Emotional benefits from the raw food diet

I always looked at the psychological benefits people [on the Primal Diet] would report, sound mind and emotions and all of that and didn't really believe it was all that much more than placebo, which is positive enough even so. Well, recently I've had higher charisma like making easier conversation even though I haven't had much life change and actually I've had some bad things happen as far as negative confrontation and still keep a level head more easily than usual. So, thats been pretty amazing that I experience that without believing it. Just noticing those emotional benefits from the raw food diet. I think it's the raw fish on my brain and [raw]beef on the glands and [raw] milk just relaxing and being my favorite comfort food.
Also, I actually started the diet to reverse my ACL*, four months later, I feel great and do climbing in a rock wall on campus but for technicality's sake I haven't gotten an MRI** yet to prove that the impossible (ACL's don't heal [according to doctors]) has yet occurred.

~Michael D
Chapel Hill, NC
*Anterior Cruciate Ligament, one of the four major ligaments of the knee and one of the most reported locations for serious athletic injuries
**Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) a test primarily used in hospitals to visualize the structure and function of the body.

Aajonus explains what has been going on in Sacramento regarding our right to drink raw milk...

"Hi, raw-milk lovers,
Many of you have been waiting for the results of our January 16th demonstration at Sacramento's State Assembly regarding AB1735 that implemented unconstitutional and unscientific regulations on raw milk that would force our two main raw dairy producers out of business. It is a complicated matter. It depends on timing, action and many people. I waited for something in writing from the Assembly prior to updating you.

Although no one counted, people approximated that 600-700 raw-milk lovers attending the Assembly demonstration. About 400 people were able to attend the meeting (because of capacity limits) while others demonstrated outside. That was extraordinary and you are commended for taking your precious time and expense to make our statement heard loudly and clearly to governments everywhere.

The Assembly, headed by Rep. Nicole Parra, offered a bill submitted March 2007 to reverse the new milk regulations, AB1604. AB1604 had nothing to do with raw milk and was meant to regulate pesticides use. Why Assembly chose to use AB1604 as their device to placate us, is to me very obvious. Since the bill was introduced last year, the bill would have to pass Assembly by January 31st. However, because of tremendous pressure from CDFA, the bill has been stalled and is now null and void. It seems as though it was all a big dance to placate us. Another bill will have to be introduced to reverse AB1735 regulations.

Many people saw all of this as a big victory, but as you know how skeptical I am from experience with CDHS and CDFA, I saw it all as a facade. Regardless, any coliform limit at 50 instead of 10 is not a win for us because, basically, the CDHS and CDFA will have made raw milk more regulated under false pretense and nonscience. Therefore, ultimately, if any bill with coliform regulations passes, raw milk will be advanced as a dangerous food. That is exactly what I an trying to prevent. Some people see the change from 10 to 50 coliform as a win. Any greater regulation of raw milk is a disaster for all of us longterm; it says that raw milk is dangerous and needs more regulation. If such regulation passes, it saves raw-milk producers' businesses but is damaging to our health longterm because health departments got away with whittling our rights to raw milk. However, 1604 will never pass. There is good cop bad cop scenario going on in the Assembly. AB1604 has been pulled for research and cannot be passed before January 31st.

Although many assume our raw milk is safe, we cannot sit back and think the battle is over when it just began. Nothing is law except for AB1735 and when enforced will virtually put commercial dairy out of business sooner rather than later. If any coliform regulation passes, we will lose our milk later rather than sooner. Thank you for continuing the battle, and continuing to visit and donate at www.SaveRawMilk.org.
healthfully,
aajonus "

Raw milk consumers, please take action

"No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session."
-- Judge Gideon J. Tucker (1826-1899)

Emergency Action Needed Immediately

to Save AB 1604 it is under attack!!!

Raw milk consumers please call all of the appropriations committee members and demand passage of AB 1604.

