Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - RawZi

Pages: [1] 2
Hot Topics / Does fruit cause cancer? Does it not? Skype debate scheduled
« on: November 20, 2011, 02:43:06 pm »
    What do you think or know?  Do you want to weigh in? The CANCER: FRUIT OR NO-FRUIT debate will be Dec. 1 at 11 am EST on Skype. Check her site if you want updates. changes etc.  See you there! Skype ID rawziraw

Hot Topics / Who had an organ transplant, and now eats a raw paleo diet?
« on: October 25, 2011, 04:57:38 pm »
    Want to know if I can help some a certain friend.  I know people with organ transplants take immunity-suppressing drugs, so doctors would say more than ever that raw meat is all bad.  What's your experience or thoughts?  Actually, not for transplant, but I was supposed to take those drugs, but I tried raw meat and it just makes me healthy.  I know transplant is something else.

General Discussion / No Indoor Climate Control
« on: October 08, 2011, 07:25:33 am »
    Somehow we neglected to pay the gas bill.  I an SO happy and feel so much better today with no heat in the house.  They're hooking us up again in another week.  I am going to enjoy this week.   

PS Another bill came today and it reads nothing about cutting us off.  I feel a lot better anyway, heating and air conditioning make me feel off.

Raw Weston Price / Bacteria - from site
« on: August 02, 2011, 06:05:34 am »
The world is filled with bacteria. They are on our skin and in our digestive system. They are everywhere. Bacteria are absolutely essential to our development, our ongoing nutrition and our health. Bacteria are not determined to make us sick, they are just looking for a place to grow and divide. Here are some key facts about bacteria:

  • Bacteria outnumber people.
  • They were here long before us.
  • They will be here long after us.
  • They dominate the diverse bio-culture of the world.
  • Our existence is integrated with that of bacteria.
  • All the bacteria in our world today have succeeded over a long period of history to find nice places to grow and divide. When we came along, a
    small number of them found that humans have some nice places wherein to grow and divide.

The bacteria that live inside and on human beings either just co-exist with us, or we have actually learned to use their presence to our advantage.

A surprisingly small number of those bacteria may cause side effects (collateral damage) when they grow and multiply.

In the whole world, there are hundreds of thousands of different kinds of bacteria, and a million trillion trillion individual bacteria. Of those bacteria that live on and inside human beings, there are hundreds of different kinds. In fact, there are more bacteria on and in our bodies than we have cells of our own.

The vast majority of these bacteria—hundreds of kinds—are beneficial. And how many kinds of bacteria might make people sick? The answer is surprising: only a couple of dozen. And only some of these actually cause illness.

The official naming system for bacteria gives the genus and species. For example with Listeria monocytogenes, Listeria is the genus and monocytogenes is the species. However there is abundant diversity within these officially named categories in the form of subtypes. There are different categories of subtypes: serotypes, genotypes, strains, forms, serovars, virotypes, varieties and isolates. For example, the highly publicized form of Escherichia coli (remember nearly all forms are benign) is Escherichia coli O157:H7. This expanded name says: the genus is Escherichia, the species is coli, and within the category of O subtypes of the species coli it is number 157, and within the category of H subtypes it is number 7.

All bacteria named with genus and species have subtypes!

The Myth of the Risk Mongers

A critical myth perpetuated by the risk mongers is that all of the subtypes in a named (genus and species) of bacteria are the same. This is how the myth works. If there is disease in some animal or man and the laboratory identifies the cause as a certain genus and species, then that makes it a "pathogen" and any and all bacteria of that genus and species cause disease. They want judges, legislators, journalists and the public to believe that the genus and species is a bad bug and must be killed. Thus, goes their logic, since one subtype of E. coli can make people very sick, then all subtypes of E. coli are pathogens and cannot be tolerated.

Yet, thousands of researchers, hundreds of books and thousands of published articles in scientific journals, all recognize the scientific fact that just because a particular subtype of a bacteria species is pathogenic does not mean that the whole species is pathogenic.

The risk mongers understand that their horror stories crumble in the face of truth, scientific facts and reality. So they keep repeating this myth to journalists, legislators and judges. Every time they say anything about possible illness, they repeat this myth. Some even imply that all bacteria are bad.

The Big Four

Let's now take a brief look at each of the four dreaded "pathogens" that cause most foodborne illness—Campylobacter jejuni, Shiga Toxin producing E. coli (E. coli O157:H7), Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella spp. (spp. Indicates that we are talking about the whole genus of Salmonella, not just one species.)

