Image by Teemu Mäntynen via Flickr
"Pure Milk Is Better Than Purified Milk"
Image via WikipediaThis article explains how pasteurization—with few outspoken political supporters during this period—first became a primary milk purification strategy in Chicago and why eight years passed between pasteurization's initial introduction into law and the city's adoption of full mandatory pasteurization. It expands the current focus on the political agreement to pasteurize to include the organizational processes involved in incorporating pasteurization into both policy and practice. It shows that the decision to pasteurize did not occur at a clearly defined point but instead evolved over time as a consequence of the interplay of political interest groups, state-municipal legal relations, and the merging of different organizational practices. Such an approach considerably complicates and expands existing accounts of how political interests and agreements shaped pasteurization and milk purification policies and practice.
Michael Schmidt movie “MILK WAR” premiered last night at the Royal Cinema in Toronto — Yay raw milk!
Milk War gives more than a token voice to the views of conventional dairy farmers and regulators. The conventional farmer interviewed comes across as a sensible and modern businessman but as someone who still cares for his animals — all 500 of them. The issue of quota is addressed and Michael re-iterates on camera, his willingness to work with the system and talks about the many overtures he’s made to try to achieve rapprochement with the Dairy Farmers of Ontario and with the Ontario government.
Michael’s bio-dynamic farming practices are discussed in the film as well, in a matter of fact way, and not as if they are some scary voodoo.
There are interviews with the one person in Ontario who has come down with E-coli in recent years that was blamed on raw milk. He says on camera that he’s pretty sure it was from a fast food hamburger that he ate in deviation from his usual all organic all healthy diet. His whole family drank the milk and he was the only one who got sick. And the man (not Michael) who was charged with selling him that milk was interviewed in the film as well. Folks, this is material that the mainstream media has yet to penetrate. This movie deserves an “I” for investigative journalism!
Image by DUP Photos via FlickrTennessee farmer adapts to raw milk
Image by DUP Photos via FlickrAll across America, dairy farmers are faced with economic challenges due to a wholesale price for milk that takes no account of their costs of operation. So what’s a farmer to do? This is an excerpt from the story of one farmer who was sufficiently in touch with the times. This farming family realized that you’ve got to give the people what they want — raw milk, from grass-fed animals. Tell me it’s not the way of the future — if dairy farming is to survive in corporate-dominated America. From theknoxnews.com website:
“A small but growing number of Tennesseans are drinking raw milk, straight from the cow and unpasteurized.
Some say it’s the elixir of good health. Health officials say it’s hazardous.
And raw dairy farmers? They’re just trying to make a living.
The sale of raw milk for human consumption is illegal in Tennessee. But a loophole in Tennessee agriculture law, passed in May 2009, has opened the door for farmers to distribute raw milk locally through what they call cow-share or cow-boarding programs.
“The only legal way a person can acquire raw milk for human consumption is if they own the cow itself,” said Tom Womack, spokesman for the Tennessee Department of Agriculture. The law allows even “partial owners” of an animal to use its milk for personal consumption.
“Some people take the next step and sell shares of those cows,” said Womack. “But (raw milk) is a serious health risk, and there’s no amount of regulation that can make an unsafe product safe.”
( How many thousands of years have people died from drinking unpasteurized milk ? I would hope the satire implied in that statement is not wasted. )
MILK IS A TOXIC SUBSTANCE?
MILK IS A TOXIC SUBSTANCE?
Destroying family farms in the name of food safety
This is the second of three articles to demonstrate the effects that Senate Bill S510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, will have on all of us. The third article in this series will be devoted to Senate bill S 510. As you read this article, it’s important to keep in mind that while the US Congress was on August recess, Senate bill S510, that will completely control the production of food, was resubmitted as a bipartisan complete substitute for the original.
On June 30th of this year, a private food co-op named Rawesome, founded by a rather iconoclastic individual by the name of Aajonus (pronounced odd-genus) Vonderplanitz was raided in Venice, California. The co-op’s members prefer to eat all raw food and have many personal testimonies of the benefits they have received from following the paleo-diet and eating all things raw. The raid involved multiple agencies - the FBI, FDA, California Department of Food and Agriculture and the Health Department among them. The agents entered with drawn guns and seized all products from the private food club. Among the products seized was raw cheese from the licensed and inspected Morningland Dairy in Mountain View, Missouri.
