March 19, 2012
By Ethan A. Huff
Did you know that the average conventional dairy farmer today earns only about $1.50 for each gallon of milk he sells to the general pasteurized market, while the average raw milk dairy farmer typically fetches between $4 and $8, or more, per gallon on the health-conscious market? A new report published by Rural Vermont explains how raw milk sales in that state generated more than $1 million in gross revenues last year for local farmers, a clear indicator of why legalizing raw milk is vitally important for reviving the rural economy both in Vermont and across the nation.
The report highlights that since the passage of Act 62 in Vermont back in 2009, a bill that expanded raw milk sales in the state by allowing individual farmers to sell up to 40 gallons per day, Vermont’s rural economy has seen a significant prosperity boost. Despite the bill’s arbitrary and ridiculous 40-gallon-per-day limit on raw milk sales, which also requires customers to come directly to the farm to buy raw milk or have it delivered to their homes on a pre-paid basis, the raw milk market is thriving in Vermont, which means rural farmers who sell it and their communities are also thriving.
Historically, the American landscape at one time was dominated by family-scale farms that produced raw milk and other farm goods for local and regional markets. Profits from the sale of such goods remained largely with the farmers that produced them, and also extended into local economies for the betterment of local communities. This model, uninhibited by the heavy hand of unreasonable regulatory tyranny, fostered food freedom for all, and constituted the very fabric by which our nation prospered at the rural level.
Fast-forward to today, and most of these family-scale farms have been deliberately driven out of business or consolidated by social engineers in government that have restructured the food economy to favor large-scale producers and processors, who end up snagging most of the profits at the expense of the farmers themselves. And as far as milk is concerned, state and federal laws regarding processing and pasteurization have forced virtually all dairy farmers to submit to a corrupt system that essentially ends up bankrupting them. This, of course, is why thousands of dairies all across the nation go out of business every year, leaving rural economies devastated.
Be sure to read the comment posted by “Steven Judge” in response to the following article, which gives great insight into the dairy industry and what has happened to the nation’s rural economy as a result of the political restructuring of food policy:http://www.addisonindependent.com/?q=node/8464
But all this can change, and the course of America’s agricultural demise reversed, if the people will stand up and resist the tyranny. The success already seen just in Vermont, where raw milk laws are not even ideal and are still very restrictive, proves that the American economy would thrive if raw milk sales were legal everywhere.
Rather than be forced to operate within the government’s food system, which steals from farmers the majority of their profits, dairies that are allowed to sell raw milk, especially at the retail level, can easily more than quadruple their profits, which also means that a whole lot more money stays in the local economy. Just think of how this one policy change could revolutionize the American economy? (http://www.realmilk.com/rawmilkoverview.html).
Learn more at Natural News
February 27, 2012
By Jonathan Benson
The truth has once again shaken the foundation of the ‘American Tower of Babel’ that is mainstream science, with a new study out of Harvard University showing that pasteurized milk product from factory farms is linked to causing hormone-dependent cancers. It turns out that the concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO) model of raising cows on factory farms churns out milk with dangerously high levels of estrone sulfate, an estrogen compound linked to testicular, prostate, and breast cancers.
Dr. Ganmaa Davaasambuu, Ph.D., and her colleagues specifically identified “milk from modern dairy farms” as the culprit, referring to large-scale confinement operations where cows are milked 300 days of the year, including while they are pregnant. Compared to raw milk from her native Mongolia, which is extracted only during the first six months after cows have already given birth, pasteurized factory milk was found to contain up to 33 times more estrone sulfate.
Evaluating data from all over the world, Dr. Davaasambuu and her colleagues identified a clear link between consumption of such high-hormone milk, and high rates of hormone-dependent cancers. In other words, contrary to what theU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC), theU.S. Department of Agriculture(USDA), and the conventional milk lobby would have you believe, processed milk from factory farms is not a health product, and is directly implicated in causing cancer.
October 6th, 2011
By: Ethan A. Huff
Food is food, some might claim, and it does not really matter whether or not it is cooked or raw, conventional or organic. The nutritive value remains the same regardless. Or does it? A recent report from Activist Post explains that, based on analysis using a technique known as Kirlian photography, researchers have discovered that the energy fields surrounding raw, organic produce are stronger and more uniform than the energy fields surrounding cooked, conventional produce.
This discovery was made possible by an earlier one stumbled upon by the late Semyon Kirlian, a Russian inventor, back in 1939. Kirlian learned that, when connected to a source of voltage, an object placed in contact with a photovoltaic plate will produce a corresponding image of that object on the plate. And the resulting image will also contain a visual display of the object’s electrical “aura,” of sorts, that both surrounds and emanating from it.
