The Kansas Department of Agriculture, in US, is considering a new law that will forbid dairy producers to display in their labels that their cows are free from synthetic growth hormones.
Recombinant bovine somatotropin is an artificial growth hormone developed by Monsanto and sold under the brand name Posilac. It is injected in cows to increase milk production. In October this year, as consumers’ opposition to this product increased, Monsanto decided to sell the business unit to Elly Lilly for $ 300m.
If approved, the new Kansas law will be valid from January 2010, banning dairy product labels from stating "rBST free." Companies will also have to include in their labels disclaimers saying "the FDA has determined that no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rBST-supplemented and non-rBST-supplemented cows."
Backers of the proposal says that the distinction in labels “confuse consumers.” Kansas Agriculture Department spokeswoman Lisa Taylor said they “simply want labels to not be misleading," arguing that there is no proof that milk from BST cows cause health problems.
The question is: how can the statement “free from rBST” be misleading? It is a plain fact. It doesn’t say that the milk is healthier. It just gives information to the consumer to let them make their choice.
Maybe the FDA and Kansas Department of Agriculture believe consumers are not able to make a choice based in facts?
And they say the UK is a “nanny state…”
PS: the pdf version of the regulation and the hearing are not available on the Kansas Department of Agriculture website, but their html versions are, thanks to Google cache:
Notice of Hearing on Proposed Administrative Regulations
Fact Sheet - Dairy Labelling Regulation