For each one, we need to know the following:

Where do they like to grow?
What is the most common source?
What is the most common reservoir?
Factors that increase potential risk to raw milk drinkers;
Factors that decrease potential risk to raw milk drinkers;
Overall human public health impact from each pathogen;
The specific public health impact from each pathogen associated with drinking milk raw.
Campylobacter Jejuni

The most common pathogen currently associated with raw milk outbreaks is Campylobacter jejuni. The virulent forms of Campylobacter jejuni can cause serious diarrhea in humans.

Campylobacter jejuni grows only inside living animal cells. The most common source is the intestinal tract of poultry. Infected chickens are not sick, but they are carriers of the organism in their feces and on meat contaminated with feces. The most common reservoir is water contaminated from poultry manure. People with diarrhea caused by Campylobacter jejuni shed extremely high concentrations of the virulent bacteria in their stools.

Ironically, the potential risk is increased with raw milk that is too fresh. Over time, the antimicrobial components of raw milk will kill Campylobacter jejuni, so—any potential risk diminishes as the milk ages under refrigeration. Longer storage time and exposure of the milk to air decrease the risk to raw milk drinkers. Likewise keeping infected poultry and people that carry campylobacter away from milk handling areas will reduce the risk.

Campylobacter is the second most common cause of all human foodborne illness. The illness usually goes away without treatment after a bout of unpleasant diarrhea, but there can be severe complications in rare cases.

As for the specific public health impact of drinking raw milk, the Centers of Disease Control (CDC) estimates an annual average of more than eight hundred thousand (845,024) people in the U.S. have domestically acquired diarrhea caused by food contaminated with Campylobacter spp.1 an annual average of 34 Campylobacter jejuni illnesses have been attributed to drinking raw milk.2

Shiga Toxin-Producing E. Coli (E. Coli O157:H7)

This pathogen grows in the intestinal tract of warm blooded animals. The most common source is fecal matter of infected humans. The most common reservoir is cows that are shedding colonized virulent subtypes.

Factors that increase the risk to raw milk drinkers include dairy animals contaminated with feces from high-shedding animals and milk handlers shedding during and after infection.

Factors that decrease the risk to humans include closed herds, managing dairy herds to minimize the spread of bacteria spread from colonized animals, and keeping people that are shedding away from milk processing and herds.

The overall human public health impact of E coli O157:H7 is small but highly publicized because of a rare side effect called hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).

As for the specific public health impact of drinking raw milk, CDC estimates an annual average of more than sixty-three thousand (63,153) people in the U.S. had domestically acquired diarrhea caused by food contaminated with E.coli O157:H7:1 an annual average of five were attributed to drinking raw milk.2

Listeria Monocytogenes

Listeria monocytogenes (often abbreviated to L. mono.) is the most serious and deadly of the contemporary foodborne pathogens. Yet it is also ubiquitous in our environment. Scientists actually know a lot about the virulence factors that are necessary before specific virulent subtypes of Listeria monocytogenes are able to cause disease.

Listeria monocytogenes can alternate between two growing modes: it grows within animal cells or it can switch to growing in decomposing plant materials. Listeriosis is a significant health problem in domestic animals. The most common sources are poorly managed silage; amniotic fluid, placenta and fetal tissues from abortions resulting from infection in cows; and meat processing plants and their equipment.

The most common reservoir is the environment, particularly if cool, wet and undisturbed. Listeria monocytogenes is present as well in our homes and on our bodies.

The public ingests listeria on a regular basis without becoming ill. You must ingest huge numbers of a virulent strain of Listeria monocytogenes to cause gastroenteritis.

Those who wish to ban all milk that is not pasteurized use the horrors (human listeriosis) of systemic disease caused by Listeria monocytogenes to support their cause. They consistently broadcast the high mortality rates from L. mono and focus on the susceptibility of pregnant women, fetuses, newborns and the elderly. However, Listeria monocytogenes has never been a significant public health risk from drinking fresh raw milk. Because of the long processing times and storage conditions, there have been rare outbreaks in which cheeses have been associated with listeriosis cases. This is a risk with cheeses prepared from both raw and pasteurized milk.

The most serious public health risk due to Listeria monocytogenes, comes from contaminated ready-to eat processed foods, particularly meats.

CDC estimates an annual average of fifteen hundred (1,591) people in the U.S. develop systemic infection caused by food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes;1 there have been no cases attributed to drinking raw milk in the last twelve years.2

Salmonella Spp

Our final pathogen is Salmonella spp. It likes to grow inside animal cells as well as in food and feed with high protein content, especially when stored warm.

The most common source is infected humans and animals, as well as contaminated animal feeds and re-warmed foods. The most common reservoir is contaminated water.

Inadequate refrigeration of raw milk increases the risk to consumers; eliminating sources of salmonella decreases the risk.

As for the overall human public health impact, salmonella is the most common foodborne illness. CDC estimates an average of more than one million (1,027,561) people in the U.S. had domestically acquired diarrhea caused by food contaminated with salmonella1—an annual average of three of these cases were attributed to drinking raw milk.2

Relative Risk of Drinking Raw Milk.

