Still harping on Monsanto

Sorry to keep going on and on about Monsanto, but I had to call attention to a great article in Vanity Fair this month (thanks, Lucy, for the heads up) about Monsanto's long history of dirty tricks.

From the article:

Monsanto already dominates America’s food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation’s tactics–ruthless legal battles against small farmers–is its decades-long history of toxic contamination.

Well worth reading.

Consumers (and cows) win one against Monsanto

When Wal-Mart last month announced their house brand milk will now come exclusively from cows not treated with growth hormones, they may have tipped the scales in favor of consumers and sounded the death knell for the use of artificial bovine growth hormone in commercial milk production.

Consumers and animal welfare advocates have long been leery of the artificial growth hormones that allow treated cows to produce up to ten percent more milk. Although Monsanto (who markets the hormones to dairy farmers under the Posilac brand) insists the hormones don't affect the safety of milk and scientists say there is no conclusive evidence to the contrary, many consumers are still leery. And animal welfare advocates point out that it can't be good for the cows -- in fact, a dairy cow raised on pasture will probably produce milk for ten years, as opposed to two years' production for cows raised in confinement dairies and given the hormones.

Conventional dairy farmers have been angered by the movement, fearing their incomes will decrease if their production decreases. But given the laws of supply and demand it seems obvious that if the entire industry is producing ten percent less milk, demand will drive prices per gallon up and eventually it should balance out for farmers (though of course being more expensive for consumers.) And according to the results of a four-year study reported in the Journal of Dairy Science, when all factors are considered, conventional dairy farmers might do well to go back to traditional methods:

Milk production was lower in this study for pasture-based systems but lower feed costs, lower culling costs, and other economic factors indicate that pasture-based systems can be competitive with confinement systems.

Kroger and Starbucks are also selling only hormone-free milk in response to consumer demand, and Safeway has switched its in-house brand to exclusively hormone-free. Monsanto, however, has stated that it has no plans to pull Posilac and that sales remain strong.

Indiana dairy labelling

Monsanto is at it again. Their rBGH product, Posilac, which artificially increases milk production in dairy cows, has seen declining sales. They think the solution is to prevent consumers from knowing how their milk was produced, and to that end they've been systematically influencing legislators in dairying states to prevent farmers who don't use the hormone from saying so on their labels. Pennsylvania and Ohio are dealing with this issue right now, and this week Indiana joined the fray.

Indiana HB 1300 would ban the use of labeling that "contains compositional claims that cannot be confirmed through laboratory analysis or can only be supported by sworn statements, affidavits, or testimonials." Monsanto's argument is that milk produced using their growth hormone can't be distinguished in a laboratory from milk produced without the hormone, and therefore labelling milk 'hormone-free' is misleading to consumers because it implies there's a difference.

If you are in Indiana want your representatives working for you instead of for Monsanto, contact your representative.

Victory in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania has rescinded the ban on 'anti-rBGH' labelling. This is great news for small dairy farmers in Pennsylvania and represents a significant win for consumers' right to know. However, a similar fight is still going on in Ohio. If you are in Ohio and want to know whether your milk is produced using rBGH, an email or phone call to Governor Ted Strickland and/or Ohio Agriculture Director Boggs would be timely and helpful. It doesn't have to be long or take a lot of time -- just a couple of lines telling Strickland/Boggs that you prefer to know how your milk is produced and don't want Ohio banning rGBH labelling.

To contact Governor Ted Strickland:
Phone: the Governor's Office at (614) 466-3555
FAX: a letter to the Governor at: (614) 466-9354
Email: click here to be taken to the contact form to send an email to the Governor.

To contact Director Boggs:
Phone: (614) 466-2732
Email: Send an email to Director Boggs

NPR on the demand for hormone-free milk

National Public Radio's Morning Edition included a story this morning on the demand for milk produced without use of artificial hormones which the government insists are harmless to humans.

Reuters' Top Health Issues of 2008

Reuters has released their predictions for the top health issues of 2008. Topping the list: Raw Milk. According to Reuters,

1. Raw Milk

People will go to extreme lengths to get it, farmers will risk their businesses to sell it, and most state governments want nothing to do with legalizing it. Raw milk -- milk that hasn't been pasteurized or homogenized -- was one of the most talked-about foods of the year.

Its fans say that pasteurization removes proteins, enzymes and healthy bacteria from milk, making it less nutritious, and that the taste of raw milk is incomparable. Those opposed to raw milk consumption -- including health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control -- argue that the harmful bacteria are of primary concern, and that the dangers posed by E. coli, salmonella and listeria are not worth the risk.

The debate is sure to continue in 2008 as raw milk goes mainstream, governments try to make it unappealing and people find more creative ways to get their hands on it.

