A few years ago when the use of bovine growth hormone (BGH)was legalized for
use in dairy cattle there was discussion over labeling. The makers of BGH
did not want to allow milk from cows injected with the hormone to be labeled
indicating this....the reason was obvious. Most consumers don't want milk
from cows getting suplimental hormone shots. The money and power of
multinationals, in this case Monsanto, prevailed. The hormoone induced milk
was not labeled. Many of us who saw (and still do) that the hormone or the
milk from the cows recieving the hormone had never been proven safe, for
humans. It had never been tested on humans, the "human safety data" was an
extrapolation of data a test done on 30 rats for 60 days or maybe it was 60
rats for 30 days. The FDA decieded the rats livers didn't enlarge too much
so BGH was declared safe for humans without any toxicology studies.
Some of us who milk cows were concerned about our market and the consumers
preference. We tried to get labeling to indicate milk that had not been
produced with suplimental hormone injections. It was a difficult
fight...Monsato's arguement being the BGH free label proclaimed the milk
produced without the BGH was better than BGH induced milk. The labeling
finally allowed is almost nonexistant, inadiquate and must clearly state BGH
induced milk is ok too.
History will repeat itself with the labeling of GMOs if money and power are
still as important as they were a few years ago. Perhaps there is a lesson
in the BGH labeling history for those considering a "super" organic label.
Thet won't be allowed either if the corporations have finally decieded they
want to cash in on organic.
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command