BlueCollarCritic
Member
Now you can argue all you want whether or not its a good idea or that its beneficial to add sweeteners of any kind, natural or artificial to milk but what is undeniable is that the US Dairy is trying to do this in a way that allows them to add any sweetener to milk and 17 other dairy products and do so without the consumer knowing it. How? By changing the definition of MILK (along with 17 other dairy products) a dairy producer can then add a sweetener like aspartame to the milk and would not be required to list on the label or anywhere else that the milk contained said aspartame or any other sweetener.
There’s no logical reason for doing this other then so that it can be done secretively. Now some will argue and say “How is this secretive when the FDA is policing announcing that they are seeking feedback on the request”. While there may be an announcement for the feedback of this change it still does not change the fact that an industry is seeking to add something to a product in a way that does not require them to let the buyer know that said additive is in the product. Making an annoucnement on a website that the FDA is accepting feedback is far from being open. The government has to accept public feedback on this kind of change and thankfully watchdogs keep an eye on these sites so that when something like this happens we wil hear about it since its unlkkely the mainstream media (TV & Radio) will report it.
Link to Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/art...ity-for-milk-and-17-additional-dairy-products
Huffington Post Article about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/aspartame-milk_n_2764729.html?utm_hp_ref=business
A Link At Courthouse News where Dairy Lobby argues that adding aspartame to the milk would be beneficial. If that’s true then why not just add it and put it on the label as oppose to trying to change the definition of mil so it can include the sweetener without listing it on the label? : http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/02/21/55075.htm
There’s no logical reason for doing this other then so that it can be done secretively. Now some will argue and say “How is this secretive when the FDA is policing announcing that they are seeking feedback on the request”. While there may be an announcement for the feedback of this change it still does not change the fact that an industry is seeking to add something to a product in a way that does not require them to let the buyer know that said additive is in the product. Making an annoucnement on a website that the FDA is accepting feedback is far from being open. The government has to accept public feedback on this kind of change and thankfully watchdogs keep an eye on these sites so that when something like this happens we wil hear about it since its unlkkely the mainstream media (TV & Radio) will report it.
Link to Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/art...ity-for-milk-and-17-additional-dairy-products
Huffington Post Article about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/aspartame-milk_n_2764729.html?utm_hp_ref=business
A Link At Courthouse News where Dairy Lobby argues that adding aspartame to the milk would be beneficial. If that’s true then why not just add it and put it on the label as oppose to trying to change the definition of mil so it can include the sweetener without listing it on the label? : http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/02/21/55075.htm