When Food is Outlawed...

CaseyMack

Write more; worry less!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 15, 2011
Messages
196
Reaction score
6
Location
Vancouver, Canada
Here's the trailer for a recently-released indy film called Farmageddon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH_my56FkuQ


This was surely a case of Big Agri out to stop a competitor animal and a competitor milk from coming into the North American market place. Five years of that married couple's life gone, and five years worth of research and all the money they poured into the project out of their own pockets.

Food DOES get declared to be "outlawed" in this nation. And the movie Farmageddon points to a half dozen examples of such bogus declarations.

Thanks for providing that link. It looks like an interesting documentary.

In a similar vein, I recommend a look at this short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us42DZO0NX0

Also, the book "The Omnivore's Dilemma" is a must read for anyone interested in the food industry.
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
And they do it because the machinery of the San Francisco system of food service regulation is working against them. The big picture that Don is trying to paint here is that the system needs revision.

His OP is only using the San Fancisco situation as a jumping off point. The main thrust of his OP is that the system of food regulation in this country is too big and inefficient and is shooting at the wrong targets while letting other (big business) offenders go.

::ETA:: And if people wanna drink raw milk, let them. Just like we let them drink booze and smoke cigarettes.

They're doing it because they don't want to pay the fees and have the inspections. It's not the San Francisco system, it's that there is a system at all.

As for raw milk - fine, as long as there is extremely tight safety regulations and inspections. As this link show, even at miniscule market share that raw milk currently has in the US, raw milk and raw milk cheeses account for 70% of the foodborne illness from dairy products.

http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/#RawMilkFacts1
 

Plot Device

A woman said to write like a man.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 14, 2007
Messages
11,973
Reaction score
1,865
Location
Next to the dirigible docking station
Website
sandwichboardroom.blogspot.com
They're doing it because they don't want to pay the fees and have the inspections. It's not the San Francisco system, it's that there is a system at all.

As for raw milk - fine, as long as there is extremely tight safety regulations and inspections. As this link show, even at miniscule market share that raw milk currently has in the US, raw milk and raw milk cheeses account for 70% of the foodborne illness from dairy products.

http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/#RawMilkFacts1


Hmmm realawmilkfacts dot com.

Here's what it says on their "About Us" page:

Real Raw Milk Facts is supported in part by Marler Clark, the nation’s foremost law firm with a practice dedicated to representing victims of food poisoning. The firm works actively with academia, industry, government, and consumer groups to end foodborne illness.
 

Mutive

Blissfully Clueless
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 8, 2011
Messages
5,255
Reaction score
3,197
Location
Seattle, WA
GMO's cause sterility, birth defects, and cancers, Aspartame causes depression which can lead to suicide. It is literally the case of pick your poisen. It's not as simple as you are presenting here.

I'm with you on HFCS (in extreme, but not in tiny amounts), but would you care to back the rest of this up with sources? I'd really love to see a reputable study that explains how GMOs are the source of all the evil in the world. (Rather than, in general, a fancy way of selective breeding - something humans have probably been doing prior to developing agriculture.)
 

Diana Hignutt

Very Tired
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
13,307
Reaction score
7,081
Location
Albany, NY
I'm with you on HFCS (in extreme, but not in tiny amounts), but would you care to back the rest of this up with sources? I'd really love to see a reputable study that explains how GMOs are the source of all the evil in the world. (Rather than, in general, a fancy way of selective breeding - something humans have probably been doing prior to developing agriculture.)

Asked and answered, my friend:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8148

http://macrobiotichealingmagazine.blogspot.com/2011/05/aspartame-and-depression-very-old-study.html

Not the best, but I'm heading out...
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
What's a couple of dead kids on the road to freedom?
Not a drop in the bucket compared to the 160 million who died for 'freedom' in the wars of the 20th century, or the 262 million murdered by various intentional acts of their governments, whom I guess you could say died for 'oppression.' That's only an average of 4.2 million a year or so. Raw milk's gonna have to go balls to the wall to touch that record.
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
Comparing war casualties to food poisoning victims is ludicrous. Especially when the "freedom" being argued for is the "freedom" to sell dangerous products without regulation for a profit. It's not a "freedom" that anyone should have.
 

firedrake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
7,297
It's kinda inevitable that war will kill people.

There's no reason why food should.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
Since this has been happening every Saturday night for at least the last six months in San Francisco, it's also going on in Washington, Atlanta, London and Amsterdam among other places, and 18 states have "cottage food" laws that allow for activities like this "food rave," I'd imagine there should be lots of people in hospitals from all that tainted food already.

Or perhaps it's proving that adults can act like adults absent a gun in their ribs.

Then I'm not really sure what your point is. Are you arguing that because these food raves have been going on, and we haven't heard about anything really horrible happening, that food safety laws should not exist? Because that doesn't really convince me.
 

muravyets

Old revolutionary
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
7,212
Reaction score
974
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Website
www.facebook.com
Not a drop in the bucket compared to the 160 million who died for 'freedom' in the wars of the 20th century, or the 262 million murdered by various intentional acts of their governments, whom I guess you could say died for 'oppression.' That's only an average of 4.2 million a year or so. Raw milk's gonna have to go balls to the wall to touch that record.
Okay, so you'd draw the line at 160 million dead? Well, then, just how many are you okay with killing -- you know, hypothetically? If you're willing to acknowledge that unregulated food can kill, but it's okay because it's freedom, but 160 million is presumably less okay, zero - 160mil is a big range. Where between those two points is your cut-off point for acceptable casualty levels in the fight for freedom from safe foods?
 

fiendish

nightwriter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
111
Reaction score
9
Location
In my head, mostly.
The thread is not about dairies selling raw milk (although as dangerous as raw milk can be, that, of all things, should be among the most strictly regulated food products).