Our raw milk protecting AB 1604 bill has been sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. We believe this to be an action to kill AB 1604. AB 1604 was to be a non appropriations committee bill and was supposed to go directly to the floor of the assembly for a vote. This did not happen and we believe that CDFA and Big Dairy interests have become involved in a very dirty back room political game to kill AB 1604 in a friendly committee.

The appropriations committee is very friendly to Big Dairy and CDFA. This is their way of stopping AB 1604. It is another zero notice sneak attack on our raw milk availability. We did know of this committee vote until today [Jan. 23rd].

More importantly, it is critical that you call all of the assembly members (click on the link and scroll to the bottom for names, phone numbers and email addresses) that sit on the appropriations committee; demand that AB 1604 pass the committee.

Here is the message;

1. AB 1604 is not supposed to be an appropriations bill!!

2. AB 1604 secures raw milk for Californians. We demand it!!

3. AB 1604 passed the Assembly Ag Committee with a unanimous vote

4. AB1604 Ag committee hearings were attended by 700 people all demanding raw milk be protected as a matter of personal choice and medical necessity.

5. Asthma and allergies are healed by raw milk and many of the raw milk drinkers asthma will return if raw milk is not protected.

6. Other medical diseases will also return to raw milk consumers including Crohns, IBS, osteoporosis and celiac disease. Testimony was heard from doctors and scientists during the AB 1604 Assembly Ag Committee hearings about the strength of raw milk as a natural pro-biotic food.

7. AB 1604 must pass: it is a citizen's right to choose foods that are not processed.

This link is updated daily; click on CURRENT BILL STATUS to check the status of AB 1604 daily.

CURRENT BILL STATUS


MEASURE :  A.B. No. 1604
AUTHOR(S) :  Parra (Principal coauthors: Nunez and Villines).
TOPIC :  Market milk: raw milk: standards.
HOUSE LOCATION :  ASM
+LAST AMENDED DATE  :  01/22/2008


TYPE OF BILL : 
               Active
               Urgency
               Non-Appropriations
               2/3 Vote Required
               Non-State-Mandated Local Program
               Fiscal
               Non-Tax Levy

LAST HIST. ACT. DATE:  01/23/2008
LAST HIST. ACTION   :  Read second time.  To third reading.  Re-referred to
 Com. on  APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.
COMM. LOCATION :  ASM APPROPRIATIONS

TITLE :  An act to amend Sections 35781, 35861, and 35891 of the
 Food and Agricultural Code, relating to milk, and
 declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect
 immediately.

The details regarding raw milk in California, from a main news article...

See the Sacramento Bee for the article giving the details of the Assembly Agriculture Committee meeting and vote. This raw milk article appeared in the main news section last Saturday.

Upholding raw milk in California as seen by a Canadian

Jim

One of the reasons I was grateful to Jeff Everson of Planet muscle
magazine for publishing my address to Governor Schwarzenegger was my
stern belief that what happens in California ultimately will have
repercussions worldwide.  I am Canadian and watching very closely the
California raw milk battle because I am concerned that a loss out there
will negatively affect our trial in May of this year in Ontario, Canada.


In November of 2006, our biodynamic farmer, Michael Schmidt's farm was
raided by the Ontario Ministry of natural Resources.  He was also raided
in a military fashion back in 1994 where they ransacked his farm causing
Michael enormous financial and emotional grief.  However, the raid this
time was a little more subdued due to the fact that Michael and family
immediately began filming the event and had the media there within
hours.  In fact, we had the news out worldwide within hours this time.

Unfortunately for Canadians, our government has clamped down on raw milk
treating it as if it were a toxic substance.  They really have infringed
on our constitutional rights and more and more people are getting fed up
with the loss of our freedoms to choose anything.   Regardless of the
raid and the coming trial where Michael is up on several charges, more
and more farmers are beginning to offer cow shares.

This will definitely be an interesting year on both sides of the border.


