Tag: milk labeling
Draft Guidance Not Enough to Prevent Misleading Labeling, NMPF Tells FDA
While the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) draft guidance on plant-based beverages acknowledges the public health concern regarding nutritional confusion, it falls woefully short of ending the decades-old problem of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 “FDA’s draft guidance is an encouraging first step toward promoting labeling transparency in the marketplace, but it’s not enough.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.
Draft Guidance Not Enough to Prevent Misleading Labeling, NMPF Tells FDA
While the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) draft guidance on plant-based beverages acknowledges the public health concern regarding nutritional confusion, it falls woefully short of ending the decades-old problem of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, the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) said in comments submitted to the agency this week.
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.
Need Peanut “Butter”? Got “Milk” of Magnesia? We’re Fine with That
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
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.
On Labeling, Keep Your Eye on the Carton
FDA has finally offered its draft guidance on the “Labeling of Plant-Based (Nutritionally Inferior and Misleading) Milk Alternatives.” So now what?
Pay attention to this:
This is from FDA’s draft guidance, showing labeling best practices for plant-based manufacturers. The guidance itself would allow plant-based beverage manufacturers to keep using “milk” on their labeling, but only if – and this is a huge “if” – they include disclosures like the ones above specifying nutritional differences. That isn’t enough to truly protect consumers, but it’s a start. Even more importantly, the agency has accepted the reality of consumer confusion over nutritional equivalence, the main argument dairy and its allies have been making for years. With that premise acknowledged and accepted, the logical conclusion –end the confusion by getting dairy terms off the labels – becomes much easier to achieve.
The draft guidance gives plant-based beverage purveyors a choice: They can use “milk” with their plant-based term and disclose their differences (i.e. shortcomings) on their packaging, or they can skip the disclaimers by not using a dairy term at all. That’s the solution consumer advocates and dairy farmers have been pushing for all along.
The next few months will be telling in whether the plant-based beverage industry gets the message.
If this guidance is taken seriously, the most misleading labels should start to disappear as packaging gets updated and store shelves get restocked. Many mislabeled “milks” that are really drinks or beverages should start being labeled as drinks or beverages. For those that stubbornly insist on misleading consumers, disclosures should appear – real ones with clear statements, not wiggle words in tiny print that say differences exist without stating what those differences are. The guidance is voluntary, and it’s only a draft, but FDA has put the industry on notice. The next move’s on them.
And it’s on us too, to make sure positive change really happens. FDA’s public comment period on the guidance lasts until April 24. NMPF has directions on how you can submit a comment. Meanwhile, take pictures to post on social media. Write companies that aren’t living up to the labeling example above. FDA’s guidance is far from enough. That’s why we’re pushing to pass the DAIRY PRIDE Act, which would direct FDA to enforce its own standard of identity for milk – which, had that occurred in the first place, plant-based misinformation would never have proliferated.
The fight for transparent labeling, is far from over, but it’s going the right way. Keep your eye on the carton. Change should be coming. It’s up to all of us to make sure that it does.
NMPF Lauds House Re-Introduction of DAIRY PRIDE Act, Following Senate
From NMPF President and CEO Jim Mulhern:
“The National Milk Producers Federation applauds the bipartisan members of the House of Representatives who today re-introduced the DAIRY PRIDE Act, which adds momentum to legislation that saw Senate re-introduction last week and needs to pass Congress this year.
“With proposed FDA guidance that acknowledges the problem of consumer confusion over the nutritional content of plant-based beverages, but doesn’t go far enough to solve the problem by enforcing its own standards of identity and limiting dairy terms used in food labeling to dairy products, DAIRY PRIDE is necessary for FDA to fulfill its own responsibilities.
“To eliminate consumer confusion over their nutritional content, plant-based drinks or beverages shouldn’t be allowed to use dairy terms in their labeling. That’s common-sense, and DAIRY PRIDE is a common-sense solution. We thank the House sponsors of the legislation – Reps. John Joyce, R-PA; Ann Kuster, D-NH; Mike Simpson, R-ID; Joe Courtney, D-CT; Derrick Van Orden, R-WI; and Angie Craig, D-MN – for being champions for consumers in this important nutrition and health issue.
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 last week, in which plant-based beverages could call themselves “milk” as long as they clearly state their nutritional differences with real dairy. FDA is accepting comments on its draft guidance until April 24.
DAIRY PRIDE was introduced in the Senate last week. Lead sponsors in that chamber were: Sens. Tammy Baldwin, D-WI; Jim Risch, R-ID; Peter Welch, D-VT and Susan Collins, R-ME.
Plant-Based Guidance a ‘First Step’ Toward Labeling Transparency, NMPF Says
Long-awaited FDA guidance on plant-based beverages that encourages manufacturers of plant-based beverages to disclose their nutrient inferiority and acknowledges the public health concern of nutritional confusion over such beverages was seen as a first step toward labeling transparency by NMPF, even as the proposed guidance’s allowance of such beverages to call themselves milk spurred a vow for further action.
The guidance “falls short of ending the decades-old problem of misleading plant-based labeling using dairy terminology,” Mulhern said in a statement released shortly after FDA’s announcement Feb. 22. “By acknowledging both the utter lack of nutritional standards prevalent in plant-based beverages and the confusion over nutritional value that’s prevailed in the marketplace because of the unlawful use of dairy terms, FDA’s proposed guidance today will provide greater transparency that’s sorely needed for consumers to make informed choices.
“Still, the decision to permit such beverages to continue inappropriately using dairy terminology violates FDA’s own standards of identity, which clearly define dairy terms as animal-based products. We reject the agency’s circular logic that FDA’s past labeling enforcement inaction now justifies labeling such beverages “milk” by designating a common and usual name. Past inaction is poor precedent to justify present and future inaction.”
Integrity in the use of dairy terms has been an NMPF focus for more than four decades. Agency activity stepped up in 2018, after then-FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb pledged a fresh look at the issue. A request for comment generated more than 13,000 responses. Guidance in the aftermath of those comments was promised in 2021 and was initially expected last summer.
Mulhern, in NMPF’s statement, noted that, while accepting nutritional confusion is a key advance for dairy and consumers, without any means of enforcement, the guidance could hold little value, urging Congress to re-introduce and pass the DAIRY PRIDE Act, legislation that would mandate FDA enforcement of its own standards of identity.
“Because FDA’s proposed guidance is meaningless without action, enforcement will be necessary to ensure that this limited progress is reflected on grocery shelves,” he said. “For these reasons, we will continue our work in Congress to pass the DAIRY PRIDE Act, which would direct FDA to enforce its own rules and clarify that dairy terms are for true dairy products, not plant-based imposters.”
NMPF’s Support for DAIRY PRIDE, introduced in the Senate by a bipartisan group of senators on Feb. 28, adds another level of momentum to the effort to create labeling transparency, even as NMPF encourages dairy supporters to comment on the FDA’s guidance, which is here.
Sens. Tammy Baldwin, D-WI; James Risch, R-ID; Peter Welch, D-VT; and Susan Collins, R-ME, led the reintroduction of the bill, which would require FDA to increase enforcement of existing dairy standards of identity, updated to respond to FDA’s guidance by essentially nullifying it. House re-introduction is expected in the next few weeks.
“Consumers and dairy producers, along with their allies in the nutrition and health communities, thank Sens. Baldwin, Risch, Welch and Collins for their leadership in this important public-health issue,” Mulhern said in a statement the day of the re-introduction. “We look forward to working with our Senate and House champions to enact the DAIRY PRIDE Act during the 118th Congress.”
While that debate is underway and comments are being accepted by FDA, Mulhern urged dairy farmers and consumers to speak up for labeling transparency – and pledged NMPF’s leadership in the effort.
“Consumers shouldn’t have to make choices in a marketplace that’s less than fully transparent,” he said. “And until the federal government fully lives up to its mission, NMPF will continue to lead the battle for labeling transparency.”
FDA’s proposed guidance is open for public comment here until April 24.
