Splinter Groups (was: Re: pork question)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/22/2002 5:24:42 PM Central Daylight Time,

skroyer@... writes:

> Hopefully that'll work, but I'm not convinced. I've not been heartened by

> Sally's response to the whole " calves fed pasteurized milk " issue. Don't

> get me wrong, I still value what and Sally have done, but the response

> on that issue seemed really weak. If that was indicative...

>

>

,

Could you fill in those of us who aren't familiar with the " calves fed

pasteurized milk " thing?

Belinda

[Guest guest]

>>>>I think we need a dry and boring WAP website.

***if that would make it more accurate and well-cited, I'm with you!

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

:

>>I think we need a dry and boring WAP website.

Suze:

>***if that would make it more accurate and well-cited, I'm with you!

Absolutely! Now who's up for the task...?

[Guest guest]

:

>>I think we need a dry and boring WAP website.

Suze:

>***if that would make it more accurate and well-cited, I'm with you!

:

Absolutely! Now who's up for the task...?

***You?

OK...us?

But seriously, what would we do? The only thing I can think of is to hold

sally and mary to task...I mean, send them our concerns about some of the

not-so-well referenced or substantiated claims on the site and in the book,

and explain why this concerns us.

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

> But seriously, what would we do? The only thing I can think of is to hold

> sally and mary to task...I mean, send them our concerns about some of the

> not-so-well referenced or substantiated claims on the site and in the

book,

> and explain why this concerns us.

Hopefully that'll work, but I'm not convinced. I've not been heartened by

Sally's response to the whole " calves fed pasteurized milk " issue. Don't

get me wrong, I still value what and Sally have done, but the response

on that issue seemed really weak. If that was indicative...

[Guest guest]

> Could you fill in those of us who aren't familiar with the " calves fed

> pasteurized milk " thing?

A month or so ago, Roman was caught off-guard when he quoted the RealMilk

website (run by the Weston A. Price Foundation) to a farmer he was talking

to. He cited the quote that states that (paraphrasing) calves fed

pasteurized milk die before maturity. The farmer countered with personal

experience that the quote was untrue. As a result, a discussion arose about

evidence for and against the quote. The result was that there was an

obscure reference to a small study of dubious quality that the quote was

based on. All other evidence pointed to it being false or at the very

least, hugely overstated.

Pretty much everybody agreed that while it may be the case that calves fed

pasteurized milk don't do quite as well as they would drinking fresh milk,

under normal circumstances they don't die from it. The issue was brought to

Sally's attention. Sally began trying to find out more about the study that

it was based on, but I've heard nothing more about it since then.

In my opinion, the evidence was sufficiently overwhelming that the quote

should be removed ASAP.

If anybody knows a message number or subject heading for the thread, maybe

they'll post it. I'm just about to run out the door, otherwise I would...

[Guest guest]

>>>> But seriously, what would we do? The only thing I can think of is to

hold

> sally and mary to task...I mean, send them our concerns about some of the

> not-so-well referenced or substantiated claims on the site and in the

book,

> and explain why this concerns us.

>>>>>>>Hopefully that'll work, but I'm not convinced. I've not been

heartened by

Sally's response to the whole " calves fed pasteurized milk " issue. Don't

get me wrong, I still value what and Sally have done, but the response

on that issue seemed really weak. If that was indicative...

***I completely agree. I was really disappointed with her reply, too. But

what's the alternative? Enig has a PhD in nutritional sciences and is

very knowledgeable about biochemistry, as well. She's well established in

the biochemistry/nutrition field. Sally's an experienced nutritional writer.

They are president and vice president of WAPF. They've established a name

for the foundation, and frankly, I think it's a wonderful foundation. What

could *we* do? Do any of us have the time, experience, knowledge or

inclination to put together a well-researched, well-cited web site and book?

And how much would it differ from NT, NAPD and the WAPF web site?

What we really want is well-researched, well-cited information, right?

Something that holds up under scrutiny, if even just that of NT/WAPF

supporters! There's got to be a way for us to influence the book and site in

that regard...

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/23/2002 10:52:49 AM Central Daylight Time,

Idol@... writes:

> I'm in agreement with those of you who want unsubstantiated/incorrect

> statements changed and more things specifically referenced, but we should

> remember that NT is a cookbook, and as such it's probably the most

> extensively referenced and annotated cookbook in history! (I still wish a

> couple elements would be revised and/or eliminated, like the reference to

> the 150-year-old man, but I don't think a cookbook needs to resemble a

> research paper.)

