Maine to Monsanto: Milk keeps Quality Seal!

[Guest guest]

Bangor (Maine)

Daily News February 26, 2003

By Sharon Kiley Mack

Maine to Monsanto: Milk keeps Quality Seal

AUGUSTA - The giant chemical maker Monsanto has failed in its attempt to

convince the state of Maine to abandon its Quality Trademark Seal program for

milk, which the state adopted in 1994. Maine Attorney General G. Steven Rowe has

informed Monsanto that the use of the seal is entirely appropriate for the Maine

milk market. " Consumer choice is not impaired in any way, " Rowe told Monsanto.

" Rather, consumer choice is broadened. " Monsanto had requested that the use of

the seal be suspended and legal proceedings brought against Oakhurst and H.P.

Hood for alleged unfair trade practices.

 

The chemical company maintained that use of the seal, which indicates that milk

does not contain artificial growth hormones, misleads consumers into thinking

that hormone-free milk is superior to milk from producers using rBST, a

Monsanto-produced artificial growth hormone. Monsanto said that using rBST in

cows is a marketing issue, not a food safety issue. Industry experts suggested

that even though the seal has been used for nearly 10 years by Oakhurst,

Monsanto was objecting now because other dairies are also joining the program.

Some organizations and consumers who oppose the use of artificial growth

hormones claim they are linked to breast cancer and premature puberty in

children.

 

Canada and the European Union have banned the use of rBST since it was approved

for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1993. Rowe informed Monsanto

earlier this month that the Quality Seal requirements are being met by all

producers that use it. Rowe also said that providing the information on the

label is just giving consumers a choice. Maine's Agriculture Commissioner Robert

Spear agreed. " The dairy Quality Trademark Seal was a compromise.

 

Instead of either banning the use of growth hormones or endorsing their use,

producers could take a stand via the Quality Seal, " he said. " We agree that

advertisements that make specific health claims about rBST or the lack of rBST

could be misleading unless they are substantiated by competent scientific or

medical tests or studies. However, the mere statement that a product comes from

cows not treated with rBST or artificial growth hormones, however, is not a

health claim requiring substantiation, " the letter from Rowe to Monsanto stated.

The trademark consists of a silhouette of the state of Maine divided into three

horizontal sections, with the word " Quality " appearing in the middle section.

" The state of Maine Quality Trademark, in and of itself, is not misleading to

consumers, " Monsanto was told. " Nor do we believe that advertising milk as

having come from cows that have not been treated with rBST or artificial growth

hormones is misleading to consumers.

 

Such statements do not constitute health claims of any sort. This advertising

simply allows consumers, who are interested for any reason in buying milk that

is not produced from cows treated with rBST, to make an informed decision. " Rep.

Nancy Smith, D-Monmouth, said the ruling by Rowe " is a great victory and should

be shouted from the rooftops.

 

This is a major victory for Maine's milk producers and an integral part of

marketing Maine milk. " Jodie Bernstein of Bryan Cave law firm of St. Louis

represents Monsanto, the Biotechnology Association of Maine and three dairy

farms. Recognizing that consumers may not even be aware that the small seal on

milk labels indicates rBST-free milk, Bernstein said Tuesday that " it's not the

seal the coalition was objecting to but rather the criteria for using the seal. "

Bernstein's position is that since the state accepts affidavits from farmers

that they are not using rBST, there is not an adequate monitoring system in

place.

 

In addition, said Bernstein, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has

recommended that any label that says the product is rBST-free should appear in

the proper context with accompanying information, such as " no significant

difference has been shown between milk derived from rBST-treated and

non-rBST-treated cows. " FDA also recommends that such a statement should be

conspicuously placed on the product label. " The coalition, although

disappointed, remains committed to promoting a nonmisleading label, " said

Bernstein. She said that taking legal action against dairies that say their milk

is rBST-free on their labels and in their advertising " is still under

consideration, but we are not to that point yet. " Monsanto notified Maine in

November and December 2002 that it wanted the seal dropped.

 

The company raised three issues: whether the requirements established by the

Maine Department of Agriculture's rules for the use of the trademark are being

met by the dairies that are licensed to use it; whether the trademark and-or the

advertising by these licensed dairies are misleading to consumers by creating a

false impression that milk produced without the use of rBST is safer or of

higher quality than milk produced with its use; and whether the trademark

unfairly limits or otherwise unlawfully restricts market access. The Maine

Department of Agriculture also notified Monsanto that all requirements of the

seal are being met by dairies using it. The requirements include that at least

80 percent of the milk in any package displaying the trademark must be produced

within the state of Maine, and that 100 percent of the milk in that package must

be from cows that have not been treated with rBST.

 

 

 

The complete " Whole Body " Health line consists of the " AIM GARDEN TRIO "

Ask About Health Professional Support Series: AIM Barleygreen

 

" Wisdom of the Past, Food of the Future "

 

http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/AIM.html

 

 

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.