefits of any food.
Ed Davis with the sustainable food advocacy group Food Freedom Project described the “food industrial complex” in an email to the SJ-R. The standard, highly processed American diet, Davis said, largely funds the U.S. health care system.
“Eating is an inherently risky behavior,” Davis said. “Just looking at the risks, raw dairy is not as risky as eating deli meats, salads and raw shellfish.”
http://www.dailyamericannews.com/article/20141007/NEWS/141009493
Click here if you wish to comment on the proposed rulemaking. bit.ly/Raw_Milk
Raw milk and fracking have something in common in Illinois.
The state Department of Public Health has been flooded with comments as the agency considers regulations on the processing and sale of unpasteurized milk products. There’s still a little more than two weeks to go in the comment period.
“We have received hundreds of comments,” department spokeswoman Melaney Arnold said.
The comment period ends Oct. 20, and comments must be addressed by the department before final rules are approved.
“It is probably going to take some time,” Arnold said.
Even pinning down the number of producers and consumers affected by the proposed new rules is difficult. The best estimate, based on U.S. Food and Drug Administration data, is that there are 300,000 to 400,000 Illinoisans who drink raw milk.
The number of producers is even less certain.
But much like the outpouring of comments on proposed state regulation of hydraulic fracturing, the raw milk debate brings out strong opinions on the issues of health versus risk and whether the state proposes to do too much or too little.
“I noticed a definite difference,” said Springfield retiree Tim Kelly, 57, who switched to raw milk products about 25 years ago. “I felt better. I was stronger. I sleep better. It really worked for me and never caused me any problems.”
Permits, inspections
Final rules likely are months away. But regulators generally propose to set up a two-tiered system of permits and inspections. Tier 1 would allow sales and distribution of raw milk products to consumers on the farm where the herd is. Tier II would apply to wider sales through “herd sharing” and other agreements.
The rules would apply to milk from cows, goats, sheep, water buffalo and other hoofed animals.
Arnold said the department proposed the rules as part of periodic reviews of state regulations, adding that the unwritten rule for decades in Illinois has been that consumers could buy raw milk if they brought their own container to the farm.
Awareness also has increased of the threat from foodborne illnesses, Arnold said. She said permits and inspections would allow the department to better track the source in the event of foodborne illnesses linked to raw milk.
“When it comes to raw milk, without rules, it basically makes it illegal,” Arnold said. “By developing rules on where it can be sold, how it can be sold and to whom it can be sold ... we’re making it a safer product.”
The proposed rules, said Wes King, executive director of the Illinois Stewardship Alliance in Springfield, are a solution in search of a problem. The not-for-profit alliance promotes sustainable food production.
Initial rules, King said, would force small producers out of business or underground by requiring them to invest in the same kind of expensive equipment and processing required of large commercial dairies.
“These farms aren’t going to stop doing this. They’re just going to do this outside the law,” King said. “Is IDPH going to send out inspectors to check every home with a couple of cows? It’s left me scratching my head.”
King said opponents of the new rules have offered concessions such as registration, on-site warning signs about the risks of raw milk, and consumer lists in the event of an outbreak. But small family farms, he said, should not be treated the same as commercial operators.
“The economics don’t work. We’re talking about farms that have one or two cows and sell a couple of gallons a week,” King said. “My hope is we can get them to stand down and restart the process.”
Conflicting studies
Sean and Danielle Londrigan are raising their five children, ages 3 to 10, on unpasteurized goat milk at Red Gate Farm near Petersburg. Three of the children are adopted.
The couple only produces milk and related products for family use. Danielle Londrigan said they decided to try raw milk about six years ago as a result of allergies and repeated ear infections for some of their children.
“After doing some research, we switched the kids,” she said. “The allergies totally went away, and we’ve never had another ear infection.”
Sean Londrigan, who retired from the U.S. Air Force after 23 years, said unpasteurized milk is part of a self-sustaining lifestyle for the family that includes home-schooling their children and producing their own food.
He said the couple has delayed commercial sales of goat milk and related products because of the uncertainty over state regulations.
“We don’t want to invest in setting up and advertising and realize we are in violation,” he said.
The pasteurized versus unpasteurized debate is not limited to Illinois. An online appeal by The State Journal-Register for consumers of raw milk brought responses from as far as way as New Jersey and the state of Washington.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta added to the debate last year by releasing a study of dairy-related foodborne illnesses from 1993 to 2006. Unpasteurized products accounted for 60 percent of 121 outbreaks, resulting in 1,517 illnesses, 202 hospitalizations and two deaths, according to the CDC.
Illnesses resulting from unpasteurized products were more severe and mostly affected consumers 20 years old and younger, the CDC reported. Some of the CDC’s strongest criticism was aimed at claims that raw milk is a healthier alternative to pasteurized products.
“There are no health benefits from drinking raw milk,” the CDC report stated, “that cannot be obtained from drinking pasteurized milk that is free of disease-causing bacteria.”
Raw milk proponents see the self-interested hand of big dairy and the food-processing industry in such conclusions and in proposals for tougher regulation. They point to recent outbreaks resulting from highly regulated restaurant and supermarket foods, including pasteurized dairy products, as evidence of the risks versus benefits of any food.
Ed Davis with the sustainable food advocacy group Food Freedom Project described the “food industrial complex” in an email to the SJ-R. The standard, highly processed American diet, Davis said, largely funds the U.S. health care system.
“Eating is an inherently risky behavior,” Davis said. “Just looking at the risks, raw dairy is not as risky as eating deli meats, salads and raw shellfish.”
Last edited:
