Tag: dairy labeling

Regulatory Staff Protect and Advance Dairy

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney
  • Pushed for labeling integrity and FDA to enforce its own standards of identity, filing extensive comments in response to its draft guidance on plant-based beverage labeling
  • Personally urged FDA Commissioner Robert Califf to develop labeling standards for cell-based and synthetic “dairy” products
  • Successfully advocated for dairy cooperatives and their producer members at the National Conference of Interstate Milk Shipments to ensure they have a voice in any updates made to the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance
  • Filed comments on FDA’s proposed “healthy” definition pushing for milk, cheese and yogurt to qualify, thus better educating consumers on dairy’s nutritional benefits
  • Outlined animal health priorities with USDA APHIS

Regulatory work is often just as much about fighting against harmful rules, as it is pushing for positive change. Efforts this year have ranged from pressuring FDA to enforce its own standards of identity for milk and develop labeling standards for cell-based products to representing member views on issues including the biannual update of the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance and EPA PFAS regulations.

FDA’s draft guidance on labeling for plant-based beverages released in February encourages plant-based beverage manufacturers who choose to use dairy terms to voluntarily disclose their nutritional differences with real milk. NMPF regulatory staff submitted comments July 31 emphasizing the importance of transparent product labeling to ensure consumer understanding FDA’s need to enforce its own standards of identity for milk.

NMPF staff also elevated the need for FDA to develop labeling standards for cell-based products to end dairy product mislabeling and prevent a repeat of the plant-based labeling fiasco through a conversation and letter addressed to Commissioner Califf sent on June 26.

The biannual National Conference of Interstate Milk Shipments convened in April to revise the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, with NMPF regulatory staff playing a vital role in the conference deliberations. NMPF submitted three proposals at the conference, dealing with on-farm biosecurity and defining equivalency – all of which had positive outcomes.

Following a proposed rule from FDA to update the labeling definition of “healthy” to align more closely with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA), NMPF urged FDA to include a broader range of dairy products, thus educating consumers about dairy’s nutritional value and improve consumption closer to DGA recommendations.

NMPF in August met with USDA Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) leadership to discuss dairy’s domestic and international animal health priorities. Staff emphasized the importance of collaboration between industry and government on preparedness for foreign animal diseases such as Foot and Mouth Disease.

To further NMPF’s antibiotic stewardship work, Chief Science Officer Jamie Jonker, Ph.D., was appointed to the Global Leaders Group on Antimicrobial Resistance to provide an animal health perspective to the group’s goal of strengthening global political momentum on the issue.

NMPF’s Bjerga on Why Milk’s Widening Its Lead Over Plant-Based Beverages

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

NMPF Senior Vice President of Communications discusses the shifting consumer preference toward milk over plant-based beverages, plus NMPF’s latest efforts toward labeling integrity, on RFD-TV. Consumer data shows consumption of plant-based drinks falling this year, while milk sales are remaining more stable. Meanwhile, NMPF has submitted comments to FDA urging it to enforce its Standard of Identity that clearly state that milk is an animal product.

 

NMPF’s Galen on FDA’s Draft Plant-Based Labeling Guidance

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Chris Galen, NMPF’s senior vice president of membership services and strategic initiatives, discusses NMPF’s latest effort to prevent misleading labeling on Dairy Radio Now. While FDA’s draft guidance on plant-based beverages acknowledges the public health concern regarding nutritional confusion, it falls short of ending the decades-old problem of misleading plant-based labeling using dairy terminology, he says. Galen discusses the comments NMPF submitted to FDA this week that emphasize the importance of transparent product labeling to ensure consumer understanding and informed purchasing decisions.

 

Draft Guidance Not Enough to Prevent Misleading Labeling, NMPF Tells FDA

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

While the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) draft guidance on plant-based beverages acknowledges the public health concern regarding nutritional confusion, it falls woefully short of ending the decades-old problem of misleading plant-based labeling using dairy terminology, NMPF said in comments submitted to the agency July 30.

As the leading voice of American dairy producers, NMPF emphasized the importance of transparent product labeling to ensure consumer understanding and informed purchasing decisions, and urged FDA to take prompt enforcement action against misbranded non-dairy beverages that resemble milk.

