[ Plant-based milk products such as almond milk have reached over
$3 billion in annual domestic sales. The dairy industry — and the
politicians who support it — want to stop producers from labeling
almond, soy, and oat milk as “milk."]
[[link removed]]

PORTSIDE CULTURE

FIGHTING TO KEEP MILK A HOUSEHOLD — BUT NOT PLANT-BASED — NAME  
[[link removed]]


 

John McCracken
March 15, 2023
Ambrook Research
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Plant-based milk products such as almond milk have reached over $3
billion in annual domestic sales. The dairy industry — and the
politicians who support it — want to stop producers from labeling
almond, soy, and oat milk as “milk." _

In the wake of new Food and Drug Administration guidance, Ali Aas

 

In the wake of new Food and Drug Administration guidance, dairy state
politicians are again trying to make almond milk change its name.

The dairy industry — and the politicians who support it — want to
stop producers from labeling almond, soy, and oat milk as “milk,”
in the wake of federal guidance that would allow for this terminology.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released draft guidance in
February for how plant-based alternative food products should be
labeled. According to the draft document, the agency would allow
companies to continue using terms like milk, as long as the source of
the liquid, — such as nuts or soy — is clearly defined.

While the FDA already had a defined definition for milk, established
in 1973 as the “lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum,
obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows,” the
agency cited First Amendment freedoms when it comes to naming
products. The agency’s draft decision said free speech in products
should only be restricted when labeling is “inherently false or
misleading.” Additionally, the FDA asserted that consumers are savvy
enough to know that nuts and oats can’t be physically milked.

“Studies indicate that consumers understand that plant-based milk
alternatives do not contain milk when shopping for various types of
products labeled with the term ‘milk,’” the agency wrote.

Since this draft document was released, dairy producers have taken aim
at the federal agency.

In Minnesota, the director of the Minnesota Milk Producers Association
told MinnPost that the new guidance is “theft” for dairy
farmers’ way of life and that “dairy farmers are offended that
someone would try to steal their whole livelihood.”

Meanwhile, the executive director of the Wisconsin Cheesemakers
Association said the new policy was full of tortured logic and claimed
that the FDA decided that “almonds do lactate,” a reference to
former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb’s infamous retort.

The movement to keep the word “milk” securely attached to
secreting mammals has made strange bedfellows in American politics.
For instance, progressive Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin from
Wisconsin has echoed similar ideas as ultra-conservative political
commentator Nick Adams.

In the wake of the FDA’s draft decision, Baldwin said the guidance
goes against her state’s dominating dairy industry and piggybacks on
the hard work of more than 6,000 dairy producers in the state. In
response to the FDA’s draft language, Baldwin reintroduced a 2017
bill that would prohibit seed, nut, plant, and algae products from
using the words “milk,” “yogurt,” or “cheese” in their
labeling.

“Wisconsin’s dairy farmers produce second-to-none products with
the highest nutritional value and imitation products have gotten away
with using dairy’s good name without meeting those standards,”
Baldwin said in a statement. “The Biden Administration’s guidance
that allows non-dairy products to use dairy names is just wrong, and
I’m proud to take a stand for Wisconsin farmers and the quality
products they make.”

This legislation mirrors past state-level efforts to prevent meat
alternatives from using terms such as burgers or sausage to brand
their products, which proponents said would prevent consumers from
making purchases under false pretenses. Baldwin’s Defending Against
Imitations and Replacements of Yogurt, milk, and cheese to Promote
Regular Intake of Dairy Everyday Act, otherwise known as the DAIRY
PRIDE Act, has bipartisan support from co-sponsors representing
Vermont, Iowa, Maine, and Idaho.

For Linda Ceylor, a 50-head organic dairy farmer in northern
Wisconsin, this bill is an affirmation that Baldwin is looking out for
dairy farmers in a competitive market. Ceylor, who produces grass-fed
milk, said labeling plant-based products as alternatives or imitations
would help consumers understand more about where the beverages come
from.

“It’s not really milk, it’s more of a refined product because
nobody has milked a cashew or an almond or soybean,” Ceylor said.
“It’s a win for us to have a voice.”

But according to Nicole Negowetti, vice president of policy and food
systems with Plant Based Food Association, a trade organization that
represents major dairy alternative producers like Oatly and Califia
Farms, the DAIRY PRIDE Act is a “solution in search of a problem.”

Wisconsin holds a huge part of the dairy market, producing 31.7
billion pounds of milk in 2021. It’s the second-biggest
dairy-producing state, while California leads the country’s almond
supply, producing a majority of the nut across the world.

Plant-based milk products such as almond milk have grown drastically
in consumption in recent years, reaching over $3 billion in domestic
sales this past year. Consumers have sought alternatives to dairy for
a variety of factors, but according to consumer studies, the main
reasons are lactose intolerance, concern for animal welfare, and
environmental stewardship.

Madeline Cohen is a regulatory attorney with the Good Food Institute,
a nonprofit group that advocates for alternatives to dairy, eggs, and
protein. She said the organization commends the FDA’s new guidance
for its focus on consumers’ ability to understand the difference
between plant-based milk and cow’s milk. She said that consumers
choose these alternatives for a variety of reasons and oftentimes
“specifically because it is not cow’s milk.”

Additionally, Cohen said, this new guidance goes in the face of the
country’s climate goals, particularly regarding the dairy
industry’s share of methane emissions that contribute to global
warming. According to the USDA, almost 30 percent of warming in U.S.
agriculture comes from the methane produced by cows, sheep, and goats.

“If the U.S. is serious about meeting its climate commitments,
imposing arbitrary regulatory hurdles that disadvantage the
plant-based dairy industry is the last thing the FDA should be
doing,” Cohen said.

While some plant-based brands have co-opted milk-adjacent packaging
and verbiage, the industry has a simultaneous history of showcasing
health and environmental problems associated with dairy consumption.

FDA did recommend that dairy alternatives voluntarily include language
to explain that the product has a lower nutrient amount than milk. If
bills like Baldwin’s aren’t passed, plant-based beverage companies
will be able to continue the use of the word “milk” for their
products once the FDA guidance becomes final.

* Milk
[[link removed]]
* nut milk
[[link removed]]
* almond industry
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit portside.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 



########################################################################

[link removed]

To unsubscribe from the xxxxxx list, click the following link:
[link removed]