>

>

>

>

> -

>

Well said . The last thing I want is a thicker, harder to follow

cookbook, which as says, is what NT is, a cookbook.

Belinda

[Guest guest]

justinbond wrote:

>

>

> > > Sally Fallon also notes that there have been

> > >links between pork and cancer and some changes in blood chemistry.

> >

> > " Notes " is right! A brief mention, footnoted IIRC from a secondary

> > source. There's really not enough information there to make an

> > informed decision.

>

> I think I now understand why a lot of activist type groups split up

> and form splinter groups even if it seems like they'd do more good

> sticking together. The fact that I post here means I'm sold on NAPD,

> and and Sally have done some amazing work, but I'm getting

> increasingly frustrated with some of the less well documented

> material.

I wholeheartedly agree. When I read NT I was disturbed by the lack of

references. I want _notes_!

Now I will admit a bias. I come from a medical family. My father is a

doctor, and my mother is a medical technologist and a biology teacher.

And I have 5 generations of teachers in my mother's side of the family.

I am used to reading scientific writings, and when I do I see lots and

LOTS of notes.

Now, don't get me wrong, here. I'm in favor of the natural foods

movement, and I like NT, but Sally's continual making of claims without

substantiation is something that bothers me a lot.

> Calves fed pastuerized milk... (which apparantly Sally has

> no intention of changing because of one un-referenced study in a

> secondary source that contradicts the observations of 99.9% of dairy

> farms),

Indeed. I too have trouble believing it. I want to see the results of

the original study. I want to be able to find the study and read the

fine print.

> now the pork thing, the statement about the Georgian that

> lived to 130 etc...

With the pork thing in particular I want to see substantiation. Notes.

8 by 10 color glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on

the back of each one.

> I think we need a dry and boring WAP website.

I don't know about a " dry and boring " WAP website, but an informative

one -=*WITH REFERENCES*=- would be nice. That is, after all, what

hypertext was invented for.

I keep hearing from assorted people that Sally expects to be sued by

some element of the food processing industry sooner or later. When and

_if_ that happens she'll need to have her ducks _all_ in a row. If she

doesn't then food industry lawyers will chew her to pieces. She needs

bulletproof references. Speaking ex-cathedra with no supporting

evidence simply will _not_ hold up in a court of law.

AP

--

Aviation is more than a hobby. It is more than a job. It is more than

a career. Aviation is a way of life.

A second language for the world: www.esperanto.com

Processor cycles are a terrible thing to waste: www.distributed.net

[Guest guest]

Alan-

>When I read NT I was disturbed by the lack of

>references. I want _notes_!

I'm in agreement with those of you who want unsubstantiated/incorrect

statements changed and more things specifically referenced, but we should

remember that NT is a cookbook, and as such it's probably the most

extensively referenced and annotated cookbook in history! (I still wish a

couple elements would be revised and/or eliminated, like the reference to

the 150-year-old man, but I don't think a cookbook needs to resemble a

research paper.)

-

[Guest guest]

> There is no need to try and find this elusive study. When every

> single factory dairy farm raises their calves on pastuerized (and

> worse, milk replacers) and the cows live to maturity, then clearly

> the methodology is flawed.

Or worse yet, the study showed a valid phenomenon but the claim based on it

actually perverted it's meaning to suggest a stronger effect than that which

the study showed.

[Guest guest]

:

> I'm in agreement with those of you who want unsubstantiated/incorrect

> statements changed and more things specifically referenced, but we should

> remember that NT is a cookbook, and as such it's probably the most

> extensively referenced and annotated cookbook in history! (I still wish a

> couple elements would be revised and/or eliminated, like the reference to

> the 150-year-old man, but I don't think a cookbook needs to resemble a

> research paper.)

,

I agree with you quite a bit regarding NT. However, we (or at least I) are

not talking so much about NT...which really is more or less a cookbook and

practical guide to nutrition. Rather, I'm more concerned about the

websites: www.westonaprice.org and www.realmilk.com. These are the public

face of an organization that is trying to produce a movement; one that

encourages membership and outreach. These resources must be kept

sufficiently accurate to survive the scrutiny of those who arrive with

strong contrary ideas. By all means, keep NT simple, although I believe

that should be done through selective *presentation* of data rather than

selective *support* of data. All presented data should be supported, but

not all supported data should necessarily be presented. :-) The websites,

however, are political and educational tools, and must therefore be held to

a higher standard.