First a personal note. I have performed the calculations based on national highway safety data and the data on foodborne illness attributed to drinking raw milk. It can be shown that I have a greater risk of being injured in the car driving to the farm to obtain milk for myself and my wife than becoming ill from the fresh unprocessed whole milk. And we drink a lot of that delicious and healthy milk every day.

Now, let's look at the risk of consuming raw milk compared to other foods. I have combed all available information including scholarly articles, reviews of foodborne illnesses, media reports, public health announcements, listings of outbreaks compiled by numerous government agencies, special interest groups and litigation lawyers and found the following data on total annual illnesses attributed to raw milk from 1999 through March 2011, a period of twelve years, as shown in Figure 1.2

For the period, there were 502 cases of illness, for an average of 42 per year. It is important to note that these illnesses were attributed to raw milk in the opinion of the reporting agencies. I have not excluded any illnesses from these numbers based on my professional judgment of the strength of the linkage reported. They include totals, both "confirmed" and "presumed" cases.

For comparison for those who insist on published data in peer reviewed journals, another set of data was compiled by Stephen P. Oliver and others entitled "Food Safety Hazards Associated with Consumption of Raw milk, published in Foodborne Pathogens and Disease.3 Oliver looked at illnesses attributed to raw milk over a nine-year period, 2000 to 2008, as shown in Figure 2. The numbers listed are those attributed to drinking fluid milk, and do not include illnesses attributed to other processed dairy products.

Ironically, Oliver and his team come up with a lower total than I did—246 cases over nine years, for an average of 27 cases per year. As you can see, there is no pattern for the frequency of illness attributed to drinking raw milk in either Figure 1 or Figure 2. With the exception of the more likely occurrence of Campylobacter jejuni illness and the absence of illness from listeria, the presumed causative organism and the frequency of illness is sporadic.

Figure 3 shows the annual incidence of foodborne illness confirmed for each of the four pathogens. Figure 4 shows illnesses confirmed for each of the four pathogens attributed to foodborne illness that might be expected among raw milk drinkers.

The numbers for illness from all food sources is data from a U.S. government report called Healthy People 2020.4 The report was finalized in December 2010 out of a collaboration of all health and food agencies of the federal government, with private sector input. In the section on food safety of this report, data is given for "baseline" 2010. The baseline in the report is given as a rate per one hundred thousand people in the U.S. In the graphs, the tall bars are totals attributed to "all foods" based on these rates using 2010 census population data. Critics of all data showing low numbers of people ill from drinking raw milk comment that since there are so few people drinking raw milk, the numbers only appear small. To counter this assumption, the numbers used in Figure 4 are also calculated using the 2010 Census and the Healthy People 2020 baseline risk of illness from all foods.

To construct Figure 4, we need to know the number of raw milk drinkers in the U.S. Fortunately, this data is available to us, and the number is surprisingly large. According to a very large telephone survey by FoodNet, carried out in 2007, 3.04 percent of the population consumes raw milk or about 9.4 million people based on 2010 census.5 This number is certainly larger today as raw milk is gaining in popularity; however, we can be conservative and use the percentage in 2007 from the phone survey of 9.4 million Americans consuming unpasteurized (raw) milk for the year 2010.

While it is true that only a minority drink raw milk, Figure 4 still shows the striking comparison between illness from all foods, and the incredibly small numbers attributed to drinking raw milk. In this graph I made the assumption that the risk of illness from all food sources was the same for people drinking raw milk. I personally suspect that raw milk drinkers as a whole are healthier and more immune than the general public, but the Healthy People 2020 did not actually make a calculation for the subset of the population that drinks raw milk.

As you can see, the number of illnesses from raw milk is very low compared to illnesses from other causes, both for all consumers and for raw milk consumers.

Illnesses Per Person

Now, let's look at the illnesses per person among the whole population and the population of raw milk drinkers. That data showing illnesses come from a 2011 publication compiled by a team of researchers at the CDC FoodNet Surveillance Center. The paper, by Elaine Scallan and others, is entitled "Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major Pathogens" and was published in Emerging Infectious Diseases.6 The model does include a factor for unreported illnesses, but it revised downward the figure of 78 million foodborne illnesses per year that government agencies have been using in the past. Instead the report estimates that 48 million Americans are sickened each year from all agents, including viruses, bacteria and toxins, in all foods. That is one out of every six people. The numbers given in the report are based on their most up-to-date information which was for the year 2008. Their data:

Total diarrheal episodes annually USA


Total foodborne illnesses annually USA


Annual confirmed foodborne infections from the four "pathogens" (all foods)


Average number of illnesses attributed to consuming raw milk (Dr. Beals, 1999–2011)2


Average number of illnesses attributed to consuming raw milk (Drs. Oliver and others, 2000–2008)3


Who's Irresponsible?

