RE: Food safety ?

RE: Food safety ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: Food safety ? (11/24/2011 8:13:44 PM)
Actually the point of this decision is made clear in the last page of the decision. Try reading it.

Termyn8or -> RE: Food safety ? (11/24/2011 10:28:38 PM)
I read it thank you. The whole thing alludes to a need for more arguments. If you don't see that don't ever be a lawyer. The specific reasons, in the picture part of my post. In other parts it says while plaintiff made good arguments they did not make the connection to this particular argument. Do I need some screenshots or what ? In fact that part is right after the screenshot in the other post. Did YOU read it ? T^T

BanthaSamantha -> RE: Food safety ? (11/24/2011 11:08:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr They can't. It's been ruled not to long ago that Americans aren't even legally entitled to grow food for their own consumption if it doesn't follow the standards the government has set. If by "not too long ago" you mean 1942, then sure. Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) The case you cite isn't some newfangled powergrab by the government, it is just an example of regulation that's been held constitutional over 60 years ago.

Termyn8or -> RE: Food safety ? (11/24/2011 11:43:40 PM)
Then it goes one of two ways. Either we are fucked or it gets proven that something has been wrong for sixty nine years. Something has been wrong for alot longer than sixty nine years but it remains to be really proven. One thing is for sure, this illusion has existed for alot longer than that. It's all a matter of perspective. T^T

BanthaSamantha -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 12:06:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr (5) no, plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice If that's the case, then why was it explicitly ruled that the plaintiffs -the FARMERS- weren't allowed to use the milk for their OWN consumption. The judge literally told them that they -or anybody else- where not allowed to grow and raise food for they OWN consumption if it didn't comply with the laws for food meant for consumers. *** However, it does not explain why they where told that they do not have the right to CONSUME the foods of their own choice, or produce those foods for their OWN consumption. I think you are misconstruing the case, as nowhere in it did the judge holde that farmers were not allowed to use the milk for their own consumption. In fact, this very prospect is contradicted in several places. In some places, the judge quoted the WI statutes allowing for this practice; he states that the law "clearly allows owners...to obtain ungraded raw milk for their personal use." The line you quote above (which is not actually in the case; it is from a clarification document) is not some sort of blanket ban on the activity. It is using legal language, and it is language specific to this situation. It is simply pointing out that, while the Constitution protects certain activities, it does not protect other activities. It is saying that the government must have a rational basis to regulate these areas, and it doesn't have to meet strict scrutiny. In addition, he isn't even holding these as conclusions at law; it is simply dicta, pointing out that the Plaintiffs have failed to adequately explain that they even have that fundamental right to begin with. You're acting like it is some misscarriage of justice, but this is the way America has been for over 200 years. quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Then it goes one of two ways. Either we are fucked or it gets proven that something has been wrong for sixty nine years. In what way does this ruling bode poorly for us? The judge is only saying that the plaintiffs have to follow WI law.

kalikshama -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 7:47:24 AM)
quote: This is part and parcel of the incredibly ignorant raw milk movement that won't go away until the next time some kids die from drinking raw milk. I would prefer to make my argument using the percentage of Medicare patients who die in hospital-caused deaths vs the percentage of raw milk drinkers who died but will have to be satisfied with 180,000 per year for the one and two in 10 years for the other to conclude that going into a hospital carries more risks than drinking raw milk. a new federal study of Medicare patients ups the estimate of annual hospital-related deaths to 180,000. vs Two times in 10 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteurization Non pasteurized, raw, milk, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), was responsible for 86 reported food poisoning outbreaks between 1998 and 2008, resulting in 1,676 illnesses, 191 hospitalizations, and two deaths. Raw milk is responsible for nearly three times more hospitalizations than any other foodborne disease outbreak.[14] Diseases that pasteurization can prevent include tuberculosis, brucellosis, diphtheria, scarlet fever, and Q-fever; it also kills the harmful bacteria Salmonella, Listeria, Yersinia, Campylobacter, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli 157 [15][16] among others. Side-effects of pasteurization Fans of raw milk (meaning milk that hasn't been pasteurized or homogenized) credit it with having more beneficial bacteria and enzymes than its processed counterpart. However, raw milk cannot be preserved for a long time and its disadvantages may exceed its benefits. In fact, raw milk is far more likely to contain harmful microbial contaminants, and pasteurization is the only effective way of killing most of pathogen bacteria — which can include a.o., listeria, salmonella, and E. coli.[17]. On the other hand raw milk does contain antimicrobial properties [18] which are destroyed with the heat of pasturization[19], along with many of the vitamins within the milk itself [20]. Raw milk has also been shown to influence the immune system with a protective effect of raw milk consumption on the development of asthma, hay fever, and atopic sensitization, although the mechanism is not entirely understood [21]

DomKen -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 9:41:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or I read it thank you. The whole thing alludes to a need for more arguments. If you don't see that don't ever be a lawyer. The specific reasons, in the picture part of my post. In other parts it says while plaintiff made good arguments they did not make the connection to this particular argument. Do I need some screenshots or what ? In fact that part is right after the screenshot in the other post. Did YOU read it ? T^T No it does not call for more arguments the order is clearly the final order, as it clearly states. It never says the plaintiffs made a good argument. It specifically says the plaintiffs had not made a case. Note that this is a followup to a summary judgement for the defence. Summary judgement is only given if the case, interpreted in the best possible light for the other side, is a sure win. IOW the plaintiffs were completely wrong on everything.

DomKen -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 9:50:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama quote: This is part and parcel of the incredibly ignorant raw milk movement that won't go away until the next time some kids die from drinking raw milk. I would prefer to make my argument using the percentage of Medicare patients who die in hospital-caused deaths vs the percentage of raw milk drinkers who died but will have to be satisfied with 180,000 per year for the one and two in 10 years for the other to conclude that going into a hospital carries more risks than drinking raw milk. a new federal study of Medicare patients ups the estimate of annual hospital-related deaths to 180,000. vs Two times in 10 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteurization Oh please, the number of raw milk drinkers in the US is miniscule compared to the number of Medicare patients who entered hospital in any given year. Let's instead talk about the reason raw milk was banned in the first place: Thousands of dead children every year due to diseases caught drinking raw milk. How high a price in dead children is too high for you to believe woo?

tazzygirl -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 10:01:22 AM)
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), there were 86 reported food poisoning outbreaks from raw milk between 1998 and 2008, resulting in 1,676 illnesses, 191 hospitalizations, and two deaths. Raw milk is responsible for nearly three times more hospitalizations than any other foodborne disease outbreak, says Hannah Gould, Ph.D., senior epidemiologist with the CDC's Enteric Diseases Epidemiology Branch. It's no wonder selling raw milk to consumers is illegal in about half of U.S. states. "We have two people, in California and Pennsylvania, who developed Guillain-Barré syndrome [which can cause paralysis and respiratory failure] after contracting a bacterial infection called campylobacteriosis from drinking raw milk," says John Sheehan, head of dairy safety at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). "These were healthy, active people who came down with debilitating, lifelong diseases." http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/12/health/food-poisoning-protection-guide/index.html How many were misdiagnosed and never suspected raw milk as a cause... or failed to report the intake of raw milk after getting sick? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foodborne_illness_outbreaks_in_the_United_States Shows the number of outbreaks each year. This thread isnt just about raw milk.

BKSir -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 10:23:25 AM)
Oh, food safety vs. corporate interference into the free market or lack of market entirely system... Such a fun topic. On food safety, let's just put it this way. In most countries around the world, they don't have anywhere near the number of rules and regulations regarding the safe handling and preparation of foods as we do in the states. What else don't they have? Anywhere near as high of a rate of food bourne illnesses. Why? Because they aren't forced, their entire lives, to eat pure, sterilized, absolutely harmless food. We are, and the second any kind of little microbe at all gets into it, we all freakin' die. We've weakened ourselves so much through all of this that we have NO choice but to have to eat the ultra homoginized foodcrap that that is literally forced down our throats. And if we are strong enough and have been brought up in a background that fostered the ability to eat actual food, THEN they pass laws to say "What? You didn't buy this from an approved store, who got it from an approved vendor, who got it from an approved farm? $5000 fine and 2 years in prison! And remember, North Korea is BEST Korea!"... erm... I mean, "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!"... >.> If food safety was SUCH an issue, well... let's take a look at other places where they don't regulate the industry quite as painfully. ITALY! Who doesn't love Italian food? Maybe some nice proscuitto? Now, I can tell you for damn sure that anyone with 2 taste buds to rub together can tell you the difference between the stuff that's processed in the ultra sterile LaboratoryFoods Co. offices and the one from farmer Nunzio's wooden shack with a dirt floor and window for ventilation. And I think we all know which one tastes a damn sight better. Well guess what, they've been doing that for a lot longer than our country has been around in their little shacks, and if it was going to kill them, I'd think that Italy would have gone extinct. But, Italy is mostly filled with a 3rd world populous and a relatively small population count. Could be a fluke. Let's consider someone else, shall we? How about eastern Asia? You know, Japan, Korea, Cambodia, Laos, China? Ohhh, China, how I love thee. The population there is a LOT higher than Italy, that's for damn sure. To the tune of about 1.4 BILLION (estimate). Try to picture 1.4 billion people in your head. You can't, I can't, that's a fucking LOT of people! And this is just the PRC, not counting Hong Kong, Macau or RoC, for those who were wondering. Now, take into account that this is up from around 550,000,000 in the mid 50s. Anyone been to China recently? Gone to the shops there? Seen the rural areas? Their food regulations are nowhere NEAR as insane as ours, hell, some of the things they do would be considered downright dangerous, neglectful and possibly even malicious by our standards. Look at the process of preparing a lot of their food, the way it's being held for sale or consumption, and you would say "Are you actively TRYING to fucking kill me!?". Well, doesn't seem to have hurt their population at all. Sure hasn't caused the mass hysteria and deaths that we get here in the states. I mean, fuck, now let's go to Korea, get some REAL kimche. I love that shit by the way... It, along with the cabbage and spices and other goodies, before being covered in its clay pot and then put into the fucking GROUND for months to ferment, is loaded up with raw oysters to help it along. Okay. Let me isolate parts of that for you real quick. "Raw Oysters"+"cabbage"+"ground"+"months". You know what that means? Here in the states, most likely, you die, or at the very least you wish you would. Over there, it's not only a staple, but the majority of their diet. And this isn't a brand new process by any means. They've been doing that shit for longer than anyone had any notion at all that our chunk of rock even existed. And despite the crazy haired old lady running North Korea's best efforts, their population doesn't seem to be on any kind of decline from it. But what of places like Africa? Look at a lot of their citizens, how unhealthy they are, and they have the same type of food handling facilities some of the places I've mentioned here. Uh, WHAT FOOD!? The poorer parts of Africa don't HAVE food, and the little they do get often comes from... uh... oh yeah, us. I could go on for weeks, literally, with perfectly good and valid examples. I've just picked out a truly minute and nearly immeasurably small selection here. The point is, we here in the states are CONSTANTLY suffering from some bullshit "disease" or "condition" or "illness" or "disorder" of some fucking sort. We are, health wise, weak compared to much of the rest of the world. Let's look at cancer alone for a moment. the US is number 7 in the world for cancer deaths. Want to know where China falls? 29. Korea is at 24. The "richer" and more "advanced overall in ratio to population", the higher that rate becomes. Now, who does this benefit? Medical corporations, research corporations, insurance corporations, blah blah blah. Not us, that's for sure. Now I'm not going to go into saying that it's a great big conspiracy, I never did really get behind those theories much. But, I do think there is something a bit screwy going on and I think that if the government wants to tell me that I can't eat food out of my own fucking garden, or get some REAL milk from farmer Eddie, they had better have a lot fucking better reason.

Termyn8or -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 10:32:51 AM)
FR If the miniscule number of deaths really bothers y'all, make them put a warning label on it. And the number is minscule. ETA : I got a solution for people who want to have raw milk. Go ahead with those coops or whatever you want to call it, just don't have any money change hands, at least on the books. That's the way any other black market the government creates works. Then they don't get any taxes on it :-) In other words they can go fuck themselves. T^T

BKSir -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 10:38:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or FR If the miniscule number of deaths really bothers y'all, make them put a warning label on it. And the number is minscule. ETA : I got a solution for people who want to have raw milk. Go ahead with those coops or whatever you want to call it, just don't have any money change hands, at least on the books. That's the way any other black market the government creates works. Then they don't get any taxes on it :-) In other words they can go fuck themselves. T^T Goddamnit... I never actually thought I'd agree with you on anything Termy... It truly is the season of miracles! ;) Happy holidays, by the way.

DomKen -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 2:36:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BKSir Oh, food safety vs. corporate interference into the free market or lack of market entirely system... Such a fun topic. On food safety, let's just put it this way. In most countries around the world, they don't have anywhere near the number of rules and regulations regarding the safe handling and preparation of foods as we do in the states. What else don't they have? Anywhere near as high of a rate of food bourne illnesses. Why? Because they aren't forced, their entire lives, to eat pure, sterilized, absolutely harmless food. We are, and the second any kind of little microbe at all gets into it, we all freakin' die. We've weakened ourselves so much through all of this that we have NO choice but to have to eat the ultra homoginized foodcrap that that is literally forced down our throats. And if we are strong enough and have been brought up in a background that fostered the ability to eat actual food, THEN they pass laws to say "What? You didn't buy this from an approved store, who got it from an approved vendor, who got it from an approved farm? $5000 fine and 2 years in prison! And remember, North Korea is BEST Korea!"... erm... I mean, "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!"... >.> If food safety was SUCH an issue, well... let's take a look at other places where they don't regulate the industry quite as painfully. ITALY! Who doesn't love Italian food? Maybe some nice proscuitto? Now, I can tell you for damn sure that anyone with 2 taste buds to rub together can tell you the difference between the stuff that's processed in the ultra sterile LaboratoryFoods Co. offices and the one from farmer Nunzio's wooden shack with a dirt floor and window for ventilation. And I think we all know which one tastes a damn sight better. Well guess what, they've been doing that for a lot longer than our country has been around in their little shacks, and if it was going to kill them, I'd think that Italy would have gone extinct. But, Italy is mostly filled with a 3rd world populous and a relatively small population count. Could be a fluke. Let's consider someone else, shall we? Should have done some investigating before posting your rant. Finding data reliable data from Italy is impossible because they do not have a centralized reporting system but based on self reported data their rates of food borne illness are comparable to ours. The estimate is 5.5 illnesses per 100,00 per year. http://www.ijph.it/pdf//10/24.pdf

Termyn8or -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 2:42:47 PM)
quote: In what way does this ruling bode poorly for us? The judge is only saying that the plaintiffs have to follow WI law. And that's exactly the problem. There are plenty of laws that are not or should not be applied to private individuals. The main question here is whether they were actually selling milk. If I could walk up to them without knowing them and buy milk from them, there should be a law that there is a warning on the label that states that this milk is unprocessed and has not been checked for - anything. Use it at your own risk. If they just use the milk themselves among their little group, as far as I am concerned the government doesn't have a fucking word to say about it. The plaintaiffs really do need a much better lawyers. When the judge says their argument didn't make their case, that's pretty bad. Calling the argument underdeveloped is just that. I agree, apparently they mentioned Roe v Wade, that's ridiculous. "I think you are misconstruing the case, as nowhere in it did the judge holde that farmers were not allowed to use the milk for their own consumption. " [image]local://upfiles/196508/ADE4AE71F4694F3BA8D33B1883C805B4.jpg[/image]

Termyn8or -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 2:44:08 PM)
[image]local://upfiles/196508/74C0BAE6C27B4B5B8BEA90B80A1CAC8D.jpg[/image] These are screenshots from : http://www.thecompletepatient.com/storage/WIorder-clarification9-11.pdf Is this the file everyone has been reading ? Incidentally it does say that it is a clarification of a ruling almost a month earlier. Notice number 2 and 5. When a judge states that officially he should be lynched. That's what the KKK was founded on, not racism against the Blacks, did you know that ? Crooked fucked up judges were their target. This government is out of line with this shit and people don't even realize it. If I make an informed decision to do something that may harm me, that is my right. I'll even eat raw pork if I choose, and I actually have. What's more I've eaten it more than once just barely cooked, with a little pink. I won't eat it raw as a habit like beef, but I am not afraid of it. And if it kills me tough shit for me. So I do not have the right to eat raw pork ? Now they say that becasue the government or an insurance company has to pay to fix me, they get to tell me what to do in every aspect of my life. And why not ? If you have a guarantee on your car the manufacturer has every right to insist that you maintain it properly. However that mainenance schedule is determined by the people who designed it, THIS IS NOT THE SAME. "They" are NOT always right. And we are not a car although they do consider us chattel, but one of these days they are going to find out how wrong they are. And if you think they really do anything to protect us, I just don't know what to tellya. It's ALL MONEY. Anything they appear to do for us is to buy votes, which make them money, ALOT of money. T^T

DomKen -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 3:46:10 PM)
Poor termy, can't call brown people the n word to their face anymore, can't drive drunk anymore and can't poison his family and friends with whatever woo fueled crap he believes this week. The judge in this case is not dealing with a farm operated for the production of food exclusively for the owner but a dairy farm trying to run a scam to sell the most dangerous food stuff in the US to ignorant people who have bought into the same nonsense you bought into.

tolovetolaugh -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 3:46:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Poor termy, can't call brown people the n word to their face anymore, can't drive drunk anymore and can't poison his family and friends with whatever woo fueled crap he believes this week. The judge in this case is not dealing with a farm operated for the production of food exclusively for the owner but a dairy farm trying to run a scam to sell the most dangerous food stuff in the US to ignorant people who have bought into the same nonsense you bought into. Paranoid on the behalf of strangers who don't want your opinion, much?

tazzygirl -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 3:49:29 PM)
quote: Now they say that becasue the government or an insurance company has to pay to fix me, they get to tell me what to do in every aspect of my life. And why not ? If you have a guarantee on your car the manufacturer has every right to insist that you maintain it properly. However that mainenance schedule is determined by the people who designed it, THIS IS NOT THE SAME. "They" are NOT always right. And we are not a car although they do consider us chattel, but one of these days they are going to find out how wrong they are. When a way is found that prevents people who make those choices from getting medical treatment, then you would have a point.

tolovetolaugh -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 3:50:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 I think the government displayed a disgusting double standard here. Restaurants operate under exactly the same laws, and i have yet to see the health department walk in to any restaurant and subject their food to the same level of scrutiny, or expect them to prove the origin of each cut tomato. pam In a way we do have to account for where every tomato comes from. It is all by using HACCP trained suppliers. I would love it if I could go to Kroger and get berries when they are on sale or something like that, but there has to be an invoice showing that everything comes from an approved source. I'm a cafeteria manager for a school, but, since the Serv Safe requirements became nationwide, I believe it is the same across the board for any food services operation. ETA Let those government agents try to come get the fresh maters my neighbor gives me every year. Only when they pry em from my cold dead fingers! Gawd they are delicious! I must know... Whats in the mystery meat meatloaf!

BanthaSamantha -> RE: Food safety ? (11/25/2011 3:58:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Notice number 2 and 5. When a judge states that officially he should be lynched. That's what the KKK was founded on, not racism against the Blacks, did you know that ? Crooked fucked up judges were their target. You might want to read the actual case itself (posted earlier) as it doesn't hold what you think it holds. Those points above are from a summary judgment order. They are listing the points in which the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of production. Basically, the plaintiffs claimed they had the above rights, but couldn't cite any case law that actually confirmed it. If you try to claim things in a court room without being able to back it up, you'll be laughed out of the chamber.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625