For goodness sake! I live in France, where raw milk and raw-milk cheese is sold in every supermarket (alongside the pasteurised versions); they are basic, everyday foods here. I don't see the French dropping like flies around me from unsafe milk ...
 

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
And if people want to roll the dice on cramps and diarrhea by buying their food from random unlicensed, uninspected strangers, I say go for it. It's no skin off my nose.

Okay, so you'd draw the line at 160 million dead? Well, then, just how many are you okay with killing -- you know, hypothetically? If you're willing to acknowledge that unregulated food can kill, but it's okay because it's freedom, but 160 million is presumably less okay, zero - 160mil is a big range. Where between those two points is your cut-off point for acceptable casualty levels in the fight for freedom from safe foods?

I wouldn't say these two posts are downright contradictory, but they are very different in tone and content, so it's hard to reconcile them without some help.

Do you think it's okay for people to have a real choice as to what kinds of foods they can buy, but just don't want people to get tricked into thinking they're buying something safe when they're really not?

Because that makes sense to me, and I'd guess that Don would be onboard with that, too.
 

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
For goodness sake! I live in France, where raw milk and raw-milk cheese is sold in every supermarket (alongside the pasteurised versions); they are basic, everyday foods here. I don't see the French dropping like flies around me from unsafe milk ...

Well, from what I know about France, it's my understanding that raw milk there is certainly not un-regulated. Some places in the U.S. allow regulated raw milk to be legally sold, as well.

But I do think there is a different between the two countries, in terms of the general attitudes toward raw milk. It's two different culinary cultures. It's definitely an interesting thing to consider, imo.
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
For goodness sake! I live in France, where raw milk and raw-milk cheese is sold in every supermarket (alongside the pasteurised versions); they are basic, everyday foods here. I don't see the French dropping like flies around me from unsafe milk ...

I'm not against selling raw milk and raw milk cheese as long as the production and distribution are strictly regulated to keep it safe. I'd be surprised if you don't have those regulations in France. What the OP was about was celebrating the defiance of food safety regulations.

As I posted upthread, in the US, raw milk and raw milk cheese comprise a tiny percentage of the market share, but account for 70% of the foodborne illnesses from dairy products. That's not indicative of a safe product here.
 

fiendish

nightwriter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
111
Reaction score
9
Location
In my head, mostly.
Well, from what I know about France, it's my understanding that raw milk there is certainly not un-regulated. Some places in the U.S. allow regulated raw milk to be legally sold, as well.

But I do think there is a different between the two countries, in terms of the general attitudes toward raw milk. It's two different culinary cultures. It's definitely an interesting thing to consider, imo.

I wasn't trying to suggest that sales/ production of raw milk, or raw milk products, are unregulated in France, rather that the presumption that raw milk is dangerous per se is an absurd one.

Certainly, the difference in food culture between the US and Europe - and France in particular - is huge. To give just one example, how about foie gras, which has actually been outlawed in various places in the US?

Here, in the south-west of France, where foie gras is produced, it's in every supermarket, on every restaurant menu (and I'm talking the village cafe here, not even beginning to be an expensive restaurant). So not only is it not banned, it's barely even seen as a luxury item.
 

fiendish

nightwriter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
111
Reaction score
9
Location
In my head, mostly.
I'm not against selling raw milk and raw milk cheese as long as the production and distribution are strictly regulated to keep it safe. I'd be surprised if you don't have those regulations in France. What the OP was about was celebrating the defiance of food safety regulations.

As I posted upthread, in the US, raw milk and raw milk cheese comprise a tiny percentage of the market share, but account for 70% of the foodborne illnesses from dairy products. That's not indicative of a safe product here.

But does it not seem odd that raw milk can be safe enough for a whole population in one country - France - and hugely unsafe in another - America?

My question would be: why is it so unsafe in America? It is clearly not inherently unsafe, if Europeans are busy consuming it on a daily basis.
 

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
I wasn't trying to suggest that sales/ production of raw milk, or raw milk products, are unregulated in France, rather that the presumption that raw milk is dangerous per se is an absurd one.

I understand. And I think I agree that raw milk can be safe, although I'm not an expert, and haven't even tried raw milk before.

In any case, welcome to the forum. It's nice to have a poster living in France - definitely gives a different perspective, especially on an issue like this one.
 

muravyets

Old revolutionary
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
7,212
Reaction score
974
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Website
www.facebook.com
I wouldn't say these two posts are downright contradictory, but they are very different in tone and content, so it's hard to reconcile them without some help.

Do you think it's okay for people to have a real choice as to what kinds of foods they can buy, but just don't want people to get tricked into thinking they're buying something safe when they're really not?

Because that makes sense to me, and I'd guess that Don would be onboard with that, too.
I would like people who advocate for a risky activity not to pretend it's not risky.

In regards to sale of home-made foods in general, yes, I'd like people to be properly informed so they can make their own decisions, but that would still require some kind of enforceable regulation to make sure that sellers do inform buyers of just what they are buying and eating.

But in regards to advocates against government food regulation, I take exception to what I see as a pollyanna assumption of goodness and purity in foods on sale in an open marketplace, as if the mere absence of government from the picture is enough to ensure the food will be safe to eat. I personally consider that attitude reckless with people's safety and health.

Further, when advocates against government food regulation say flippant things like how they'd be willing to put up with a few dead kids on their road to freedom, or how deaths from food-borne pathogens are nothing compared to the historical totals of deaths from war, so meh, who cares, I do get kind of prickly. I guess I don't find it charming or witty -- and certainly not persuasive -- to cop an attitude of not caring about the lives of other human beings even when it's just meant to show utter disdain for one's opponent's concern for food quality and safety. I think it undermines debate on the topic, and I think it makes the advocates against regulation seem un-serious.