From the perspective of a national public health professional looking at an estimated total of 48 million foodborne illnesses each year;6 or from the perspective of a healthcare professional looking at a total of 90,771 (data from Healthy People 20204) confirmed bacterial foodborne infections each year (about 0.2 percent), there is no rational justification to focus national attention on raw milk, which may be associated with an average of 42 illnesses maximum among the more than nine million people (about 0.0005 percent) who have chosen to drink milk in its fresh unprocessed form.

Using this average of 42 illnesses per year, we can show, using government figures, that you are about 35,000 times more likely to become ill from other foods than you are from raw milk.

Calculations on Relative Amounts of Illness from Foods for persons Drinking Raw Milk

It is irresponsible for a senior national government administrator to testify that because of those forty-two people, raw milk is inherently hazardous, parents should not be allowed to decide which foods they serve their children and milk should be banned across the nation unless it has been pasteurized.


Source Versus Reservoir

Another of the critical myths perpetuated by those who promote fear is that bacteria grow remarkably fast. The most common example used is the statement that E. coli multiplies every 20 minutes; suggesting that this is how all bacteria behave. The implication is that even if there is only a single bacterium, it will rapidly multiply producing alarmingly high numbers to spread infection. Yes, in a laboratory you can get E. coli to multiply that quickly if you put it in its most favorable environment, with abundance of all the desired nutrients, at the optimal temperature for growth (99 degrees F) and the right mixtures of gases. But just for comparison, Listeria monocytogenes divides once every fifteen to thirty-four hours at refrigerator temperatures in packaged meat slices. For the purposes of this discussion, bacteria can multiply, or if conditions are not favorable, they will diminish in numbers. So experiments either show increasing or decreasing numbers over time. In publications they may say "growing" to mean multiplying, and "surviving" to mean diminishing in numbers.

And for the purposes of this discussion, a "source" is a location that has conditions under which the specific virulent bacteria significantly increase in numbers. A "reservoir" is a location in which a specific virulent bacteria is able to survive for some time or has conditions to enable very limited multiplication.

Gastrointestinal Illness

As a physician, I am dedicated to understanding, preventing and minimizing the impact of disease. Gastroenteritis has a real personal impact. Frequent trips to the bathroom, often with terrible abdominal pain, inability to go about your daily activities, lasting for days, is serious. The fortunately rare complications that can occur periodically with the forms of gastroenteritis mentioned here can be horrific and have a devastating impact on individuals and their families. In no way do I wish to trivialize the personal impact of these illnesses. However, all activities have risk. Consumption of any food has some risk of illness or adverse reaction. And the consequence of basing public policy on horrific personal experiences is that all foods will ultimately be banned, and we will not be able to participate in any activity.


Scallan E, Hoekstra RM, Angulo FJ, Tauxe RV, Widdowson M-A, Roy SL, et al. Foodborne illness acquired in the United States—major pathogens. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011 Jan. Table 2

Average annual illnesses attributed to drinking raw milk are from a comprehensive database of outbreaks attributed to raw milk started in Jan. 1, 1999. This database includes all incidents that have been included in any publication or review concerning raw milk outbreaks, newspaper reports, press releases, attorney webpages, lists compiled by interested groups and state and federal agencies as well as presentations at conferences or on TV. The numbers listed here are obtained from this dynamic database as of March 25, 2011. Additional incidents and updated information are being added to this database on an ongoing fashion. In this discussion the annual averages for each "pathogen" include all illnesses (confirmed and presumptive) reported in summary or final reports that have been made public. The annual average numbers of illness include only cases that occurred in the USA and were attributed to drinking raw milk that was produced specifically for consumption by people in the fresh unprocessed form. The numbers do not include cases attributed to dairy products other than fluid whole milk. I did not make a personal judgment to determine if the cases were proven to be caused by virulent pathogens in the milk. Attribution used in calculating the annual averages is solely at the determination of the reporting agency that made the final report. It should be noted that since the database is ongoing; the numbers will change at future points in time because new incidents are added as they surface, and information is continuing to be added to incidents already included in the database.

Stephen P. Oliver and others entitled "Food Safety Hazards Associated with Consumption of Raw milk, published in Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. Volume 6, Number 7, 2009.

Healthy People 2020.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Foodborne Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet) Population Survey Atlas of Exposures. Atlanta, Georgia: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006-2007.

Scallan E, Hoekstra RM, Angulo FJ, Tauxe RV, Widdowson M-A, Roy SL, et al. Foodborne illness acquired in the United States—major pathogens. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011 Jan. Table 2

About the Author

Ted Beals, MS, MD, is retired from the University of Michigan Medical School and Veterans Administration Health Administration. A pathologist

Carnivorous / Zero Carb Approach / How do you eat suet?
« on: July 02, 2011, 02:33:13 am »
    I may have asked this before, but I'm really trying to eat suet again, and it's so strange to me.  How were you with suet when you first started eating it? It's so easy to eat unhealthy food, but when I try to eat suet so far, I have a pretty difficult time. How does it digest? I'm looking forward to suet stories. I figure this topic belongs in zero carb, as I think maybe more zero carbers eat suet than other raw paleo people do.

Personals / place to stay 5 boros 3 day-3wk ur choice
« on: April 07, 2011, 10:18:55 am »
  please pm me. I may need somewhere where raw food can be eaten, where I can keep cooler, charge cell phone, private secure sleeping space and decent toilet. if you have somewhere better than that, then i say "all the better!". Price trade or whatever is negotiable. U can private message me from twitter too.

General Discussion / How Do You Bear the Smell?
« on: March 12, 2011, 04:29:34 am »
    Short term strategies please?!

    I've cheated on my diet, and now smells are bothering me again.  Some places it's chemicals, others it's benzene or gasoline.  Right now it's non-organically grown all kinds of food that's slightly off. 

    I'm almost wishing these smells would bother other people, so they wouldn't act so nonchalant about it. Of course best would be 100% paleo environment, or at least a little closer than my surroundings right now. 

    Do these smells bother you? 

General Discussion / Mineral supplements
« on: February 02, 2011, 08:21:35 am »
    Do you use one of some kind? If so, which brand? How do you use it? Has it helped you or someone you know? If so, how?

Off Topic / No more farts now that we're raw paleo!
« on: February 01, 2011, 07:00:13 am »
    One thing I noticed on a diet that includes raw animal foods for me is no gas or very little.  When I was with Anne Wigmore and a few other times no gas too.  So many other food programs seems to come with gas I think, right? On some of the other forums even following strictly it seems people on different diets seem to all get gas. Do RAFs resolve gas for you?  Do plant foods give you gas?  When do you get gas?  I get gas only when I'm constipated, which doesn't happen if I eat raw animal fats and a low to no fiber diet.  
    To be fair, we do have two pages on farts:,!!/?wap2.  I do see many more though elsewhere.  Could be the case in eggs and milk it's because of the cows and chickens being grainfed, or could be frozen milk, I don't know.  It doesn't seem a raw meat diet with some fruit does it though.

    How do you know what the animal ate, if someone else raised it and slaughtered it far away?  I don't trust what I don't see.

    I got tripes to eat a few times.  The contents therein were smelly brown decayed grass.  I didn't find any grainlike substances.

    How about you?  Experience or advice for knowing grassfed?

    Wow, the government will maybe dislike this.  We're supposed to accept whatever they say is for our best, without ever thinking it out.

    Have you found grain in the tripe?

    I just came across this article:

    Do milk drinkers grow taller?  Inuit are not very tall, and they do not drink milk of other animals.  Pygmies, I've never heard of them drinking milk.  Maassai drink milk.  A number of very tall people I know drink lots of milk.  A number of people I know who were always sensitive to milk are short.  Seems like people who drank moderate amounts are average height.

    Any reason you think milk affects anyone's height?  Does it render the molybdenum null so the bones can keep growing?  Anyone know scientific or nutritional reasons either way?

    I don't know if it's good to be tall, or short or medium height, as long as you're healthy.

General Discussion / Tonsils
« on: December 14, 2010, 03:08:47 am »
    I still have full size tonsils.

    My son does not.  He wasn't operated, they just shrunk.  I was surprised to see that.    

    The rest of my family does not have tonsils.  Half of the members shrunk, half of the members had tonsilectomies.

    I'm thinking shrinking is not hereditary.

Off Topic / pet food
« on: October 15, 2010, 09:48:45 pm »
    I would like to dedicate this thread to raw pet food, and I will get back to it later, but i ask one thing for today. Please email me here at my rawpaleoforum inbox telling me of a meat grinder I can put whole chicken in for my cats to eat. I want to get a grinder for this purpose today. You are also welcome to tell me it is a bad idea if it is. I will probably get one today any way.

    Hi.  I'm asking this because of what my ailing son brought up to me.  He's on a raw diet of raw milk, raw honey and raw fruit.  He rarely eats anything else, rarely a salad.  He used to be a cooked vegan (and a raw vegan), and got extremely chronically ill (not due to diet according to modern medicine).  The doctors tested him for B12, iron, protein, calcium, thyroid, liver/kidney panels, all was fine.  They wouldn't do the tests we wanted.  Eventually he realized he needed raw animal food (had tasted cooked years before with terrible reactions), so he started with the milk and honey.  He knows now that he needs to change again, perhaps eat raw meat.  He's scared to eat raw meat and not that he thinks it will make him worse, but that he may need a hospital anyway, and if he told them he ate raw meat, they might play like before (nurse/doctors/staff have hurt him strange stories).  

