![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Milk Industry
If you drink milk, read:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27092.cfm
U.S. Dairy Industry is petitioning the FDA to approve aspartame as a hidden, unlabeled additive in Milk, Yogurt, Eggnog and Cream -- cuz like, aspartame is safe...
[EDIT: My thanks to gardengirl6 for sharing this on FB!]
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27092.cfm
U.S. Dairy Industry is petitioning the FDA to approve aspartame as a hidden, unlabeled additive in Milk, Yogurt, Eggnog and Cream -- cuz like, aspartame is safe...
[EDIT: My thanks to gardengirl6 for sharing this on FB!]
no subject
no subject
Me, I like whole raw milk, but the gov't fell into the common but completely illogical trap of trying to get people to lose weight by eating less and exercising more.
no subject
Time to buy a cow.
no subject
Reasonable and educated comments backed with facts posted there might make some difference.
I already don't use much dairy, as lactose intolerance runs in my family. If this ruling goes through, I expect I shall eschew dairy entirely.
no subject
I don't do a lot of dairy, and mostly raw milk, which still has the enzymes in it for help with digesting milk, or cheeses like cheddar, which is lactose-free.
Goat cheese works okay for me too :)
no subject
That's the search string I did for finding the petition, Docket No. FDA-2009-P-0147, to make a comment on the petition.
In the ID fields, for Organization I put NONE and for Categories I chose Individual Consumer (bottom of list of choices).
no subject
In other words, they want to change the standard that requires flavored dairy products with non-nutritive sweeteners in them to always be labeled as "reduced calorie". That's all.
In other other words, completely not what Mike Adams is claiming it says.
This is why I never trust Mike Adams in anything, for any reason. When I was writing the health newsletter for work, I found that this kind of lies and distortion is standard practice for him. If he says the sky is blue, you can bet it's raining. Or snowing. Or a tornado is coming in.
no subject
"They state that it is most efficient to consider all of the proposals together. According to the petition, the requested changes to the additional dairy standards present the same issues as the milk standard, and it is therefore appropriate to consider all of the requested changes together."
And the question the FDA asks is "Would the proposed amendments promote honesty and fair dealing in the interest of consumers?"
For careful people like us, I would say it probably doesn't make a difference. But if the container doesn't have anything on it that references the reduced calorie content, will everyone who eats or drinks these produce actually read the ingredient list? They should, of course, but I think most people just grab and go.
I was glad to learn that Adams was wrong about the ingredient listing and that it's the "reduced calories" labeling that's under discussion.
So all the important information would still be present, which is good and I'll definitely have to watch Adams' writing a lot more carefully in the future, but I still think it's deceptive and only really useful to the milk industry. They're using the milk as the focus (It's for the children!), but kids don't use creamers and people of all ages consume eggnog, yogurt, cream, etc., so while the industries are using the "It's for the children!" card, they're actually targeting their entire consumer base.
no subject
The added bit toward the end of the petition asking that the FDA amend the definition of all forms of milk cited is basically not part of the main petition, it's an "oh and while you're at it", and unlike the main body of the petition may be completely ignored by the FDA at its pleasure. It's kind of like the teenager asking for the car to go someplace and then as a supposed afterthought also asking for $20 for gas: it's audacious and presumptuous, and even if Mom or Dad hand over the car keys they may tell the kid to pay for his or her own gas. The milk industry is making a bet that the FDA will choose to address their PS, but the actual call is in the FDA's hands.
Current Federal labeling requirements for aspartame, due to the phenylketonurea (PKU) issue, mandate that the front of the package be labeled clearly, in a box or on a banner, to indicate the presence of aspartame. Other non-nutritive sweeteners don't have the same requirement as they don't, according to current scientific consensus anyway, contribute to any known disease. (The consensus is actually debatable, but Federal regs don't see it that way.) So in the petition, the milk industry is shining by the fact that it would still have to banner the containers of any product sweetened with aspartame. I'm pretty sure that the FDA would not have the power to grant the milk industry the right to drop the aspartame banner, because that isn't an FDA regulation, it's a Federal labeling law and FDA can't change those on its own recognizance. The FDA can, however, fail to enforce the law and thus could let the milk industry just kind of forget all about those pesky banners. Shucky darn!
I should also clarify that just because I despise Mike Adams for being a lying liar who lies a lot*, especially if his lies enable him to sell product, doesn't mean I think the milk industry is a bunch of innocents. Like most corporate industries, they're a bunch of slimeballs who will do anything to sell product and who don't give one single damn about the consumers they deceive and/or injure in the process. They're definitely trying to do something dishonest and inappropriate here, which may hurt innocent consumers, and taking steps to try to stop them is entirely appropriate and wise IMO.
*(Some day I'll tell you about some of the more egregious lies I've caught him in, or the way I used to save my main article to use it to debunk some of his worse deceptions.)
no subject
Big Ag... that "ag" would stand for "aggravating", right?
no subject
no subject
no subject