New Zealand's recent food safety agreement with the US FDA must not be allowed to force a redefinition of 'milk' that will threaten public health, as new proposals in the US threaten to do.
The FDA is open for public submissions on plans to change what can be labelled as "milk" being proposed by The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk ProducersFederation (NMPF).
The two organisations have filed a petition requesting the FDA “amend the standard of identity” for milk and 17 other dairy products.(1)
"There is concern that the mutual recognition agreement with the FDA could force lower standards onto New Zealand, including allowing misleading labelling that will impact public health," says Jon Carapiet, spokesman for GE free NZ in food and environment.
"The public need a commitment that any deals made under the TPPA and the recent FDA food safety agreement will not undermine New Zealand laws requiring GM labelling, and will not allow artificial sweeteners to be added in secret.”
It is against the public interest for the FDA and New Zealand's food authority to enable even more toxic chemicals such as 2,4-D to be used on food, and to make it OK to hide GMOs and other artificial ingredients.
The proposals now being considered add to growing concerns that the TPPA and the FDA safety agreement will weaken regulation needed to protect people.
It is unacceptable for international negotiations to water down standards or to increase risks to the public from toxic chemicals and genetic engineering in food.
Contact- Jon Carapiet 0210507681
Big Dairy Petitions FDA to Allow Unlabeled Use of Aspartame in Dairy Products
The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) have filed a petition with the FDA requesting the agency “amend the standard of identity” for milk and 17 other dairy products.
If the amendment goes through, that would mean anytime you see the word “milk” on the label, it could include aspartame, sucralose, or any other dangerous artificial sweetener, but you could never be quite sure, since there will be no mention of it — not by listing the artificial sweetener used, nor with a no- or low-calorie type label, which is a tip-off that the product might contain a non-nutritive sweetener.
The IDFA and NMPF maintain that “consumers can more easily identify the overall nutritional value of milk products that are flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners if the labels do not include such claims.”
They also state that consumers generally don’t recognize milk — including flavored milk — as necessarily containing sugar. Therefore, since you’re don’t realize that flavored milk might contain added sugar, sweetening the product with non-nutritive artificial sweeteners, while listing it as simply “milk” on the label, will make it easier for you to identify its overall nutritional value.
FDA already allows the dairy industry to use the unmodified “milk” label for products that contain added sugar or high fructose corn syrup.
The petition also requests the FDA similarly amend the standards of identity for 17 other milk and cream products, to allow the use of any safe and suitable sweetener in the optional ingredients, without specifying the type of sweetener used on the label:
Acidified milk Cultured milk Sweetened condensed milk Nonfat dairy milk
Nonfat dry milk fortified with vitamins A and D Evaporated milk Dry cream Heavy cream
Light cream Sour cream, and acidified sour cream Light whipping cream Eggnog
Half-and-half Yoghurt Lowfat yoghurt Nonfat yoghurt