    Would you go to a hospital?  Would you if you were weak and ill?  Would you eat the meat anyway in his situation?  Any recommendations for him?  All raw meat eating friends welcome.  I would welcome raw veg friends, but I'll ask you in your forum if I want to.  Thank you all.  

Primal Diet / Raw Foods Attacked By The Government. What's Next?
« on: July 04, 2010, 04:46:21 pm »
Friday, July 2, 2010 at 11:03AM

From the Aajonus Vonderplanitz raw milk web site,
The question I keep asking myself about the raid Wednesday on Rawsome Foods is this: why is the government confronting Aajonus Vonderplanitz?

Certainly officials had to know going into his private food outlet in Venice, CA, that they were taking on someone who is both extremely knowledgeable about the laws and also more than willing to challenge the authorities.

Quite simply, Vonderplanitz won't take grief from anyone, least of all public health regulators. He's already made that clear. Yesterday, his lawyer walked out of a hearing scheduled by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. "That hearing was to occur less than 24 hours after the raid; impossible, no sane court would support such brief notice," he says.
Moreover, according to Vonderplanitz, the search warrant used in the Wednesday raid claims the buying club was "used as the means of committing a felony." Serious allegation.

In an email to members explaining the events of the last couple days, Vonderplanitz says he previously confronted the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health in 2005, when it tried to shutter Rawsome, quoting from a letter he sent then:

"Without intending to be antagonistic, we must face the legal implications regarding your trespassing onto that property clearly posted as no trespassing. Seven of the members testified that you enter the posted NO-Trespassing premises without permission or warrant. Four of them testified that they told you to leave the property immediately but you refused and did not leave for about 30 minutes. That was antagonism and harassment against us. We are willing to forgive your trespass unless you and the county continue to harass us. Resultantly, the Hearing Notice is without legal merit. This letter and supportive document have explained everything that you would have learned in a hearing and we choose not to attend."

In his email, Vonderplanitz asks, "Why, five years later, is the county attempting to close Rawsome?"

He offers some possible reasons, including his backing of raw dairy farmers who have been targeted by federal and state officials in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Illinois. Government officials "are upset," he states.

But beyond those immediate issues, wonders Vonderplanitz, "What is the larger picture/story here?" 
He offers his ideas: "We must consider that the government is aligned with Big Dairy and has clandestine representatives in government. They want to continue to monopolize dairy and regulate it to the point that small dairy farmers cannot survive with or without them. The proverbial thorn in their sides is the healthy raw dairy movement. It has also been suggested and argued by many people that there exists a ruling class that wants to dumb-down everybody so that they can be easily controlled. The greater civilization grows in numbers, the more they feel the need to control people. Lowering people's health results in a weak populations that is not going to have the health, energy and time to stop politicians from stealing tax dollars for banksters,"

He also argues that local government agencies are doing the work of the federal government because they are so dependent on government funds.

His conclusion: "Obviously to me, they have come to my backyard Los Angeles to cut off the legs of Right to Consume Healthy Foods/me. (RTCHF is his nonprofit organization that sponsors other private food organizations.) They want to win this here so they can establish precedents. We cannot allow that to happen. It will affect everyone in USA and Canada."

I wonder if there's another factor here that Vonderplanitz doesn't allude to directly. If you read through his buying club membership materials, he takes what many in public health would consider to be a radical view of food rights. The application says the member wants food that is not only free of chemicals and undue heating or cooling, but also "may contain microbes, including but not limited to salmonella, E.coli, campylobacter,listeria, gangrene and parasites..." In other words, don't try to give us protection we don't want.

This promises to be a protracted battle. Vonderplanitz invites those who want to support his legal efforts to contribute through his web site.


Shari Danielson, who runs a popular food web site, a couple weeks ago came up with this idea that food poisoning lawyer Bill Marler and I should engage in a debate about raw milk. So we went back and forth via email, and she just posted the entire exchange. Interesting debate, now that I look at it again...and we kept it civil.


Update on Saturday, July 3, 2010 at 08:26PM by  The Complete Patient
Word I have from an associate of Aajonus Vonderplanitz is that the Rawsome buying club in Venice, CA, was open and busy on Saturday, when it's normally scheduled to be open.

