On April 25, 2008, in
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Mark Nolt,
a Wenger Mennonite (Horse and Buggy
Mennonite) dairyman, threatened for months
with arrest for selling raw milk without a
permit was removed from his property by
state troopers.
Jonas Stoltzfus, a friend, fellow farmer,
and Church of the Brethen, was asked by Mr.
Nolt to speak for him, and said of the raid
yesterday - "Six state troopers and a man
with the Pennsylvania Department of
Agriculture trespassed onto his property,
and stole $20-25,000 of his product and
equipment."
Mr. Stoltzfus explained that Mr. Nolt did
not have a permit because "he chose to turn
his permit back in because it did not cover
all the products he was selling. He felt he
was being dishonest selling stuff that was
not covered by the permit. He is a man of
great integrity."
"According to reports from neighbors and the
Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, several
officials of the Pennsylvania Department of
Agriculture participated in the raid, and
while Mark was being transported by police
car to the courthouse, PDA officials
confiscated $20,000 to $25,000 worth of
dairy products and production equipment.
Neighbors reported the farm had been closed
and that a large group of officials had
gathered, with videos prohibited."
"Mr. Nolt was told that people had gotten
sick from eating his food, but no one ever
came forward and no proof was ever offered."
"This is a secret police raid," Jonas
Stotlzfus said, "complete with state
troopers, raiding a hard-working farmer
selling milk to friends and customers. And
his customers ARE his friends." Mr. Nolt
Mr. Stoltzfus said of Mr. Nolt, "he is not
going to stop [selling raw milk] til he is
ready to stop. He is the equivalent of that
little black lady in Alabama who wouldn't go
to the back of the bus. He is doing the same
thing, he won't go to the back of bus." Mr.
Stoltzfus said "she got arrested for that
and so did Mr. Nolt. He ignored [the threat]
and kept on selling. He is a courageous
man." Mr. Stoltzfuz said "Mark believes it
is his right to sell, according to the
constitution, just like it was Rosa Park's
right to sit wherever she wanted on the bus.
Same deal. There is nothing in the
constitution to prevent Mr. Nolt from buying
and selling, especially to his friends," Mr.
Stoltzfus said.
Stoltzfus commented that Mr Sheridan of the
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (Stoltzfus
does not have the spelling and believes he
is with the licensing division) used to work
for Dean Foods and Hershey Foods, big
corporate operations, and that Sheridan was
"jealous that farmers make a better product"
and called the raid by Mr. Sheridan "a
vendetta."
This case is similar to that involving
Meadowsweet Dairy LLC in New York, in that
both Pennsylvania and New York allow raw
milk sales, but adamantly oppose the sale of
other raw dairy products.
Mr. Nolt was doing things the way his
community has for generations, selling milk
straight from his cows to those he knows.
Mr. Nolt contends that the regulations have
not been approved by the legislature and
shouldn't apply to him because he is selling
directly to consumers, via private contracts
that are outside the purview of the state,
making a privilege out of a right he
believes he has - the right to private
contracts."
The permitting issue, ostensibly for food
safety, is contradicted by a look both at
raw milk itself and at its competition,
corporate milk - pasteurized and often from
cows injected with rBGH.
Four issues stand out:
1.
INDEPENDENCE of farmer and customers
Raw milk:
Farmer sell raw milk from their own cows, to
neighbors and friends at a price farmers set
themselves, paid by people who value their
product, without a middleman.
A growing
number of people prefer
raw milk
(unpasteurized milk), considering it not
only safe but healthier than pasteurized
milk because it is still rich in pro-biotics
not killed off by pasteurization.
l
Farming
communities have consumed raw milk for
generations. The exchange between farmers
and neighbors play a central part in the web
of relations sustaining those communities.
Yet raw milk is banned in many states.
Corporate
milk: Dairy farmers sell their milk to milk
"producers" who pasteurize it, may add
things to it, bottle it, distribute it,
often at great distances. Dairy farmers must
accept a price set by others, in a large
competitive market. Nothing in the process
promotes local farming communities.
"...The
system of influence and control..is highly
skewed in favor of the corporate and
financial system." -
Vincente Navarro,
(Professor of Health and Social Policy, John
Hopkins U.).
2. HEALTH
Raw milk:
"[For
years, m]illions [in California]
consumed commercial raw milk, ... not a
single incidence was reported. During
the same period, there were many
instances of contamination in
pasteurized milk, some of which resulted
in death. [I]f we withdrew ... every
food type responsible for a case of food
poisoning, there would be virtually
nothing left to eat. But only raw milk
has been singled out for general removal
from the food supply.
"... the
bacteria in raw milk is the healthy
bacteria of lactic-acid fermentation
while the bacteria in pasteurized milk
is the bacteria of spoilage. ... Both
raw and pasteurized milk contain E. coli,
normally a benign microorganism. The
most likely source of the new strains of
virulent E. coli is genetically
engineered soy, fed to cows in large
commercial dairies. If there is any type
of milk likely to harbor these virulent
breeds, it is commercial pasteurized
milk. ... Children fed raw milk have
more resistance to TB, scurvy, flu,
diphtheria, pneumonia, asthma, allergic
skin problems and tooth decay. In
addition, their growth and calcium
absorption was superior." (In
California, there is currently an effort
to ban raw milk.
