| Yesterday I posted a piece about the threat by Mark McAfee to send me a letter from his lawyer unless I retract some or all of what I said in my raw milk article on Alternet. That prompted comments by bloggers on this site, including some who assumed that McAfee was correct and that I had screwed up.
I did not screw up. I did do my homework. I did print the truth. I will not print a retraction. McAfee noted that he has never bottled the milk of another dairy. From my understanding, that is the truth. Also, it is my understanding the McAfee likes to stoke the controversy he provokes because it tends to gain him more business. I based my claim that McAfee had - at some point, if not now - outsourced some of his products on a statement made by McAfee himself on a blog. McAfee said:
We no longer outsource for cream or butter. Our HACCP policy closed our herd and now we produce all the products required. If we do not make it or we run out of it...then we will use ear plugs and let the crying begin.
In the past we have purchased raw cream from other organic creameries to make butter. We have not done this in a while and our policy prevents this going forward.
and
We have been buying colostrum and remember that colostrum is not a dairy product and is regulated differently
In other words, he outsourced his colostrum, a product that comes out of a cow's udder but is not regulated as a dairy product.
I should have posted this evidence yesterday, but I was sick yesterday and was not in my most logical state. I am a bit offended that some of the people on this site assumed I was in the wrong as I think it is fairly clear that I always do my homework and when I am wrong, I say so and apologize as soon as I find out I've made a mistake. I speak my mind and I don't hold back to be politically correct, but I am not hotheaded and impetuous as commenters accused me of being yesterday.
The raw milk piece I wrote took weeks to research. I read the book The Raw Milk Revolution in its entirety and spoke to people on both sides of the debate. Prior to printing the article, I let a person on either side of the debate read what I wrote to check it for accuracy. The regulator found it to be balanced. The pro-raw milk person was less pleased with it but I made a number of changes to make it more balanced in her opinion. The one thing that would have made the piece better in the pro-raw-milk person's position would be if I had quoted or mentioned some of the more hardline regulators. There are regulators out there (many of them) who would much prefer to shut down all raw milk instead of just regulating it to make it as safe as possible while still allowing people freedom to eat or drink what they wish to eat or drink. I don't appreciate those regulators any more than I appreciate raw milk advocates who refuse to accept any regulation or admit that raw milk may carry any risk whatsoever. Both sides will need to compromise if this debate is going to come to a good conclusion. And unfortunately, it seems like - at least in some cases - the fringier elements on either side of the debate are driving their opponents toward extremes instead of towards compromise. And the regulators, unfortunately, hold all the cards. That's a situation in which everyone loses. |