“For far too long, plant-based beverage manufacturers have blurred well-defined standards of identity to inappropriately and unfairly capitalize on dairy’s nutritional benefits while FDA has ignored its enforcement obligations,” said Jim Mulhern, NMPF president and CEO. “FDA’s draft guidance is an encouraging first step toward promoting labeling transparency in the marketplace, but it’s not enough. Our comments outline a solution to the misleading labeling practices existing in the marketplace today, and provide clear, truthful labeling options for marketers of plant-based beverages.”

In its comments, NMPF commended FDA for its acknowledgement of consumer confusion over the nutritional content of dairy imitators. “For decades, NMPF has been frustrated with FDA’s unwillingness to enforce its own standards of identity for milk and milk products which continues today. We are encouraged by the agency’s acceptance of the reality of consumer confusion regarding nutritional content,” NMPF wrote. Still, NMPF cautioned FDA to adhere to the law by going through the proper legal process, as outlined in NMPF’s Citizen Petition and comments.

Because of the voluntary nature of the proposed guidance and FDA’s undependable labeling enforcement history, NMPF continues its work in Congress to pass the bipartisan, bicameral DAIRY PRIDE Act, which would direct FDA to enforce its own rules and clarify that dairy terms are for true dairy products.

Lab-based ‘milk’ Labeling Fight Is Here

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

By Clay Detlefsen, Chief Counsel, NMPF

One would think that four decades’ worth of lessons would lead to some truths being learned. But as laboratory-based dairy imitators enter the marketplace, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seems poised to repeat the same mistakes it has made with plant-based beverages, in which their labels mislead consumers into confusing one thing with something very different.

At issue is a product called “Bored Cow,” which markets itself as “milk.” While the product does include a whey protein that’s the product of fermentation in a laboratory setting, other elements on its long list of exotic ingredients show what should be obvious to every consumer: This isn’t milk as nature has ever known it.

NMPF has been fighting with FDA over its lack of enforcement of dairy standards of identity for decades. What Bored Cow is doing is taking one whey protein that’s synthetically made by precision fermentation, blending that with a myriad of other food ingredients that are quite disgusting-sounding in many cases, and calling the product “dairy milk.”

That’s the wrong description for what they’re selling.

Milk has 13 essential nutrients. It contains 400 different fatty acids. It has got two categories of proteins, casein and whey, numerous micronutrients, and it’s an incredibly complex matrix that delivers an enormous nutritional package for consumers. You cannot replicate that in a laboratory. Milk is natural and it’s good for you. And you can’t duplicate what comes from a cow in a stainless steel vat.

But so far, FDA is allowing this violation of its standards of identity to persist, though finally after decades of inaction, FDA has gotten the message that consumers are confused and misled about the nutritional inferiority of most if not all plant-based milk alternatives. We are still hopeful FDA will step up and enforce its rules. Earlier this year, FDA proposed a voluntary labeling guidance in which they ask marketers of plant-based milk alternatives to voluntarily disclose their products’ nutritional offerings and, in most cases, those products’ nutritional inferiorities.

While NMPF appreciates the more explicit side-by-side comparison, the overall FDA guidance is flawed and we want it withdrawn. When it comes to Bored Cow and its one synthesized dairy protein, we are concerned that this, too, is a nutritionally inferior imitator that will mislead consumers and deliver a mediocre product that could harm human health.

One caveat that lab-based companies are using to distinguish themselves from plant-based imitators is that their products include one component of dairy milk. While that’s the case, it doesn’t change how very different in overall composition these products actually are — the same fundamental challenge that is also at the root of concerns over plant-based labeling. In both cases, processors are largely ignoring existing rules and regulations and doing whatever they want — not in the consumer’s interest but in their own. It’s sloppy, lazy marketing and it needs to stop.

As with plant-based foods, FDA needs to enforce its rules and regulations and send a clear message to the plant-based folks, and now the synthetic “milk” processors, that the dairy rules are on the books, and they, like everyone else, have to follow them. Otherwise, the integrity of the marketplace — and the FDA’s role as the protector of consumer interests — will continue to erode. That’s not what consumers deserve. And it’s completely preventable — if only, after four decades, FDA finally learns.

This column originally appeared in Hoard’s Dairyman Intel on July 31, 2023.

Need for Lab-Based Beverage Action as Clear as a Milk Label

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

It’s the difference between

“Water, animal-free whey protein (from fermentation), sunflower oil, sugar, less than 1% of: vitamin A, vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin), vitamin D2, riboflavin, citrus fiber, salt, dipotassium phosphate, acacia, gellan gum, mixed tocopherols (antioxidant), calcium potassium phosphate citrate, natural flavor,” …

and this:

We’ve warned FDA of the problems resulting from this fabrication, and we hope our warning doesn’t fall on deaf ears. After more than four decades of plant-based imposters using dairy terms that violate the agency’s Standard of Identity for milk, lab-based fermenters of single dairy proteins are trying to mislead consumers in the exact same way – by creating a false impression that their slurries of highly processed ingredients are equivalent to dairy.

They’re not. And consumers shouldn’t be led to believe otherwise.

In a letter to FDA asking the agency to take action against the brand Bored Cow, which is marketing its beverage as “animal-free dairy milk” because it uses a single fermented whey protein (real milk has dozens of protein variants and literally hundreds of different fatty acids), the National Milk Producers Federation notes that “it is baseless, preposterous and absurd” to call such a product milk.

“In the interest of public health, the misleading labeling charade must end before it gets out of hand,” NMPF writes. “FDA must act, and must do so now.”

Will it? While FDA’s proposed guidance on the naming of plant-based beverages finally admits a problem, the lab-based conundrum shows how its purported solution – allowing imitators to use the term “milk” if they disclose nutritional differences – falls short. It’s not just about the limited nutrition knowledge we have. It’s about the substance itself, and the complex interaction among naturally-occurring  ingredients that any honest marketer, scientist or regulator knows we don’t fully understand. That humility, and the need to protect against consumer confusion that’s been acknowledged by the last three FDA commissioners, is more than enough reason to take action now.

Because without it, the imposters will proliferate, the headaches will grow, and the marketplace will only become less transparent, in yet another abandonment of FDA’s mission to protect consumers. FDA must enforce its Standard of Identity rules on lab-based dairy labeling now. The need is as basic as the ingredient listing on a bottle of milk. FDA can’t let that clear principle be dragged through the mud – or whatever substances these fake “milks” are made of.

NMPF Warns FDA: Don’t Repeat Plant-Based Mistakes with Lab-Produced Fake ‘Milk’

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must end dairy product mislabeling by manufacturers of synthetic, cell-based “dairy” ingredients that are in violation of federal dairy Standards of Identity to prevent a repeat of the plant-based labeling fiasco that’s created confusion among consumers and regulatory headaches at the agency, the National Milk Producers Federation said in a letter to the agency.

“Bored Cow’s product takes water and adds what we believe to be one unidentified, lab-engineered ‘whey protein’ along with a highly processed concoction of food additives, preservatives, oil, sugar and several added vitamins, and claims to have created ‘animal-free dairy milk.’ It is baseless, preposterous and absurd to call the resulting product ‘milk,’” NMPF President and CEO Jim Mulhern said in the letter sent to FDA on June 26. “In the interest of public health, the misleading labeling charade must end before it gets out of hand. FDA must act, and must do so now.”

NMPF, which has repeatedly called on FDA to enforce its identity standards for milk as plant-based fakes have proliferated, has been warning the agency that lab-based milk imposters would be next on the horizon without agency action. Even as the agency is wrestling with draft guidance that finally acknowledges consumers’ core concern over plant-based beverages – their false positioning as dairy equivalents in the face of glaring nutritional inferiority – lab-based imitators are following the plant-based playbook and plastering “milk” and other standardized dairy terms on products that in composition bear little resemblance to true dairy.

“As we have seen in the decades-long folly of plant-based beverage labeling, an ounce of prevention is worth oceans of cure,” Mulhern wrote. “We ask the agency to exercise its well-established authority to prevent this company and others that seek to follow from leading consumers down what will become a superhighway of misinformation, absent your willingness to enforce the law.”

Consumers concerned with labeling integrity may visit NMPF’s Call to Action on plant-based labeling here. For an in-depth discussion on lab-based “dairy” and its pitfalls, listen to this podcast here. A copy of NMPF’s full letter regarding Bored Cow, a brand offered by New York City-based Tomorrow Farms, is here.

