Recent Comments

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: Celine in reply to: Pure Market Express Offers Raw Food to Go

    Such a shame that the review does not match the flavor of my experience. I love raw food but this location does not deliver the taste I would have expected after reading this article. It appears the food is still as awful as it must have been back in 2006. Apparently it is time to go back to that intensive training on the east coast and see if they can get it right.

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: Kris in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    If you're interested in a read about raw milk and many other transactions deemed illegal by the government, check out Joel Salatin's book, "Everything I Want to Do is Illegal."

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: magicdave13 in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    I used to get my raw milk products delivered here in Va. on sort of a clandestine basis. The products came from an organic dairy in Pennsylvania. The practice has stopped because of the interstate provision of the Federal law. The only legal way to purchase ANY raw dairy products in Va. is to buy a "herd share" from a farm. This makes it impractical to buy raw dairy products, for me anyway. The laws are that were put in place to "protect us" are foolish. I grew up on raw milk. The laws were put in place because a very very long time ago when a lot of cities in the U.S. had neighborhood breweries, dairies were started next door to them and the cows were fed the mash from the breweries after it had been cooked to remove the sugars. These "dairies" were filthy, disgusting places and people got sick from some of them but generally the raw milk from a well run dairy produces milk that will not harm you because it is loaded with anti-pathogenic compounds. All mammalians offspring all sterile at birth and get their protection from the mother's milk and not just from the colostrum but also the milk after the first feeding. Raw milk straight from the teat has enzymes and antibodies that kill any pathogens that might be present on the teats of the mother. Mammals in the wild and specifically ruminants have no way of washing their teats so survival of the off spring is dependent on these enzymes and antibodies. many tests have proven that pathogens will not grow in Raw Milk. All of the laws restricting the sale of Raw Milk are still there because of the industrial food industry. It is factory farming that has ruined our food supply and made us dependent on foods that are the underlying cause of a multitude of "modern diseases."

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: bearing in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    For instance, did you consider getting the farmer's permission before publicizing the existence of the drop and publically accusing him of knowingly breaking Minnesota law?

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: bearing in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    "First, please notice I did not disclose one bit of information about where I buy my raw milk. I would never do anything to jeapardise that valuable resource for me and my family."

    OK, but let's see what you're doing here. You are basically announcing under your own name that you are participating in what you believe is an illegal enterprise. You have announced that you know who is supposedly breaking the law, you have announced that you believe the person to be deliberately breaking the law, and you know where and when this lawbreaking is happening every week.

    The government has this thing called a "subpoena" by which they could, if they liked, order you to give them the information you have. You are already putting the farmer at risk. I am trying to warn you because I support your right to buy raw milk and I would not like to see the farmer shut down (even if he is breaking the law), nor would I like to see him legally harassed if he is not breaking the law.

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: Shari D. in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    Wow! I guess I struck a "raw" nerve!

    OK, let me respond:

    First, please notice I did not disclose one bit of information about where I buy my raw milk. I would never do anything to jeopardize that valuable resource for me and my family.

    Second, straight from the UMN Extension office about food safety:

    "The Minnesota Statute 2002, Section 32.393 Subd. 1 requires pasteurization of milk for sale for the purpose of human consumption. The exemption to this rule: 'shall not apply to milk, cream, skim milk, goat milk, or sheep milk occasionally secured or purchased for personal use by any consumer at the place or farm where the milk is produced.' The buyer must provide the container for the milk. Under the pasteurization ruling, the farmer cannot advertise the sale of raw milk."

    So, when I buy milk, it is not occasionally, it is regularly. It is not at the place where it is produced, it is at a suburban home. And, further, I do not provide my own containers, the farmer owns the glass bottles the milk comes in; I pay a deposit for them and return them each week. So you be the judge whether or not it is illegal.

    My whole point in writing about this is to bring to light another important real-food topic. Is raw milk better for us? And if it is, why can't we more easily purchase it? Emily is correct -- in California, you can buy a limited supply of raw milk in stores, but the legality of that is constantly under attack by factory dairies who have to pasteurize the hell out of what they sell because it wouldn't be safe to drink otherwise.

    I would guess that the Minnesota farmers who sell raw milk in the way I've described do so with full knowledge of whatever statue prevents them from doing so legally. But sometimes, when there's a law that's without merit -- whether it applies to segregated buses, "don't ask, don't tell," or, on a smaller scale, the sale of raw milk -- it can take an act of civil disobedience to help spark needed change. The more people who get a taste for raw milk, the more legislative power they will have in getting new laws that make more sense for consumers and farmers.

    Thanks for letting me participate in a great discussion. Let's keep talking!

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: Grok in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    So sad it's illegal in many places. How many people really get sick from it? The number is probably way less than people getting sick from salad bars.

    I love raw milk!!! Maybe it's my Swiss heritage? I was going through two gallons a week by myself (1 cow/ 1 goat). I love it in every stage. I use a little bit of the plain milk in my coconut flakes sometimes, but 80% is made into kefir. The other 20% is made into cream cheese, harder cheeses and sometimes butter. Amazing stuff in every stage! Nothing like homemade raw blue crumbled on your salad.

    I've had to dial way back back lately, it was stalling my weight loss. I really miss it and am salivating just thinking about it's deliciousness!

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: bearing in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    I mean, the author of this blog post is basically accusing the farmer of knowingly and deliberately breaking the law. That doesn't strike me as an appropriate way to treat someone who voluntarily provides you with a service that you say you value.

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: bearing in reply to: Got a Craving for Raw Milk? Blame it on Nina Planck

    Thanks for the link. I guess it depends on what "secured or purchased" means. If I call the farm and order some milk, have I "secured" it? See what I mean?

    In any case, it seems pretty irresponsible for the original blogger to go on and on here, non-anonymously, on this public blog about how the milk she buys is illegal. Is she trying to get them shut down? Even if she's incorrect about the milk being illegal -- and I think this is the case -- this is kind of inflammatory, and some reader of the blog who gets off on USDA regulations may notice this, make a complaint, and cause trouble for the farmer.

  • 5 years 19 weeks ago by: Dennis Courtier in reply to: Minnesota's SweeTango Apple: Colorful, Crisp and Controversial

    Once again, just the facts please.

    The contract says "up to" $3 per tree. Anybody who has actually contacted us knows we intend to charge $2 per tree, and only after the 4th leaf when the trees are bearing fruit to offset the cost. The trees have not reached that age, so none of the Licensed Minnesota Growers have paid a penny yet for the use of the variety or the trademark.

    The $2 per tree actually is about the same amount per box, and is a lower percentage of revenue, than those of us who are members of the Co-op will be paying. We chose to share this cost on a per tree basis instead of a percentage of revenue basis to simplify the accounting. Presumably the 80+% of Minnesota's commercial apple growers who have signed the license and planted trees did the math first and decided it is a worthwhile business proposition.

    I believe there has never been a new U of M apple variety that was so quickly planted, and by so many growers. I'm not going to apologize for the fact that with this whole program we are trying to raise more money for the U of M's breeding program. That is one of the goals.

    The "sole source agreement" thing is just completely untrue. We have no such agreements and never have. The truth is we have to earn our customers' business everyday with great quality, good service, and a fair price.