I hear they’ve got a new editor in the local paper in Michael Schmidt’s neck of the woods, and the paper is now as staunchly anti-raw-milk as they seemed to be pro-freedom-to-choose last year. Coincidence? Or is “someone” yanking their chain? Anyway, I’m sure you’re all dying to see what they wrote about the latest kerfuffel down in Newmarket. Here it is; they call it “Michael Schmidt should stop flauting the law“:
“The Ontario government does not have the capacity to ensure that unpasteurized milk is safe to distribute. Michael Schmidt does not have the right to pick and choose which laws he wishes to obey.
It’s time the Durham-area farmer gave up his raw-milk crusade and got back to farming, or whatever other legal, gainful employment he chooses to pursue.
Schmidt was found guilty yesterday of contempt of court for disobeying a court order that he stop selling raw milk.
He has not yet been sentenced. But in a typically flamboyant gesture, the raw-milk advocate asked the judge to impose “the highest penalty you can find.”
We beg to differ. A middling penalty, suitable to any unknown person who choose to flout the law, will suffice. Schmidt wants to be martyr. He should be denied that privilege.
Schmidt’s raw-milk operation may be the most sparkling-clean in all of Ontario. His methods of storage and transport may be beyond reproach. His milk cows may be grass-fed, free-range, pest-free and of above average intelligence. For all we know they may produce wonderful abstract-expressionist paintings in their off hours.
That does not change the fact that drinking raw milk brings with it a heightened risk of salmonella, E. coli and Listeriosis. Nor does it change the fact that pasteurization saves lives.
Anyone who doesn’t believe this should ask someone old enough to remember the days before pasteurization was introduced.
If selling raw milk were legal, it would in short order become a big business. The Ontario government, knowing the statistical risks of raw-milk distribution, would be legally and morally responsible for ensuring that no one got sick as a result…”
Oh well, as they say, no publicity is “bad” publicity. At least they’re giving the story “ink”. And readers, I’m sure, are making up their own minds on the merits of the case.