Why is this "Unsafe" Food Banned When It's 35,000 Times Safer Than Others?
As you're probably aware of by now, there's a war being waged against raw milk. It's nothing less than an unconstitutional assault on one of your most basic rights, i.e. your right to choose what you want to eat and drink, and one of the excuses used to defend the violent persecution of those who dare sell this healthful food is that unpasteurized (raw) milk endangers human health.
But is raw milk really a major source of foodborne illness?
NOT according to the US government's own data!
Food safety chief and former Monsanto lawyer Michael Taylor has defended the FDA's gun-toting tactics against raw milk producers, calling the campaign "a public health duty." Furthermore, the new Food Safety Modernization Act, which was enacted earlier this year, grants the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) extraordinary new powers to detain any food the agency suspects to be unsafe, whether there are good grounds for suspicion or not. Taylor himself has stated that the new agency focus will be on preventing food poisoning outbreaks rather than responding to them after the fact.
Government Data Proves Safety of Raw Milk
Research by Dr. Ted Beals, MD, featured in the summer 2011 issue of Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, shows that you are about 35,000 times more likely to get sick from other foods than you are from raw milk! Statistically, you're also more likely to get injured driving to the farm to pick up your raw milk than becoming ill from drinking it.
The Weston A. Price Foundation writes:
"At last we have access to the numbers we need to determine the risk of consuming raw milk on a per-person basis"… The key figure that permits a calculation of raw milk illnesses on a per-person basis comes from a 2007 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) FoodNet survey, which found that 3.04 percent of the population consumes raw milk, or about 9.4 million people, based on the 2010 census. This number may in fact be larger in 2011 as raw milk is growing in popularity. For example, sales of raw milk increased 25 percent in California in 2010, while sales of pasteurized milk declined 3 percent."
In his report, Dr. Beals writes:
"From the perspective of a national public health professional looking at an estimated total of 48 million foodborne illnesses each year [from all foods]… there is no rational justification to focus national attention on raw milk, which may be associated with an average of 42 illnesses maximum among the more than nine million people (about 0.0005 percent) who have chosen to drink milk in its fresh unprocessed form.
… Consumption of any food has some risk of illness or adverse reaction. And the consequence of basing public policy on horrific personal experiences is that all foods will ultimately be banned, and we will not be able to participate in any activity."
If this isn't food for thought, I don't know what is. These statistics are the smoking gun proving that the war on raw milk cannot be based on food safety or protecting your health from an even remotely real threat…