The theory behind this energy field, of course, is that the stronger and more vibrant it is, the healthier and more “alive” the object. And based on this theory, it has been observed that the energy field of an apple, for instance, is the strongest right after it has first been picked. The longer it remains off the tree and is allowed to ripen, the weaker its energy field becomes.
In the documentary The Beautiful Truth, which was released in 2008, a team of scientists used Kirlian photography to analyze various foods. They found that organic foods emitted a clearly more vibrant and harmonious energy field than conventional foods. Raw foods also fared better in the energy department than cooked and pasteurized foods, the latter of which appeared duller and less uniform than their raw counterparts.
You can view a roughly two-minute clip from the film where the Kirlian technique is used here: http://youtu.be/suBjc9rIFNY
If this energy field is truly indicative of a food’s “life source,” then it appears as though whole, clean foods eaten as close as possible to the way nature intended are more life-giving than over-processed, pesticide-ridden foods. It also means that simply counting calories and looking at ingredient content are not enough to determine the true nutritional capacity of food.
August 4th, 2011
The Huffington Post
File this one under “things we always sort of knew, but wish we didn’t.” All that “100% orange juice, not from concentrate” stuff you’ve been drinking? Technically, it’s “not from concentrate,” but it’s not really 100% orange juice either, a report at Civil Eats details.
The process is rather depressing. Gizmodo explains part of the process:
Once the juice is squeezed and stored in gigantic vats, they start removing oxygen. Why? Because removing oxygen from the juice allows the liquid to keep for up to a year without spoiling. But! Removing that oxygen also removes the natural flavors of oranges. Yeah, it’s all backwards. So in order to have OJ actually taste like oranges, drink companies hire flavor and fragrance companies, the same ones that make perfumes for Dior, to create these “flavor packs” to make juice taste like, well, juice again.
Any taste difference in say Minute Maid versus Tropicana is therefore due to the specific flavor pack the company uses. Since these flavor packs are made from orange byproducts, they don’t have to be considered an ingredient, and therefore are not required to appear on food labels. This is despite the fact they are chemically altered.
Perhaps its time to take the juicer out of that dusty corner in the garage.
UPDATE: Karen Mathis, the Public Relations Director of the Florida Department of Citrus wrote HuffPost Food the following letter that offers the citrus industry’s description of the process, without disputing any of the above:
Dear Ms. Polis,
On behalf of the Florida Department of Citrus, I am writing in response to the article on HuffPost Food, entitled “Why 100% Orange Juice is Still Artificial.” Please allow me to share further information.
Purchased by nearly 70 percent of American households, people choose 100 percent orange juice for its great taste and nutrition benefits. Both “from concentrate” and “not from concentrate” orange juice are healthy options that provide a variety of nutrients. By utilizing state-of-the-art technology, Florida is able to provide a consistent supply of high quality, nutritious orange juice year round.
By law, 100 percent orange juice is made only from oranges. The basic principle of orange juice processing is similar to how you make orange juice at home. Oranges are washed and the juice is extracted by squeezing the oranges. Seeds and particles are strained out. Orange juice is pasteurized to ensure food safety.
During processing, natural components such as orange aroma, orange oil from the peel, and pulp may be separated from the orange juice. After the juice is pasteurized, these natural orange components may be added back to the orange juice for optimal flavor.
Please visit www.OrangeJuiceFacts.com for more information about orange juice.
Please feel free to contact me if you’d like to discuss in more detail. Thank you for your time and consideration.
July 11, 2011
By Dr. Mercola
On May 16th, Representative Ron Paul asked,
“If we are not even free anymore to decide something as basic as what we wish to eat or drink, how much freedom do we really have left?”
Paul was talking about the FDA ban on the interstate sale of raw milk for human consumption — milk that has not been pasteurized. The ban began in 1987, but the FDA didn’t really begin enforcing it seriously until 2006 — when the government began sting operations and armed raids of dairy farmers and their willing customers.
The New American reports:
“Even if the FDA were correct in its assertions about the dangers of raw milk, its prohibition on interstate raw milk sales would still be, as Paul termed it, ‘an unconstitutional misapplication of the commerce clause for legislative ends’ …
Saying he is ‘outraged’ by the FDA’s raids on peaceful dairy farmers and their customers, Paul has introduced legislation … ‘to allow the shipment and distribution of unpasteurized milk and milk products for human consumption across state lines,’ in effect reversing the FDA’s unconstitutional ban on such sales.”
The “Food Safety Modernization Act” that was enacted earlier this year gives the FDA almost unlimited authority to decide if food is harmful, even without credible evidence. But farmers who have been persecuted by the FDA for selling raw milk, like Amish Farmer Dan Allgyer, are not backing down. Allgyer’s case is going to court.
Citizens are irate that the FDA allows damaging junk food, but prevents people from making an educated, informed food choice in purchasing raw grass-fed milk.