{"title":"“别大惊小怪,老兄!”:承认原奶牧群分享协议。","authors":"Timothy J Mayer","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dissatisfaction with the industrial model of food production has caused many consumers to seek out food produced on local, family-scale\nfarms that use U.S. Department of Agriculture certified organic or other sustainable practices to grow their food and raise their\nlivestock. While almost all of the types of food that are available at the grocery store can also be found at the local farmers market, one\nfood that is difficult to find in many states is raw milk—that is, milk that has not undergone pasteurization (heat treatment). This\ndifficulty lies in the fact that most states prohibit the direct retail sale of raw milk to the final consumer because public health officials and\nstate legislators fear that raw milk may contain bacteria harmful to human health such as E. coli, Campylobacter, and Listeria. However,\nsome consumers reject these warnings and instead believe that raw milk possesses both nutritional and medicinal qualities. Indeed, an\never-increasing body of scientific research published in peer-reviewed journals supports the claim that raw milk consumption can mitigate\nor prevent some allergies and infections, especially in young children. In order for consumers to obtain raw milk in states where its sale is\nprohibited, some consumers have entered into arrangements with farmers known as “herd sharing,” through which the consumer\neffectively becomes an owner of the herd of cows or goats. For the price of the share and a monthly boarding fee, the shareholder can\nreceive a weekly distribution of the herd’s primary dividend, namely the raw milk. Several states expressly permit this practice while most\nare silent and still a few prohibit it outright. The three courts in the United States that have ruled on herd share agreements have split,\nwith two courts rejecting the agreements as a circumvention of the state’s prohibition on the sale of raw milk, and the other court\nassuming the agreement’s validity in light of the state’s failure to adequately define “sale.” I argue that courts should consistently\nuphold properly written herd share agreements where such agreements are not prohibited because such agreements are deeply\nrooted in the longstanding practice of shared ownership agreements for livestock found throughout the agriculture industry. Furthermore,\nraw milk has been found by some researchers to be a low-risk food that may actually have some nutritional and even medicinal qualities\nnot found in pasteurized milk. And to the extent that raw milk consumption could cause harm, the risk of a large-scale outbreak from\nmilk obtained through a herd share is slight considering how few participants are in any given herd share.</p>","PeriodicalId":73212,"journal":{"name":"Health matrix (Cleveland, Ohio : 1991)","volume":"25 ","pages":"383-435"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Don't Have A Cow, Man!\\\": Recognizing Herd Share Agreements for Raw Milk.\",\"authors\":\"Timothy J Mayer\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Dissatisfaction with the industrial model of food production has caused many consumers to seek out food produced on local, family-scale\\nfarms that use U.S. Department of Agriculture certified organic or other sustainable practices to grow their food and raise their\\nlivestock. While almost all of the types of food that are available at the grocery store can also be found at the local farmers market, one\\nfood that is difficult to find in many states is raw milk—that is, milk that has not undergone pasteurization (heat treatment). This\\ndifficulty lies in the fact that most states prohibit the direct retail sale of raw milk to the final consumer because public health officials and\\nstate legislators fear that raw milk may contain bacteria harmful to human health such as E. coli, Campylobacter, and Listeria. However,\\nsome consumers reject these warnings and instead believe that raw milk possesses both nutritional and medicinal qualities. Indeed, an\\never-increasing body of scientific research published in peer-reviewed journals supports the claim that raw milk consumption can mitigate\\nor prevent some allergies and infections, especially in young children. In order for consumers to obtain raw milk in states where its sale is\\nprohibited, some consumers have entered into arrangements with farmers known as “herd sharing,” through which the consumer\\neffectively becomes an owner of the herd of cows or goats. For the price of the share and a monthly boarding fee, the shareholder can\\nreceive a weekly distribution of the herd’s primary dividend, namely the raw milk. Several states expressly permit this practice while most\\nare silent and still a few prohibit it outright. The three courts in the United States that have ruled on herd share agreements have split,\\nwith two courts rejecting the agreements as a circumvention of the state’s prohibition on the sale of raw milk, and the other court\\nassuming the agreement’s validity in light of the state’s failure to adequately define “sale.” I argue that courts should consistently\\nuphold properly written herd share agreements where such agreements are not prohibited because such agreements are deeply\\nrooted in the longstanding practice of shared ownership agreements for livestock found throughout the agriculture industry. Furthermore,\\nraw milk has been found by some researchers to be a low-risk food that may actually have some nutritional and even medicinal qualities\\nnot found in pasteurized milk. And to the extent that raw milk consumption could cause harm, the risk of a large-scale outbreak from\\nmilk obtained through a herd share is slight considering how few participants are in any given herd share.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health matrix (Cleveland, Ohio : 1991)\",\"volume\":\"25 \",\"pages\":\"383-435\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health matrix (Cleveland, Ohio : 1991)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health matrix (Cleveland, Ohio : 1991)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
"Don't Have A Cow, Man!": Recognizing Herd Share Agreements for Raw Milk.
Dissatisfaction with the industrial model of food production has caused many consumers to seek out food produced on local, family-scale
farms that use U.S. Department of Agriculture certified organic or other sustainable practices to grow their food and raise their
livestock. While almost all of the types of food that are available at the grocery store can also be found at the local farmers market, one
food that is difficult to find in many states is raw milk—that is, milk that has not undergone pasteurization (heat treatment). This
difficulty lies in the fact that most states prohibit the direct retail sale of raw milk to the final consumer because public health officials and
state legislators fear that raw milk may contain bacteria harmful to human health such as E. coli, Campylobacter, and Listeria. However,
some consumers reject these warnings and instead believe that raw milk possesses both nutritional and medicinal qualities. Indeed, an
ever-increasing body of scientific research published in peer-reviewed journals supports the claim that raw milk consumption can mitigate
or prevent some allergies and infections, especially in young children. In order for consumers to obtain raw milk in states where its sale is
prohibited, some consumers have entered into arrangements with farmers known as “herd sharing,” through which the consumer
effectively becomes an owner of the herd of cows or goats. For the price of the share and a monthly boarding fee, the shareholder can
receive a weekly distribution of the herd’s primary dividend, namely the raw milk. Several states expressly permit this practice while most
are silent and still a few prohibit it outright. The three courts in the United States that have ruled on herd share agreements have split,
with two courts rejecting the agreements as a circumvention of the state’s prohibition on the sale of raw milk, and the other court
assuming the agreement’s validity in light of the state’s failure to adequately define “sale.” I argue that courts should consistently
uphold properly written herd share agreements where such agreements are not prohibited because such agreements are deeply
rooted in the longstanding practice of shared ownership agreements for livestock found throughout the agriculture industry. Furthermore,
raw milk has been found by some researchers to be a low-risk food that may actually have some nutritional and even medicinal qualities
not found in pasteurized milk. And to the extent that raw milk consumption could cause harm, the risk of a large-scale outbreak from
milk obtained through a herd share is slight considering how few participants are in any given herd share.