Randy Roach .

To make raw milk available, know the science and facts...

We recently made steps ahead in making raw milk legal in California. There is more to be done on that, based on the wording of the resolutions and 6 month moratorium and so on. We will get details for you. Ponder this: what if none of us health seekers had found out about the few words being added into AB1735? Because we were alerted somehow, we managed to show ourselves in force, with our research and testimony and at least not get trampled. There is some really bitter and completely false "information" circulating, paid for by some vested interests with deep pockets, and symbolized as public interest. (I can provide examples if you wish).
Thomas Jefferson said this better than I can: "I know of no safe depository of the ultimate power of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion." It is toward this aim that the Primal Diet newsletter is written. Armed with the science (for instance the PETITION and REPORT IN FAVOR OF NATURAL MILK that was handed to each Senator and Representative of the United States of America in the summer of 2007 and is available to subscribers at www.wewant2live.com) each of us may represent our cause with facts. Please send me any comments and links apropos to the above.

Raw Milk in California - a victory in the making

Those of us who appeared in Sacramento today to support the cause of raw milk supply in California made a definite step ahead! We packed the courthouse and slipped in our testimony here and there. In the words of one demonstrator, "it was a healthy crowd that is not going to give up!" The details will follow on this blog, but the vote was YES 8-0. Video footage may be available; check this blog regularly.

Your reason for drinking raw milk is valid...

As of January 7, 2008 our access to raw milk is still not protected and the law has not yet been repealed or overturned. CA still plans to enforce AB 1735 an the new testing is beginning.

Thank you for signing the online petition on our website. I am writing to update you. The firm of Gross Belsky in San Francisco is filing a lawsuit in the next few days.

Our consumers' suit is different than the one being filed through the WAP associated Farm to Consumer Legal Defense. That suit is on behalf of the producers. Both producers are in communication with us about our suit and the legal teams are also in communication. We all agree that having several suits filed only strengthens our chances of protecting our right to food choice in California. We would like the following specific types of plaintiffs:

1. a person who wants to drink raw milk for personal reasons (such as bodily integrity, believing foods should be in their natural state, etc.)

2. a person whose doctor has told him or her not to drink pasteurized milk, but only raw milk.

3. a person who drinks raw milk for medical reasons, but has not been directed by a doctor to drink raw milk.

4. a person whose religion has dietary principles, and one of those principles is to drink raw milk.

We would like at least one of these plaintiffs to be a San Francisco resident and all should be California residents.

Please help us find plaintiffs of the above description for the suit. We are almost ready to file. If you would like to be a plaintiff, please email terry@grossbelsky.com or write to us on the "contact us" page.

Please continue to donate to fund the lawsuit. Most importantly, please pass on our website www.saverawmilk.org to your friends and contacts to help spread the word. We feel sure that what happens to raw milk in California will impact the rest of the country and perhaps the world. So even if you don't live in California, please inform yourself, spread the word and support us as best you can.

Thank you, Theo and the SaveRawMilk.org team

Hi, raw-milk lovers, from Aajonus:

Your diligence is working, faxing and mailing letters to State officials. Again, when the CA State health department is involved in anything, I am not optimistic until it is over. Raw milk is still very threatened. The head of agriculture refused to put it in writing that our raw milk supply would not be impaired by AB1735. They have not withdrawn their statement to the press that they are going to enforce Ab1735. Everyone has refused to put anything in writing except law AB1735 will be enforced sooner or later. As far as I can tell, they are measuring our resolve on this issue. That means that we have, in down-home vernacular, to stay on their butts like hip pockets.

This is not a time to rejoice and congratulate ourselves on pushing them to the point that they are going public with something. We do not know what they are going to do or announce. Several of the producers group think that this is all in our favor. I guarantee that there is nothing to celebrate because the only thing they have put in writing and publicly supported is AB1735. Besides the present ministration, they are the most ruthless bunch of thugs that I have ever encountered and I have dealt with them too many times on this issue since 1970. They have never willingly given up anything. Only by force of numbers and action by lawsuit and/or letters/faxes/calls.

