AFACT

[Guest guest]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/business/09feed.html?ref=business

March 9, 2008

The Feed

Fighting on a Battlefield the Size of a Milk Label By ANDREW MARTIN

IT may be the last stand of Posilac.

A new advocacy group closely tied to Monsanto has

started a counteroffensive to stop the proliferation

of milk that comes from cows that aren’t treated with

synthetic bovine growth hormone.

The group, called American Farmers for the Advancement

and Conservation of Technology, or Afact, says it is a

grass-roots organization that came together to defend

members’ right to use recombinant bovine somatotropin,

also known as rBST or rBGH, an artificial hormone that

stimulates milk production. It is sold by Monsanto

under the brand name Posilac.

Dairy farmers are indeed part of the organization. But

Afact was organized in part by Monsanto and a Colorado

consultant who lists Monsanto as a client.

Afact has also received help from Osborn & Barr, a

marketing firm whose founders include a former

Monsanto executive. The firm received a contract in

2006 to help with the Posilac campaign.

Lori Hoag, a spokeswoman for the dairy unit of

Monsanto, said her company did provide financial

support to Afact. But Ms. Hoag asserted that the group

is led by farmers, not Monsanto.

“They make all the governing decisions for their

organization,” she said. “Monsanto has nothing to do

with that.”

Afact has come together as a growing number of

consumers are choosing milk that comes from cows that

are not treated with the artificial growth hormone.

Even though the Food and Drug Administration has

declared the synthetic hormone safe, many other

countries have refused to approve it, and there is

lingering concern among many consumers about its

impact on health and the welfare of cows.

The marketplace has responded, and now everyone from

Whole Foods Market to Wal-Mart Stores sells milk that

is labeled as coming from cows not treated with the

hormone. Some dairy industry veterans say it’s only a

matter of time before nearly all of the milk supply

comes from cows that weren’t treated with Posilac.

According to Monsanto, about a third of the dairy cows

in the United States are in herds where Posilac is

used.

And the trend might not stop with milk. Kraft is

planning to sell cheese labeled as having come from

untreated cows.

But consumer demand for more natural products has

conflicted with some dairy farmers’ desire to use the

artificial hormone to bolster production and bottom

lines, and it has certainly interfered with Monsanto’s

business plan for Posilac.

Cows typically produce an extra gallon a day when they

are treated with Posilac. That can translate into

serious money for dairy farmers at a time when prices

are near record highs.

So Afact has embarked on a counteroffensive that

includes meeting with retailers and pushing efforts by

state legislators and state agriculture commissioners

to pass laws to ban or restrict labels that indicate

milk comes from untreated cows.

Last fall in Pennsylvania, Dennis Wolff, the

agriculture secretary, tried to ban milk that was

labeled as free of the synthetic hormone because, he

said, consumers were confused. Mr. Wolff’s office

acknowledged that it had no consumer research to back

up his claim, and he eventually had to scale back his

plans when consumer groups and Gov. G. Rendell

balked.

Instead, the state tightened up the language on milk

labels to make sure it was more accurate. But Posilac’s supporters haven’t given up.

In recent months, labeling changes have been floated

in New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, Kansas, Utah, Missouri

and Vermont, according to Hansen, who has

tracked the issue as a senior scientist for Consumers

Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports.

A Consumer Reports survey last summer found that 88

percent of consumers believed that milk from cows not

treated with synthetic hormones should be allowed to

be labeled as such.

Afact says it believes that such “absence” labels can

be misleading and imply that milk from cows treated

with hormones is inferior. In fact, the F.D.A.

maintains that there is no significant difference

between milk from cows that are treated and from those

that are not.

Afact also argues that some consumers are paying a

premium for milk that doesn’t include artificial

hormones.

“We know it’s a technology that makes us money and is

safe for our cows,” said Carrol , a Kansas

dairy farmer who is co-chairman of Afact. Mr.

said he became involved in the issue because his

cooperative called him and asked him to stop using

Posilac; instead, he found a new cooperative.

Ms. Hoag of Monsanto said her company was not actively

pushing changes in milk labeling laws.

Advocates for Posilac, including Monsanto, have been

complaining for years about milk labeled as free of

artificial bovine growth hormone. In September 2006,

Holloway, president of the Monsanto dairy unit,

gave a speech in which he said the “fundamental issue”

was dairy farmers’ ability to choose the best

technology. “Dairy farmer choice to use a variety of

F.D.A.-approved technologies is at risk,” he said.

That same year, the Monsanto dairy unit hired Osborn &

Barr to handle, among other things, the Posilac brand,

according to an article in the St. Louis Business

Journal.

In 2007, Monsanto and several dairy organizations met

by phone to “lay the groundwork” for a grass-roots

organization, according to an online dairy industry

newsletter.

Afact was created in the fall of 2007. In addition to

receiving money from Monsanto, Afact has received help

with its Web site from Osborn & Barr, said Monty G.

, a Colorado consultant who was hired to

organize the group. Afact believes that the push for milk from untreated

cows is being driven by advocates like Consumers Union

and PETA, “who make a profit, living and business by

striking fear in citizens,” Mr. said in an

e-mail message.

The group also believes it will be hard for food

retailers to “move away from the rBST-free stance

without legislation and government policy,” according

to an Afact presentation to dairy farmers in January.

In the presentation, Afact also listed “integrity,”

“honesty” and “transparent” as “words we wish to

embody.” They could start by being more straightforward about

who is behind Afact.