Protect Us From Choice -- Please Posted by Reggie at 11/16/07 03:18 PM

Last month, in an Orwellian stretch of logic and without warning or any public discussion, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) notified 19 dairies that “their labels are false or misleading and need to be changed” So, what kinds of labels were so terrible that the PDA felt they had to be removed from milk cartons immediately? Labels that told the consumer that the cows that produced the milk had not been given any artificial hormones. Examples of some of the supposedly “misleading” labels include, “Our farmers’ pledge: no artificial growth hormones,” “From cows not treated with the growth hormone rBST,” and “free of artificial growth hormones.” As of January 1, 2008, these labels will be illegal. The PDA says that such labels “confuse” consumers, “making it hard for consumers to make informed decisions.”

Some cows are in fact given an artificial hormone, produced by Monsanto. Called recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH) or recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST), it is a genetically engineered drug designed to increase milk production. However, farmers who don't use the drug have discovered that many consumers actually prefer their milk produced the natural way, and are using their non-use of the hormone as a selling point.

We find the PDA's sudden prohibition against farmers telling consumers they are not using hormones to be surprising, to say the least. Some 13 years ago, when the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) made its controversial decision to approve the hormone use, it also issued guidance specifically saying that dairies whose farmers didn’t use the artificial hormone could label their milk as “from cows not treated with rbST/rbGH.”

During the years since then, consumers have increasingly sought out milk from untreated cows. Recently, a significant number of stores and chains, including Starbucks, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, Krogers, and Publix, have begun offering milk and other dairy products labeled as coming from cows not treated with rbGH or rbST.

In late 2002 Monsanto asked the Maine Attorney General to declare "Our Farmer’s Pledge: No Artificial Growth Hormones" labels “misleading” but he refused. (See our letter to the Maine Attorney General, asking that he not grant Monsanto’s request). In 2007, Monsanto asked the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to take action against such labels, but they refused as well. In late August, the FTC wrote to Monsanto, “The FTC agrees with FDA that food companies may inform consumers in advertising, as in labeling, that they do not use rBST.” However, in the Governor and the Secretary of Agriculture of the state of Pennsylvania, Monsanto has apparently found a sympathetic ear.

Questions also remain about the safety of rbGH use, which FDA approved in 1993, but was rejected in Canada and the European Union (our op-ed on this issue can be found here):

comments (28)

1 Posted by Elisabeth LoFaro at 11/29/07 02:55 PM

Already you shouldn't be using the hormone in the first place, but to lie about it too!?! Have you no ethics whatsoever? I pledge never to purchase anything your company has laid hands on, as well as to educate anyone with whom I come into contact about your evildoings. Talk about the Axis of Evil--in our own country. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

2 Posted by kimber at 11/29/07 03:18 PM

Cows and humans share an identical growth hormone Naturally that has been proven to increase rate of breast cancer growth...not to mention the milk with Added pus and growth hormones !!!Got kids? PLEASE
spend 5 minutes getting eye popping ,sound scientific research from THE NOTMILK MAN ,at notmilk.com, and click on Milk A-Z ...No dairy products for 1 week has been shown to improve kids' respiratory and bowel functioning, and more!Clean water ,organic soy milk ,but first, mama's vegan breast are best!

3 Posted by George Hopkins at 11/29/07 03:20 PM

I only buy milk with NO growth hormone and don't find it confusing. I would hate to have to buy milk from Denmark!

4 Posted by Reggie at 11/29/07 03:28 PM

Let me clear up a bit of confusion. There is no indication that the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture labeling ban is a reaction to companies lying about whether they are using artificial hormones. There has been no indication of fraud.

Monsanto Corp., the company that makes Prosilac (the artificial hormone rGBH) and some of the large dairy producers convinced the Department to issue the ban because they do not want consumers to be able to tell the difference between more naturally produced dairy products and the products that come from herds treated with artificial hormones.

If there are no labels, the consumer’s choice is limited to dairy or no dairy rather than artificial hormones or no artificial hormones. This is an issue of censoring truthful, useful labeling and in my opinion it’s purely about money.

5 Posted by Debbie at 11/29/07 03:59 PM

Really, why doesn't the producer have to list the fact that they DO use synthetic growth hormones? Why are they able to hide the facts and those who do not use them are unable to tell the truth? This trend has got to stop. We need gmo and country of origin labelling as well.

6 Posted by Mariah at 11/29/07 04:22 PM

How nice... when you are told you are safe, it gets blocked. When your at risk, dress it up and make it sound good. So who is kicking back to who???

Seems like all companies are in the same bed with twelve other rattlesnakes.

7 Posted by Debbie at 11/29/07 04:39 PM

This you tube story tells a lot about when the press tried to cover this story in the 1990's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axU9ngbTxKw

8 Posted by Antoine at 11/29/07 05:39 PM

Just as the manufactures of MSG monosodium glutmate disguise their product in foods like Cambel and Knor soups, Monsanto will soon find out that they can do the same and disguise the growth hormone in milk products as well. Woe be to the company that does it, because when the consumer finds out they will virtually boycott their product. Look out chicken farmers like Tyson who claim the no use of growth hormones. Have you seen chicken breasts lately. I swear, I can't tell which is larger the chicken or the turkey?