We have the opportunity to be heard on this issue before the Assembly Agriculture Committee on WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 16TH, specifically addressing a proposed bill that will be written and altered on Monday, January 14th. We do not have any idea what that bill is going to say. Some people are very optimistic but as I stated, they have given nothing but shallow promises. Whatever the bill states by Monday evening, we must be prepared to support it or condemn it beginning now. I give a proposed letter to fax below to each Assembly Agriculture Committee member.

Those who are willing to travel to Sacramento to demonstrate for the safety of raw milk, should make arrangements immediately. In Los Angeles the day of the vote, we had a record demonstration at a County Board meeting. We had so many people that wanted to be heard on the raw milk issue, they agreed to vote yes if everyone that was pro-raw milk declined to be speak. I agreed if they would put it in writing. They did and I agreed. That bill dissolved the 38-years-old County Medical Milk Commission, putting 6 doctors out of a government job.

Usually committees begin about 9:20 am and hear debates all day on proposed bills. You never know which one they will address at any particular time even though there is a schedule; so be there early. Have someone posted in the Agriculture hearing room because they could call on the bill when no one expects it. If the subject were scheduled for 1:30 pm and they call it at 10 am, you lose your chance to speak on the issue. Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors tried that one twice in 4 meetings. Because I had someone posted in the meeting, she was able to alert us to the sneaky tactic. If no one is there when the issue reaches the floor, they simple state it is a no-show contest and we lose everything we had work for to that point. It is an ugly game that they know how to play very well. Do not underestimate them. Do not trust them. I will not be there because I am in a remote area of Thailand where I cannot get a phone connection in many places.

Have demonstration signs stating "RAW MILK PROVEN SAFE; LESS REGULATIONS NOT MORE!" Any other declaration will be moot. We must stress the safety issue because that is where they attack raw milk. Yes, freedom of choice is very important but as you know from this administration, freedom of choice is a matter of what they think safety is.

WHERE: California State Capital, at 10th and L Streets, Sacramento, CA, Room 4202

WHEN: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 9 am. Begin demonstration immediately. You may occupy the side walk but you must leave room for people to freely pass. Do not block the sidewalks, steps or doors. They will declare you are unsafely demonstrating and order you to stop. If you see anyone jeopardizing your demonstration and refuses to stop, call on a police officer to handle the situation. Have video cameras rolling to be certain that everything is documented if the government tries to refuse your demonstration. Constitutionally, you do not need a permit unless you disrupt sidewalks and street traffic.

WHAT TO BRING:

• Children speak volumes for support of raw milk*.
• Banners and signs that do not obstruct traffic, stating: RAW MILK PROVEN SAFE; LESS REGULATIONS NOT MORE.
• Food, especially raw milk!
• Your written prepared statement of why you want raw milk or testimonial - must be 2 minutes or less.

*A 10-years-old boys testimonial at a Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors meeting: "My name is ______, I have asthma. I cannot drink pasteurized milk. It makes me sick. I can drink raw milk and I feel good when I drink it. Don't take my raw milk away from me."
That testimony was the most moving to everyone in the room and it was given in about 1 minute.

Thank you all! We are going to win this issue. Also, the lawsuit is almost ready to file. Please continue to visit www.SaveRawMilk.org and donate.

healthfully,
aajonus

------------------------------

Suggested letter for faxing (faxes are always best) and mailing (for those of you who do not live in CA, you may or may not delete the first sentence):

January 13, 2008
Re: Raw-milk proven safe; less regulations not more!

Dear Agriculture Committee Member,

Since you have governance over all of California Agricultural law, and I live in California, I am your constituent.

