By CELESTE BAUMGARTNER
Ohio Correspondent

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The Ohio Department of Agriculture’s (ODA) recent rule on dairy labeling regarding recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) – also referred to as recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH), a supplement used for milk production – has become a hot topic.
The rule provided guidelines for the language permitted on labels. The department will approve the labels if a claim that the milk is derived from “from cows not supplemented with rbST” is verifiable.
The claim must also include a contiguous, identically formatted U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) disclaimer stating: “No significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-supplemented and non-rbST-supplemented cows.”
Carol Goland, executive director of the Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Assoc. (OEFFA), and Jerry Slominski, vice president for the International Dairy Food Assoc. (IDFA), spoke about their opposition to the rule, while Ohio Farm Bureau Federation (OFBF) spokesman Joe Cornely said it was in favor of the ruling, and ODA Director Robert Boggs reinforced his department’s view.
IDFA is a trade association of dairy processors representing companies such as Kroger, Reiters Dairy and Dean Foods. The label presents a marketing problem, Slominski said – there is a growing demand for milk from cows not treated with rbST. Consumers Union did a survey which showed that 88 percent of consumers are looking for milk labeled from cows not treated with rbST.
“Most of the larger processors are going to that, and the ruling restricts the ability to so label and market that product,” Slominski said. “So we also have a commercial free speech or right to advertise and market a product concern over the Ohio label.
“The (label) I’ve seen from Ohio allows you to make a production claim that is eight words long and then it has a disclaimer that I counted at 18 or 19 words long. So you have a claim that is half the size of what the disclaimer is. By requiring it to be all in the same type and font, you really aren’t able to effectively advertise what you want to advertise.”
Cornely said OFBF’s policy is that food labels provide consumers with useful information and don’t provide misleading statements.
“It is our opinion that the milk labeling regulations that Director Boggs issued accomplish that,” Cornely said. “I find it hard to understand how you can argue that the consumer needs more information, and then at the same time argue that you’re giving them too much information.
“If you say this milk comes from cows not treated with rbST and don’t finish the sentence, then it’s misleading – and by finishing the sentence, I mean providing the information that there is no difference in the milk,” he said.
“Consumers should be able to buy what they want. Farmers should be able to use the production technology they want.”
Goland said she is opposed to actions limiting the information that consumers have.
“The details of the rule are making it very difficult for processors, farmers to comply with the labeling,” she explained. “They have found it impossible to comply with the rule so, in fact, they’re saying nothing ... It’s as if the Department of Agriculture had banned the labeling of dairy products as rgBH-free altogether.”
ODA has rightly said that labeling the milk as “hormone free” is not acceptable because of the fact that there is natural bovine hormone in the milk, so “hormone free” should not be allowed, Goland said.
“But it doesn’t wash with me that somehow allowing somebody to label the milk and make a true claim about their production practices is tantamount to taking away technology,” she said. “Just because the FDA approved it does not mean that there can’t be legitimate scientific doubt about the product and its safety.”
Said Boggs, “The retailers ... look at this as a marketing tool and I don’t blame them; they have a right to market their product. But at the Department of Agriculture, we look at a label as providing balanced information, presenting both the claim of the processor – that is, what they believe is good about it – and we believe that has to be balanced out with the scientific information that goes along with it.”
FDA has made clear that with respect to rbST, there is no difference between rbST (the synthetic hormone) and bST (the natural hormone) milk, Boggs said.