Sunday, February 19, 2012

Foremost on my Mind: The Raw Milk Debate

It has come to my attention yet again about the apparent evil of selling and drinking raw milk. Let me re-state that, so there's no confusion: In certain circles, raw milk is seen as bad—so bad, in fact, that a police raid took place recently back East, something on par with the Prohibition (yesteryear) and grow-ops (today).


The absurdity of comparing raw milk with marijuana is not lost on me either. If I must connect the dots here, people, the former is very good for you, whereas the latter can lead to even worse habits.


Some innocent Amish farmer is the latest felon. His crime? Selling raw milk to willing con-

sumers. The result of his crime? Healthy customers—healthy, as in not sick, as in not absent from work, as in not clogging up hospital wards. We must leave room, you know, for those who have drinking, cholesterol, and obesity issues—probably from ingesting government-sanctioned products.


If I were rich and courageous enough, I'd blow the lid of this medical racket when it comes to the healthy foods versus unhealthy foods argument. I don't think it's rocket science to anyone that processed food, canned goods, and really anything with a long shelf life, are not good you. On the other hand, I think there is a general consensus that rawer (if that's a word) and fresher and greener are better—and no, Maurice, green would not apply to meat.


Take the lowly tomato, for instance: Which variety would be better for you, the one just fresh out of your garden or the one that was pulled out of a southern California field four weeks ago? And what do you know about its exposure to sprays, pesticides, and other growth stimulants? Most imported tomatoes must absorb these long before you absorb the tomato.


Now multiply that by every fruit and vegetable you buy. I submit to you this is one reason why we have a health crisis.


Another factor in eating well versus eating easily has to do with contents: Any bottle, can, or pacakge of fresh, frozen, or fried food that can sit on the shelf for months at a time is not very healthy for you. Only the Lord above knows what is allowing them to “survive” for so long. Well, maybe the Lord and big corporations. I wonder if they have intentionally written the ingredients with six-syllable words, so as to confuse the common shopper.


There are two faults here, possibly three: One, of course, is the big corporations themselves. I am all for the need for these companies, but I think we as consumers are too naive when it comes to entrusting them with our diet.


Two, area retailers. Like big corporations, we really need the small-town supermarkets. While they may or may not carry everything the consumer wants (or needs), they may not actually have a choice when it comes to selection; distribution centres may, in fact, establish the inventory.


And third, you, as in you-the-eager-consumer, have to assume some guilt as to what you buy, what you support, and ultimately, what you eat. Last time I checked our democracy, this was not Serbia or North Korea or Zimbabwe. We have a marvelous freedom of choice.

Part of today's discussion is about the right to drink raw milk. The other part is much, much deeper, namely, the lack of consistent controls (with the emphasis on “consistent,” not “controls.”)


If Big Brother, an Orwellian moniker for bloated and dopey government, was genuinely concerned about its citizens' health, wouldn't it seem logical to start with the food fare that has been proven to be poisonous? There are myriads of websites that give ample evidence that much of what we feed our kids, or what restaurants have the gall to call a “meal.”


Corporations, retailers, and consumers are each a little culpable. Believe it or not, perhaps, we, the little guy, are the most guilty. After all, we don't have to eat the canned this or packaged that. There are alternatives to eating long-lasting, processed food. Keep in mind that it would be really hard for big business to survive if consumers shopped with a conscience.


Food co-ops, county gardens, and farmers' markets are good places to start. And don't foget about your own backyard: A lot of the food we eat comes from our backyard. Yes, we have the rare days of the sniffles, but in the main, we eat well, so we stay well—though I'm sure homeschooling and no immunization plays into that.


Isn't the raw milk debacle just a flashpoint for the lack of freedom we have? If we want to eat tofu and drink raw milk, bake our own bread and butcher our own beef, why can't we? Why should the government interfere with some simple entrepeneur, especially when his product is proven to be so much better than the commercial diet?


I'd drink to that proposal—as long as it's with raw milk.



No comments: