Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Not Milk.

The FDA is mulling over yet another labeling issue, this time over milk that would be used in items like cheese and ice cream. It seems it is cheaper to "ultra-filter" the milk, removing the liquid which contains things like vitamins and minerals (calcium), and to transport this concentrated substance then reconstitute it later. This ultra-filtered end product has none of the nutritional benefits of real milk.

The FDA would require the label to say "ultra-filtered" milk, which may or may not mean much to consumers who are not aware of the processing. Manufacturers insist that it would be an unfair economic "burden" to alter labels and would prefer to keep customers in the dark and more profits in the black.

You can comment on this issue until April 11, 2008.

Meanwhile, lobbyists are still pursuing a state-by-state dodge of the FDA ruling on allowing dairies to label their milk "rBGH-free." Utah and Kansas are the current targets. Missouri will likely be next. Got to keep those consumers in the dark about what their milk contains (or doesn't), it's good for profits. You can submit comment on this issue here.


Anonymous said...

Oy vey! These labeling outrages are ... outrageous! The idea that we have no right to know what we're putting in our bodies is beyond my comprehension.

If you're game, I invite you to participate in the 6-word-memoir meme - see this post for details

Anonymous said...

This sort of reminds me of when several years the cow milk industry paid out millions to stop a label on cow's milk which would let buyers know of increased ear infections ,phlem build up, colds,etc.,in children when milk is consumed.

Anonymous said...

In my comment I meant to write the word "AGO" after the words several years...........Get it? Got it?Good!:)