Why is the FDA using swat teams on raw milk?

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Last edited:

misle

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2000
3,371
0
76
According to this article, they didn't have permits.

Stewart runs the Venice market Rawesome, which has been in operation for more than six years but has never had any type of business permit or license, prosecutors allege.
.......
While it is lawful to manufacture and sell unpasteurized dairy products in California, applicable licenses and permits are required.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
permits and licenses which probably are so onerous to get that you have to be one of the larger concerns in order to afford one. the same larger concerns that were and are the source of the problems of industrialized food.

problem is the laws are written to protect non-expert consumers from industrial concerns, and basically don't allow much in the way of informed consumers purchasing from cottage industries.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
after recent outbreaks of salmonella and other foodborne illnesses, the FDA should crack down on farmers selling unpasteurized dairy products.

if you want unpasteurized, you should grow it yourself.... but not sell or distribute it.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
But the FDA has been cracking down on raw milk a ton.

Because its a public health issue.

I fully support the FDA in this decision.

If a company was selling untreated river water in bottles, that would be ok? Its the same thing with the milk. Mankind has moved past the stone age. We know how to prevent diseases, so lets use that technology.


So then buy pasteurized milk.

Most people do not know what pasteurized milk and non-pasteurized milk is. They just read the label, and say "oh, ok".
 

Hoober

Diamond Member
Feb 9, 2001
4,413
58
91
Most people do not know what pasteurized milk and non-pasteurized milk is. They just read the label, and say "oh, ok".

Government != nanny state. Or rather, it shouldn't. If people want to buy natural milk, let them. It's their body.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
It's their body.

Its one thing if the disease could not be spread.

Its another thing if someone drinks raw milk, gets sick, then spreads that disease to someone else.

Its not just the person drinking the milk, its everyone that person comes into contact with. From there, how many work at a day care, live with someone who attends day care, is a food handler,,,,,,,.
 

torpid

Lifer
Sep 14, 2003
11,631
11
76
A large number of cheeses use unpasteurized milk.

As long as the dairy farm is getting regular safety testing and following standards commensurate with raw milk production, it is likely as safe as a big box pasteurized milk brand since the standards for raw milk are more stringent and the farms tend to be more concerned with milk quality. Obviously this varies by the company, but many milk companies have way less oversight over their own milk quality than a small farm because they are getting a mix of milk from a wide variety of sources and monitor only basic indicators such as somatic cell count of the aggregated mixture.
 

MagnusTheBrewer

IN MEMORIAM
Jun 19, 2004
24,122
1,594
126
This has nothing to do with food safety and EVERYTHING to do with permit fees, inspection fees and, regulation power. Can't have our citizens bypassing the gubmints cut now can we?
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
But the FDA has been cracking down on raw milk a ton.

Mind if I send you a gift basket filled with tasty treats from Chinese street vendors?

Here in the USA, the Evil Gubment likes to stick its nose into the bidness of people selling food that might be tainted. On the whole (milk) I think that's a good thing.

If you prefer dirty cardboard, trash, rancid cooking oil, vermin, stray pets, lead, melamine and other flavorful additions to your food feel free to start importing it from less Big Brotherish sources.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,857
31,346
146
Its one thing if the disease could not be spread.

Its another thing if someone drinks raw milk, gets sick, then spreads that disease to someone else.

Its not just the person drinking the milk, its everyone that person comes into contact with. From there, how many work at a day care, live with someone who attends day care, is a food handler,,,,,,,.

well, you can't spread a salmonella or listeria infection.

But the places where you can actually get raw milk--these customers are not the type to mistake the two if they prefer one over the other.

If it is an issue with the FDA cracking down on un-licensed distributors mixing their product into the licensed supply line, then fine. But if it's simply them strong-arming responsible producers and making it tough for them to get licensed, then that's a bunch of BS.

I love milk, but I don't care for Raw milk. Well, not sure I've had it, actually, but I don't really like whole milk. so for this, I'm not personally concerned about Raw milk--just the FDA getting in the way of real food products, yet again.

I do prefer unpasteurized cheese, though, and my wine to not be "fortified" with surplus sulfites, fuck you very much, FDA.
:colbert:
 

MagnusTheBrewer

IN MEMORIAM
Jun 19, 2004
24,122
1,594
126
Mind if I send you a gift basket filled with tasty treats from Chinese street vendors?

Here in the USA, the Evil Gubment likes to stick its nose into the bidness of people selling food that might be tainted. On the whole (milk) I think that's a good thing.

If you prefer dirty cardboard, trash, rancid cooking oil, vermin, stray pets, lead, melamine and other flavorful additions to your food feel free to start importing it from less Big Brotherish sources.

Food is inherently healthy. else we would have died off long ago. The problem with food regulation and milk in particular is that the gubmint still lists milk as a protected and subsidized commodity. In other words, there is no market value for milk. These regulations do not insure quality as much as they insure there is government to regulate it. Those folks worried about Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria can draw a deep breathe because milk that tests above the regulated levels is not fit for pasteurization either. In other words, there currently is NO value to pasteurization except for the inspections, fees and permits it requires.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
well, you can't spread a salmonella or listeria infection.

But the places where you can actually get raw milk--these customers are not the type to mistake the two if they prefer one over the other.

If it is an issue with the FDA cracking down on un-licensed distributors mixing their product into the licensed supply line, then fine. But if it's simply them strong-arming responsible producers and making it tough for them to get licensed, then that's a bunch of BS.

I love milk, but I don't care for Raw milk. Well, not sure I've had it, actually, but I don't really like whole milk. so for this, I'm not personally concerned about Raw milk--just the FDA getting in the way of real food products, yet again.

I do prefer unpasteurized cheese, though, and my wine to not be "fortified" with surplus sulfites, fuck you very much, FDA.
:colbert:

Wikipedia tells me that true french roquefort blue cheese MUST use unpasteurized milk. At least across the pond.

But there's seriously something wrong when the FDA won't allow people to cow share and take some of the "raw" milk for use. Now I don't know if that is a state or FDA or licensing thing, but it's still wrong.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Food is inherently healthy. else we would have died off long ago. The problem with food regulation and milk in particular is that the gubmint still lists milk as a protected and subsidized commodity. In other words, there is no market value for milk. These regulations do not insure quality as much as they insure there is government to regulate it. Those folks worried about Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria can draw a deep breathe because milk that tests above the regulated levels is not fit for pasteurization either. In other words, there currently is NO value to pasteurization except for the inspections, fees and permits it requires.

True. Dairy farmers are VERY serious about contamination and cleanliness and testing. If the let contaminated stuff get out, their business and livelyhood is likely ruined.

I even saw some cool automated milkers on discovery channel that tested the utters, tested the milk, cleaned the utters before and after milking and the entire milk delivery system was sealed. Pretty slick stuff.
 
Last edited:

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
I thought the US has never allowed raw cheeses? Which is a real shame because unpasteurized cheese can be amazing.

Not sure I've had straight raw milk since those summers on my Grandparent's farm when I was a youth.

KT
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
I thought the US has never allowed raw cheeses? Which is a real shame because unpasteurized cheese can be amazing.

Not sure I've had straight raw milk since those summers on my Grandparent's farm when I was a youth.

KT

Honestly, is there a taste difference? That's what I'm trying to understand because many things I've read say for cheese, absolutely. Something about the enzymes that aren't broken down, etc do good things for the cheese.

I summon The Pizza to answer these questions. Pizza! Pizza! GoatMilkPizza!