Don't Cry Over Plant-Based Milk: Why the Use of the Term “Milk” on Non-Dairy Beverages Does Not Constitute “Misbranded” Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Don't Cry Over Plant-Based Milk: Why the Use of the Term “Milk” on Non-Dairy Beverages Does Not Constitute “Misbranded” Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Mancinelli, Michael 5/10/2020 For Educational Use Only DON'T CRY OVER PLANT-BASED MILK: WHY THE USE..., 14 J. Health &... 14 J. Health & Biomedical L. 481 Journal of Health & Biomedical Law 2018 Note Giuliana D'Esopo 1 Copyright © 2018 by Journal of Health & Biomedical Law; Giuliana D'Esopo DON'T CRY OVER PLANT-BASED MILK: WHY THE USE OF THE TERM “MILK” ON NON-DAIRY BEVERAGES DOES NOT CONSTITUTE “MISBRANDED” UNDER THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT Of course, the global economy couldn't very well function without this wall of ignorance and the indifference it breeds. This is why the American food industry and its international counterparts fight to keep their products from telling even the simplest stories ... about how they were produced. The more knowledge people have about the way their food is produced, the more likely it is that their values-and not just ‘value'- will inform their purchasing decisions. 2 I. Introduction In December of 2016, Congress launched an effort to prevent nondairy drink manufacturers from labeling their products as “milk.” 3 Thirty-two members of the House signed a letter to the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) claiming that plant-based manufacturers are misleading consumers, and describing nondairy products as “unable to match the nutritional makeup of the product they mimic.” 4 Though dairy consumption has long played a role in society, drinking dairy milk is a fairly new practice beginning in the late nineteenth century. 5 As demand dictates supply, dairy farms became industrial businesses with federal approval to increase milk production by extraordinary means, including injecting cows with various genetically- *482 engineered growth hormones such as bovine growth hormone (“rBST” or “rBGH”). 6 Researchers have conducted various studies on the links of these hormones to prostate, colorectal, and breast cancer but these links are still largely unexplored. 7 While the scientific community still lacks certain agreement on various growth hormones' effects on human health, the professional opinions on the necessity of dairy milk largely agree that plant-based products are often better sources of nutrients found in dairy milk. 8 Due to vigorous advertising such as the “Got Milk?” marketing campaign including an advertisement featuring major league baseball player Cal Ripken Jr. with the caption, “[w]ith all the milk I drink, my name might as well be Calcium Ripken, Jr.,” milk is perhaps best known for its association with bone health as a source of calcium and protein. 9 In clinical, longitudinal, retrospective, and cross-sectional studies, however, the consumption of dairy products has not shown “even a modestly consistent benefit” for young adult bone health. 10 Plant-based milks are free of animal fats, growth hormones, antibiotics, and lactose sugar, while also providing comparable levels of protein. 11 Nevertheless, in January of 2017, the Senate introduced the “Defending Against Imitations and Replacements of Yogurt, Milk, and Cheese To Promote Regular Intake of Dairy Everyday Act” (“DAIRY PRIDE Act”), alleging that plant-based products “often *483 do not provide the same nutrition content as real © 2020 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 Mancinelli, Michael 5/10/2020 For Educational Use Only DON'T CRY OVER PLANT-BASED MILK: WHY THE USE..., 14 J. Health &... milk ... derived from dairy cows.” 12 The Act cites data from the Dietary Guidelines, developed by a Committee that includes members with past or present ties to the dairy industry. 13 Further, the Senate introduced the Act only after a survey from Nielsen, a global information, data, and measurement company, revealed that plant-based product sales grew 250 percent, while dairy milk sales fell seven percent in 2015. 14 Despite these complaints of the dairy business suffering from the rise of plant- based manufacturers, milk giants are in fact investing in plant-based companies; for example, milk giant Dean Foods recently announced a minority stake and distribution deal in Good Karma Foods, a manufacturer of flaxseed-based milk alternatives. 15 This note will explore the evolution of dairy milk production into the industry it is today, compared to the rise of the nondairy competition. 16 This note will first examine the nutritional makeup of dairy milk, the research on dairy milk and the influence of such research on its labeling regulations, and the effects of milk product labeling on human health and perception. This note will investigate various Congressional enactments promoting dairy milk consumption such as the Dairy Production Stabilization Act of *484 1983. 17 Next, this note will compare the rise of plant-based milk and its financial impact on the dairy industry. 18 In analyzing whether plant-based manufacturers are misleading consumers, this note will discuss the dairy industry's own mislabeling and whether plant-based milks really are comparable to dairy milk in their constitution. The conclusion advocates for the continued labeling of plant-based drinks as “milk,” rather than the proposed requirement of labeling these drinks as “imitation milk.” II. The Evolution of Dairy Milk Production A. The Promotion of Milk's Nutritional Makeup by the FDA and the Dairy Industry The FDA regulates milk and is the main food safety inspection agency of the United States government. 19 The FDA began in 1862 as a scientific institution, but did not acquire regulatory functions until 1906 with the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act prohibiting interstate commerce of misbranded food. 20 Since 1968, the FDA has been responsible for working with state and municipal milk control authorities to assure safe milk supplies. 