Grist
Six things you should know before defying the real food police
Driven by increasingly harsh crackdowns by local and federal agencies on small producers and distributors of unpasteurized (raw) milk and other nutrient-dense foods, growing numbers of individuals involved in this part of the food chain are publicly refusing to abide by government edicts and shutdown orders.
But the reality for today's rebels is far from glorious. Max Kane, the owner of a buying club in Wisconsin that distributes raw milk, is facing jail if his appeal on a contempt of court conviction last December is denied. He had several times refused orders from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection to provide information about the farmers who supply his milk and the names of his raw milk customers.
But the reality for today's rebels is far from glorious. Max Kane, the owner of a buying club in Wisconsin that distributes raw milk, is facing jail if his appeal on a contempt of court conviction last December is denied. He had several times refused orders from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection to provide information about the farmers who supply his milk and the names of his raw milk customers.
Our Mission: The Center for Food Safety works to protect human health and the environment by curbing the proliferation of harmful food production technologies and by promoting organic and other forms of sustainable agriculture. CFS has offices in Washington, DC and San Francisco, CA
Food Safety Bill S510 Update
There has been a lot of activity surroundingSenate Bill 510 which aims to regulate food systems in order to promote food safety. Everybody wants safe food. The government wants it, the consumers want it; even the middlemen want it. Food is, after all, the great equalizer: we all need it, regardless of economic or social class.
S510 was designed to bridge the gap between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). As it stands, there are certain grey areas that aren't covered by either agency, and this is how and why many of the safety regulations break. When it was first written, it was reactionary, including every food source to be regulated by federal agencies, which could give way to a number of problems including the weeding of competition to large corporations by instilling fees and taxes that will literally break a small farm.
The most recent egg recall brings up some very interesting points about how the distribution and regulation of industrial food works, and what safety precautions are already in place.
S510 was designed to bridge the gap between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). As it stands, there are certain grey areas that aren't covered by either agency, and this is how and why many of the safety regulations break. When it was first written, it was reactionary, including every food source to be regulated by federal agencies, which could give way to a number of problems including the weeding of competition to large corporations by instilling fees and taxes that will literally break a small farm.
The most recent egg recall brings up some very interesting points about how the distribution and regulation of industrial food works, and what safety precautions are already in place.
Tainted Meat/Rotten Eggs: What Does It Really Take to Make Food Safe? - Huffington Post
Alison Rose Levy
Posted: August 26, 2010 10:03 AM
In the wake of the salmonella outbreak in eggs emerges a vital question: How do we raise and grow healthy food? Do we need more drugs, antibiotics, hormones, and vaccines, or fewerdrugs and healthier growing practices? Do we need more layers of federal oversight that will do little to curb industrial food practices, while burdening small suppliers? Or do we need smarter legislation targeted to the real causes of food hazards?
As the discussion of this proceeds in three (and more) Huffington blogs, guess who is chiming in -- in a sponsored blog (his first) as a 'top food and drug safety expert?' It's a Strategy Executive from the IBM emerging technologies group. What is his food safety know-how? Why, it's in the use of tagging barcodes for food tracking, an area of "tremendous growth," Paul Chang says. Food safety is a big industry for IBM, which is why they decided to capitalize on the salmonella scare by weighing in on the need for more tech solutions as proposed by the upcoming Food Safety bill, discussed later in this blog.Salmonella is a problem-- but a lesser problem when eggs are grown via healthy practices from the start. Moreover, the bug is killed by cooking.So let's first consider why we permit industries to raise chickens in filthy, inhumane conditions. Or feed them feed they were never designed to eat, that contains unhealthy byproducts? The near inevitable result will be disease and infections in animals and food, with vaccinations and antibiotics used to address the resulting illnesses.Animals "raised on industrial farms are routinely fed antibiotics to make them grow faster and compensate for overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions," urges the non-profit organization, FarmAid. "This overuse of antibiotics creates stronger and more drug-resistant bacteria that can cause tragic results." Such as antibiotic resistance in humans, a rising health concern.Further, there is little scientific research into whether the antibiotics, vaccines, growth hormones, and pesticides absorbed by livestock are passed along to humans who consume them, though new studies indicate that they may well be.Though many recognize the downsides to this agricultural, food, and health management infrastructure, it's less clear how to shift it. The upcoming Safe Food legislation is a good place to begin. If, the bill passes in its current form, how long can the health conscious avoid such foods and choose organic? Will healthy food options still be available long-term without a change in the public policies and resource allocations that support the monolithic food model, and wipe out other smaller, safer food production options?With the salmonella outbreak immediately followed by the "tainted meat" recall, I couldn't help but note the timing-- a prelude to the impending Food Safety bill S510, coming up this fall in Congress. What a coincidence that the outbreak is perfectly timed to scare the public into spending millions of dollars of tax payer money on legislation which:
- Builds bureaucratic compliance mechanisms that serve the industrial agricultural food chain, while unnecessarily burdening organic growers and small farmers, who operate at a safer, smaller scale. Ironically, growers with safer practices could be driven out of business meeting such requirements.
