The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has posted on its website a report from the 35th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission that convened in Rome earlier in July 2012. In addition to adopting a number of standards on food additives, food hygiene guidelines, maximum levels of melamine for liquid infant formula, and maximum pesticide residue levels, the Commission agreed to update a scientific review of the use of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) to stimulate milk production in dairy cows. Maximum residue levels have been stalled at Step 8 since 1995, and debate over the issue apparently continues. Those opposed to the use of rBST cited animal health, welfare and possible anti-microbial resistance, while the United States and others contend that these issues exceed the Codex’s scope, the science is sufficient and no food safety issues remain.
Tag Archives milk
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has decided which of the parties sued over an E. coli outbreak that sickened dozens of Sizzler Steak House patrons in 2000 and caused the death of a 3-year-old are liable for consequential damages, indemnity and costs under various supply chain and insurance contracts. Kriefall v. Sizzler USA Franchise, Inc., Nos. 2009AP1212 & 2010AP491 (Wis., decided June 29, 2012). Among other matters, the court ruled that Sizzler was entitled to (i) recover consequential damages for the meat supplier’s breach of implied warranties despite limiting language in the continuing guaranty provision of their contract, and (ii) indemnity from the meat supplier for Sizzler’s advance partial payment to the family of the deceased child “because the payment was not voluntary and the jury found that Sizzler was zero percent liable for the E. coli contamination.” The court also ruled that Sizzler could not recover its attorney’s fees despite a jury finding…
Two groups of scientists at Inner Mongolia University in Huhhot, China, have reportedly created two genetically modified (GM) calves capable of producing either low-lactose milk or milk high in omega-3 fatty acids. According to media sources, the group involved with low-lactose milk production hopes to create herds of GM cows that would supply a range of dairy products for lactose-intolerant consumers within five to 10 years. “Ordinary milk contains lactose, while milk produced by our modified cow will have relatively low content of lactose, or even have no lactose,” one scientist told The Telegraph. “Most people suffer the lactose intolerance in varying degrees. We are attempting to breed a dairy cow that produce low lactose milk for supplying the market. We hope to commercialize it in the future.” The second research team apparently modified cow embryos with genes from roundworms to produce milk with four times the level of omega-3…
According to news sources, Philippine Department of Justice Secretary Leila de Lima issued an opinion in May 2012, upholding a Department of Health (DOH) memorandum that prohibited multinational companies that make infant milk and other nutritional products from using registered trademarks that contain health and nutrition claims which may undermine breastfeeding and breast milk. The companies were not prohibited from selling or advertising their products as long as their marketing materials, including product labels, comply with DOH rules. DOH apparently took the action on the basis of data showing that the country has a weak breastfeeding culture. In issuing her ruling, de Lima rejected the companies’ contention that preventing a trademark owner from the right to use its own registered mark on its products constituted a deprivation of property without due process of law. She reportedly said, “deceptive marks and misdescriptive marks are absolutely unregistrable.” See Business Mirror, June 13,…
“The new wave of American cuisine has a regressive side, wrapped up in nostalgia for an imagined past… To chefs like [Daniel Patterson], unprocessed milk does not just taste better; it is sentimental and, more important, it is pure,” claims New Yorker staff writer Dana Goodyear in this article chronicling the raw milk movement and its ongoing confrontation with government regulators. Focusing on a California-based group known as “the Rawesome Three” who in 2011 were arrested for—among other charges—running an unlicensed milk plant and processing milk without pasteurization, Goodyear likens the covert world of raw milk to that of marijuana and other illicit substances. Despite the insistence of food safety officials that unpasteurized milk “can carry salmonella, campylobacter, and E. coli O157:H7,” the raw milk acolytes quoted in Goodyear’s report apparently believe in the product’s natural healing properties and will go to great lengths to obtain it, frequenting undercover specialty stores…
A federal court in California has granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to dismiss claims that its product labels, ads and Website representations for Muscle Milk® ready-to-drink beverages and snack bars violate state unfair competition and false advertising laws and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and constitute fraud, negligent misrepresentation and unjust enrichment. Delacruz v. Cytosport, Inc., No. 11-3532 (N.D. Cal., decided April 11, 2012). While the court determined that the plaintiff has standing to pursue the putative class claims and that the claims are not preempted by federal law nor should be stayed under the primary jurisdiction doctrine, it found many of her claims insufficiently pleaded. According to the court, the only claim that survives the motion to dismiss alleges that the term “healthy fats” on the 14-ounce Muscle Milk® ready-to-drink label could constitute deceptive product labeling, because “[a] reasonable consumer would be likely…
A federal court in Iowa has dismissed claims filed by a legal defense fund and a number of raw-milk producers challenging Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations prohibiting the shipment of raw milk for human consumption across state lines. Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund v. Sebelius, No. 10-4018 (N.D. Iowa, decided March 30, 2012). According to the court, none of the plaintiffs alleged that “the FDA has applied or sought to apply the challenged regulations to them, and Wagoner’s contentions are merely conclusory and based on speculation.” Raw milk producer Eric Wagoner had apparently alleged that a Georgia Department of Agriculture official “ordered an embargo of raw milk that he had transported from South Carolina, where it is legal to buy raw milk, to Georgia, where it is not” and claimed that “the embargo was ordered at the direction of the FDA.” There was no evidence of FDA involvement, and because…
A federal court in Tennessee has dismissed the two remaining claims in antitrust litigation filed by certain retail processed milk sellers against Dean Foods Co. and the Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. In re: Se. Milk Antitrust Litig., No. 08-1000 (E.D. Tenn., decided March 27, 2012) (ruling applies to Food Lion, LLC v. Dean Foods Co., No. 07-188). At issue were claims for violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act (agreement not to compete and conspiracy to monopolize). The court found that the plaintiffs’ expert failed to “create a material issue of fact on the question of whether the price increases were ‘by reason of’ an illegal conspiracy in violation of the antitrust laws and Plaintiffs do not allege an injury of the kind which the antitrust laws are designed to prevent.” Because the plaintiffs were unable to establish antitrust injury, the court determined that the defendants…
According to news sources, a state court has ordered dairy farmers on the California Milk Advisory Board to answer questions about marketing the dairy industry in California. The order was reportedly entered in a lawsuit filed in June 2011 by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) alleging that the board’s “Happy Cow” ads deceive the public by representing that California dairy products come from cows that are “happy,” humanely treated, healthy, and comfortable. According to the animal rights’ organization, the board lacks the evidence to substantiate the ad campaign. The court also apparently denied PETA’s motion to subpoena confidential dairy-producer records relating to animal-welfare practices. The litigation is currently in discovery, and the next hearing has reportedly been scheduled for May 25, 2012. See Capital Press, February 9, 2012; Merced Sun-Star, February 16, 2012.
A federal court in Pennsylvania has granted the U.S. government’s motion for summary judgment and permanently enjoined a Pennsylvania dairy farmer from selling raw milk and milk products in interstate commerce. United States v. Allgyer, No. 11-02651 (E.D. Pa., decided February 2, 2012). According to the court, Daniel Allgyer’s interstate sales of raw milk were discovered through an undercover investigation that involved placing online orders for the product through a membership-only group. Members were cautioned by the website to “not share information” about the group with government agencies or doctors. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) apparently purchased some of the milk for delivery out of state, and independent testing confirmed that it was unpasteurized. FDA warned the farmer to stop violating federal law, but he continued to make deliveries to out-of-state consumers through a different membership organization. The court rejected the defendant’s arguments that summary judgment should not be…
