organic milk /non-bst label
Robert Zomer (email@example.com)
Thu, 3 Mar 1994 01:56:11 -0700
Afterall, what rational person can abide by the absurdity of the FDA
interim voluntary labeling guidelines. Both outrageous and disgusting. A
comparison would be: saying that sugar-free diet sodas are false and
misleading because they imply there is something wrong with sugar. Or
dissallowing the labels: no additives (will they sue Pennzoil next),
free-range chickens, etc. Where does it stop. And, more importantly, why
is the FDA going to such extreme lengths to protect Monsanto's investment
in this product. Approval of bST on its (supposed) merits is one thing.
Mandating it is another. Again, if all mainstream milk is destined to
include some milk from bST treated cows, then the organic label is the
surest alternative for the consumer. It may also be the alternative for
the producer interested in higher premiums for his non-bst milk.
Perhaps someone at Monsanto would like to clarify their position on
suing dairy processors and intimidating food retailers with threatened
litigation. Is this normal operating procedure for a pharmacuetical
company marketing a veterinary drug?
Ecology Graduate Group
University of California
Davis, CA 95616