- Gifts the FDA with unprecedented powers despite its poor track record in enforcingexisting safety measures
- Increases costs astronomically while not increasing actual on-site inspections. Perhaps some of those costs are for sophisticated tracking technology rather than actual improvements in safety practices
- Forces across the board compliance with the WTO, a first internationally.
If these twin food scares build momentum for the bill's passage, the real question may become: what is the cure for an opportunistic infection -- of fear?
If these twin food scares build momentum for the bill's passage, the real question may become: what is the cure for an opportunistic infection -- of fear?
Bill Text Versions
111th Congress (2009-2010)
S.510
S.510
CRS Summary
Congressional Budget Office Estimates FSM Act Cost
The Congressional Budget Office released its estimates of the cost of programs that would be implemented under the Food Safety Modernization Act. The report predicts that spending during the 2011-2015 period would come in at $1.4 billion. This is $600 million dollars less than the House version of the bill. The difference lies mostly in the collection of facility registrations fees which is not authorized in the Senate bill.
Latest Version of S. 510 Goes The DistanceSaturday,
August 14, 2010
I just finished reading the latest version of the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010 and let me tell you, if the previous text protected small farms and business from undue regulation, this version pounds that into the readers head. Over and over.
Actually, it's a quite adequate and sufficient, and almost comical, response to the concerns of what is now being described as "small entities". When I say comical, I merely mean that the instead of deeming one paragraph allowing for the consideration of small entities, the new bill inserts it in practically every line. No one reading this bill can now sanely argue that this is geared towards or going to ruin small producers.
If you don't know, I've been dealing with the organization FARFA a lot lately. I've taken it upon myself to directly challenge Judith McGreary's internet misinformation campaign. In it, she uses talking points that are not based upon facts to garner the voices of those who support organics, small farms, CSAs, and farmers markets. She is co-opting these voices in order to push an amendment which would exempt businesses that are twice the size of the USDA's definition of small farms. McGreary continually claims that the bill mandates a set of regulations, procedures, and paperwork that will put our local farmers out of business. That this was not the case before the latest version of the bill did not matter to McGreary and FARFA. It will be interesting to see if the anti-bill/Tester amendment internet campaign reacts to this latest version. My guess is that their talking points will continue to be reproduced across the 'Net as if the government is coming after all our cucumbers.
S.510 Food Safety Modernization Act
The bill increases regulation on processors, packers, manufacturers, slaughterhouse, etc. It clearly states that, in regard to HACCP plans and registration of facilities, farms and restaurants would be exempt. This disproves the main talking point of opponents of the bill. They are saying that your local farmers' market is the target, which it most certainly is not.
19 Sept - News Picks and RSS
Comments
S. 510 doesn't deal with the issue of raw vs. pasteurized.
( This is a Canadian blog written by a fellow who worked - as a labourer - in the Canadian cheese industry for some years : mostly in distribution. We have a hog slaughtering operation nearby also, where HAACP is the replacement for government inspectors : paperwork sent to the government by the packing house. This constitutes 'oversight.' Deregulation has worked so well (not) to control negative situations that were to be contained by....regulation.
But a real 'bone of contention' for Canadians would be how 'harmonization of standards' for 'Free Trade' - an initiative which destroyed the party supporting it nationally when it was on the election platform in 1993 - threatens Canadian food security.
To do that one would have to understand that things which give one partner a cost advanatage in production threaten domestic operations in a country where the cost of fuel is to be no less than the country importing it ( the U.S.A. ), transportation costs are not subsidized ( in a place where national eat-west trade routes suffer a horrid cost disadvantage because of distance ), where subsidies to U.S. farmers are ignored, where distribution costs and delays from parts suppliers are greater, and where the growing season is much shorter.