[Guest guest]

<<< The issue was brought to

Sally's attention. Sally began trying to find out more about the study

that

it was based on, but I've heard nothing more about it since then. >>>>

Yes, in fact a message from Sally was forwarded to this list asking if any

of US could find out more about this study. I did spend some time trying to

find out the specifics of the study as I am quite interested myself, but as

of yet have come up with nothing.

<<<< If anybody knows a message number or subject heading for the thread,

maybe

they'll post it. I'm just about to run out the door, otherwise I would...

>>>

If you go to the messages and search the archives by typing " calves fed

pasteurized milk die before reaching maturity " you'll get the posts you are

looking for. Also note created a poll on the subject.

Carmen

[Guest guest]

-

>, we (or at least I) are

>not talking so much about NT...which really is more or less a cookbook and

>practical guide to nutrition. Rather, I'm more concerned about the

>websites: www.westonaprice.org and www.realmilk.com. These are the public

>face of an organization that is trying to produce a movement; one that

>encourages membership and outreach.

And on that I agree completely. I was just responding to a specific point

about NT, which is, after all, a cookbook. The websites, however, do need

to be comprehensive and comprehensively supported, though I don't think

we're quite to the point of needing to start splinter groups. <G>

-

[Guest guest]

At 11:12 AM 4/23/02 -0400, you wrote:

>I keep hearing from assorted people that Sally expects to be sued by

>some element of the food processing industry sooner or later.  When and

>_if_ that happens she'll need to have her ducks _all_ in a row.  If she

>doesn't then food industry lawyers will chew her to pieces.  She needs

>bulletproof references.  Speaking ex-cathedra with no supporting

>evidence simply will _not_ hold up in a court of law. 

>

>

>AP

Going to the thread on focusing on what is different or exclusive on a product

rather than what's not good about another. (something I have a terrible time

with as I know what another is being told, is not known hurts their health and

family) A stigma of the inquistive mind I guess and life different than most.

Just finished Fast Food Nation and it does say that 13 states have " vegie

libel " laws. Was used in Texas against Oprah Winfrey over a beef statement. In

Colorado its a criminal offense. Basically where the laws are any criticism of

agricultural commodities needs to be backed with " reasonable " scientific

evidence.

Wanita

[Guest guest]

>>>>I don't think splinter groups are inherantly bad. Where would

vegetarianism be if there were only one school of vegetarian thought?

What I'm starting to think would be cool is something

like 'beyondveg.com'. We could call it 'beyondnapd.com'

or 'beyondwap.com'.

***I think that's kind of an expected evolution of thought...to try to go

beyond what has become " conventional wisdom " or writings even within an

unconventional paradigm. Coincidentally, this is exactly the way I felt last

year about canine nutrition and BARF. The BARF diet is/was thought by many

interested in natural diets to be the 'best' most sensible diet for dogs

based on their historical/evolutionary diet. But there were things that

bothered me about 'conventional' BARF (as proposed by a few authors/leaders

of the approach) and some of the lists i belonged to discouraged any sort of

rigorous investigation beyond its basic tenets. so i started my own list

(along with a natural rearing breeder) and called it, you guessed it -

beyondbarf!

(to keep the discussions at a reasonably advanced level, we recently

implemented a minimum experience level with feeding home prepared diets as a

criteria for joining)

>>>>Unlike beyondveg it wouldn't be about ex-wapers,

but it would be 'research baised appraisals of traditional

nutrition'. We could all just write essays about differant topics and

then nitpick the hell out of them.

In the meantime we can just pick topics that we've already thought

about and try to exhaustively research them. Find the references that

contradict our points so that we can 'while some studies (1,2,3) have

found the opposite, the bulk of the research (4-12) has found that...'

***I really like the idea, but doubt I'd have the time to exhaustively

research and write about a nutrition topic in-depth. I *am* seriously

considering studying nutrition formally though, which would mean I'd have

even less time to write an essay (unless it's for one of my courses). But

I'd love to read and nitpick others' work And, I would *try* to make an

effort to research one myself, as time allows.

>>>>We don't have to make a website at this time, just write and

constantly revise well-referenced essays on topics that interest us.

And a couple years down the road it may hit critical mass. We are in

this for the long haul, right?

***I am definitely into healthy eating for the long haul. So far, I feel

that the basic principles put forth by WAPF and NT are the right direction

for me to move in. I am pursuing a similar path for my dogs (in fact,

started with them first), and believe that my own good health depends on the

lessons from my ancestors (traditional prep methods, buying local, etc) as

well as WAP's data on healthy primitives. Funny how you sometimes have to

look to the past to find the right path for your future.

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

At 08:38 PM 4/23/2002 +0000, you wrote:

>In the meantime we can just pick topics that we've already thought

>about and try to exhaustively research them. Find the references that

>contradict our points so that we can 'while some studies (1,2,3) have

>found the opposite, the bulk of the research (4-12) has found that...'

:

I think you've hit it on the head. The best way to get closest to " the

truth " is to get a group going on it, researching it, talking it over and

arguing about it. Apparently when researchers got a " group consensus " on

football scores before a game from a group of football nuts, this was THE

most accurate way of predicting scores. I've been enjoying the

back-and-forth about calves (and other things!) you get a lot of points of

view and eventually you get something that is pretty accurate.

Myself I have the " sloppy research " problem with MOST books I read

nowadays, but it's really irritating when you have books that totally

contradict each other and both say they are based on " scientific fact " .

Some of NT I can check out pretty easily -- like, " did they REALLY make

pickles like that in the old days? " -- and test with a low down-side risk.

But others -- like " saturated fats are good for you " is a lot more

volatile, and since it IS a challenge to most of the " accepted knowledge "

out there, I think a good amount of oversight is both necessary and

valuable -- it's necessary because, among other things, it helps validate

it. Or find the holes in it. It is important because when you start trying

something like eating a different kind of fat or eating raw milk, you are

gambling with your life and health, and people SHOULD be able to see that

things were well-researched and " peer reviewed " .

The main problem I have with most religions is that they hit on a new idea,

and then resist change like all get out. Truth has to be flexible, open,

and checked for accuracy constantly!

Heidi Schuppenhauer

Trillium Custom Software Inc.

heidis@...

[Guest guest]

Idol wrote:

>

> Alan-

>

> >When I read NT I was disturbed by the lack of

> >references. I want _notes_!

>

> I'm in agreement with those of you who want unsubstantiated/incorrect

> statements changed and more things specifically referenced, but we should

> remember that NT is a cookbook, and as such it's probably the most

> extensively referenced and annotated cookbook in history! (I still wish a

> couple elements would be revised and/or eliminated, like the reference to

> the 150-year-old man, but I don't think a cookbook needs to resemble a

> research paper.)

Oh, don't get me wrong. I know it's a cookbook and most decidedly not a

research paper, and I'm not asking that it be one. But I don't think

end notes and a properly noted and referenced bibliography would be too

much to ask for.

Fallon and Enig make a lot of unsupported claims in the book, and I'd

like to know where they got them.

And this is not an attack on them. Not at all. I like ~95% of what I

read in NT, I just want to know where it came from.

AP

--

Aviation is more than a hobby. It is more than a job. It is more than

a career. Aviation is a way of life.

A second language for the world: www.esperanto.com

Processor cycles are a terrible thing to waste: www.distributed.net

[Guest guest]

>Suze said,

>

>***Well, it's the ONLY cookbook I've ever seen with a political statement as

>the sub title:

> " The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet

>Dictocrats. " If that's not a provocative political statement, I don't know

>what is. There are similar statements in the content, so I would not

>consider it to be 'just a cookbook.'

>

>Having said that, I agree that I'm *less* concerned with the content of NT

>as I am with that of the WAP foundation web site, journal, and brochures. I

>do think the cookbook is making a political statement, and as such, may come

>under the keen scrutiny of industries that would suffer economically from

>people following NT, so I do think the first 70 pages or so that are

>dedicated to nutritional information (not recipes) *should* be strongly

>sourced (which they are) and accurate.

>Also, I simply think *consumers* should have accurate information. period.

Perhaps the trouble with NT is that it tries to do too much. A lot of

food movements have a book explaining the theory behind a given diet,

and then a separate cookbook, Hey, then Sally could sell TWO books

instead of one.