NMPF’s Galen Discusses Lab-Produced Fake “Milk”

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Chris Galen, NMPF’s senior vice president of membership services and strategic initiatives, discusses NMPF’s recent effort to end dairy product mislabeling by manufacturers of synthetic, cell-based “dairy” ingredients that are in violation of federal dairy Standards of Identity to prevent a repeat of the plant-based labeling fiasco that’s created confusion among consumers and regulatory headaches at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

NMPF, which has repeatedly called on FDA to enforce its identity standards for milk as plant-based fakes have proliferated, has been warning the agency that lab-based milk imposters would be next on the horizon without agency action. Even as the agency is wrestling with draft guidance that finally acknowledges consumers’ core concern over plant-based beverages – their false positioning as dairy equivalents in the face of glaring nutritional inferiority – lab-based imitators are following the plant-based playbook and plastering “milk” and other standardized dairy terms on products that in composition bear little resemblance to true dairy.

Consumers concerned with labeling integrity may visit NMPF’s Call to Action on plant-based labeling here.

Need Peanut “Butter”? Got “Milk” of Magnesia? We’re Fine with That

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Of all the misinformation the plant-based sector has aimed at dairy over the decades, one of the most aggravating has been the idea that because dairy farmers want nut-juice manufacturers to stop pretending their products are equal to theirs, they must somehow also oppose terms like peanut butter, Cream of Wheat, and other common products that have dairy-associated words in them.

They do this to both to obscure our real point – that their mimicking of dairy’s properties and use of dairy terms to sell nutritionally inferior imitations creates a real public health issue – and to try to make our arguments seem silly. But the problem is, that’s never been our position – it’s just another “plant”-ed lie. We’ve even specifically rebutted the point, in the Citizen Petition we sent FDA in 2019. So once more, with feeling, here’s the difference between our position on terms like “peanut butter” vs. plant-based dairy alternatives.

It all comes down to:

21 U.S. Code § 343 – Misbranded food

Plant-based fake-dairy products are misbranded. According to FDA regulations, a food shall be deemed to be misbranded … “If it purports to be or is represented as a food for which a definition and standard of identity has been prescribed by regulations.”

The italicized part is the important part. (That’s why we italicized it.) The main principle behind the concept of misbranding is “don’t pretend to be something you’re not,” and that’s the difference between plant-based imitators and common foods that have long used dairy terms without pretending to be in the same food category.

Cream of Wheat is a wholesome breakfast food, but no one’s urging you to pour it in your coffee. Coconut-milk-in-a-carton is problematic (we’ll explain why), but coconut-milk-in-a-can isn’t being sold as a beverage.

Nut butters are spreads, but they don’t substitute for butter in baking — and if you decide to slather body butter on your toast because you thought it’s dairy flavored with … then you’re just an awful human being, and you deserve to vomit. By the same token, Milk of Magnesia isn’t pushing to worm its way into the federal school lunch program, even if the occasional school lunch may make some students wish that were so.

The common thread is that none of these items are trying to masquerade as dairy products. They aren’t promoting marketplace confusion, and they aren’t implying nutrient content they don’t provide.

Contrast that with the plant-based imposters. They’re sold in gallon jugs, cartons and tubs. Even though most don’t require refrigeration because they’re not fresh, they try to fool consumers by paying grocery stores to put their products in the dairy case. They add artificial colorings to make them look like the dairy products they mimic, and they market themselves as being able to do whatever true dairy milk, butter, cheese, or yogurt can do – with the implication that if they can do the same things, they must be equivalent, which in nutrition, they clearly are not.

That’s misleading, as consumer research shows. That’s misbranding, as the FDA defines the term. And that’s what we oppose, as we continue our fight for labeling transparency.

This charade’s been going on for decades. As then-WhiteWave CEO Steven Demos said in 2001 of how soy beverage came to be a dairy imitator: “We also had to figure out how to get this product category to market. Dairy milk is a staple food that we consider a fundamental part of the scenery in a supermarket. Why not position fresh soymilk to be as close as possible?”

That attitude is all about market position – but not market integrity. But integrity has never been the plant-based sector’s strong suit. We’re hoping that our campaign to add comments to FDA’s draft guidance on plant-based beverage labeling will encourage the agency to start enforcing its own rules, just as we’re supporting the DAIRY PRIDE Act as a congressional solution.

We’d encourage you to use the materials we provide as you compose your letter to FDA. Write it while you’re enjoying a peanut butter sandwich and cooking a coconut-milk-based curry. Maybe treat yourself to some chocolates for dessert (the cocoa butter in them must be 100 percent pure to meet FDA’s chocolate standard of identity, by the way).