All this to establish a 'level playing field.'
With milk : it doesn't stop there. There is a difference between U.S. produced milk and cheese and Canadian produced milk and cheese which gives an accounting advanatage to U.S. producers...at the cost of hormones in the milk supply.
Some of the 129,000 results on a Search of that parameter
All this to establish a 'level playing field.'
With milk : it doesn't stop there. There is a difference between U.S. produced milk and cheese and Canadian produced milk and cheese which gives an accounting advanatage to U.S. producers...at the cost of hormones in the milk supply.
Some of the 129,000 results on a Search of that parameter
Bovine somatotropin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bovine somatotropin (abbreviated bST and BST), also known as bovine growth hormone, or BGH, is a protein hormone produced in cattle. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin
Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) in milk threathens our health
The US General Accounting Office (GAO) and the Consumer's Union have warned of the potential hazards to human health caused by consuming milk, ...
www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/bgh.htm
Bovine Growth Hormone: Milk does nobody good...
The recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), a genetically engineered hormone manufactured by Monsanto, has sparked a controversy nationwide since its ...
www.ejnet.org/bgh/nogood.html
Bovine Growth Hormone
14 Jan 2004 ... RACHEL Articles | Where to find more info | BGH Conspiracies | Links | Life Beyond Milk | IGF-1 in Milk Causes Breast, Colon & Prostate ...
www.ejnet.org/bgh/
Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone
by YL Offices
Recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) is a synthetic (man-made) hormone that is marketed to dairy farmers to increase milk production in cows.
www.cancer.org/Cancer/.../AtHome/recombinant-bovine-growth-hormone
OCA: Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone (Posilac, also ...
rBGH is genetically engineered Bovine Growth Hormone injected into lactating cows so that they produce more milk. Labeling of rBGH free products in organic ...
www.organicconsumers.org/rbghlink.cfm
rbST Facts | Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone
rbST facts offers the truth on recombinant bovine growth hormone. Visit today for more up-to-date and relevant rbST information.
www.rbstfacts.org/
Family Farm Defenders : Bovine Growth Hormone
Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH or rBST) is a genetically engineered hormone injected into cows to increase milk production by 8-17 percent. ...
www.familyfarmdefenders.org/.../BovineGrowthHormone/BovineGrowthHormone )
“Goats are a good ecological alternative to mowing and they’re used all over California for grazing. It’s much less resource intensive than pulling weeds by hand or using pesticides,” says Nicolette Niman, the author of Righteous Pork Chop, who has been developing a goat herd with a cooperative of ranchers over the last two years. “And you can end up with meat, too.
Government puts monitoring advocacy groups above protecting drinking water
Another scandal surfaced in the Pennsylvania drilling world today – this time with a twist: in an email he accidentally sent to an anti-drilling advocate, the head of the state’s Office of Homeland Security revealed he has been monitoring groups fighting to protect against health & environmental risks associated with fracking and reporting back to gas companies. You read that right.To quote State Homeland Security Director James Powers' email directly: “We want to continue providing this support to the Marcellus Shale formation natural gas stakeholders, while not feeding those groups fomenting dissent against those same companies.”The irony here is painful. The government won’t protect Americans from health & environmental risks associated with natural gas drilling, but they will protect gas companies from those Americans. It can’t regulate this heavy industrial activity that transforms communities and threatens grave health & environmental risks – but it can let the gas companies know which public meetings concerned citizens plan to attend.
Burning the biosphere, boverty blues (Part I)
This is the first of two posts on some large issues connected with global fire regimes, biomass flows, and food security
Boverty is the human impact of too many bovines overwhelming the local biosphere’s ability to feed them … the bovines are usually cattl
This is the first of two posts on some large issues connected with global fire regimes, biomass flows, and food security
This is the first of two posts on some large issues connected with global fire regimes, biomass flows, and food security
Boverty is the human impact of too many bovines overwhelming the local biosphere’s ability to feed them … the bovines are usually cattle and more than a few African countries have precisely this problem. Their livestock is a millstone around their necks and helping to keep them poor. Well-meaning aid organisations often contribute to the problem.