--

Quick

www.en.com/users/jaquick

" Representative government -- where many crooks get to vote

one crook into office. " --ny Hart in the comic strip " B.C. "

[Guest guest]

> --- In @y..., " dkemnitz2000 " <dkemnitz2000@y...> > >

> Dennis,

> > >

> > > Suppose the best possible scenario: we contact Sally's nephew

and

> he

> > > corroborates her. We also manage to dig up the 'calves fed

> > > pastuerized milk die before maturity' study. And lets suppose

> that

> > > both Sally's nephew and this study found that even when you

graze

> > > calves, they die before maturity when fed pastuerized milk.

> > >

> >

> > >>>>>>> I'm following you thru this point.

> > >

> >

> > Now realize that 99.99% of the industrialized world feeds their

> > > calves pastuerized milk.

> >

> > >>>>>>>>> I don't think 99.9% of the industrialized world

> feeds

> > calves pasteurized milk. In America anyway, dairymen don't

> pasteurize

> > the milk they feed calves. They feed raw milk here in the

midwest,

> I

> > think. Those huge dairies out in Ca or Arizona might pasteurize

> > before feeding calves.

>

> Fine. Lets just consider the huge dairies in California or Arizona.

> If calves fed pastuerized milk die before maturity, how come that

> isn't happening to the calves at the huge dairies in California or

> Arizon?

>

>

Remember the whole line above was hypothetical.,.......

I don't know, tell me. Did you confirm they're feeding only

pasteurized milk to calves in CA or AZ? What else they feeding

there? Why do you keep trying to discombobulate this exchange of

information. And how did you the poor speller spell corroborative so

correct and fast? And corroborative sounds like some bunch of

legalese rather than science,IMO. What sense are you using

corroborative in your statement above? Dennis

PS

Ans.B

They're not mature and if born males very very few reach maturity.

Ans. C

They don't reach maturity . They're slaughtered way before that.

What's NT's def'n of maturity anyway?

Ans. D

For that matter what's your method of pasteurization?

[Guest guest]

Ok guys

I think a little reason must be entered here.

The reason 99.9% of farms feed pastureized milk is that the raw milk they

receive from cows is unfit for calves as well as people.

If you want a explaination I will offer it , but not at this time.

So a need for pastuerization was not out of benifts, but safety of the calf

crop.

If you want to get picky about it why is the milk so bad to begin with, that

pastuerization wether it is the liquid product or calf starter is needed at

ALL!!!!!!!

So the milk is poor quality to begin with, then kill it, and feed it soley to

a calf for X number of weeks it will die as well as you!!!

And yes their are vast differences in colostrum quality from farm to farm, to

the point it is unusable in most cases, which shortens the life of the calf

by feeding it replacement colostrum which doesn;'t even resemble real

colostrum. It a by product of by products and it does not work.

The quality of calves differ from farm to farm, which will also effects the

outcome of any feeding program.

We have a mortality rate of 5%- we have 36 cows outside as much as possible,

eating a little grain as possible , 25 miles to the south confinement

facility 600 cows calf mortality rate 40% all grain no pasture ,colostrum is

dumped because all cows freshening are heifers(first calf cows) and colostrum

in the best circumstances from those animals insuffecent for good calve

growth.

By all means open the box to scrutiny, but good luck gett'in the cat back in

once you realize the scope of the issue.. if you ever attain it..

and while you are trying to catch the perverbial cat, a small portion of the

industry is looking at our group and the WAP site looking to improve the

quality of their dairy herd and its resulting product and see a bunch

nonfarmers trying to debate an issue on the wrong side of the coin.

The dairy and food indusrty giants will love it for they like to see splinter

groups which takes away from the whole.

I really wish I had the time to debate this with you but I am trying

desparetly to win a raw milk case in Wi that will effect the whole nation as

to wether you nit- pickers can get your milk you so love to fight about.

Spend the time to contact your Reps in State government and keep the milk

flowing. Spend time in your slinter groups and soon you will be S.O.L. for

milk.

I just wish once that i would see a holistic view point on this site, it

seems their are blinders hooked to some computer screens in this group which

creates some very disturbing tunnel vision.

If this is the clientele I am using every last resource to serve, no thanks,

get your own fricken cow.

As for any farmers out there under the age of 45 and have used pastureized

milk and or milk replacer and have had " good results " as for calf health and

cow or goat production longevity, please get real..

We don't even know what to expect anymore in our animals as to the longevity

of the past.