There has not been one scientifically proved link between raw milk and any type of illness. All of the reports that linked raw milk to diarrhea and/or vomit were associated by survey and hearsay not science. When a hospital or doctor reported a case of diarrhea or vomit, a health department employee called the sufferer and asked what s/he ate. Each time that it was discovered that raw milk was consumed, investigations and inquiry stopped and raw milk was blamed. That is not science. That is prejudice based on rhetorical nonsense that raw milk carries, spreads and causes disease. There is absolutely no sound science to prove those assertions. Those erroneous claims rooted in the 1930's when Knudsen Dairy began pasteurization and wanted to eliminate the raw-milk competition. They hired writers and doctors to create and generate myth that raw milk was dangerous. The myth still exists and your health department continues to believe and act on myth.

True science has been done and reported that raw milk benefits health. The research and observation were by Harvard, Princeton, Cambridge, University of Georgia Dairy Science Department, Dartmouth College, Ohio State University School of Agricultural Chemistry, Washington University School of Medicine, Tufts University, Mayo Clinic of Minnesota, Price-Pottenger Nutrition Foundation, Weston A. Price Foundation as swell as medical journals and publications such as Certified Milk Magazine, American Association of Medical Milk Commission, Milk Industry Foundation, The Lancet, JAMA, World Cancer Research Fund, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, Consumer Reports, Consumer's Union, St. Vincent's Hospital, and the prestigious Hartford Hospital. I understand that Dr. Vonderplanitz sent you his and Dr. Douglass' report covering raw-milk fact, not fiction. If you have misplaced it or need another copy, contact Dr. Vonderplanitz at optimal@earthlink.net.

Also, Fact:
coliform (col·i·form) (ko´lĭ-form) [L. colum a sieve] Lactose-fermenting, gram-negative bacilli.
Lactobacillus acidofilus, bulgaris and causicus - beneficial coliform bacteria found in the intestinal tract of healthy mammals

genus Lactobacillus - type genus of the family Lactobacillaceae

lactobacillus - a Gram-positive rod-shaped bacterium that produces lactic acid (especially in milk)

Acidofilus is sold to aid digestion. Yogurts full of coliform are sold to better digestion and health.

The State's coliform regulation does not address any bacteria that is isolated and reported to cause disease, such as E.coli 0157:H7. In fact, the new coliform regulations are superfluous to the claim that they protect the health of the people. Getting rid of healthful coliform does exactly the opposite.

Comparing regulations of pasteurized and raw milk is like comparing apples to oranges. I choose to drink raw milk because of the live coliform that helps digestion, the intact vitamins and enzymes, and stable proteins, fats and milk-sugars. Virtually ridding the milk of healthful coliform by pasteurization or any other method does not make milk more sanitary or safe. It makes it less digestible and nutritious. My family and I want beneficial coliform in our milk. Forcing raw dairy producers to eliminate coliform by poisoning the raw milk with iodine or any other substance does not add nutrient value to raw milk. In fact, it does the opposite, poisons it and makes it unsafe. Statements that raw milk are unsafe are scientific nonsense fed to you by the FDA and CDC. Please, NOT ONLY REVERSE ALL REFERENCES TO COLIFORM COUNTS IN RAW MILK BUT ELIMINATE SUPERFLUOUS REGULATIONS OF RAW MILK.

Thank you. I look forward to your written response.


CA Ag members::

Nicole Parra, State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0030, (916) 319 - 2030
(916) 319 - 2130 Fax

Doug LaMalfa, State Capitol, Room 4164 P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0002, Ph: (916) 319-2002
Fax: (916) 319-2102

Tom Berryhill, State Capitol Room 4116, Sacramento, CA 95814, Ph: (916) 319-2025
Fax: (916) 319-2125

Mervyn M Dymally, State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0052, (916) 319-2052
No fax number listed; you will have to call the office on Monday to discover fax number.