The ecosystem impacts of cattle spread far and wide but it may not be the owners of the animals who suffer the impacts. Indeed, the animals canbuffer their owners against the worst impacts of boverty. This is analogous to the way that drivers of large SUVs do well in collisions with smaller vehicles. The entire community suffers from the presence of the vehicles, but the owners may be the least affected.
his post surveys the impacts of livestock, firstly at a very general level on the biosphere due to its domination of global biomass consumption, proceeding through the cattle-specific annual planetary conflagrations as people ignite the world’s grasslands to prevent reforestation. Lastly, we look at more intimate and sometimes more indirect bovine impacts, like the accelerated degradation of arable soil, the tens or hundreds of thousands of children killed by cooking with dung, and the global increase in respiratory and heart disease from ozone increases caused by rising methane levels.
Cattle are a major causal component in all these problems. The planet’s 1.4 billion cattle have a liveweight biomass exceeding that of humans and dominate many of our adverse impacts on planetary eco-systems.
e and more than a few African countries have precisely this problem. Their livestock is a millstone around their necks and helping to keep them poor. Well-meaning aid organisations often contribute to the problem.
The ecosystem impacts of cattle spread far and wide but it may not be the owners of the animals who suffer the impacts. Indeed, the animals canbuffer their owners against the worst impacts of boverty. This is analogous to the way that drivers of large SUVs do well in collisions with smaller vehicles. The entire community suffers from the presence of the vehicles, but the owners may be the least affected.
his post surveys the impacts of livestock, firstly at a very general level on the biosphere due to its domination of global biomass consumption, proceeding through the cattle-specific annual planetary conflagrations as people ignite the world’s grasslands to prevent reforestation. Lastly, we look at more intimate and sometimes more indirect bovine impacts, like the accelerated degradation of arable soil, the tens or hundreds of thousands of children killed by cooking with dung, and the global increase in respiratory and heart disease from ozone increases caused by rising methane levels.
Cattle are a major causal component in all these problems. The planet’s 1.4 billion cattle have a liveweight biomass exceeding that of humans and dominate many of our adverse impacts on planetary eco-systems.
Burning the biosphere, boverty blues (Part II)
Many grasslands on the planet are not the product of natural forces, but were cleared by people and kept as grasslands for livestock grazing by annual or occasional conflagrations. This is global burning on a massive scale as shown in the NASA firemaps presented in Part I. The continent with the most deliberate human burning is Africa. Over 200 million hectares and 2 billion tonnes of dry matter are burned annually in deliberately lit fires. Almost all of these fires are set by livestock herders to stop grasslands becoming forests. By comparison, burning by shifting cultivators for crops covered an area about 10 percent of this size. A recent study in Nature gives an idea of what could happen if the burning stopped. The reforestation potential is massive.
Africa is about 4 times the size of Australia but has 260 million cattle compared to our 28 million. On average the cattle are smaller with an average carcase weight of 150kg compared to 250kg in Australia. By now you may have predicted what so astonished me and drove the preparation of this post. The areas doing so much of the burning are precisely the ones with the most cattle and the most chronically hungry people.
Do a little googling and you will find plenty of news stories over the past few years about China (and others) investing in Africa to grow food. At home, China is losing land to desertification and running out of water. It has also developed a taste for beef and now has over 80 million cattle (plus 20 million buffaloes) to feed on top of its half a billion pigs. What is the cause of so much of its desertification? Grazing, of course, with sheep being as effective as cattle.
But why Africa? How do you produce food in Africa? This is the continent with the worst food insecurity on the planet. A New York Times article relates the astonishment of a botanist who was flabbergasted at Saudi plans to grow food in Africa, thinking that if Africa can’t feed itself, how can it feed foreign markets? Easy. With some exceptions the problems of food in Africa are cultural and financial, they are not technical. Africa is 3 times bigger than China with 300 million less people. Yes, it has some rather large desert regions (40 percentof the land area), and some poor soils, but also large areas of current and potential forest. In simple terms, if mother nature can produce a forest somewhere then a good farmer can grow food.
