“rbGH-Free” Momentum Building in U.S. Creamery Assn. of Oregon declared that its prized cheeses would no longer contain milk from Posilac- injected cows. Tillamook’s leadership saw sales of the co-op’s pre-eminent branded cheeses impacted by consumer concerns about rbGH. After the Tillamook co-op board of directors announced a “rbGH-Free” policy for its cheeses, then Posilac’s manufacturer—Monsanto—tried to disrupt the co- op’s membership. * In the summer 2006, Alpenrose Dairy (Redmond, Oregon) became completely “rbGH- More and more U.S. dairy processors are responding to consumer Free”. concerns by selling “rbGH-Free” dairy products. This trend was * In December 2005, Darigold’s Seattle, building fast, even before recent reports that rbGH–related hormones Washington's fluid milk supply went “rbGH-Free”. in milk were causing increased multiple human births. Darigold (formerly operating as West Farm) is mov- ing step-by-step, according to Rick North. In by Pete Hardin Nutrition, where author Dr. Gary Steinman reports February 2006, Darigold shifted production of its that a secondary hormone related to “Posilac” injec- Increased consumer demand for “rbGH-Free” yogurt to a “rbGH-Free” plant. tions—Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1), may dairy products is driving more dairy processors to be causing up to a five-fold increase in births of require their raw milk supplies contain no milk from twins in milk-drinking women in the U.S. Global hospital wellness group: anti-rbGH dairy farms using Monsanto’s synthetic, milk-stim- ulating cow growth hormone—“Posilac”. Rick North reports another key organization is Meatrix 2 video targets factory dairies/rbGH involved with the “anti-rbGH” effort is an interna- Some raw milk marketers are absorbing higher tional group—Health Care Without Harm. That costs to find a home for milk from farms using Public debate about rbGH milk (and added group consists of some 443 organizations in 52 “Posilac”. The tempo of “anti-rbGH” consumer senti- IGF-1) in consumer dairy products has spread far countries. Health Care Without Harm promotes ment is building fast, particularly on the West Coast beyond the ability of mere dairy industry public safe practices in hospitals. Originally, the organiza- and the East Coast. relations to contain. Earlier in 2006, a food activist tion focused on eliminating mercury from hospitals Historic consumer opposition to injecting U.S. group unveiled a Web site-based presentation titled and safe disposal of medical waste. In June 2005, dairy cows with milk-boosting, synthetic hormones “The Meatrix 2”—which attacks “factory dairies”. Health Care Without Harm came out against feed- runs very, very deep. Back in the late 1980s and That group’s first presentation—“The Meatrix”— ing dairy products processed from milk from farms early 1990s, several years before Posilac was com- an expose on feedlot beef industry practices, was using Posilac. The group’s “rbGH-Free” policy mercially sold, multiple consumer opinion surveys viewed by about 10 million persons. states: consistently showed that about 75-80% percent of To see a copy of this video, go to the Web site: “Health Care Without Harm opposes the use consumers thought it was a bad idea to inject cows www.themeatrix2.com of recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH or with synthetic hormones to boost milk output. Truth rbST)—a synthetic hormone given to cows to be known … this issue is clearly a case where con- At that Web site, to find the policy statements on rbGH, click on “U.S.” and then “Food”. increase milk production, due to the adverse impact sumers’ gut-level skepticism proved far wiser than upon animals and the potential harm to humans. We the assurances of government officials, dairy indus- therefore urge health care providers to purchase try flunkies, and university professors who asserted The “Meatrix 2” video contains supplemental non-rbGH milk from suppliers.” “human safety” of milk from rbGH-injected cows. information that focuses on the Starbucks coffee chain. The Web site for Health Care Without Harm is: Recent events show demand for “rbGH-Free” Starbucks is the highly-profitable, national upscale dairy products is galloping. Over the years, public coffee chain with thousands of outlets. Starbucks is a www.noharm.org skepticism about potential human dangers from hor- major purchaser of cream—used in those fancy latte mone-residues in rbGH-derived milk have not gone coffee drinks. If Starbucks were to declare a “rbGH- Key human health issue: higher IGF-1 levels: away. Amid the back-and-forth assertions of “dan- Free” policy for