By JIM ALGIE
Raw milk advocate Michael Schmidt expects to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada about a recent Ontario Court of Appeal ruling against him in a long-standing, high-profile, legal battle over Ontario public health regulations.
Schmidt confirmed in an interview by phone, Monday, he’ll pursue the appeal. He declined, however, to discuss details until a planned, late-April announcement.
The appeal deadline is May 11, Schmidt said. He expects to file legal papers before the deadline and plans a formal announcement later this month, likely, April 28 or 29. Meanwhile, the veteran Grey County dairy farmer is among nine scheduled speakers for an international symposium on raw milk science, April 22, at the University of Guelph’s Aboretum Centre.
Organized by the university’s Food Science Department, the full-day event also features scientists and food safety experts from Canada, the United States, Belgium and New Zealand, says a university website announcement. It’s the first such event involving Schmidt for a university-level debate about the science and health policy issues of raw milk.
Schmidt is to appear as part of an afternoon panel discussion that also includes University of Guelph marketing professor Sylvain Charlebois and University of Vermont nutritionist, Dr. Catherine Donnelly, who is also a director of the Vermont Institute for Artisanal Cheese. Other notable speakers include Belgian government food chain analyst Wendie Claeys and New Zealand Centre for Public Health Risk director Dr. Jeroen Douwes. Significantly, Douwes is also principal investigator in recent studies at New Zealand’s Massey University into protective effects of raw milk on allergies and asthma.
Since 1994, Schmidt has waged a campaign against Ontario regulations that outlaw distribution of raw milk because of potential health risks from bacteria. He believes raw milk can be produced safely and has health benefits for consumers.
A three-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled against Schmidt earlier this year. In a unanimous decision the appeal court upheld the April 2012 conviction by Justice Peter Tetley which came with a $9,150 fine for illegally distributing raw milk.
The conviction followed a Crown appeal from Schmidt’s earlier acquittal by an Ontario justice of the peace on more than a dozen, raw milk-related charges.
Schmidt has operated an organic dairy farm in Grey County near Durham for 30 years. BF
Comments
here we go again ......collect thousands of dollars from people to fight your cause again.
what part of NO don't you understand
Yes he must be a pro at selling Raw Milk and a know it all on the same subject, because they want him to speak. It must be good for you because its naturally pure and nothing done to it , well the same can be said about S??t its natural and nothing done to it so it too must be good for you. What a waste of money of the tax payers maybe he should be handed a bill for the costs of the Courts and Lawyers.
Anonymous comment deleted by editor.
I am proud to say that i have personally known Michael Schmidt for nearly 20 years and like any one else who knows Michael will know he is a solid person with a wealth of knowledge and education and he would never advocate or promote the consumption of raw milk without first advising people that they need to produce raw milk in a much different fashion then most farmers produce milk now. Not all milk is meant to be consumed raw, i have been to scores of dairy farms where i would never consume their milk either raw or pasteurized, the sanitary regulations governing milk production are very lacks in my opinion at the farm level, many herds have high cell counts and Jonhnes and yet there milk still is sent for human consumption. I can guarantee you that these issues would never be found on Schmidts farm because they wouldn't fit with raw milk production. I have personally seen Quota farmers come to Schmidts farm dead set against raw milk production and then leave realizing they had a lot of misconceptions about how safe producing raw milk can be.
Sean McGivern
Yes 1 Farm makes it right to sell Raw Milk , hope you are not the one to get sick or die from drinking his milk. Yes there is farms out there that I too would not drink their milk out of the Bulk Tank Raw or Pasteurized , that is why there is a law against selling Raw Milk. What is it that You or Him do not understand. I think the Robot Milkers is bad for the Quality of milk, which the lines or milkers is only washed ever so many hours and not like the pipeline which the cows are milked then the equipment is cleaned up for the next milking and then chor. is put in it to sanitize the equipment. So are you saying that this one person is the only one that should have the right to sell Raw Milk.
What a bunch of hogwash,Canadian Dairy farmers have some of the highest standards in the world but l have yet to see a 0 Bacteria count and l seriously doubt that Mr.Schmidt is the first.Even so,having a low bacteria or somatic cell count does not necessarily mean the milk is free of other harmful pathogens.
I think its absurd to guarantee anything with it comes to the production of raw milk.Technology,sanitation and hygiene have come a long way in the milk industry but cow manure is still cow manure,sh-t is still sh-t, unless Mr.Schmidt has come up with a totally sterile cow which is highly unlikely
Breaking the law and selling a potentially harmful product like unpasteurized milk is a good image of a farmer ??
I wasn't real happy when seat belt wearing became manatory and many people thought that was against their freedom of choice also but we have come to see that it reduced injuries and many deaths.The same can be said about Pasteurizing milk years ago.I certainly don't want to go back to not wearing seat belts,especially for our childrens sake,the same can be said of "raw" milk.
Well we might all be thankful in some ways that the issues of food security and access have been brought forward in this case. What is more important is the evidence that was not heard, mainly that comprehensive study by academic researcher has demostrated without any doubt, following the international standard of food risk, that raw milk is actually considered low risk, meaning no more risk then eating farmed vegies. The whole non-pastuerized part is just way over played and totally out of context. Just spend a brief moment and think about it...you can get your eggs raw and your meat raw, both of which are highly subsceptible to pathogens if not treated well. And so the public health authority hold the position , that you should cook your eggs and meat, but it is still available raw. Raw milk is no different! what people do with it is their concern, just like eggs and meat.
Yes, you cook eggs and meat - people won't cook milk.
Actually there are people out there who eat raw eggs and meat, although i am not one of them, i would never call for or support a ban form preventing them from doing this. I could never support any laws that would limit ones rights to food. Lets be honest this has nothing to do with food safety, it has everything to do with the big guys and the quota holders trying an other lame tactic to protect what they consider their market share. There are thousands of people in Ontario who drink raw milk every day and they have zero issues or extremely isolated issues from consuming raw milk. Every dairy farmer i know and every Amish and Mennonite i know drink raw milk if it was such an evil substance then why aren't these people dying on a weekly basis ? the matter of the fact is that they take precautions by proper sanitation of their equipment and their cows, because when you actually produce food for people you know you take a great deal more care to so with those people in mind.
Michael Schmidt even helps other farmer by providing educational courses on raw milk production and if the government would get serious and actually work with these farmers which there are dozens of cow shares in Ontario they could actually help to ensure food safety.
Its just like what the government has done to help drug users they realized they are losing the battle by police enforcement so they now offer safe injection sites where they can monitor and track the people to help prevent any further issues or crimes.
I think the government should realize they can't stop these cow shares, so they would be better to just work with them and actually have they inspected each month or every 6 months by a health unit inspector to ensure they are complying and doing what they say they are doing, rather then wasting tax payer money to try and regulate them out of business, and treat them like any other food company that gets health unit inspections.
Its like the war on drugs the government will never over throw cow shares they will just go underground ......
Sean McGivern
Raw milk is safe most of the time. Milk on Ontario dairy farms has pathogens present about 4 per cent of the time. But most of the time is not good enough for public safety, that is why milk is pasteurized.
Why don't dairy farmers face a high risk from raw milk? Simple, Sean. Illness from pathogens is load dependent.
Let me explain. Excellent raw milk has 2,000 bacteria cells per ml and the average is perhaps 10,000. Most of the time, none of these bacteria are pathogens that cause human illness. But, sometimes there are pathogens.
Milk with pathogens present may have fairly low bacteria levels present in the first 24 hours after it leaves the cow but the number of bacteria present will double about each day it is kept in the fridge (or every 30 minutes at room temperature). That is why farmers are at fairly low risk as raw milk drinkers, because they drink very fresh milk. Fresh from the barn every day.
Consumers picking up raw milk from a farm and consuming it over probably 4 to 7 days face a very different risk compared to milk consumed fresh each day from the same farm.
That is the simple microbiology of why the risk is fairly low for dairy farmers.
If we have a more significant part of the population buying raw milk once or twice each week - we will get a predictable result - illnesses.
That is why Ontario law will continue to require that we pasteurize milk.
Schmidt, nor no Schmidt.
Thanks, that was open and honest.
Raw milk is available in super markets all over the world, and if it was such a high risk food item, then governments around the world would also have a 100% ban on the sales of raw milk and they don't, its only the low populated country of Canada that does.
There country and regions much older then Canada and if the EU countries which have been around for since jesus was a boyscout feel its safe for their citizens to consume raw milk then i think we here in Canada can also safely consume it.
If the tax payer money that has been spent on fighting raw milk had of been spent on developing on farm testing equipment then we wouldn't have this conversation today, but lets face it the powers to be don't want farmers having access to these tools as they might be a little to empowered and not needing to rely on the multinationals to process all there milk.
Sean McGivern
You boil it.
If it is boiled, the sugars carmelize and spoil the taste.
Yes, of course the whole non-pasteurized part is over-played and totally out of context...just a lot of people died or got sick from it,mostly children..that's all!
And raw milk should not be banned either. Just regulate it and let the consumer decide. Raw milk is considered so safe it is sold in vending machines throughout Europe allowing anyone to access it 24/7, yet artisanal, pastured raw milk is considered so dangerous it has to be banned in Canada? Anyone can buy factory-farmed raw ground beef and eat it raw (steak tartar anyone?) and no one cares. Milk and beef come from the same animal, so something does not add up. The ban can't really be about health, but might actually be about protection of big dairy. V Gurd
The European countries that sell raw milk raise their dairy under a qualitative style operation, the farmer checks each individual cow and its milk for any irregularity before ever combining the milk from that cow to the others.
Canada is quite the opposite many dairies dry fit the automatic milkers onto the cow without even washing the utters, but it doesn't matter.... all the milk is pasteurized anyways. Canada's dairy is based on a quantity based system, so getting as much milk as you can makes the money here. I've even seen sick cows being pumped, makes me a bit sad.
Working at a Canadian Dairy now for 7 years, the stuff that happens there have taken me off milk. Visited a Swiss Dairy last year that sells raw milk, and such a contrast in the care and attention that the animals receive, and the quality of the milk is not comparable. Even the butter (real butter) is a bright yellow or orange colour with no added dyes (raw or pasturized). If only Canada sold high quality dairy. Thumbs down Canadian Dairy. Al Dun
I understand what your saying but its always about the money,producing organic milk is about money and yes,even selling raw milk is about money.
We milked a small herd for over 30 years and probably like the Swiss we pastured them also as long as we could,took the individual care but l would never consider selling or giving that milk to city relatives,especially ones with children.I just never will understand how people could take that chance.
Any young family out there with small children contemplating raw milk because of its supposedly health "benefits" should look to the web for the statistics on illnesses due to drinking unpasteurized milk,the internet is full of them.Especially the testimonials from some mothers who were searching for a healthier lifestyle for the family by purchasing raw milk,only to greatly regret that decision.
These illnesses are transmissible, so other kids at day cares and schools can be exposed and infected. Their parents didn't choose to take any risk with raw milk but their kids could play the price as collateral damage. That's why this isn't just a personal choice but a societal risk. And that's why the legislation requiring pasteurization is in place and will stay in place. Any medical officer of health in the province of Ontario will confirm this position.
Public health must be number 1.
Risks are known.
Benefits are somewhere between dubious and bogus.
Editor: This anonymous comment will be published if resubmitted and signed. The headline has been modified.
Post new comment