Jean Fuller, State Capitol Room 3098, Sacramento, CA 95814, Ph: (916) 319-2032
Fax: (916) 319-2132

Cathleen Galgiani, State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0017, Tel: (916) 319-2017
Fax: (916) 319-2117

Dave Jones, State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0009, (916) 319 - 2009
(916) 319 - 2109 Fax

Tony Mendoza, State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0056, Tel: (916) 319-2056
Fax: (916) 319-2156

Raw milk testimony scheduled to be heard...

California residents: Play your part in ensuring raw milk is available to us from here on out, with no curve balls or surprises. As you write or video your 30 second testimonial How Raw Milk Has Changed My Life please send me a copy at facilitator@wewant2live.com or place it right on this blog as a comment.

...our access to raw milk is still unprotected...

Message from Aajonus:
As of January 10, 2008, our access to raw milk is still unprotected.
AB1735 has not yet been repealed or overturned and no State authority
has agreed to put in writing that they will not take raw milk off CA
shelves. In fact, the State is now testing with the new standards set
by AB1735 and plans to enforce them beginning immediately. So, even
though State officials promised raw-milk producers that raw milk will
not be banned as a result of the new standards, officials refuse to
put it in writing.

The law firm of Gross Belsky in San Francisco will be filing our
consumer's lawsuit in the next few day but we need to select
several key plaintiffs as examples for all 900 plaintiffs who have joined.

Our consumer's suit is different than the one being filed through the
WAP associated Farm to Consumer Legal Defense on behalf of
California raw dairy producers. Both producers are in communication
with us about our suit and the legal teams are also in communication.
We all agree that having several suits filed strengthens our chances
of protecting our right to food choices in California and elsewhere.

We would like the following specific types of California-resident
plaintiffs:
1. a person who wants to drink raw milk for personal reasons (such
as bodily integrity, believing foods should be in their natural state, etc.)
2. a person whose doctor has told him or her not to drink
pasteurized milk, but only raw milk.
3. a person who drinks raw milk for medical reasons, but has not
been directed by a doctor to drink raw milk.
4. a person whose religion has dietary principles, and one of those
principles is to drink raw milk such as those outlined in the Essene
Gospel of Peace.

We are ready to file but need those specific plaintiffs to represent
all other plaintiffs who have joined the lawsuit. If you would like to
be one of those specific plaintiffs, please contact me immediately so
that we can file our lawsuit immediately.

Please continue to fund our lawsuit with donations. Please tell your
friends and email lists about our plight to choose our food at
www.saverawmilk.org.

We are certain that what happens to raw milk in California will impact
the rest of the country and perhaps the world. So, even if you don't
live in California, please keep informed, spread the word and support
us in any way that you can.

RAW MILK - IT DOES A BODY GOOD

The following is reprinted with the permission of Jeff Everson's Planet Muscle magazine, by

Randy Roach, historian and author: “Muscle, Smoke and Mirrors."
Believe it or not, once upon a time, back about 1950, when guys like Gironda, Reeves, Grimek, Ross and Tanny, promenaded and exercised at Muscle Beach, there were no anabolic steroids. Bodybuilding did not mean the greatest massive size, with the least body fat. Instead, it stood for a 100% healthy lifestyle, clean and fresh, and sometimes raw foods, clean fresh air, no drugs, booze or smokes, and plenty of exercise in the open and clean air and sunshine.In fact, starting well back over 100 years ago, both lifestyle and bodybuilding were actually unified under one umbrella term known as “Physical Culture”.

Now my point, over all those years, many of the physical culturists promoted the muscle and health effects of raw milk, including Joe Weider, in his 1981 book, “The Weider Approach to Bodybuilding”. So, it is with great irony (and sadness) that this decade’s-long right for California health advocates to choose farm fresh milk, is being terminated by CA. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who, somewhat uncharacteristically this time, seems badly misinformed on the subject matter.