cream purchases, that could almost gers” (by critics) and “safety” (by Monsanto’s single-handedly force cream suppliers to shift to “no The discipline that Rick North has followed at allies), one fact stands clear: consumer demand for rbGH” milk/cream procurement policies. the Campaign for Safe Food is to present fact-based human health/safety concerns, in opposing Posilac- “rbGH-Free” milk is growing each year. And late- Perhaps recent surging demands by dairy proces- ly, such demand is galloping. derived milk. The specific human health concern is sors’ for “rbGH-Free” milk supplies is a straight-line elevated levels of a powerful, secondary hormone: correlation to increased publicity about dangers of hor- IGF-1. Wal-Mart pushing “rbGH-Free” milk mone-laden, rbGH-derived milk products … regard- less of whether consumers concerns are being The Campaign for Safe Food cites research The word in the dairy industry is that a major spawned by cartoons or medical journal articles. showing elevated levels of blood IGF-1 for persons push for “rbGH-Free” milk is coming from the consuming rbGH-derived cows’ milk. Back when nation’s largest fluid milk retailer: Wal-Mart. Wal- the federal Food and Drug Administration original- Mart is pressuring its primary packaged milk suppli- Oregon PSR group pushes anti-rbGH facts … ly approved commercial sale of rbGH, that agency er--Dean Foods for “rbGH-Free” fluid products. And Carefully watching increased, “rbGH-Free” claimed that the additional IGF-1 in milk from Dean Foods, in turn, is demanding “rbGH-Free” farm consumer dairy trends is Rick North (Durham, rbGH-injected dairy cows would be destroyed by milk from its near-exclusive supplier, Dairy Farmers Oregon). For almost three years, North has spear- digestive acids. Subsequent research has shown of America. ( headed the “Campaign for Safe Food” for the that presumption is not true: the IGF-1 is shepherd- More processors go “rbGH-Free Oregon chapter of the Physicians for Social ed through the human digestive tract by casein (pro- tein) molecules in milk. On June 1, 2006, the Dean Foods’ fluid milk Responsibility focusing on food safety. In general, plant at Florence, New Jersey shifted to a “rbGH- the group has dealt with Genetically Modified At that Web site, look particularly for the Free” status. Raw milk marketers supplying that plant Organism (GMO) food safety issues, but with a par- eight-page brochure titled, “Know Your Milk.” must have certificates from all their dairy producers ticular focus on rbGH. swearing they don’t use “Posilac” at all. Indeed, sell- The Web site for that group is: Warning: “rbGH-Free” wave surging ing raw milk to fluid processors in New England, www.oregonpsr.org eastern New York, New York City, metropolitan New More than a dozen years after Monsanto’s Jersey … down to the Philadelphia market is increas- North, who previously worked for the biotech cow hormone was approved for commercial ingly difficult. Fluid milk processors in southern New American Cancer Society, directs an effective, fact- sale, consumer demand for “rbGH-Free” dairy England are almost rock-solid in their demands for based campaign promoting “rbGH-Free” dairy products is dramatically rising. FDA’s original “rbGH-Free” raw milk. Farmland Dairies products in the Pacific Northwest. North’s group assertions about rbGH human “safety”—especially (Wallington, NJ), Hood/Crowley (in New England) does not “target” processors, but has worked “com- those involving the secondary hormone, IGF-1— and Dean Foods (New England and New Jersey) all municating” the growing list of human safety con- look increasingly bogus as time and scientific tout “rbGH-Free” milk claims to their consumers. cerns about rbGH-derived cows’ milk to dairy knowledge about IGF-1 grow. processors in the region. That task hasn’t always The recent journal article that correlates dra- Late word arrives from Montoana that two been welcomed by dairy executives. fluid mil processors–Darigold (the local co-op) and matically higher rates of “twins” birthed to non- Meadow Gold (Dean Foods)–have announced they But North points to several “rbGH-Free” dec- vegan women in the U.S. with elevated levels of will be “rbGH-Free”. larations by dairy processors in the Pacific IGF-1 in dairy products promises to further fuel Northwest as feathers in the cap of the “Campaign public desires to avoid milk from farms using No prior consumer concerns about rbGH-milk for Safe Food”. Posilac. will be reduced by recent findings reported in the * On April 1, 2005, the Tillamook Cooperative May 2006 issue of The Journal of Reproductive The Milkweed • July 2006 — 5 A