Standards of identity are designed to protect consumers, not stifle competition, says GFI

Dairy Pride Act is 'anti-competitive' and 'unconstitutional,' says Good Food Institute

By Elaine Watson contact

- Last updated on GMT

The Dairy Pride Act, says supporters, simply requires the FDA to enforce standards of identity already enshrined in law
The Dairy Pride Act, says supporters, simply requires the FDA to enforce standards of identity already enshrined in law
More than 46,000 people have signed a Good Food Institute petition urging Senator Tammy Baldwin and Congressman Peter Welch not to pursue the passage of the Dairy Pride Act, which the GFI argues, is both “anti-competitive” and “unconstitutional.” 

The Act (S.130)​ - introduced to the Senate on January 12 and to the House (H.R.778)​ on January 31 - says products labeled with terms such as 'almondmilk' are misleading consumers and openly violating federal standards of identity, which limit the use of the term 'milk' to the lacteal secretions of cows.

The Act would “require that non-dairy products made from nuts, seeds, plants, and algae no longer be confusingly labeled with dairy terms like milk, yogurt, and cheese," ​and would require the FDA to issue guidance for nationwide enforcement of “mislabeled imitation dairy products​” within 90 days.

It would also permit products from the lacteal secretions of other hooved mammals such as goats to be described as 'milk,' 'cheese,' and 'yogurt.'

Standards of identity are designed to protect consumers, not manufacturers

However, The Good Food Institute​(a supporter of 'clean meat' and plant-based dairy alternatives) argues that the “absurd​” act is a waste of government resources​ ​- and that there is no evidence that consumers are being misled, while plant-based brand Daiya has dubbed it a “solution looking for a problem​.”  

In a letter accompanying the petition​, GFI executive director Bruce Friedrich said: “Federal standards of identity are designed to protect consumers from being misled by confusing labels. These regulations are not designed to protect particular industries against free market competition.”

Serious constitutional concerns

He added: “In 2013, a federal judge found that soymilk is indeed an accurate label, noting it stretches the bounds of credulity​’ that any consumer would be deceived.

“Americans are actively seeking out plant-based milks for a wide variety of reasons—they enjoy the taste, they want to avoid cholesterol, they’re concerned by the environmental impacts of conventional animal agriculture or the treatment of dairy cows. Regardless of the precise motivation, everyone who purchases soy, almond, or coconut milk is entirely aware of what they’re buying.”

Finally, he argued, the legislation “raises serious constitutional concerns,” ​adding: “If the government is going to censor companies that manufacture plant-based products, it must further a substantial government interest. Curbing market competition for the sake of bolstering dairy industry profits does not qualify.”

BruceFriedrich-1

"Federal standards of identity are designed to protect consumers from being misled by confusing labels. These regulations are not designed to protect particular industries against free market competition."

Bruce Friedrich, executive director, The Good Food Institute

Nutritional equivalence

The National Milk Producers Federation and the International Dairy Foods Association, however, argue that the Dairy Pride Act simply requires the FDA to enforce standards of identity already enshrined in law.

They also argue that many consumers believe that all plant-based milks are nutritionally equivalent – or superior to – dairy milk, at least when it comes to protein (an argument bolstered to some degree by plant-based brand Ripple​, which dubbed almond milk ‘a sham’ in a media campaign last week).

These plant-based products are imitations, but they are not substitutes for the comprehensive nutrient package offered by real milk​,” said Michael Dykes, president and CEO of IDFA.  “The reason we have food standards is to preserve the integrity and consistency of what’s inside the packages. Milk should be milk​.”

Click HERE​ to read the petition.

FURTHER READING:

Related news

Show more

Related products

show more

30544-Fortitech-HeartPart1-Banner-SmartLead-616x347

Strategic Nutrition for Heart Health-Part II

Fortitech® Premixes by DSM | 18-Oct-2017 | Technical / White Paper

Consumers are increasingly shopping for heart healthy products. Identify nutrients that can help differentiate your products and learn how custom nutrient...

YOUR GUIDE TO CLEAN-LABEL FORMULATION

YOUR GUIDE TO CLEAN-LABEL FORMULATION

Tate & Lyle | 16-Oct-2017 | Infographic

Consumers prefer food and beverage products to have short, easy-to-understand ingredients lists, and they're willing to pay a premium. That's...

Related suppliers

3 comments

Imitation

Posted by Joe M. Regenstein,

When a product such as imitation crab is made it is labeled imitation because it does not meet the nutritional standard for crab. So how about a compromise -- Soy milk -- an imitation milk! That also is consistent with the law and would meet the need for "Truth in Labeling"!

Report abuse

Another case of Feelings vs written law

Posted by Richard,

In the Code of Federal regulations is written the legal definition of milk to be used in the United States of America. This is law. "Title 21§131.110 Milk.
(a) Description. Milk is the lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows."
This dairy pride act is not new law, it only wants to enforce law that has been on the books for a very long time. What is at debate ultimately is that the plant based beverage industry has just not been forced to deal with this specific labeling violation until now.

Report abuse

The Good Food Institute is missing the point

Posted by Jaye,

Bruce Friedrich is deliberately missing the point. From childhood, people are aware of the high nutritional quality of cows' milk. While they may be well aware of the origins of plant-based 'milks', they will no doubt assume that the nutritional quality of such products is equivalent to the cows' milk they are familiar with. This is clearly not the case and therefore using the term 'milk' for plant-based alternatives is misleading to all except those few consumers that carefully read and compare the nutritional information on all products labelled as milk. If Mr Friedrich truly believes that people are fully aware of the nutritional differences between cows' milk and plant-based products then what's the harm from dropping the term 'milk' from plant-based products? The marketers could surely come up with another accurate and appealing name for plant-based products.

Report abuse

Follow us

Products

View more

Webinars