Waiting on House to take up the vote
https://www.radioiowa.com/2022/03/09/iowa-senate-passes-bill-to-let-dairy-farms-sell-raw-milk/
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is seriously illegal???
I hear the raw stuff tastes better. I say bring back the milkman.This is seriously illegal???
Yes, because it makes so many people sick. Including kids who can’t even make the informed choice for themselves.This is seriously illegal???
https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/rawmilk-outbreaks.html
Based on statistics from the five-year period 2009-2014, people who drink unpasteurized, raw milk are 840 times more likely to contract a foodborne illness than those who drink pasteurized milk.
“Unpasteurized milk, consumed by only 3.2 percent of the (U.S.) population, and cheese, consumed by only 1.6 percent of the population, caused 96 percent of illnesses caused by contaminated dairy products,” according to the report scheduled for June publication by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2017...-840-times-more-likely-for-raw-milk-drinkers/
So what? They knew what they were buying.
Their kids don't.
That's why I take a shot of listerine every night before bed.Listeria is no joke.
I completely agree. I also think it's important for the average person to keep in mind how awful and dangerous food born illness is, and just how prevalent it was before the advent of food safety regulations.I think stuff like this works as a specialty item. We allow cigarettes and booze to exist -- put a warning label and make sure it's not to be confused with pasteurized milk.
It's your health-freak crowd that gets into it. Notice California allowing it on the map. If they want to take the risk, fine. (I think it's kind of dumb -- if you're super into health, why bother with milk at all?) Just make sure the regular consumer isn't confused.I completely agree. I also think it's important for the average person to keep in mind how awful and dangerous food born illness is, and just how prevalent it was before the advent of food safety regulations.
Did they? The government has a duty to protect its citizens from themselves ( and for the greater good).So what? They knew what they were buying.
Where is this ‘duty’ spelled out?Did they? The government has a duty to protect its citizens from themselves ( and for the greater good).
As with sugar?Did they? The government has a duty to protect its citizens from themselves ( and for the greater good).
Where is this ‘duty’ spelled out?
Lol. The Declaration of Independence is just that; a statement. It is not law.Declaration of Independence - inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that the US government is to protect.
Constitution - Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 - US government to provide for the general welfare of its citizens
Lol. The Declaration of Independence is just that; a statement. It is not law.
And to claim that “ the general welfare of these united states “ is equal to an unlimited nanny state is ridiculous.
A) Nothing to do with Kim.I’m trying to understand the anger in this thread. It seems like the OP is upset that the Iowa House hasn’t voted on it yet because of fealty to the Iowa Farm Bureau. And it seems like most everyone else is upset that the Senate passed the bill in the first place because innocent children are going to get sick and die.
Either way…goddamn it, Kim!
Lmao. Okay, Joe.Of course, I made neither of those arguments, so please feel free to prattle on about strawmen ...
And please tell me more about how the Declaration of Independence is a Declaration. Fascinating.