Those who know are dead and they ain't talk'in.

Any book written in the past 60 years on current feed rations don't even come

close to that an animal was 100 years ago and the expectations that was

considered normal for healthly long living animals.

Have a nice day..

Tim

Clearview.

justinbond wrote:

> >

> > > > I'm sitting here weighing 10.0000 gram flour samples for

> > > iron

> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>clipped by Dennis

> > >

> > > I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think honesty is the

> best

> > > policy.

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> > >>>>>>>>>>> I agree with you, " honesty is the best policy " .

> Of

> > course we have realize each person has a differing idea of

> honesty.

> > Anyway, has anyone requested from Sally Fallon the name of the

> dairy

> > farmer and his nephew she told us about thru ? We at

> the

> > very least need to talk to those people and get the information

> first

> > hand,in writing, if possible. I'm sure Sally would give us their

> name.

> > And if not have another " brainstorming " session. Dennis

>

> Dennis,

>

> Suppose the best possible scenario: we contact Sally's nephew and he

> corroborates her. We also manage to dig up the 'calves fed

> pastuerized milk die before maturity' study. And lets suppose that

> both Sally's nephew and this study found that even when you graze

> calves, they die before maturity when fed pastuerized milk.

>

> Now realize that 99.99% of the industrialized world feeds their

> calves pastuerized milk. Science works by corroboration and

> reproducibility. Furthermore, there are tons of studies in dairy

> science journals, such as those found by Carmen, that show that

> calves fed pastuerized milk don't die before maturity.

>

> Do you really want to leave the statement as is, just because we can

> now attach a reference it? Wouldn't you prefer that we acknowlege the

> full body of research as well as standard animal husbandry practice?

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>>>>>I really wish I had the time to debate this with you but I am trying

desparetly to win a raw milk case in Wi that will effect the whole nation as

to wether you nit- pickers can get your milk you so love to fight about.

Spend the time to contact your Reps in State government and keep the milk

flowing. Spend time in your slinter groups and soon you will be S.O.L. for

milk.

***Dear Tim,

While I still firmly believe that WAPF must disseminate *accurate*

information in order for the organization to have any meaningful impact on

the world, thanks for the reality check You are right that some of our

energy would be well-spent making sure that we even have *access* to healthy

raw milk. Otherwise we may end up debating a moot subject, as the gov chips

away at the few remaining farms that produce and sell it.

How can I, how can *we* help you in your struggle with the state of WI? I

already wrote something for your testimonial book (or was that a different

farm?) - is there something else we non-residents can do to help you?

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

Dennis:

> After we're sure pasteurized milk is unsafe for calves we

> can devise another test as financing allows and as needed. I'm not a

> researcher either so maybe some one will want to do some other test.

Dennis,

That's just the point. We'll never be " sure pasteurized milk is unsafe for

calves " unless we're delusional. The entire point is that, while certainly

not optimal, pasteurized milk *is safe* for calves when used as part of a

typical calf-rearing scenario. As used, the statement on RealMilk.com is

simply wrong. The statement as currently written is pure hyperbolic

boloney; it has zero validity. It's an embarrassment and a discredit to the

rest of the site. No matter how much data we compile to show that

pasteurized milk kills calves, it will never be enough to counter the

enormous body of evidence that it doesn't. Most importantly, this is

because there is no reasonable, real-world scenario in which it does kill

calves. The statement is an example of letting emotions and ideology

override objective reasoning.

In the late 80s, a company announced that they had achieved " cold " fusion.

Every study since has shown that they did not, in fact, achieve cold fusion.

I can quote the original study and footnote it to my heart's content, but it

won't change the fact that the information is wrong. Even if we

successfully dig up the references on this elusive study, find three more

that show the same thing, and get a half-dozen anecdotes from farmers, the

bulk of the evidence would still show the opposite. Unrepresentatively

selective use of research information and real-world anecdotes to prove a

pre-conceived notion doesn't do anybody any good.

[Guest guest]

Dear Suze

I have been thinking of this for most of the day.

i guess I would contact a friendly representative to keep an eye on the law

makers and dairy code lobbyists.

Many states are watching Wi right now as to the raw milk issue. We have gotten

state documents that show the conversations between Wi and other states.

We also have documents that outline the " perceived problems " of the WAP web site

and rawmilk.com as well as other raw milk web sites from the state and cover

stations of how they want to deal with them.

