I was happy to read a similar story in my local paper today but this Pitsburgh Post Gazette story is more informative. Apparently many people care about how the cows are treated and are willing to pay a premium for a more natural product.
Opponents of consumer choice point out that rBST, the artifical growth hormone marketed by Monsanto as Posilac, is not detectable in milk so it impossible to know if milk labeled "hormone free" actually came from hormone free cows. They also point to studies that suggest there are no known adverse health risks to consumers from rBST. They claim rBST just artificially boosts the level of an already existing hormone in the cow so it produces more milk and that there are no adverse side effects to the cow.
Here's my take on this.
- There is no ban on labeling foods "No Artificial Flavors" or "No Artificial Coloring" so why should there be a ban on "milk from rBST free cows"?
- I don't trust Monsanto.
- I prefer food products as natural as I can get them.
- Monsanto sucks.
- Just because I want a more natural product and am willing to pay more for it does not mean I am acting irrationally or that I have irrational fears about this artificial hormone.
- Even if there were zero known side effects in all cows that are injected with rBST I would not want it used because it causes cows to do something unnatural. Natural milk production does not result in INCREASED risk of these problems as printed on every POSILAC package:
For my own benefit I am embarking on a research journey about rBST. I want to hear from scientists that don't work for Monsanto or the FDA. Why is rBST illegal in Canada, the EU and Japan? Has Monsanto been forthright with sharing their own safety studies? How did rBST come to be approved by the FDA? I realize I have not been scientifically persuasive here but common sense tells me that this stinks and we may not know why for years.
