Public Outcry Keeps Artificial Hormone Milk Labels in PA

[Guest guest]

FYI Jane and her husband Steve were fired from Fox over a story

on rbST.

http://www.injuryboard.com/national-news/public-outcry-keeps-hormone-milk-labels-in-pa.aspx?googleid=29144

Public Outcry

Keeps Hormone Milk Labels in PA

Posted by Jane Akre

Saturday, January

19, 2008 1:53 AM EST

LEARN MORE

Consumer

letter to Gov.

Oregon PSR

Consumers

Union Monsanto

At a time when consumers can look at labels to find whether their

food has less salt, is Kosher or trans-fat-free, the Pennsylvania

Agriculture Department thought, when it came to labels on dairy

products, less was more.

In October, Pennsylvania became the first state to ban the practice

of labeling milk as free from Monsanto’s artificial growth hormone rBST

also known as rbGH (synthetic or recombinant bovine growth hormone).

The labels were too confusing since milk already has naturally

occurring hormones and it might be difficult to verify whether “coming

from cows not treated with rBST” was actually true according to the

state agriculture secretary, Dennis

Wolff who issued notice of the ban.

But on the eve of the February 1 deadline for label changes, a

bombardment of consumer emails, letters and calls into Governor

Rendell's office convinced him to intervene and reverse the labeling

prohibition.

In

a statement Thursday, the governor said, “The public has a right to

complete information about how the milk they buy is produced.”

Hansen, Ph.D, a senior scientist with Consumers

Union,

one of the groups involved announced, “This is a victory for free

speech, free markets, sustainable farming, and the consumer’s right to

know. Consumers increasingly want to know more about how their food is

produced, and particularly whether it is produced in natural and

sustainable manner.”

Rick North of Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility tells IB

News,

“Make no mistake – with thousands of messages of protest, plus the

sign-on letter of over 60 organizations protesting the ban, and, of

course, the threat of a lawsuit, this caught them completely by

surprise, they had no idea this would generate a very significant

consumer response.”

Litigation could have involved charges of infringement on commercial

free speech.

Why target Pennsylvania farmers? “We were almost rbst free before

the labeling ban,” Snyder tells IB News about

dairy industry in his state, “and the numbers were dwindling.”

Snyder is the executive director of a organized group of 4,000, half

of whom are dairy farmers called Pennsylvania Association for

Sustainable Agriculture (PASA).

While the average dairy farm in Pennsylvania is 67 cows, the trend

nationally has been toward larger corporate mega-farms that milk

thousands of cows in a day.

The difference is a philosophical one - local, seasonally grown

food without added chemicals and hormones. “Small farms are an

impediment to the advancement of the industry,” Snyder says.

“If you can’t put on labels, it puts small farmers out of business.”

Consumers might be wondering why the push away from labels

when the national trend is to give more information.

Beginning this year shoppers will find it easier to make selections

of food based on upgraded nutrition labels called the Overall Nutritional Quality Index (ONQI).

Rick North of PSR says, “This isn’t about protecting consumers. This

is about protecting Monsanto’s dwindling profits.”

While Monsanto won’t release sales figures, it once claimed

one-third of the nation’s dairy cows were injected with the drug

hormone commercially called Posilac.

That number is now estimated to be closer to 17 percent according to

Consumers Union.

Nationwide consumers are rejecting dairy from cows injected with

artificial growth hormones.

DATAMONITOR,

which tracks supermarket sales, has reported that "growth in organic

milk is largely driven by continued use of hormones such as rbGH and

antibiotics in the conventional dairy industry."

Organic dairy products, which don't allow rbGH, have soared to

double digit profits. That in turn has grocers such as Kroger, Publix,

Safeway and soon Wal-Mart following the money trail hoping to capture

some of the market that Organic Valley and Horizon have taken away.

By mid-year Kraft will offer an rBGH/rBST-free cheese to offer to

consumers as a “premium brand.”

The largest U.S. Dairy company, Dean Foods Co., now offers a line of

artificial hormone free products and last year Starbucks Corp. banned

the use of rBST/rbGH from its nearly 6,793 company owned stores.

Chipolte Mexican Grille Inc., a Mc’s spin-off has also banned

rBSt/rbGH.

rbGH was declared safe and approved by the FDA for use by the

nation’s dairy farmers in late 1993 to produce more milk. The hormone

is replicated by bacteria and is genetically engineered in a lab to

mimic a cows natural growth hormone. Monsanto had pinned big hopes on

taking the drug international.

But rbGH has always been controversial. At the time of approval,

critics claimed and Monsanto’s own research affirmed, that milk from

treated cows contained higher levels of a spin-off hormone IGF-1, which

has been linked to prostate and

breast cancer.

Monsanto insists the milk from treated cows is no different than

untreated milk.

During an October analysts’ conference, Chief Financial Officer

Terrell Crews told

Chicago Business the company has seen declines in Posilac sales

because “we’ve seen some pressure in the dairy business on that

product.”

Rick North of PSR believes Monsanto is behind the push in

Pennsylvania and has taken the effort to overturn labels to Ohio, which

is scheduled to make a decision this month.

Washington and Missouri had also been considering label

prohibitions. Recently New Jersey had considered taking a similar

action but opted against it.

Snyder admits there are lots of false labels that confront consumers

everyday. “Farm fresh” when it's been transported from Chile,

‘natural” when the food is highly processed.

“Certainly problems with labels are rampant, but in this case they

picked on one certain issue and blew it out of proportion. They were

doing this to preserve a market for the maker of rBST.”

The FDA announced this week that it had approved the milk and meat

of cloned animals for human consumption. Labels won't be needed the

agency says. Snyder says the timing is curious. “To my mind a lot of

the battle is not rbST but a fight over clone-free labels they’re

preparing for because that’s going to be the bigger one.”

As it stands for now, farmers in Pennsylvania who don’t use

rbGH/rBST can continue labels that say their milk is “coming from cows

not treated with rBST.”

What they can’t say is “No Hormones” because with natural hormones

present, technically that isn't accurate.

Also the labels must include an FDA suggested disclaimer stating

that, “no significant difference has been shown between milk derived

from rBST-treated and

non-rBST-treated cows."

For dairy farmers who believe in local, regional and sustainable

agriculture, Snyder says the ruling allows them to continue offering

something the public wants.

“We have a couple thousand farmers in our membership and it just

means everything to them that they can communicate to their customers

about how they produce the foods they’re selling. It reaffirms a

fundamental right that we can continue to put high quality products on

the market and support farming methods they want to see.” #