There is a sign which caught my eye from the first day I travelled through this small airport in Albany (even before I knew it as home): The purpose of freedom is to free others. It is not in quotations because I don’t know who said it originally, but I believe Toni Morrison said something close to this in one of her speeches: “The function of freedom is to free someone else.” — Barnard College commencement speech, 1979.

Freedom is the decision to make a choice without asking for permission. I have spent many hours staring at this sentence and pondering life and freedom.

Today, another meaning of this phrase clicked with me. Just because we have the freedom to do something doesn’t mean it is OK, and there will always be consequences to doing it.

This month, the Iowa Senate (bless their hearts) just approved selling of raw milk on farm. While I understand that the Iowa House is reviewing this proposed legislation, it still baffles me why we are considering this to be OK. I also understand that the proposed bill will require raw milk producers to post their coliform counts and other tests for customer review. I guess I didn’t realize consumers knew how to interpret coliform counts (sarcasm here).

But what amazed me the most is the statement from an Iowa Senator: “I don’t think in this state people ought to be criminalized for things that they choose to do that don’t harm someone else.” This apparently is the definition of freedom: “not having to ask permission.” And this is where it clicked for me. There is a second part to the definition of freedom which needs to be considered: “without harming others.” We are free to do it, but should we be doing it?

Bless Iowa’s heart. Because selling raw milk does affect “someone else.” Raw chicken is being blamed for most of the cases of Salmonella in the U.S. currently. Does this CDC data consider raw milk illnesses? I am not saying that raw milk is the sole cause of Salmonella, or that we as an industry do not have a responsibility to produce safe product. That is a no brainer – of course we do, and we do it well.

If the poultry industry has regulations to follow for process control, then why not have those same applications for a higher-risk food such as raw milk? Salmonella cases are up, but are they mostly from chicken (on a percentage of product sold basis)? What if the data included the 127 outbreaks reported from raw milk (based on percentage sold) and the 144 hospitalizations (based on percentage of raw milk sold)? Of course, we all know, these outbreaks are just the reported illnesses and that number is probably low. Should chicken really be the entire focus of the problem?

The freedom to sell raw milk is going to cause harm to someone else, per the outbreaks reported. Raw chicken is not the only food source to blame for the Salmonella problem. Just because we have the freedom to do it doesn’t mean we need to be free to do it.

I really do have a lot more to say about this, but for now the only words I have are “Bless their hearts!” And I think y’all know what I am talking about.

Bless their hearts

Join for free* to continue reading.