How Much Does A Senator's Sell-Out Cost? Open Letter -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV):
Dear Senator Reid:
We, the People of These United States of America want to know, Senator Reid, how much we need to ante up to "see" Agribiz' purchase of you and to raise the bid enough to buy your allegiance. After all, Senator, you are both an ex-professional gambler and a professional politician and therefore understand how to play the game. You acted correctly on the morning of September 16, 2010, and announced that you would shelve S. 510, the disastrous Food Fascism Bill (deceptively titled the "Food Safety" Bill). True, you "blamed" that correct and courageous decision on Sen. Coburn of Oklahoma, whose steadfast opposition to the degradation and industrialization of our entire food supply has been a source of pride and gratification to anyone in the US who treasures sanity, freedom or clean food, but we understand that politics requires such CYA tactics.
Later that day, however, your reversed course and, citing a meeting with Rylee Gustafson of Henderson, NV, who was hospitalized as a 9-year-old in 2006 after "eating contaminated spinach", you decided to support the destruction of the US food supply of clean, wholesome food instead. Senator Reid, did you ask Rylee whether the spinach he ate was produced by a local family farm, since it is factory farms, not family farms, including phony industrial "organic" farms, which are the source of all US food borne diseases? CDC says that 1 American in 4 will be struck with food borne disease this year, but those diseases do not come from family farms, according to the CDC itself. Clearly FDA regulation is not working. We have a disastrously unsafe food supply precisely because it is a factory farm food supply, not in spite of it.
Did you ask if Rylee's mom washed and cooked the spinach sufficiently to ensure its safety? Did you ask if Rylee's mom's kitchen had been inspected by the FDA Kitchen Police?
Despite the fact that factory farming is responsible for food borne disease, it is local and family farms which are slated for extinction by S. 510, in favor of their giant, and deadly, sound-alikes. Both are called farms, but small, local farms produce safe food. Industrial farms produce disease and bribes.
Small, local, organic farms did not produce the recall of billions of tainted eggs two weeks ago. Just two factory farms produced all those billions of poisonous eggs, aided and abetted by the ineffective regulation of bloated, corrupt government agencies to whom S. 510 would give more power to abuse and more bloat to waste.
So tell us, Senator Reid, in the hours following your decision to table/kill S. 510 and your abrupt reversal of that decision to ram it through the Senate, what was the blood price which you accepted to sell America's food supply, increasing the number of illnesses and deaths with the death of family farms, and our liberty, health, freedom along with it?
What emoluments were you offered, Sir, which would salve your conscience even temporarily sufficiently to allow you to announce that you would use the parliamentary procedure of cloture to cut off all debate on this bill and to ram it through the Senate?
You see, Senator, We, the People, understand the oft-repeated saw that "an honest politician is one who stays bought". We do not have reason to believe that your decision is one which will stay bought since your decision did such an abrupt about-face. We would like to enter the game, Sir, that Big Agribiz and you are obviously playing.
What is the price you have put on your support or decision to ram this bill through, instead of killing it, Sir?
We know that tracing the labyrinth of industrial connections of these corporations leads us quickly to a veritable rats' nest of Uber Cartel connections and interests: Big Pharma, Big Chema, Big Agribiz, Big Biotech, Big Medica, Big Oil and Big War.
So tell us, Sen. Reid, what was the deal you were offered, and accepted, not to gamble with our future, but, worse, to trade it for what in the Bible is referred to as "a mess of beans", a trivial prize in exchange for something of monumental importance?
For Esau, it was a hot and savory dish when he was hungry for which he traded his birthright. As foolish as that was, Senator, it was his to trade.
You, on the other hand, have traded OUR collective birthright to health, clean, unadulterated food and the freedom to select it and it was NOT yours to trade! So here's the deal: tell us what you were offered and we will up the ante to meet, and beat the price. You get what you want and we keep our Food Freedom.
Yours in health and freedom,
We, The People of These United States
Past posts
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2010/08/19-aug-food-and-filth.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2010/09/9-sept-war-by-other-means.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2010/05/18-may-gas-wells-are-not-our-friends.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2010/02/25-feb-killing-food-nutrition-is-stupid.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2010/02/14-feb-gm-monkey-business.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2010/01/31-jan-forest-insanity.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/12/31-dec-food-farming-poison-misplaced.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/11/24-nov-gm-foods.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/11/seeds-of-global-slaveryand-human.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/10/health-and-wellness.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/08/environment-sickening-practices.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/08/green-acres-food-and-junk-food-post.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/08/institute-of-science-in-society.html
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/07/water-wealth-power.html
Corporate Farming
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment