• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Nutritional, Technical, and Economic Aspects of MILK SUBSTITUTES J.W. Hammond, S.T. Coulter, and R. Slrny AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY of MINNESOTA CONTENTS Introduction . 3 Development of Filled and Imitation Milk . 4 Laws and Regulations . 4 Nutritional Issues . 6 Technical Issues ........................................................ 10 Economic Consequences . 11 Adjustments in Milk Production . 18 Summary and Conclusions .................... : . 19 Role of the Institute of Agriculture ........................................ 20 Nutritional, Technical, and Economic Aspects of Milk Substitute~ J .. W. Hammond, S. T. Coulter, and R. Sirny·* While the introduction of filled and imitation these products in several states as a direct replace~ milk into the nation's markets has been of interest ment for pasteurized and homogenized .fluid milk. to consumers, it has been viewed apprehensively by This inquiry is pertinent because food constitu­ members of the dairy industry. Production and sale ent selection is increasingly shifting from the kitc4~ of. these products could significantly alter an impor­ ens. of homes and institutions to those of processor~. tant branch of agriculture. In years to come, modem Products sold under the federal government's Stand­ technology will have a heavy impact upon traditional ards of Identity must conform to standards of the methods of food production. Development of milk Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, substitutes will just be part of overall research de­ there are no Standards of Identity for many products signed to produce synthetic food substitutes. sold under fanciful· names. This bulletin, prepared upon request by the ad­ Economic pressure force~ food processors tp use ministration of the Institute of Agriculture, presents the lowest cost ingredients and formulation th~t are a comprehensive statement of the opportunities and consistent with legal re,quirements or company problems associated with these products. It is de­ standards. Also, new packaging methods or.dev:elop~ signed to provide a basis for Institute of Agriculture ment of new foods, such as frozen meals,. might policies regarding developments in this area. It has necessitate a change in the formulation of food three specific objectives: ( 1) to provide some back­ items for reasons of stability rather tl;lan economic ground on the status of milk substitutes, ( 2) to or nutritional considerations. This.· does not impJy describe nutritional, technical, and economic issues that food processors are. not conceJ,Tied with nutri~ that might arise from the development of these tive values of their products. However, it does mean products, and ( 3) to indicate the role of the Insti­ that to an increasing extent food processors are set­ tute regarding these products. Some of the issues ting the nutritional levels of their products without considered here reach far beyond the immediate any actual or implied responsibility for their nutri­ problem of filled milk. Substitutes for other tradi­ tional adequacy. tional foods have appeared on the market and this This contrasts markedly with products that are trend is expected to continue. prepared for pets or even farm animals. Processors Filled milk is a product in which vegetable or assume almost total responsibility for nutritional other fat replaces the milk fat. Imitation milk is a adequacy. From the standpoint ·of the objective product that resembles milk, but it is of nondairy sought - the health of the pet, the weight gain per origin. These two names are not used universally pound of food and per day - results . have been and products vary from manufacturer to manu­ highly favorable. A similar responsibility has been facturer. accepted by processors of infant and baby foods. Filled milk is not a newly developed product. Mter infancy, the child selects from a wide va­ Its sale in this country has been prohibited by laws riety of foods and the nutritional adequacy of his for many decades. Imitation milk is not entirely new diet then becomes, partially, a matter of individual either: nondairy baby foods have been sold for a choice. However, the question of what responsibility number of years. What is new is the legal sale of the food processor has in assuring an adequate diet remains open for public consideration. Public agen­ * J. W. Hammond is an associate professor, Department of Agricul­ cies such as the University of Minnesota clearly have tural Economics; S. T. Coulter is professor and head of the Department a responsibility to explore and illuminate potential of Food Science and Industries; and R. Sirny is professor and chair­ man of the Nutrition Division of the School of Home Economics, problems. Nondairy products sold under the sem­ Institute of Agriculture, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota. blance of milk are a case in point.. Development of Filled and Imitation Milk have enacted statutes to prohibit the production and sale of such products. During World War II the U.S. Army Quarter­ . Undoubtedly, these laws and regulations were master Corps found that milk reconstituted from Imposed to pro~ect th~ interests of the dairy pro­ nonfat dry milk and milk fat usually· tasted better ducer. But certamly legislators were concerned with than reconstituted dry whole milk. This led to es­ insufficient and improper labeling of substitute milk ta~lishment. of reconstituting plants (nonfat dry products and with the special place milk is consid­ milk and milk fat) to serve military installations in ered to have in the human diet. t~e. ~ester~ Pacific. Extension of this practice into If it. is in the public interest to prohibit the ClVlh~n ~se m the Western Pacific and, ultimately, production and sale of "filled" milk then it seems substitutiOn of less expensive coconut fat for milk ' mconsistent. that the laws of the same state permit fat followed. Eventually, the process returned to this the manufacture and sale of nondairy milk substi­ country through Hawaii, then California and Ari­ ~utes. This inconsistency partially reflects the grow­ zona, and finally to other states. mg trend toward honesty in identification and label­ Imitation or nondairy products are not entirely ing, but not banning of the sale of the actual new. Gruel made from soybeans had been used for w~olesome food .. Federal Food and Drug laws per­ centuries in many parts of the world. Baby formulas mit the productiOn and sale of food items under based on soy protein preparations and vegetable fat two general requirements: (1) Standards of Identity had b~en sold for several years in this country, large­ which require that a product sold under a name fo; ly for mfants allergic to cow's milk. which there is a standard of identity shall conform Imitation milk did not evolve from baby form­ to the requirements for that product; ( 2) other ulas, but rather from technology used to develop products may be produced and sold under fanciful nondairy creaming agents. They are made from veg­ names if they conform to general Food and Drug etable fat, corn syrup solids, sodium caseinate and laws and are formulated from constituents and in emulsifiers and bodying agents. Modern techn~logy amounts approved for food use. Constituents must de~eloped v~getable fat preparations and corn syrup be listed on the package. sohd.s sufficiently. bland f?r use in these products. Addmg a proportioned mixture of these ingredients The constitutionality of the filled and imitation to water produces a liquid that looks and tastes milk acts is uncertain. The Federal Filled Milk Act much like milk. Sodi?m caseinate is relatively bland, was challenged in 1938 and 1944 in the Supreme but the amount which can be used is limited for Court. In both instances it was upheld. But most flavor reasons. Soybean protein preparations that likely its constitutionality will be challenged again are sufficiently bland for creaming agents have not in the future. The U. S. Supreme Court has also up~ yet been developed. · held two state filled milk laws, the Ohio Act in 1918 and the Kansas Act in 1944. State laws have not fared nearly as well when Laws and Regulations challenged in state courts. In 1931 the Illinois filled milk law was declared unconstitutional. In 1936 Economic control of filled and imitation milk another Illinois law and the Nebraska and Michigan takes two forms: ( 1) outright restriction of the laws were d~clared unconstitutional. The Washing­ manufacture and sale of products and ( 2) the im­ ton and Anzona laws were declared void in 1967. position of pricing provisions of state· and federal A suit was brought against the Wisconsin Act in market orders for milk. In addition to the Federal 1968. I~ .one state court case, Pennsylvania in 1938, Filled Milk Act, at least 30 states prohibit the manu­ the vahdity of the filled milk law was upheld. facture and sale of filled milk. Several states also prohibit the sale of nondairy substitutes. Thus, the dairy industry's ability to maintain Economic controls were enacted for several rea­ legislative restri~t~on on fluid milk substitutes ap­ sons. So~e were proposed by the dairy industry to pears to be declmmg. Already, nondairy substitutes protect Its markets and to reduce economic pres­ are outside the purview of the federal act and most sure to substitute less expensive vegetable fats for state acts. ~n addition to unfavorable court rulings, milk fat. Crossing state boundaries with any product urban-dommated legislatures are likely to repeal containing milk, cream, or skim milk combined with so~~ ~f th~se acts. Such a . move is underway in fats or oils other than milk fat and made to resemble ~I.rgi~Ia. F1~ally, the precedent set by margarine milk was prohibited by the Federal F-illed Milk Act htigation pomts to the inevitable failure of restric­ passed in 192 3. Many states, including Minnesota: tive legislation.

Load more

  20

Copy Link