From Margo McIntosh‘s “Balance Your Apple” blog:
“As most you probably know by now, the court system has failed to recognize that tax paying citizens in Ontario have the right to choose what they eat and drink in this “free” country of ours. Michael Schmidt is again looking at a legal battle in his attempt to stop this ridiculous control that makes no sense to anyone who understands the raw milk movement and the realities of safe raw milk.
Now is the time for consumers to stand up and make themselves heard by the governments of every province. There are a group of us organizing rally’s across this country. Here in Ontario we will be doing a raw milk rally fundraiser for the Canadian Constitutional Foundation at 11 a.m. on November 23, 2011. What we want to see is every province of this great country of ours join us by having a rally at exactly the same time. I know that there are hundreds and probably thousands of people right now drinking raw milk safely in this country of ours. Many of you have been quiet and waiting to see what happens. It’s time to put your voice to ours and stand up for your rights or I promise you that you will lose those rights. We can no longer sit back and wait for someone else to “fix” this. Michael Schmidt cannot do this alone. He needs your help. We need your help. Here are some things you can do:
1) Help arrange a rally in your province or at least be at a rally to lend support.
2) Let me know who in Quebec and the Maritime provinces is a strong advocate for raw milk and/or the freedom of food choices movement and have them contact me at margo@balanceyourapple.com. We need these people to organize a rally in their provinces. The west and Ontario are covered right now but even there we need to hear from more people involved in this. If you want to be involved let me know and I will link you with the person organizing in your province.
3) Write a hand written letter to the Minister of Agriculture in your province and send a copy of that letter to your local MP and Health Canada. State clearly how you want our laws to change regarding raw milk and any other issues that small farmers in your province are facing. Keep sending these letters on a regular basis. Let the governments of your provinces and the Federal Government know that this movement is large and the people will be heard.
4) Go to the CBC website and put your name to the poll there as a vote for raw milk. http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2011/09/should-raw-milk-be-sold-in-canada.html
5) Contact the media in your area and either write a letter to the editor about this or at least start to compile the names and contact information of reporters sympathetic to our cause so that we can keep them informed of what we are doing.
6) Make sure that the major newspapers and television companies in your area know about the rally’s on November 23rd so that we get coverage right across the country.
7) Pass this information through your social media groups so that everyone drinking raw milk in Canada will know about this effort and be able to join in.
The time has come folks to stand up for your right to decide what you eat before the government takes over those rights completely. Please join us!!!!!
Margo McIntosh, RHN, RNCP
Raw milk drinker and advocate!!!!!!”
Once again, this is from Margo McIntosh’s “Balance Your Apple” blog.
The Bovine 
What a great activist “to do” list. I’m from the “down-under” 48 States, so I cannot participate regarding this list, but I pray many Canadians will participate with Margo and support your farmer Michael Schmidt. What I am advocating for those who want to stand in solidarity with Michael and company who are on this hunger strike is to fast with them on Thursdays and, if you can, repeat the Ho’oponopono mantra throughout the day, in your minds and hearts: “I’m sorry.” “Please forgive me.” “I love you.” “Thank you.” Please, let this go viral on the media network of facebook and twitter…both of which I’m not into, but that I know many use to express themselves and circulate information. Fasting and prayer “en masse” can make a difference. Those who are otherwise healthy can do this, and stand with these courageous farmers and advocates…they can use all the support they can get! JMHO.
To quote Marietta above:
” Fasting and prayer “en masse” can make a difference. Those who are otherwise healthy can do this, and stand with these courageous farmers and advocates…they can use all the support they can get! ”
Let’s do a collective “Thursday Fast” with a glass of raw milk.
I’m in.
Cheers,
Shirley Ann
Margo, you know Alberta joins you in this rally. We are also organizing one for Nov 23, at the Alberta Legislature grounds. Location on the grounds to be announced,. I am trying to gather up people to attend and to get the word out. I think we should put up a page on facebook and also get the word out in the press around the country, that these rally’s are going to happen. Later today I will try and find people in the eastern provinces to join us.
Our bodies …… Our choice!