It's still a mystery as to why FBI agents might have been present. Maybe the local police and agents from the FDA (some of whom are armed) didn't think they could handle a bunch of foodies without backup. As to why the media haven't covered, keep in mind that the Los Angeles area much larger than Minneapolis, with a lot more "noise" competing for media attention. Besides, the established media more likely to react when  government officials announce actions, like they did in Minnesota, than with the Rawsome situation, where it was just ordinary people making announcements.

 The Complete Patient |  10 Comments |  Email Article |  Share Article
Authorities, Including FBI, Raid Aajonus Vonderplanitz' CA Buying Club and Raw Dairy Herdshare in New Buying Group Assault; He Orders Staff to Stay Open, Ignore Red Tag

 Thursday, July 1, 2010 at 03:03PM

Aajonus Vonderplanitz
The food police have increased the heat on private providers of nutrient-dense foods, raiding and shutting down Rawsome Foods, a Venice, CA, buying club run by raw-food advocate Aajonus Vonderplanitz.

In addition, the authorities have gone after a nearby goat dairy Vonderplanitz has a herdshare arrangement with--one they raided a year-and-a-half ago, run by Sharon Palmer.

Vonderplanitz is a celebrity of sorts in the emerging raw-food movement, which encourages consumption of not only raw dairy, but raw meat, fish, and vegetables as a means of ensuring good health and countering disease. He travels the world running workshops on the raw food diet, and is understood to have been out of the country yesterday when the raid was conducted by a collection of agents; he reported to several associates Friday afternoon that the raiding party included agents from the Los Angeles Police, city and county health departments, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Involvement of the FBI in a food buying club assault would be a first.

The raiding party confiscated dairy products and honey. By Friday afternoon, he had ordered his staff to open the buying club, and ignore the red tag placed on the property to signify its shutdown.

Most immediately, the legal reason behind the shutdown was the absence of a permit from the Los Angeles Department of Public Health to operate the buying club, according to the text of the shutdown order reproduced on a site.

It's difficult not to think that the raid on Vonderplanitz's buying club isn't an intensification of the pressure on private food groups nationally, including the case against Max Kane in Wisconsin, the four buying clubs in Massachusetts, and more recently the shutdown of the Traditional Foods Warehouse in Minneapolis.

Vonderplanitz is one of the earliest supporters of raw milk, having fought crackdowns in California during the 1980s in Los Angeles. He was an early investor in Organic Pastures Dairy Co., and has provided legal and research documents supporting raw milk to farmers fighting regulators in various parts of the country. He says he used a raw diet to help him recover from terminal cancer when he was in his 20s. Max Kane credits the Vonderplanitz diet with helping him recover from Crohn's disease.?

Update on Thursday, July 1, 2010 at 10:42PM by  The Complete Patient
I originally posted this Friday afternoon, and updated it Friday evening based on several additional reports.

 The Complete Patient |  13 Comments

Would you suggest that everyone reduce their intake of carbohydrates and eat more raw meat and raw fat?

The human body developed over millions of years eating a hunters diet of meat and fat. Cultivation is a relatively recent event that has progressed humans toward disease. According to Dr. Stuart Struever, past Native American civilizations increased in disease proportionate to their increase in consumption of cultivated foods. The Eskimos lived disease-free on 90% animal matter, of which most was raw; until cooked and processed foods were introduced. I will venture to say that the attempt to evolve humans to live healthfully on a carbohydrate diet is not probable. If it is possible it could take hundreds of thousands of years if not millions. Yes, I would suggest that if people want to gain better health they give up carbohydrates and cooked foods, and begin eating raw meats and raw fats.

    I'm putting this in "hot topics"; because some members take antioxidants and likely will continue to.  I do not take any, I don't know if I'm right.  I have tested allergic to antioxidants, feel healthier without them (I do mean excellent quality ones), and I know other people including various types of natural health professionals who do not sell anything consumable, yet also have problems with antioxidants, even to their surprise at the discovery.  So often people tell me "you gotta take antioxidants".  Lay people and not do this.  Then I see the below:

JAMA. 2007;297:842-857.

Context  Antioxidant supplements are used for prevention of several diseases.

Objective  To assess the effect of antioxidant supplements on mortality in randomized primary and secondary prevention trials.

Data Sources and Trial Selection  We searched electronic databases and bibliographies published by October 2005. All randomized trials involving adults comparing beta carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C (ascorbic acid), vitamin E, and selenium either singly or combined vs placebo or vs no intervention were included in our analysis. Randomization, blinding, and follow-up were considered markers of bias in the included trials. The effect of antioxidant supplements on all-cause mortality was analyzed with random-effects meta-analyses and reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-regression was used to assess the effect of covariates across the trials.

Data Extraction  We included 68 randomized trials with 232 606 participants (385 publications).