On October 8th of this year, Schwarzenegger signed anti-milk legislation, AB1735. This changes bacteria standards to include less than 10 coli forms per ml. of raw milk. When this law is activated early in 2008, it will basically clear the shelves of some 300 California stores, depriving thousands of customers of the milk of their choice!

The claims of raw milk as being dangerously unhealthy, borders on sheer fraud, as varying medical politicians, operating through both state and federal agencies, have been very successful in manifesting a germ phobic society, (Seinfeld Germaphobes), such that we have become a culture that literally fears its food. However, it was actually one of the medical orthodoxy’s own, Dr. Henry Coit, who forged the certified raw milk movement back in the 1890s because he understood the medicinal value of properly-raised cows, yielding pure, raw milk.

Technology has moved tremendously since the atrocities of the dirty distillery dairies that helped make the case for pasteurization, many years ago. The safety standards now where raw milk is processed are enormously high. Yet today, other industry doesn’t seem to care at all what they feed livestock or how it is raised; hell, destroy and over-farm the soil, fill it full of chemicals, stuff the cattle and hogs full of growth hormone and steroids, the cows will still produce milk. Why worry? Scientists can just genetically modify, irradiate (cold pasteurization), or chemically spray or boil, all milk!

Consumers of farm fresh milk are not stupid people. People who drink certified raw milk are not aimlessly lining up at dairy farms simply to acquire diarrhea. They represent hundreds of thousands of people across the United States and Canada who have researched this issue and find it more than worth the effort to seek the benefits of raw milk. Dr. Scott Connelly, the inventor of MET-Rx and Progenex, notes, “Raw milk contains higher undisturbed levels of many critical nutrients.”

It’s all another erosion of your free right to choose. Bodybuilders have always been nutrition-ally innovative, and we must protect that right. This is not just a stance to consume raw milk, but also to maintain a standard of clean, organic and biodynamic farming by knowledgeable farmers who know that healthy life begins in a healthy soil. These tillers of the land not only produce quality food for those who desire it, but also high quality source products that constitute a number of the supplements you utilize in your own protocols.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, 7 times Mr. Olympia, 5 times Mr. Universe, author of “The Education of a Bodybuilder” and “The Encyclopedia of Bodybuilding”, this is your golden opportunity to stand up and show the people of the Golden State and those who primarily built your status over the years, (bodybuilders who read M&F, went to the movies and Arnold Classic), just exactly who and what you truly stand for. Randy Roach, historian and author: “Muscle, Smoke and Mirrors."

Preface for members of the Fitness Community:

It is important for all factions of the fitness industry to be aware of what is happening in California presently regarding the right for citizens to acquire farm fresh milk due to legislation AB1735 signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

This issue extends much further than the forced pasteurization of all milk. Federal agencies are also entertaining thoughts of cold pasteurizing leafy, green vegetables. How do you cold pasteurize? Look it up! This influence also continues in the form of a constant push to ban many supplements which is happening world wide.

The fitness community is large and powerful and has successfully turned back such threats on previous occasions. This is about uniting and retaining our rights to choose the foods we consume for our health. A loss in California will have serious repercussions right across North America in terms of the quality of our food production.

Hi, raw-milk lovers, from Aajonus:

Emails were exchanged between Mark McAfee [CEO of Organic Pastures Dairy - a raw milk dairy in California] and me [three time heavy-weight defender of raw milk in California]*. In them, I explain my position on the raw-milk issue in California that differs from Mark and Sally's. For those of you who think that I am too critical and should be more supportive of Mark and Sally efforts, you will probably better understand my position once you have read the exchanges. I think that is was very sad that Sally made the statement that my last email was unfortunate. She and her law firm have no experience in California raw milk battles or law. I have been battling in California since 1970 and continue to win even though we have been without raw milk for long periods.