Also on the list: the 2007 Farm Bill, Food labelling, Michael Pollan, The End of Cheap Food, and Fixing the FDA/USDA. Pretty much an all-star lineup from the Local Eating team.

Ohio Dairy Labelling

The folks up in Columbus who feel compelled to protect us from things we want to do by making them illegal have sunk to a new low: now they want to protect us from knowledge.

Up for consideration: a bill that would make it illegal for Ohio dairy farmers who don't use hormones on their cows to label their product 'hormone-free.' It seems all the dairy farmers who do use hormones on their dairy cows think such labels might make consumers think there was something wrong with milk produced when dairy cows are injected with hormones to make them produce more milk than nature intended. And, not coincidentally, farmers using hormones tend to be the ones with the most money to spend on lobbying government officials.

This letter to Governor Strickland, signed by many notables in the food safety, consumer protection, and dairy industry (including, strangely, Aurora Organic Dairy who have been in the news lately for playing fast-and-loose with the term 'organic') asks Ohio's governor not to interfere with our right to know.

Ohio Milk Labeling: if it's us vs. them, why are we being represented by one of them?

Oh, that's nice. According to Saturday's Columbus Dispatch, on the Ohio Department of Agriculture's advisory committee to investigate whether Ohio dairymen should be allowed to label their milk as "hormone-free," the consumer point of view is being represented by Robin Steiner. Ms. Steiner once worked for Monsanto (which markets the synthetic growth hormone given to cows to increase milk production) and is married to a dairyman who uses the hormones in his herds. She's the only member of the committee with "consumer" listed as her affiliation.

Her point of view? Her elderly mom

...lives on a limited income and doesn’t have extra money to spend on milk that isn’t compositionally different from less-expensive types.

So clearly the solution is not to tell mom what’s in the milk. Ignorance being bliss, and all.

Uh, do you think maybe she’s already made up her mind about this one?

Sustainable Organic Local Ethical milk

When I decided I wanted to extend my local eating to local dairy, I discovered it wasn't going to be as easy as finding a local source for tomatoes. Most of us buy milk from some anonymous corporation which in turn has bought it from multiple dairy farms -- some of them megafarms -- and put it all into one big vat. It's impossible to know exactly where that glass of milk came from.

It may have come from somewhere not too far away. United Dairy Farmers' milk is local, if you consider the tristate to be our local area. Their 200 stores in Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana are supplied by a milk co-op that includes approximately 75 dairy farmers located throughout the three states. In the grand scheme of things, that actually seems pretty local to me.

But there's a further issue. When I walk out of a UDF with a half-gallon of skim, I have no idea which of those 75 farmers produced that milk, whether his farming methods are sustainable, or how the cow was treated. I also know that the farmer likely is making around $1.77/gallon for his product, which for a small dairy farmer almost certainly isn't enough to keep his farm going from one generation to the next.

Part of my reason for wanting to eat locally -- a big part of it -- is that I want to know how my food is raised. I want to know my food dollars are going to support local farmers using sustainable, humane methods. When possible, I want to know the person who is feeding me. About the only way you can know who produces your milk and how it was produced is to buy it directly from the dairy farmer -- which means it probably hasn't been processed. It's raw. And here in Ohio, that's illegal. In Ohio, raw milk cannot be sold.

Which is why I bought a herdshare.

Under a herdshare agreement, the milk consumer purchases a portion of a cow, pays a set amount per month for that cow's board and care, and receives milk back as the owner's dividend.

I found a dairy farmer nearby who for $50 sold me 1/25th of one of his eight cows. I pay $22 a month for my portion of the cow's board, and in return each week I drive out to the farm and pick up a gallon of fresh raw milk, which works out to about $5.08 per gallon if you discount the original purchase price which I'll get back if I ever decide to sell my portion of the cow. My farmer* produces only raw milk -- an important distinction, as milk intended for pasteurization is generally handled very differently from that which is consumed raw. On my first visit to his farm, he took me out to his small sweet corn field where 'the girls' were eating the remains of the stand of corn that had been lost to this year's drought. They looked up when we came through the gate and came when he called, Cinnamon and the others, and they clearly expected to get petted for their trouble.

The farmer's wife told me on my last visit that they now had a waiting list. I told her they needed to buy another cow. She threw her hands up. "Don't tell him! That's what he's saying! We don't need another cow!"


* I won't reveal my farmer's name for fear of getting him in trouble. Herdshares take advantage of a loophole in Ohio law which has been treated differently by different administrations. The current administration is looking the other way, for now, but given that Big Dairy is a powerful lobby, that could change at any time. The previous administration had a policy of harrassment of herdshare offerers in what seemed a clear attempt to put them out of business by the simple but very effective strategy of requiring them to run up legal fees until they went broke.