It seems rather insane that this is all over a glass of milk and ones freedom of

choice, but big dairy interests are dead set to control 100% of the milk supply.

We have had direct information from those connected with the big boys and their

attitude towards us.

I'm sorry to report Organic Valley(cropp) is one of them.

Also farmers must be made aware of the product they produce is of quality or

that it can be easily attained rather than the down play big business has fed

them for 45 years.

Also any contrary info of the safety of raw milk must be shown as a base of

about 3 documents that have been passed around and altered slightly to give the

impression that many source report the same out come when in fact many sources

are repeating the same false information.

As for direct help in my state, we are doing what we can and seem to be making

progress but a massive state budget shortfall has thrown a wrench into the gears

of progress.Now it is not enough that big business is pressuring state to remove

any competition for them it now expects the department of ag to gut the staff

and basically get rid of the watch dog arm of the Ag department which will

inturn give them free reign on plant safety or the lack of it, and the death

nail of the small processor. There will not be enough inspectors to inspect any

new or even existing small processing plants, which turn direct producers out

into the cold and tah dah no competition.

raw milk is easy to pick on given its unfair prejudiced history.

The butcher and the baker are alittle harder to get to, but they are making

progress in this state any way, don't let it happen in yours.

Also watch out for all the 911 related food safety reforms, it is a smoke screen

to remove your choices, and end your freedoms.

i find it ironic that Bush is so concerned of the threat to the U.S. form

outside its boarders, we have the most insidious threat right in our own back

yards.

Corporate america.

Thanks for your interest, and the health tips you offer on a impressive

frequency.

Tim

Clearview

Suze Fisher wrote:

> >>>>>I really wish I had the time to debate this with you but I am trying

> desparetly to win a raw milk case in Wi that will effect the whole nation as

> to wether you nit- pickers can get your milk you so love to fight about.

> Spend the time to contact your Reps in State government and keep the milk

> flowing. Spend time in your slinter groups and soon you will be S.O.L. for

> milk.

>

> ***Dear Tim,

>

> While I still firmly believe that WAPF must disseminate *accurate*

> information in order for the organization to have any meaningful impact on

> the world, thanks for the reality check You are right that some of our

> energy would be well-spent making sure that we even have *access* to healthy

> raw milk. Otherwise we may end up debating a moot subject, as the gov chips

> away at the few remaining farms that produce and sell it.

>

> How can I, how can *we* help you in your struggle with the state of WI? I

> already wrote something for your testimonial book (or was that a different

> farm?) - is there something else we non-residents can do to help you?

>

> Suze Fisher

> Web Design & Development

> http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

> mailto:s.fisher22@...

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hey Suze

I had some additional thoughts to the question you posed yesterday.

I answered the question on a state level as to that was the problem.

Its not. We are seeing a consolidation of the dairy industry into about 3

companies that control about 89% of the milk processing in the country.

That is why every state citizen consirned about food choices must be diligent in

the fact that raw milk remain a choice for the consumer.

Its not each state looking at the problem its 3 companies pressuring each state

to limit the access of consumers food choices..

Maybe thats why I get so upset with the infighting I see in this group and

others I am involved in giving the power over to the big boys instead of having

a solid front to combat the powers that be.

I hope this clarifies my postion..

have a good weekend Tim @ Clearview

Suze Fisher wrote:

> >>>>>I really wish I had the time to debate this with you but I am trying

> desparetly to win a raw milk case in Wi that will effect the whole nation as

> to wether you nit- pickers can get your milk you so love to fight about.

> Spend the time to contact your Reps in State government and keep the milk

> flowing. Spend time in your slinter groups and soon you will be S.O.L. for

> milk.

>

> ***Dear Tim,

>

> While I still firmly believe that WAPF must disseminate *accurate*

> information in order for the organization to have any meaningful impact on

> the world, thanks for the reality check You are right that some of our

> energy would be well-spent making sure that we even have *access* to healthy

> raw milk. Otherwise we may end up debating a moot subject, as the gov chips

> away at the few remaining farms that produce and sell it.

>

> How can I, how can *we* help you in your struggle with the state of WI? I

> already wrote something for your testimonial book (or was that a different

> farm?) - is there something else we non-residents can do to help you?

>

> Suze Fisher

> Web Design & Development

> http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

> mailto:s.fisher22@...

>

>

>