Thank you for all of your work. PLEASE continue to fax and call the governor, head of CA Agriculture and CA legislators, and donate for consumer legal action to save raw milk at www.SaveRawMilk.org. I will send a suggested reply to Gov. Schwarzenegger's ridiculous response to your letters within 24 hours. So far, you have donated $5,000 in the last few weeks. We are $10,000 short of the $40,000 needed to conclude injunctive process and begin complaint processes. Let's do it.

Also, whether you have joined the lawsuit online or faxed it to me, please email me if you have any medical support for drinking raw milk. That is, if you have the records of having been tested positive for milk allergies yet can drink raw milk without allergies, I want to hear from you. Also, let me know if you are in a minority group that has a high ratio of pasteurized milk allergies, such as 95% of Asian Americans, 74% of Native Americans, 70% of African Americans, and 53% of Mexican Americans. Of course, if you are one of the 15% of Caucasians who have been diagnosed as lactose intolerant but thrive on raw milk, let me know. Thank you.
healthfully,
aajonus
*bracketed comments [ ] are from the person running the blog


Hi, Mark,
I wish that I could share your optimism but experience tells me that I would not only be naive, I would put my raw-milk supply at risk, and resultantly my health. I am not going to be gentle anymore about this issue. It is too arduous in the midst of people who make it a huge challenge and time-consuming including those of us trying to protect raw milk.

I am alarmed because I have been through this very same situation previously, 3 times in 1990's. California health departments gave Stueve's Natural the same assurances that the State gave you. The people of California were without raw milk for almost 3 years until I got the law changed, you began producing and James Stewart distributed raw milk. I am alarmed because the state declared to the San Francisco Chronicle that the State intended to enforce the law in response to your lawsuit. I do not intend to change one word of what I stated until your dairy has been unaffected for months and the law has been changed, or you receive something in writing from the state declaring they will not enforce AB1735; I will believe something that makes them legally liable and at risk. I hope I am WRONG but from history, I do not believe that I am.

In your lawsuit, your attorney's use of other foods not having the same standards was considered moot in past legislative and legal pleadings. I am concerned that your attorney did not do proper, thorough and adequate research to discover that that argument, presented excellently by biological attorney Raymond Novell in 1998-2000, was and is considered comparing apples and oranges. Novell won every court case against Alta Dena/Stueve's Natural for decades with juries. However, the argument worked against changing the law when judges and legislators were concerned. The argument, under the present bacterial phobic-mania, put raw milk in the minds of lawmakers and enforcers as more of a bacterial threat than before. You, Sally and attorney just do not get it. The thing that strikes me as alarming is that you, Ron and Sally take your attorney's' qualifications as good and sound for raw milk and he has had absolutely no experience more that the last year and does not know the legal history of raw-milk battles in California. Probably, Attorney Novell and I are the only one's qualified to be advisors on the issue but you have chosen to follow your attorney's naive advice on the issue. I am angry, appalled and concerned that all of you have placed our raw-milk supply at risk. Stueve's Natural's president thought that I was not loyal to the cause when I thought he was being too trusting of health-officials assurances that every thing would be resolved and raw milk would be on the shelves. Every month for 2 years, he said that his raw milk would be on the shelves within the next 30 days. It never happened and I did nothing but hound the health department and legislators with complaints. We lost Stueve's raw milk on commercial shelves forever.

Also, I was concerned that Sally's email stated that I had already declared that raw milk was unavailable in California. No where in my email did I state that. My subject heading stated, "Losing" not "Lost". I stated that we failed to stop enforcement of AB1735. I specifically stated. "Please act now because raw milk will not be on your shelves in California very much after January 1, 2008" in context that the state said that they were going to enforce the law after they assured you that they were not. I wish that we were all together on this but your faction of the same plight seems to be naively shooting with closed eyes and wishful thinking. Again, I hope that I am wrong. The next few months will tell unless another lawsuit can be initiated that is more threatening to the state. Our actions will move things one way or another, and time will tell.
healthfully,
aajonus