Data Synthesis  When all low- and high-bias risk trials of antioxidant supplements were pooled together there was no significant effect on mortality (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.98-1.06). Multivariate meta-regression analyses showed that low-bias risk trials (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.05-1.29) and selenium (RR, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-0.9995) were significantly associated with mortality. In 47 low-bias trials with 180 938 participants, the antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08). In low-bias risk trials, after exclusion of selenium trials, beta carotene (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.11), vitamin A (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.10-1.24), and vitamin E (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07), singly or combined, significantly increased mortality.

    Personally, I do not think vitamin supplements are paleo.  I understand people taking them, when they need it for their health.  I consider myself a raw foodist (not excluding the four food groups theough (meat, milk, veg, fruit).  I haven't decided to definitely eat (raw) paleo diet.

    I know it doesn't matter.  JAMA isn't paleo either, so it doesn't need to be any kind of ideal of ours to listen to them.  How do you do with antioxidants?

Off Topic / Vincent: Byrne interview Ireland Baxter vaccines
« on: February 25, 2010, 05:05:25 am »

    Listen when you have time.

Off Topic / Who's Paying This Doctor?
« on: February 25, 2010, 03:14:13 am »

What do you think?  Kevin Trudeau?  In any case, he's extremely educated, and correct about almost everything.

Hot Topics / Pets who eat RAF
« on: February 21, 2010, 05:02:10 pm »
    Do you have pets?  What do they eat? 

    My hamsters eat unsalted raw grass grazed cheese, butter and cream, pastured egg yolks, raw 100% grassfed beef, lamb heart, lamb liver, calves liver, lamb kidney, pork, live crickets and live meal worms.  They don't like fruit, but they like a few vegetables. 

    I haven't tried nuts and grains on these yet, but I know other hamsters will eat that. 

    The foods they like seem to be good for them.  They are doing well.  I give them whatever I have around, and if it's animal origin they grab it and devour half right away.

    The crickets seem to do well with variety.

    You must all know what my cats eat, so I won't go there here.

Wai Dieters / Wai and Spirituality
« on: February 01, 2010, 07:17:22 am »
    This young man says Wai diet has helped him with his spirituality:

    In this video, he talks about the diet also.  One thing is, he tells why Wai usually recommends against land meat.  I haven't watched it all yet, but I hope you enjoy :)

Off Topic / Color and Appetite
« on: January 30, 2010, 05:55:28 pm »
    How do colors affect your appetite?

    The reason I am asking this question, is because according to ayurveda and psychology, serving your food on red plates is supposed to increase appetite.  So I've had red dishes for about ten years, and I never found them appetizing.  I was shopping recently and saw dishes in pretty shades of blue.  I saw a lot of dishes, but these blue ones made me feel good.  Are other diets good on red dishes, but for some people, whatever they eat, blue better?  I wonder if I should get the blue ones.  I think I will.

    I know color affects other things in relation to health and psychology, and didfferent people have different color needs.  The same color affects two people differently.  That is proven.

    What color dishes do you eat off of?  (if you use dishes)

    Anyone here have lots of successful color consulting experience and seen differences that relate to color and diet?

Off Topic / Length of Lifespan of Animal, Depending on Diet
« on: January 26, 2010, 12:58:49 am »
    Someone who eats raw meat told me that vultures not in captivity live five hundred years each.  I tried googling now, nut all I found was this at

Egyptian Vulture (average life-span of about 118 years)

If animals, birds and fish can outlive humans without getting sick and going to a doctor for pills, we must have our intelligence all mixed up in a conceited maze of refined intellectual thinking. Could it be we really do not need to die a premature death from disease? Do we have no option other than to declare, there is no other choice than intermittent illness throughout our lifetime, leading to an early grave?

    Do meat eating varieties of animals live longer than their vegetarian counterparts?  Do vultures live longer because they eat animals that were already dead and rotting? (high meats) 

General Discussion / Detoxing Of Cosmetics From The Body
« on: January 25, 2010, 03:57:51 pm »
    I used to use permanent wave solutions in my hair.  Could this be one reason I may have toxins in my brain lining?

    What about having used toothpaste like CrestTM as a child.  Does that soak in, and eventually detox out with raw meat diet?

    If you come up with any experiences with detoxing cosmetics from your body, please let's talk about this.

    What made me think of it, is that apparently I taste like mint or some herb like mint when I have not used any cosmetic recently nor eaten any mint recently nor do I work with mint or similar herbs or herbal solutions.  I also have not been drinking green juices these last couple weeks, not that I did mint.  In the last few weeks I've only washed anything with water and my body with egg.  There is a mint plant in my house, but I never ate any of it, nor do touch the plant.  Is my body possibly detoxing mint from years ago?  Mint used to be my favorite flavor.  I didn't eat much, but I liked Andes mints, Peppermint Patties, Thin mints and Junior mints.

Pages: [1] 2
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk