Editor’s note: This commentary is by Scott Waterman, who is director of communications and policy for the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets.
The Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets read the recent commentary in VTDigger by Michael Colby of Regeneration Vermont entitled: “Ben & Jerry’s drug problem.” The agency has concerns with a number of Colby’s statements about data and processes attributed to the agency, and so thought it important to provide full information and context related to this topic.
In the commentary Colby states: “there have been at least two antibiotic-contaminated milk loads picked up, processed and sold to the public through the St. Albans Cooperative Creamery in the last year.”
In 2019, two separate small farms provided milk to the St. Albans Co-op (now DFA) in milk tankers that co-mingled milk from a number of different, Vermont dairy farms. Per FDA standards and best practices, every tankerload of milk delivered to a co-op is tested at the processing facility for antibiotics and other health concerns. These two tankers’ milk showed no detectable levels of antibiotics. However, the 3-ounce samples of milk taken from these two farms in question at pickup (this is standard for every pickup) did show levels of antibiotics in the 3-ounce sample representing each farm. These samples are tested after a tanker load of milk has passed the required drug testing to allow the milk to be processed. Per FDA guidelines and best practices, because the tanker load containing this milk tested negative, it is determined that the milk is safe for human consumption. If the milk on that tanker had tested positive, it would have been disposed of.
The purpose of testing every load of milk that comes from each Vermont farm is to find any possibility of drug residues in the smallest and strictest sample size, 3 ounces. This testing allows the agency to be informed of issues that would otherwise go undetected. The agency responded individually to each farm’s positive test sample to ensure proper on-farm procedures going forward.
In the commentary Colby states: “Last November, a Middlebury farm that ships to what is now DFA was cited for an antibiotics residue violation that went undetected before processing and presumed consumption. According to ag agency officials, this happens when the milk from a violating farm is comingled on the same truck with milk from other farms that are below allowable residue limits, thus bringing the entirety of the load within limits. The offending farm’s milk isn’t detected until later when the individual samples from each farm’s pick-up are tested at the processor’s labs, tests that can take weeks to complete, longer than the milk sticks around the plant.”
In this one instance, a new lab employee working on a weekend thought the agency was not to be contacted until the clearing sample came back, thus delaying sending the producer’s 3-ounce vial positive result to the agency. This time span has been addressed and won’t be this delayed in the future. No milk was allowed to be picked up at the farm until the producer’s milk cleared and showed no antibiotics. This is the case with all positive drug tests. Per FDA guidelines and best practices, because the tanker load containing this milk and delivered to the co-op tested negative, it is determined that the milk is safe for human consumption.
In the commentary Colby states: “Do not know” is how the farmer responded to the cause of the violation on the ag agency’s “Antibiotic Residue Incident Response Form,” while also noting that they thought they had milked all “treated cows into a pail” to be discarded. Similarly, in May of this year, a New Haven farm that also ships to DFA was found to have both violated antibiotic residue regulations and had its milk processed and, presumably, consumed. Again, the farm wasn’t sure how the violation occurred but pointed to “a fresh cows (sic) that was purchased and don’t know if she was dry treated but was at least three days from calving.”
While Colby accurately relates two failures to prevent cow’s milk treated with antibiotics from being picked up, he neglects to mention that the agency left recommendations with the farmers to prevent this from happening again, including a best practices manual which the agency leaves with every farm that has a positive test. The agency is constantly educating and working with Vermont farmers to prevent this issue from occurring.
In the commentary Colby states: “The most recent data obtained by Regeneration Vermont from the Vermont agriculture agency showed dozens of antibiotic violations statewide over the last couple of years, with many not being detected until the milk was already processed and sold to the public.”
In 2011 there were 42 positive antibiotic results on Vermont dairy farms. In 2018 the number was 15 and to date for 2019 the total is nine. These numbers demonstrate that Vermont co-ops and the Agency of Agriculture work tirelessly to mitigate this issue. Milk is picked up either daily or every other day from every Vermont farm (currently 702 dairy farms), equating to 128,115 milk pickups in 2019 with only nine detections of antibiotics. This result speaks to the industries’ and regulators’ efforts to protect consumers.
In the commentary Colby states: “Ben & Jerry’s has a drug problem because the industrial dairy supply that it relies upon has an antibiotics problem, which is why organizations like the Organic Consumers Association and Regeneration Vermont have been campaigning to convince them to transition away from CAFO-dominated dairying and towards the regenerative organic alternatives. In other words, Ben & Jerry’s should be practicing what it’s been preaching and put more than ‘aspirations and beliefs’ in its claims and programs, especially when it comes to an issue as important as antibiotic residues in the food supply.”
While the agency cannot and will not speak for Ben & Jerry’s, the public can rest assured that our Vermont dairy processors do not have a drug problem. The data available on this topic proves this. As we indicated previously, across Vermont’s 702 dairy farms that milk their cows twice daily, there have been only nine positive tests out of at least 512,460 milkings in 2019. That’s a mistake rate of .00001756%. This extremely low number is directly due to the diligence of our Vermont dairy farmers and the Agency of Agriculture to protect the public and our value-added producers from antibiotic residues.
The agency is happy to provide the data supporting these conclusions upon request. It is the same data that was requested by Colby and Regeneration Vermont earlier this year.
Read the story on VTDigger here: Scott Waterman: Data shows Vermont dairy protects public and producers.