While I found the court decision posted on the CCF web site, I noticed it wasn’t posted here on the Bovine. Perhaps it explains a bit about people’s perception about the ruling. Upon reading the ruling, I am not sure what exactly we are supposed to protest. Are we suppose to protest the lack of integrity in Micheal’s cow share program, or are we suppose to protest the ruling as being bad (and if it is bad, how did Tetley error?). Are we really protesting injustice, or are we protesting current social standards? I suspect it is the latter. And if the latter, perhaps it would good for us to define what it is that we want, rather than ranting about what we don’t want.
Peter. We are not protesting Michael’s cow share program. We are not protesting Tetley. He said some very telling things in his judgement. There have been no major outbreaks of illness here in Canada or around the world with regards to raw milk. (certainly not a direct quote) And yet our provincial governments still will not allow anyone that does not own a cow to drink it’s milk. In Alberta that law was only changed in 1991. What happened in 1991 to make the government put that law on the books? Nothing that I know of.
Some want the laws changed, others want to simply be able to secure a source for raw milk and drink it with no hassles. We protest for that. We also protest for food rights in general. Every time we turn our head another right is taken from us and processed commercial food is stuff down our throats. We have had enough! And so we protest!
We are in the process of defining what we want.
So, if we are not protesting Tetley (because his judgement is just?), is there an injustice to be protested? If we want the right to choose, I don’t believe that has been taken away by anyone. In deed, I believe Tetley confirmed that we have that right. So if it seems a right has been taken away, can we identify which one it is?
I think many people assume that the right to consume raw milk = the right to have another person provide it to them. As Peter points out, the former has been confirmed as a right and this judgment doesn’t change that. Tetley has basically said that Michael Schmidt doesn’t have a lawful right to provide it to others. Tetley’s analysis showed that the Crown’s arguments, based on the legislation, were sound and there were no Charter issues. So what’s the real issue?
Simply put, what people want is for the legislation to be changed to allow for distribution of raw milk to others. As such, the focus needs to be put back on squeezing the politicians – they are the ones who enact legislation, not the courts. The courts seem to be a black hole for time and money (apologies to Karen Selick, particularly if you do have an ace up your sleeve for the appeal).
Who will be responsable for the sickness and death from unpasteurized milk?
Of coarse its us tax payers who will have to cover an easily preventable sickness, E- coli, listeria, etc. Of coarse the most vunerable are the children( have little choice of what they eat) Pregant women and the elderly.
Tell me Tim, does the government take responsibility every time a commercial food plant does a food recall and the resulting food that is already in the food supply kills sometime or causes them a lengthy illness or hospital stay? Do the companies?
You have a much higher chance of getting sick from commercial food then you ever would with raw milk. I’m going to take a guess, and say most of all the farmers producing raw milk in Canada are drinking their own product. They are not about to poison themselves! If Raw milk was so dangerous, you would have no dairy farmers in the country because they and their families would be dead from raw milk poisoning! Did you know that the majority of dairy farmers drink the milk from their bulk tanks!
Damn right we do.
Our kids were raised on raw milk and had zero dental issues until they got older, started eating some of their friends ate, and still their dental problems were minor. I went 33 years without visiting a dentist. Have all my teeth at 55. We seldom my wife or myself ever get sick. Wife more than me because she works at a public school. Allergies? What are allergies? No allergies, none for our children either.
To call raw milk an excessive danger, or really much of any kind of threat at all, is pathetic. It is healthy.
nedlud
We drink goats’ milk now. Maybe some of you people wanting raw milk so bad could figure out how and where to keep a goat of your own. The main thing is: Don’t buy pasteurized, processed junk milk even if it’s called organic.
Canadians still have the right to use and enjoy one’s private property. You cannot assert a right when sitting down = you must get up on your hind legs … Any such right right belongs to those who assert it
what the raw milk legislation in Ontario does is called “inverse condemnation” of the right to use property
… oh sure, say those poly-ticians. ” you have the right to eat and drink what you want” as they smirk up their sleeves in delight, thinking about the bribes that have changed hands in this farce … but for about 6 million in Trawna, that is a right just out of reach
PRAISE GOD The REAL MILK is flowing today in British Columbia, partly because of the foresight of Alice Jongerden, back at the begining, when she registered our herd with Jersey Canada. Taking Tetley’s ruling and arguing it for us here, we can point to precisely WHO owned the cows on any given day in question, and we can prove which preciselywhich cows we’re talking about. Glencolton farm couldn’t
more exhaustive treatment of this is in my Response to Application by Fraser Health’s allegation of contempt of Court against me, posted on my website on the page titled 124618
Hi Tim Kanold,
I would like to include the following excerpt of a letter my husband wrote a couple of years ago for you and others. It would be worthwhile to read it:
The Department of Health claims that Raw milk is unsafe, however the data available on the web from places like the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) and other publications including the USFDA and the American Journal for Public Health (which are also consistently opposed to the sale of raw milk) indicate, contrary to their stance, that raw milk is just as safe as any other food product and in fact safer than many.
All the public statments that I have seen from our health officials, in the media and on the web, approach the issue by reciting various cases of illness that have been linked to the consumption of raw milk. The cases mentioned are always serious and are clearly chosen to engender fear in support of their case. What they invariably leave out is the “rest of the story” namely the relative incidence of illness attributed to other foods, including pasteurized milk. (Yes, there are lots of cases of people getting sick from pasteurized milk – and in most of those cases the pasteurization was verified to have been done properly! ).
Although there are certainly reported cases of illness where raw milk is the suspected cause, the numbers are very small compared to those attributed to other foods, including pasteurized milk. For instance in 2002 the FDA reported that there were 200 cases of people getting sick in the US attributed to raw milk. This is in an article stating the raw milk is not safe (because 200 people got sick!). Well 200 doesn’t seem like a huge number given the total population of the US. Conveniently, they don’t say anything about the numbers of illnesses attributed to other foods, or due to pasteurized milk.
If you look at the CDC FoodNet report for 2002 they state that there were 16,389 reported cases of food related illness in the population that Foodnet monitors which is about 14% of the US population. That extrapolates to about 116,000 cases in the total US. Which means that the percent of reported food related illnesses due to raw milk out of the total is a miniscule 0.17% ! (Another section in the same reports quotes an estimate made by the CDC that in 1997 if unreporeted cases were included, there were probably 325,000 cases of hospitalization due to foodborne illness and 76 million probable cases of milder illness !! )
Of course you could quite correctly point out that because there are so few people who drink raw milk, of course there will be proportionately fewer people getting sick from it. A better statistic would be the illness rate due to milk among raw milk drinkers. That’s harder to come up with since those specific statistics are not reported, but you can get an rough approximation from the fact that about 1% percent of the milk sold in the US is raw. Dividing 0.17% by 1% gives you 17%. What that says is that among small number of raw milk drinkers who do get sick, 17% of the illness are due to the milk, and 83% are due to other foods. So although raw milk may cause some illness, it is certainly not the worst cause. The data I have seen for the general US population shows that salads are the worst, then fruits, then chicken, with milk having the lowest incidence. (I wasn’t able to get data on beef)
Another thing that the FDA report leaves out is where the raw milk that caused the 200 illness came from. Did it come from certified and regulated producers or others? If you look at the performance of concientious individual raw milk producers, you will see some stellar results. Michael Schmidt for instance, has been providing raw milk for over 20 years and has not had one case of illness attributed to his milk. In California, the sale of raw milk is legal although it must be clearly labeled. A major raw milk dairy in California, Altena Dairies has been selling raw milk for 40 years with 0 cases of illness reported. California has a highly regulated raw milk industry and the highest sales of raw milk of any US state. There have been a number of years in California when there were 0 cases of illness atributed to raw milk. In the same years there were numerous cases attributed to pasteurized milk in California.
The thing that struck me though as I went through this is that there appears to be a strong bias amongst health authorities against raw milk, even though their own statistics suggest that the bias is unfounded. What concerns me is that the health officials and government are not comparing apples to apples, and are presenting incomplete information to bolster their case.
Given the small numbers of illness due to raw milk, relative to the scale of other food (and water!!!) issues that are out there, it seems a total waste of government resources to be going after people like Michael Schmidt when there are far more important health problems to tackle. I don’t have hard data on this, but based on news reports I’ve heard over the last year or so on water quality issues, I’m willing to bet that despite Walkerton and its aftermath there are still far more illnesses in Ontario due to poorly treated water than there are due to raw milk.
There are risks involved in every aspect of life. Driving a car is far more risky than drinking raw milk, so is the consumption of alcohol. And what about tobacco? Smoking creates a huge strain on our health system, but it’s still legal.
From what I can see, when a well regulated raw milk system is in place, the incidents of illness relative to the amount of raw milk consumed drops considerably. Which is why it would make a lot of sense for Ontario to establish such a system
…..So I would like to ask who’s ills are the taxpayers paying for. Note that in all the time Gelencolton has been in operation, there has not been illness due to his milk….only health, well being, good agricultural practices, good care for the animals and the land.
Let’s try to think about what is truly of value,
Shirley Ann
It’s not about “public safety”.
Behind just about every piece of legislation impeding upon peoples’ right to choice, there are “real reasons” which are hidden from the public. If something as outrageous as the raw milk fiasco no longer makes sense and the government tries relentlessly to fight it, then there’s more to the official story then we’re being told.
Who benefits? In that you’ll find your answer.
We are still in the process of identifying what portions of Justice Tetley’s decision will constitute grounds for appeal. The test is for “errors of law” and we believe there are several. When our Notice of Appeal is ready, it will be made public.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Constitution Foundation is grateful for the support and donations that we have been receiving.
Please let us know the location of the rally when it is determined.
there are no grounds for appealling the decision of Tetley, J.
He relied on “black letter law” deferring to the power of the Legislature
lawyers are so enamoured of the Charter,they have forgotten the heritage English people have, especially in Upper Canada and in British Columbia…. which were colonies on their own before being confederated. The law of England is the basic law of each of them.
for instance, the right to use and enjoy private property, as spelled out in the Cdn Bill of Rights 1960.
sectioin 26 of the Charter of ( less) Rights and Freedoms. says everything that needs to be said about using one’s property
why bother appealing, if Glencolton farm has changed its legal structure, now 5 years from the incident out of which the charges arose?
Just do things the way the Court directed and get on with producing the good stuff
meaning : a cowshare just needs to be able to give a snapshot of itself, on any given day, describe precisely who owns what property
Aww c’mon Gordon. Lawyers (and the courts) need to eat too. And all they know how to do, and they do it well for money, is befuddle everything and make a bigger mess, than before.
And so on.
And so on. Spell it B-U-R-E-A-U-C-R-A-C-Y.
How can we be expected to live without their constant updates, reviews, revisions, adjustments and further regulations, and interpretations of those regulations, in our lives?
We are too stupid to exist without them.
Right?
Justice Tetley’s view of the law is not the only view of the law, as we know from the fact that Justice of the Peace Kowarsky acquitted Michael.
For yet another view of the law, please see the factum submitted on MIchael’s behalf to Justice Tetley. It was posted on The Bovine on April 4, 2011 and can be accessed via this link: https://thebovine.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/defense-factum-now-posted-for-the-crown-april-13th-appeal-of-raw-milk-farmer-michael-schmidts-acquittal/
Judge Tetley’s view of the law holds sway at the moment, ONLY because he has at his command uniformed thugs with loaded firearms on their hips. those goons have a very limited authority to do anything past the precinct of the Court
What’s obvious now is that the Constitutional Foundation does not have the measure of the enemy
When the race traitors in high places brought in the policy of Multi-culturalism – knowingly displacing the white population so people from very different cultural mores, get preference, that’s when the “common sense” about what the law ought to be in this Christian Dominion, started unravelling
the Schmidt case is only one very small outworking of the anti-christ agenda to impose one-world govt. They said they’d unlimber the Food Weapon, and here we are. If I could find the particular protocol of the Learned Elders, which states that they will run their opponents off into the weeds of Court, I’d put in it, but I can’t think of it right now
Point of the above being, you’re wasting your time splitting hairs as to interpretation of terms. Since the days of Nimrod, the central govt. is only the biggest toughest gang in town The only thing they understand is brute force.
It’s too late to hang the pricks, and too soon to start shooting, so
The way we cope with them at the moment, in these circumstances is to outproduce them
the latest example of how the Cult of the Black Robe perverts the law to suit themselves is the ruling by the SCC that lawyers DON’T have to abide by the requirement to disclose money given to them by their clients. Solicitor /client privilege being more sacred that confessions to a priest, or a man’s conversations with his wife. The very swine that George Orwell warned us about … lading heavy burdens on the people, while making themselves exempt from the same laws
you think it’s going to get any better for Michael Schmidt as his case wends its way up the juridicial ladder? I don’t
when put to the test by Tetley, J. the evidence of who actually owned the Glencolton herd, was lacking. End of story
Michael Schmidt must now rely on the precept that if an accused sincerely believed in a set of facts, which – had they been true – would have exonerated him, that’ll get him off the hook, sort of, but only for a lesser punishment.
If Michael Schmidt raises another hundred thousand or so dollar$ to pay the professionals ( of whom a certain kibitzer on this forum speaks so highly) to ‘handle’ his case, pleading such abovementioned belief , he’ll face the Crown asking the very pointed question := if so, then, after the acqutital in Provincial Court why was the cowshare restructured so that Glencolton Farm is now owned by tenants-in-common?
my = unasked-for = advices, is : suck it up. They’re not going to let you win in their ballpark Throw himself on the mercy of the Court. Pay the idiots their tribute money. Use what $$ is available from the supporters of raw milk across Canada, in order to get out of that airless little chamber and back out on the pasture, producing the good stuff.
Other cowshares ought to find out how strata-title works in your jurisdiction, then put all the names on title to a piece of dirt. So those individuals are farmers in deed, who take home their own property … that would be, the milk from their own cows
Dear Gordon
As much as I respect your initiative in regards to the raw milk issue, as much I am disturbed about your hateful rants and name calling.
It is utmost inappropriate and insensitive to everyone who reads this blog.
I maintain that utmost respect for the other side should be always our standard.
I do ask you please to refrain from using offensive and hurtful wording for the sake of all of us.
There cannot be peace and understanding unless we exercise it first.
I do like to apologize to anyone who was hurt or offended lately by Gordon Watsons comments.
Regards
Michael
Thanks Michael. We do need to stand up for our rights and freedom, and I agree we all must keep peace and understanding as our ideals…..and I’d like to add hope and love….That is a lot better than despair and hate.
All the best in your efforts in this cause,
-Shirley Ann
I read the early comments by Gordon Watson, and they are highly, highly offensive and very disturbing …earlier I had only glanced at what I found to be a very offensive line at the end of Gordon’s submission and decided to ignore the rest. His comments are disdainful. I teach in a very multicultural school, and that is the beautiful future of our country and our world. If I am going to speak up about milk, I am certainly going to speak up about racist and ignorant comments.
Thank you again for your addition Michael.
Re: Gordon Watson’s comments
I agree whole heartedly with Michael and SA. Gordon’s comments are racist and completely inappropriate. I am not only offended by his statements on this post, but on several previous posts too. What’s equally troubling is that he appears to be a spokeperson in the media for the raw milk movement in British Columbia – don’t think that sends the best message.
Although free expression is obviously valued on this site (and rightly so), I do wonder if the Bovine moderator should step in and delete any racist material posted by Mr. Watson.
An apology from Mr. Watson wouldn’t hurt either.
what a classic … it wasn’t me who used the word “war”
but since I have been through a few wars – compared to which this one is just a walk in the park – I do have the measure of the enemy, far better than those who are coming along now, a decade since I wrote my first letter to the govt. of BC … in fairly polite language
you wait ’til you show up to get your milk, and discover that the little vipers have dumped your food down the sewer … we’ll see how restrained you-all are, then
If I had a dollar for every time I’ve been chided for my style, I’d be happily retired now … coming up to me and saying “you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” … as though that’s the first time I’ve eve heard it! I’m not in the flycatching business
‘t was ever thus … people like you-all, who are about a decade behind understanding what’s really going on …
as for the kneejerk reaction about “racist” … see David Gumpert’s blog today, where the Race card is folded-in. What a perfect illustration of who’s really the racist … as long as it’s about non-whites, oh yeah, mention of race is OK. But when I tell you the truth – that this is first and last about white people … you-all can’t stand it.
If you think you can win this by being “nice enough” … get back to me in a couple of years when it find out that nice doesn’t work with the tyrants
Dear Gordon
This is not winning at any price. If I disregard my own principles just for the sake of winning and beating the other side then we truly have lost this battle before it ended.
I know what you are talking about haha methods are used to undermine justice and due process.
Do we have to get down to their level how they operate.
I am not prepared to do that.
You might have lost faith into the system me tool but only in the system and not in human nature.
Warm regards
Michael
I was under the impression that there had been a Declaration of War … I’m acting and speaking accordingly
read the Federalist Papers = communications between the leading lights of the colonies, as the Americans were figuring out how to constitute their new country, after quitting Britain. The thing they worried about most was restraining governmental power, because they knew all too well that human nature is totally depraved to start with … they’d seen what that it does with power
the ones who win wars are those prepared to be most cruel, so, if you’re not prepared to get down in the mud and the blood and roil-around on tjhe barroom floor with them, you’ll wind up outwitted in their game, in their ballpark .. eventually out in the weeds of endless court action.
If you think little tyrants like Inspector Richard Asplin of Fraser, who personifies a guy with the classic little-man complex, bursting at the seams with insolence, smirking at us deferring to him as he stole our food, breaking his word from less than 24 hours earlier, and his colleagues will play fair, you’re going to find out the hard way what vipers they are.
I used to say to the so-called Pro-Lifers : “what would winning be?” They did not have an answer. In this case : winning is simply asserting our right to use and enjoy our own private property without interference from mindless bureaucrats
the decision of Tetley, J. does not impair that right. Rather, his Reasons all but spell out how to go about doing it properly
I stand by my criticism of the professional barristers, who demonstrated nothing better but that they have a fatal blind spot about one of the most basic rights of all = to private property
Since they didn’t argue that at the appeal, it is not available to them in the Courts above. You’re wasting your time and other people’s $$ flogging a dead horse
what wondeful comedy from Jenny = she’s all in favour of free speech EXCEPT for ideas that confront her self image… then the answer is censor-ship! It’s Freed9om to REad week soon, Jenny. Beware ! if you actually consider the content of what I say, rather than the style, you may find your self thinking for yourself, instead of parroting the non-sense you swallowed at govt. shrines to the religion of Baal-worship
what if the proposition that the engine of the Campaign for REAL MILK is, white people awakening to their racial identity and demanding our birthright = the Kingdom of Heaven on earth, here and now, starting with milk and honey? Maybe the problem is you can’t handle such a profound notion … that racial differences, programmed into our DNA … are simply a fact of human existence?
I would propose from now on, that comments are moderated not censored
it becomes unbearable.
It was in no way the intend of this blog (i hope). to become a fanatic expression of different views rather a respectful dialogue for justice.
Gordon I respect your views but you are destroying the willingness of people to help, to support and engage.
A declaration of war does not mean killing the integrity, the human being behind orders. it is clear that,the art of war is smartness and intelligence and not name calling and insults. . If the other side wants to go there so be it I am on a different path, i rather stop this battle before I lower myself to hurtful personal insults.
Warm regards
Michael
I don’t like the idea of censoring anyone, but it appears Gordon is unable or unwilling to demonstrate any self-control with regard to racially sensitive remarks. Again, I would ask that the Bovine moderator remove this type of material.
Thank you Michael for speaking out on this, even when you have so many other important things happening right now.
Dear Michael ;
I was wondering what took you so long to decide to moderate this wonderful blog ?
To be honest moderating the blog will be an easy job. If you simply delete one particular person’s submissions for a month you will find that 99.9% of the problem solved !
I think many,many sincere people who tried to raise sincere points of discussion were scared away by someone’s attacks , racism and otherwise extreme views.
Why alienate potential allies ?
I unfortunately do sincerely feel that this individual has treated your blog like a garbage can for his own confused agenda.
Most importantly , I am concerned that it reflects back on you and makes you look like an extremist as well (even though you are not ) simply by virtue of your being polite and conversant with the non-stop racism , rant, conspiracy theories and otherwise outright rubbish emanating from this individual on a daily basis .
This is simply not what you are about . Public Relations is a tricky business and one can not take it for granted. The moment you drop your guard any kind of strange energy can enter in like a virus .
Once it contaminates your work it will take a long time to build a new image.
I, and my life partner, agree with the BC Food Security posting above. Michael, and those on Glencolton, have treated all people of different race, religions, views, ages, abilities, and backgrounds with utmost respect. They have opened their doors to people of many backgrounds and abilities, to work and to participate in farm experiences. Michael has responded to adverse situations on the blog with integrity and grace, the latter one being a case in point. The impetus of Glencolton Farm has always been for the betterment of society.
I say this, because an alternative outlook would be sadly mistaken.