Ethan A. Huff
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Incensed by the idea that Iowans might soon be able to make their own food choices when it comes to fresh dairy products, Daniel H. Gervich, M.D., a board-certified infectious diseases and critical care medicine doctor from Des Moines, Iowa, recently declared that feeding raw milk to babies is “child endangerment.”
This outlandish claim, which was part of a recent rant he made against raw dairy published in the Des Moines Register, infers that mothers who feed their babies raw milk are abusing their children. And should anything negative happen to these children during the time in which they are drinking raw milk, their parents should apparently be held criminally responsible in Dr. Gervich’s view.
The editorial was published in response to the proposition of House Study Bill 585, a bill that would undo the State of Iowa’s highly-restrictive laws against any sale or transfer of raw milk. If passed, H.S.B. 585 would allow farmers to sell raw milk and raw dairy products directly to customers from the farm, or have it delivered, without restrictions, to customers’ homes (http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us).
Demand for raw dairy all across the country is soaring as individuals learn about the health benefits of raw milk, including how lactose intolerance is not an issue when drinking raw milk. But in many states, including in Iowa, sales of raw milk are strictly prohibited, which is why legislation like H.S.B. 585 is being introduced everywhere.
But attempts to re-legalize access to raw milk continue to be met by outmoded superstition, bad science, and blatant misinformation campaigns designed to protect the filthy dairy industry from the threat of a burgeoning raw dairy market. After all, small-scale farmers can earn a much better living selling clean, pastured raw milk to their customers independently rather than be forced to process their milk into the standardized dairy pool, where they earn a mere fraction of the profits.
“Dr. Gervich’s overused soundbite simply serves as a perfect example of the establishment attempting to wreak fear in the hearts of all parents that their children might be removed from their home if they do not agree with the prevailing medical or nutritional model consistent with medical, industry, government, (and) stakeholder made up standards,” wrote Eileen Dannemann, director of theNational Coalition of Organized Women, in response to Dr. Gervich’s editorial.
“Does the Doctor, unschooled in nutrition, plan on calling Child Protective Services for ‘child endangerment’ on those mothers who seek unadulterated, un-homogenized, un-pasteurized farm fresh milk from a sister species as a substantially equivalent substitute?”
Sources for this article include: