Consumers Union, 29 groups ask Sebelius to veto hormone milk bill
By Owen Morris in News
Tuesday, Apr. 14 2009 @ 10:30AM
Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports and Consumerist, has sent a long letter to Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius regarding Kansas House Bill 2121. Twenty-nine groups involved in agricultural and food production added their signatures to a copy and sent it as well.
The letters have to do with milk labeling. HB 2121 would require producers who say their cows were not treated with rBGT, rBST or other hormones to add this disclaimer: "The Food and Drug Administration has determined there are no significant differences between milk from cows that receive injections of the artificial hormone and milk from those that do not."
The letters say it is imperative that Sebelius veto the bill. Some highlights:
The 29 groups, representing everything from small farms to restaurants to co-ops, have released another joint statement saying "over 160 hospitals all over the country have pledged to serve rbGH-free products" and "more than half of the 100 largest dairy processors in the country have gone partially or completely rbGH-free to satisfy consumer demand."
Yet there is one person who hasn't released any sort of statement on the issue: Sebelius. How she will vote is unknown.
 |
| Flickr: Laura |
The letters have to do with milk labeling. HB 2121 would require producers who say their cows were not treated with rBGT, rBST or other hormones to add this disclaimer: "The Food and Drug Administration has determined there are no significant differences between milk from cows that receive injections of the artificial hormone and milk from those that do not."
The letters say it is imperative that Sebelius veto the bill. Some highlights:
We feel that HB 2121 puts unnecessary obstacles in the way of consumers getting the information they want, restricts free speech rights of dairies and processors, and interferes with the smooth functioning of free markets.An impressive list, but Consumers Union is just getting warmed up.
...The American Nurses Association, Center For Food Safety, Food and Water Watch, National Family Farm Coalition, Humane Society of the U.S. and many other organizations have all officially opposed the use of rbGH. Consumers Union (publisher of Consumer Reports), has said that FDA should suspend approval of rbGH until new evidence (since approval in 1994) related to human safety can be evaluated.
Any state that requires a specific statement on a label has an obligation to ensure that statement is true. It is obvious from a significant body of science and the positions of numerous respected organizations that there are serious questions whether this statement is true ... Also, companies that sell products nationally, such as Ben & Jerry's ice cream or Tillamook cheese, would either have to not market products in Kansas or change labels on all their products to comply with the regulation.I edited out 90 percent of the letters (which can be found in full here) but left in the main points: Science is unclear about hormone-treated milk, disclaimers are bad for business, there are no good arguments to pass this bill.
...HR 2121 will mandate misleading label language and negatively impact Kansan consumers' ability to make informed decisions about the dairy products they buy. It interferes with farmers and dairies' rights to free speech. In this era of increased concern about what's in our food and how it is produced, Kansas should be making more information available, not less.
The 29 groups, representing everything from small farms to restaurants to co-ops, have released another joint statement saying "over 160 hospitals all over the country have pledged to serve rbGH-free products" and "more than half of the 100 largest dairy processors in the country have gone partially or completely rbGH-free to satisfy consumer demand."
Yet there is one person who hasn't released any sort of statement on the issue: Sebelius. How she will vote is unknown.
Post a Comment
