Activists understand what’s wrong with milk marketing; where are the regulators?
href=”http://www.milkismilk.com/blog/” mce_href=”http://www.milkismilk.com/blog/”>Milk is Milk Blog by Alex Avery
A recent posting on an environmental activist group blog took up the topic of the Cornucopia Institute’s attacks claiming certain organic milk was more organic than competing brands based on differing grazing practices. The commentator complained, “Consumers now face a dizzying array of milk choices,” adding, “What a bummer. Now, even milk is complicated.”
Even if we put aside the fact that nutritionally, chemically and by all other measurable aspects the organic milk under attack by Cornucopia is the same - as is all milk organic or traditionally produced; and if we ignore that Cornucopia’s attacks are apparently also funded by the “more organic” dairy interests who benefit from these campaigns (hmmm, is anyone else thinking RICO suit?); the real problem revealed here is that special interest groups are teaming up with for-profit marketing interests to bilk consumers and as a result also harm America’s family dairy farmers. If even environmental activists understand that complicating milk is “a bummer,” then how come the majority of state and federal regulators empowered to protect consumers appear to be ignoring this problem?
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a think tank-funded study to see the problem. Just look at the dairy case in your local Safeway, Kroger, Star Market, Trader Joe’s(which appears to be on some kind of misleading “hormone-free” kick lately) or Wal-Mart. They don’t look anything like the dairy cases of yore. In the good old days - say 5 or 10 short years ago - what did we find in the dairy case? Milk, cream, butter… maybe some eggs and cheese. Then the only milk choice was skim, 2% or whole. Today consumers are faced with “a dizzying array of milk choices” which usually includes a lower-priced store or generic brand, a premium labeled and priced brand which often includes some production-oriented distinction (e.g. “Free Farmed” or “rbST-free”), and a high-priced (often 100% more expensive) organic brand exclaiming a range of misleading qualities (e.g. “free from toxic pesticides,” “no hormones” and “antibiotic-free”). Next to these dairy offering we find soy “milks” and power drinks - many of which promote their benefits over dairy products. No wonder consumers are drinking less milk - these choices and claims presented side-by-side are confusing and scaring them away from a safe, affordable and important source of nutrition.
All of the respected, independent health and science experts agree that milk is milk. The American Medical Association, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the dozens of food and animal scientists who study and publish on dairy issues all report that from a quality, chemical, nutrition and safety perspective traditionally produced milk — milk produced from cows receiving approved animal health and productivity treatments — and organically produced milk is exactly the same. Independent research clearly shows that dairy consumers are confused and misled by marketing claims into believing that generic, premium and organic branded dairy products have safety, health or non-descript quality differences - differences which simply do not exist.
According to the National Council Against Health Fraud, the FDA has been issuing warning letters regarding false and misleading marketing of various products at a rapid pace. Last year it ordered more than 100 companies to stop making illegal claims for dietary supplements, herbal products, homeopathic products, and/or devices. Yet, despite receiving numerous complaints about false and misleading marketing by a growing number of unscrupulous marketing interests in the dairy industry FDA’s only action to date has been to issue four warning letters over two years ago - these complaints targeted some of the smallest possible violators with no apparent follow-up or enforcement. Yet, of the countries largest multi-million dollar dairy companies continue to make the same claims which FDA has clearly said are false and/or misleading and in violation of laws which govern the labeling and marketing of food products. Some examples of the companies which regulators fail to enforce truthful and non-misleading claims against - claims which harm consumers and America’s family dairy farmers - include:
A more comprehensive list of false and/or misleading claims is available at the Stop Labeling Lies coalition Web site. These marketing practices are harming dairy farmers and swindling consumers. FDA and other state regulators have received complaints for years about this from consumer coalitions, dairy farming cooperatives, and food industry alliances. But the regulators lack of meaningful enforcement and blind eye to the worst offenders has left farmers, packagers and retailers with little choice but to jump on the false and misleading marketing bandwagon.
One positive example of consumer protection and stewardship that FDA and other states should consider are the good people at the Washington State Department of Agriculture. When they became concerned about misleading antibiotic and hormone claims associated with “Free Farmed” labels they took responsible action and today those labels are gone in Washington State.
Feel free to take a minute and forward this article or your comments to Felicia Satchell at FDA - Ms. Satchell appears to be pretty good at ignoring dozens of emails, calls and letters about this problem so don’t expect a response right away.
Felicia Satchell, Office of Nutritional Products, Labeling and Dietary Supplements
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
HFS - 820
200 C Street, SWWashington, DC 20204
Felicia.Satchell@cfsan.fda.gov
Remind Ms. Satchel of what she already knows - milk is milk, and it’s her job to make sure consumers are protected against people trying to sell us claims to the contrary.