9 Posted by Gene Ginter at 11/30/07 10:47 AM

The FDA Approved the use of rbST/rbGH in 1993. The first big surge in Autism happened in 1995. I strongly believe there is a link in the chemicals they use in our food to increases in Autism.

10 Posted by Sharon Roper at 11/30/07 02:50 PM

When are we going to put a stop to Big Agri, Big Pharma and all the other BIG bullies from making personal freedom choices for us?! It's time to act!

11 Posted by Wendell Williams at 11/30/07 08:55 PM

I think it preposterous for the FDA to prohibit
any dairy producers the right to label their milk containers with the notation "No Growth Hormones"

12 Posted by suzanne at 11/30/07 10:57 PM

i personally believe we are at a crossroads with what i have heard regarding this b.s. in not allowing pennsylvanians the right to know what is in their food. that goes for the rest of us.i would like to know what percentage of "sludge" is being used in all our foods. sludge for those of you who don't know ...is what is left over after our sewage has been "cleaned".i know in canada, they have found sludge used in their fertila. what fertilizer is our government using or allowing elsewhere in food we grow in other countries?how can we become more informed if we have people like the governor of pennsylvania and the head of the agriculture purposely misleading their constituents?

13 Posted by Georgia Champion at 12/03/07 11:36 AM

I want to know that there is no growth hormones in my milk. I hope by using only organic milk I will be safe.

14 Posted by Eleanor Herman at 12/04/07 04:19 PM

We have been purchasing milk with labels that state they DON'T HAVE GROWTH HORMONES. It's wrong to leave off that info. We are entitled to know! I understand that use of hormones can be painful for the cows and cause infections in utters which can then taint the milk.

15 Posted by Dale at 12/24/07 05:47 PM

I just read 22 of the most stupid comments I have ever heard. All you dummies need to study real science and stop subscribing to your dumb ass activist magazines. The only reason there is a problem is retail stores are trying to find a better market to squeeze another doller out of you idiots and you are sure helping them out.
MILK IS MILK IT IS ALL SAFE NO MATTER WHAT YOU READ!!!!!!!

16 Posted by Gene James at 01/10/08 11:57 AM

I'm confused! Is the PA Dept Ag ban saying a producer may not say "no artificial hormones" when the cows received natural hormones? Will PA allow one to label "No hormones"?? If so, get off their back: to label "no artificial hormones" when other hormones are used is indeed misleading!
My read of this site makes it seem that they are being reasonable:http://www.agriculture.state.pa.us/agriculture/cwp/view.asp?a=3&q=145988
The reporting and comments on this issue are very sloppy and often use "hormone", "artificial hormone" and "growth hormone" interchangeably.
I just got a mass-mailing from CU about this matter and found it dreadfully lacking in clarity and detail. And I'm ticked off that the author provides no email or phone contact info.

17 Posted by Susan at 01/15/08 07:45 PM

Anyone is free to drink milk from large commercial dairy herds if they want to, Dale. However, I and many others should be equally free to choose milk from herds that are not treated with artificial growth hormones. It's our choice -- that's the whole point of this country. Remember when companies told us that DDT was safe? CCA-treated (pressure-treated) wood? Chlordane? Are you seeing a pattern here? It's my right to be proactive about my health if I choose to. Why should you care how I spend my money? I dont care if you choose to support commercial intersts -- knock yourself out, just dont get in my way and tell me how to choose my food. Consumers deserve to know how their milk was produced. "Real science" cant deny that there is a difference in milk production between treated and untreated cows -- that's the whole reason for the hormone in the first place. If I choose to support farms that dont use artificial hormones on their cows, that is MY RIGHT. STOP GETTING IN THE WAY OF OTHER PEOPLE'S RIGHTS!

18 Posted by Joan at 02/07/08 06:13 PM

I am a breast cancer survivor whose cancer was hormone positive. I therefore try to limit my intake of hormone treated meat and dairy products. This is a health related issue for many women and we have a right to know what we are buying!

19 Posted by Sonja Coryat at 03/05/08 11:23 PM

I am against BGH as much as any of the readers above, and probably more so because I remember reading long ago about the history of how this all came about, and how millions of cows were slaughtered to cut down on their number, in anticipation of the new chemical's socalled wonders. Entire herds were just eliminated everywhere, and many small dairy farmers were put out of business. Nevertheless, I just thought I'd put some perspective on the subject of dairy products, and tell you what Tobias Smollett wrote in 1771 in a book called "The Expedition of Humpry Clinker, describing milk and butter in London at that time: "Milk is the produce of faded cabbage leaves and sour draff, lowered with hot water, frothed with bruised snails, carried through the streets in open pails. The tallowy, rancid mass called butter is manufactured with candle grease and kitchen stuff." So we have made some progress since then. www.sonjarants.blogspot.com

20 Posted by Robert Trabosh, Jr. at 05/05/08 08:50 AM

I live in Pa and I am very upset they sold us out to Monsanto,