Dairy is fine with that. We know who we are — and we know where the confusion always comes from. It’s time for it to end.

DAIRY PRIDE Momentum Builds

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

House introduction of the DAIRY PRIDE Act on March 8 intensified mobilization among dairy and its allies as FDA’s proposed guidance on the proper labeling of plant-based beverages brings new momentum for NMPF’s efforts at ensuring marketplace integrity.

The Defending Against Imitations and Replacements of Yogurt, Milk, and Cheese To Promote Regular Intake of Dairy Everyday Act” aka DAIRY PRIDE, requires FDA to enforce its standards of identity and would supersede the inadequate solution it offered in February, in which plant-based beverages could call themselves “milk” as long as they clearly state their nutritional differences with real dairy.

A bipartisan group of six House members introduced DAIRY PRIDE, led by Reps. John Joyce, R-PA, and Ann Kuster, D-NH. NMPF President and CEO Jim Mulhern applauded the members – who also included Reps. Mike Simpson, R-ID, Joe Courtney, D-CT, Derrick Van Orden, R-WI, and Angie Craig, D-MN. Now that FDA has made clear it won’t enforce dairy standards of identity of its own volution, “DAIRY PRIDE is necessary for FDA to fulfill its own responsibilities,” Mulhern said.

House introduction followed February’s Senate DAIRY PRIDE introduction led by Sens. Tammy Baldwin, D-WI; Jim Risch, R-ID; Peter Welch, D-VT and Susan Collins, R-ME. Baldwin explained during her guest spot on NMPF’s “Dairy Defined” podcast that the DAIRY PRIDE could pass Congress this year via one of several vehicles, including the farm bill due this year.

“Many of the folks that I’m joining forces with are going to have significant input as we draft a new farm bill, which is something that I expect to get completed this calendar year. So that’s certainly one area that we can look towards,” she said. “We also have funding bills for the Food and Drug Administration, and that would certainly be another opportunity to look at this type of legislation.”

Meanwhile, NMPF is leading grass-roots advocacy on labeling, with a call-to-action organized around the FDA guidance. FDA is accepting comments on its draft guidance until April 24. To participate in NMPF’s call to action, click here.

Be It Bank or Beverage, Choices Matter

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

While we’ll leave fuller explanations for the turmoil financial institutions such as Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank and others to those with more expertise, it’s clear that good-old-fashioned poor choices played a role.

It turns out that betting heavily on low-interest government debt when that government is hiking interest rates to fight inflation might not work well; nor is overloading your portfolio on cryptocurrency. And given that propensity for bad bets, it isn’t shocking to see what Silicon Valley Bank had to say about plant and cell-based meat-and-dairy alternatives in this 2019 analysts’ report, which mixed tired tropes of the ills of animal agriculture with boosterism for the future of dairy ripoffs like Ripple and Perfect Day as well as alt-protein companies like Beyond Meat, which “has wowed consumers with its realistic taste and meat-like appearance,” according to the authors.

“At Silicon Valley Bank, we embrace the future of the food industry. We have deep expertise working with foodtech companies and strong ties to the Silicon Valley ecosystem,” the analysts wrote. “If you are working in this space and would like to learn more about SVB’s role, please reach out to chat.”

Of course, we know that that turned out. Beyond Meat stock is now considered a “recipe for disaster” due in part because of its wildly self-inflated expectations. Plant-based beverage sales fell last year. And Silicon Valley Bank? It’s now part of First Citizens Bank & Trust Company after being unloaded by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which took over the institution upon Silicon Valley’s failure.

So yes, perhaps it’s time to “reach out to chat.” About how venture capital investors have thrown good money after bad at products of questionable quality that are more about marketing pitch than actual market need. About how banks seeking a quick buck put depositors at risk with poor investment choices, which include those products. And about how high-quality, proven nutrition, with a product that’s been in demand for millennia, might, unsurprisingly, be the best investment anyone could make – both for consumers and for investors who’d happily have a little less drama in their financial futures.

Dairy, like every other industry, has its challenges, which it’s dedicated to meet. But with record exports and the highest U.S. per-capita consumption since 1959, it’s a safe bet to say its future is bright. That’s what you get with real quality.

You can bank on it.