As of February 1, 2008, it will not be legal to sell dairy products in Pennsylvania if the label states—even truthfully—that the product comes from cattle not treated with rBGH. Recombinant bovine growth hormone, marketed by Monsanto under the brand name Posilac©, is a synthetic replicate of a natural hormone. It is injected into lactating cows to increase production and extend their days in lactation.

The labeling change came suddenly this month from the state’s department of agriculture, allegedly to clear up “consumer confusion” caused by so-called “absence claims” of what’s not in dairy products. The secretary says shoppers could unjustly think that milk not labeled rBGH-free would be somehow less safe to drink.

The new wording from the department is comprehensive, however, in disallowing all claims relative to rBGH. This includes untrue claims (“No hormones,” when all milk contains natural BGH), claims without substance (“No antibiotics,” when no milk is legally allowed to be marketed with detectable antibiotic residue) and also true claims (“This product comes from cows that were not treated with synthetic bovine growth hormone.”)

More and more conventional milk processors in the past year have asked their producers to stop using the production-enhancing synthetic hormone, and consumers have responded well. Monsanto and its supporters have made repeated attempts across the United States to prevent consumers from knowing whether rBGH was used to treat cattle producing labeled dairy products. This Pennsylvania initiative falls in line with corporately determined food messaging control, usually to deprive consumers of knowing precisely what is done to produce crops or livestock for the mass market.

There are many reasons farmers don’t want to use rBGH, especially if they respect the natural production cycles of their cattle, or even if they just want their cattle to last a long time in their herds.

There are many reasons why consumers want to know if the herds producing their milk receive rBGH. For all of us, the “precautionary principle” would have us avoid a non-natural addition to our food production system. The EU, Japan and Canada all do not allow rBGH to be used, testifying to the level of scientific uncertainty of its health impact on humans and cattle.

Below, you can read more… and if you want to stand with the citizens of Pennsylvania who want to be able to know when their milk comes from rBGH-treated cows, take action in the national or state campaigns below.

Whether or not you even drink milk, this stealth attempt to distort food labeling rules in favor of undetectable technological intervention must not stand.

News stories

STLtoday.com: Monsanto scores win in Pennsylvania
Wire story with quotes from Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Dennis Wolff, Rick North of the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, and Todd Rutter, president of Rutter’s Dairy Inc., which sells milk labeled as being free of artificial hormones – a label that would be banned by the new order.

New York Times story: Consumers Won’t Know What They’re Missing
Op-ed with quotes from Dennis Wolff, Todd Rutter and Leslie Zuck, Executive Director of Pennsylvania Certified Organic.

Action Alerts

Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture (PASA)
Take action on the milk labeling debacle in Pennsylvania
Focal points: animal welfare, human health risk potential, farmer freedom of speech, consumer information, ethical consistency on performance-enhancing drugs

Rutter’s Dairy
Your right to know about the milk you are drinking
Company statement focusing on consumers’ right to know, verified non-use claims.

The Center for Food Safety’s The True Food Network
Pennsylvania Restricts rBGH-Free Dairy Labels
Focal points: Consumers’ right to know, farmers’ right to label, rbGH health impact on cattle