Consumer Law

ABC news reports on the battle between a group of farmers backed by Monsanto and another group of farmers supported by Ben & Jerry's over whether dairies can label milk "rBST Free."  For over a decade Ben & Jerry's has labeled its products as free of recombinant bovine somatotropin, or rBST, also known as recombinant bovine growth hormone, or rBGH.  More recently a number of dairies have been marketing their milk as rBST free.  While not challenging the express statement, Monsanto, which markets rBST, believes that such claims imply to consumers that milk from cows treated with rBST is less healthy or safe than milk from untreated cows.

As I mentioned in April, Monsanto complained to the The Federal Trade Commission about dairies making rBST free claims.  The FTC refused to open an investigation noting that the FDA determined that there is "no significant difference between milk from treated and untreated cows" and that food companies could make rBST free claims as long as those claims did not imply a health benefit. The FTC staff explained that it reviewed the ads Monsanto alleged were deceptive and found no national or significant advertising campaigns that linked rBST to human health or safety.  Rather, it found that most companies making rBST free claims included a disclaimer about there being no significant difference between milk from treated and untreated cows.

Unable to get the FTC involved, according to ABC News, Monsanto-backed farmers have taken the fight to state legislatures in an effort to pass legislation that would prohibit dairies from labeling milk rBST free.  So far Pennsylvania and Indiana have considered and rejected legislation.  Ohio has held hearings on the issue and a decision by the state's agricultural director is expected early this year.