"Four
distinct groups of bacteria survive
pasteurization....the strep of
pasteurized milk are the most frequent
cause of rheumatic fever --the most
deadly disease of childhood.'" - USDA
Corporate
milk:
During the
Clinton administration, a new study was
released "conclud[ing] that milk from cows
injected with [genetically engineered bovine
growth hormone - rBGH) increases risks of
breast and colon cancers in humans.
....
"rBGH poses an even greater risk to human
health than ever considered," warned Samuel
Epstein M.D., Professor of Environmental
Medicine .... "The FDA and Monsanto have a
lot to answer for. Given the cancer risks,
and other health concerns, why is rBGH milk
still on the market?"
Since 1986,
independent scientists have expressed
concern about the lack of research on rBGH
milk.
Michael
Colby, Executive Director of Food and Water
said, "Monsanto 's claims that rBGH is
perfectly safe have been proven dead wrong
today .... Only Monsanto is benefiting from
this drug. It's time for dairy companies to
side with consumers by adopting a policy
that they will not allow rBGH, under any
circumstances, to be used by their farmers."
Epstein said:
"The entire nation is currently being
subjected to a large-scale adulteration of
an age-old dietary staple by a poorly
characterized and unlabeled biotechnology
product which is very different than natural
milk."
In 2007 -
when Mark Nolt was first arrested for
selling raw milk (natural milk) - a
citizens' petition to the FDA on rBGH milk
showed 30 scientific journals indicating an
up-to-7-fold increased risk of breast
cancer, and an increased risk of colon and
prostate cancern.
3. PROMOTION
Raw milk is
sold primarily through word of mouth.
Corporate
milk is promoted through large, expensive ad
campaigns.
The
California Milk Processor Board is now
targeting teens:
"Goodby,
Silverstein and Partners created a page
on MySpace to promote White Gold and the
Calcium Twins, a team of new fictitious
characters turned rock stars who spread
their love of and devotion to milk
through music. TV spots, print ads and
PR will also support
the
promotion.
"The Milk
Processor Education Program ... is
funded by the nation's milk processors
... committed to increasing fluid milk
consumption."
www.thinkaboutyourdrink.com.
4. LABELING
Raw milk is
just milk. Those who buy it know that and
seek it out for that reason.
On the
corporate side, Monsanto continues pushing
bans on labeling rBGH-milk. Customers
usually do not know they are consuming rBGH
milk.
During its
approval process,
"FDA
scientist, Dr Richard Burroughs
concluded ... Monsanto was manipulating
the [test] figures. In 1989 he was
sacked after complaining to Congress ...
To deal with the ... controversy
Monsanto assembled ...PR companies ...
of which [BURSON-MARSTELLER] was one."
During the
Clinton administration, Monsanto employees
were appointed to run the FDA. Monsanto's
rBGH - the first genetically engineered
product ever, was approved.
"[In]1994, people at the FDA [wrote] an
anonymous letter to ... Congress,
[fearing] retribution ... The basis of
our concern is that Dr. Margaret Miller
... wrote the FDA's opinion on why milk
from [rbGH]-treated cows should not be
labeled. However, before coming to the
FDA, Dr. Margaret Miller was working for
the Monsanto company as a researcher on
[rbGH].”
In 1996,
there was a press conference on rBGH's
medical risks. "Given the potential health
impacts of consumption of milk and other
dairy products derived from rBGH treated
cows, all such products at a minimum be
labeled so that consumers are aware of what
they are purchasing and consuming. More
prudently the FDA approval of rBGH should be
withdrawn until the agency performs adequate
long term testing ..."
"...
Wisconsin, Minnesota, California and
Vermont attempted to enforce labeling of
milk produced with, and containing, this
hormone. Their efforts were thwarted by
Burson-Marsteller acting on behalf of
these companies."
Burson-Marsteller has been a long-term (now
campaign) advisor to Hillary Clinton,
through its CEO, Mark Penn. And Monsanto's
effort to ban labeling of the milk continues
today.
Banning of
labeling of rBGH milk in effect puts
millions of Americans into a human
experiment with genetic engineering,
exposing them to greatly increased risk of
cancers. The Nuremberg Code makes clear that
experimental subjects must give informed
consent.
Mr. Stoltzfus
added up losses for Mark Nolt: "Trepass on
private property, private personal
merchandise stolen, being deprived of a
significant amount of hard work he and his
family put together. He is being deprived of
the opportunity to market his product now,
they are throwing it away. It's a shame."
Mr. Nolt did
not have a permit. He has twice lost
thousands of dollars of work or material,
and faces jail.
Monsanto
sells rBGH-milk associated with cancers,
Clinton hired Monsanto employees which
approved their own genetically engineered
product, Hillary Clinton has been silent up
to today about the risk rBGH poses to women,
PR firms strongly push the milk on all ages.
None face jail or fines for altered facts,
for PR campaigns encouraging even children
to drink rBGH-milk, or for banning labeling
of it, which has put the entire US
population at medical risk for years.
Monsanto, the Clintons, Burson-Marsteller
and Goodby, Silverstein and Partners are all
making millions.
Mr. Nolt,
released after being taken off by state
troopers, refused to accept a ride from
them. He started walking. Friends gave him a
lift home.
Linn
Cohen-Cole can be reached at:
lcohencole@gmail.com