21 The FDA currently defines “milk” as the “lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows.” 22 Though humans have been consuming dairy since as early as the fifth millennium B.C., dairy milk consumption did not amplify in the United States until the nineteenth century, as infant mortality rose in cities. 23 As a growing interest in nutrition emerged, so did the consumption of milk as a convenient source of protein, calcium, and vitamin B12. 24 *485 Pasteurization practices emerged in an attempt to make milk consumption safer, and in 1987, the FDA required the pasteurization of all milk to prevent the spread of dangerous bacteria in raw milk responsible for diseases such as tuberculosis. 25 Milk soon became known as a staple of the American diet, with the United States Department of Agriculture's (“USDA”) Dietary Guidelines consistently advocating for two to three daily servings of milk, yogurt, and cheese. 26 The USDA introduced the first Food Guide Pyramid in 1992, serving as the official guide for recommended daily serving sizes and recommending two to three daily servings of the milk, yogurt, and cheese group. 27 The USDA's protein foods group includes nuts, seeds, and “processed soy products.” 28 Variously processed forms of dairy milk as well as “calcium-fortified soymilk (soy beverage)” are also included in this group. 29 For those with lactose intolerance who are unable to digest lactose, the natural sugar found in milk, the FDA suggests drinking milk anyway so long as it is “lactose-free,” stating that *486 otherwise it may be necessary to take a dietary supplement with calcium to maintain bone health. 30 The dairy industry, like the FDA, is adamant about promoting the health benefits of dairy. 31 Dairy farmers created the National Dairy Council in 1915 for the purpose of promoting the consumption of milk. 32 The National Dairy Council describes milk's “unique nutrient package” of nine essential ingredients, including calcium, protein, and vitamins A, D, and B12. 33 California dairy processors created the California Milk Processor Board in 1993 to increase milk consumption, largely through advertising campaigns such as the “got milk?” campaign beginning in 1995. 34 The importance of milk has been especially emphasized © 2020 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 Mancinelli, Michael 5/10/2020 For Educational Use Only DON'T CRY OVER PLANT-BASED MILK: WHY THE USE..., 14 J. Health &... as a source of nutrients for infants unable to chew or digest solid foods, through advertisements such as those by milk giant Borden Dairy showing the tag line, “why more mothers choose Borden's Milk.” 35 B. The FDA's Approval of the Use of Genetically Altered Bovine Growth Hormone (“rBST” or “rBGH”) on Dairy Cows and Antibiotics to Mitigate Associated Health Problems Seen in Treated Cows Milk's increasing popularity led to the FDA's 1993 approval of genetically altered bovine growth hormone (“rBST” or “rBGH”), an engineered growth hormone injected into a lactating dairy cow to increase her milk production. 36 Cows supplemented with rBST require less feed per unit of milk produced, which is one reason the dairy industry considers rBST an efficient production tool. 37 Cows administered rBST show a ten to *487 twenty percent increase in milk production, which is why rBST is administered to approximately one-third of the United States' 9.39 million dairy cows. 38 Dairy companies mitigate the health risks in cows treated with rBST, namely a twenty-five percent increase in the frequency of udder infections, with antibiotics. 39 American farm animals consume twenty-eight million pounds of antibiotics per year; by comparison, Americans consume approximately seven million pounds of antibiotics per year to combat infection. 40 Additionally, a majority of antimicrobials used on farm animals are used nontherapeutically. 41 Due to concerns of developing resistance to antibiotics, in 1996, the FDA, USDA, and Center for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) created a partnership called the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System to analyze drug-resistant pathogens and animal products, and publish its findings each year.
Recommended publications
  • December 2019 FOOD BUYING CLUB CATALOG Pacnw Region UNFI Will Be Closing Our Auburn Facility in August
    July - December 2019 FOOD BUYING CLUB CATALOG PacNW Region UNFI will be closing our Auburn facility in August. Your store will now be ordering/receiving from our newly expanded Ridgefield, WA distribution center. n = Contains Sugar F = Foodservice, Bulk s = Artificial Ingredients G = Foodservice, Grab n' Go BASICS Pricing = the lowest 4 = Sulphured D = Foodservice, Supplies _ = 100% Organic K = Gluten Free price at the shelf per unit. H = 95%-99% Organic b = Kosher (Except for FIELD DAY items) : = Made with 70%-94% Organic Ingredients d = Holiday * "DC" Column T = Specialty, Natural Product , = Vegan NO CODE= All Warehouses U = Specialty, Traditional Grocery Product m = NonGMO Project Verified W = PacNW - Seattle, WA C = Ethnic w = Fair Trade For placing a SPECIAL ORDER - It is necessary to include: *THE PAGE NUMBER, Plus the information in the BOLDED columns marked with Arrows "▼" * ▼Brand ▼ ▼Item # ▼ ▼ Product Description ▼ ▼ Case/Unit Size ▼ ▼Whlsle Price▼ Indicates BASICS Items WS/ SRP/ Dept Brand DC Item # Symbols Product Description UPC # Case/Size EA/CS WS/CS Brand Unit Unit Indicates Generic BULK Items BULK BULK BAKINGBAKING GOODSGOODS BULK BAKING GOODS 05451 HKnw Dk Chocolate Chips, FT, Vegan 026938-073442 10 LB EA 6.91 69.06 8.99 BULK BAKING GOODSUTWR 40208 F Lecithin Granules 026938-402082 5 LB EA 7.18 35.90 9.35 BULK BAKING GOODSGXUTWR 33140 F Vanilla Extract, Pure 767572-831288 1 GAL EA 336.90 336.90 439.45 BULK BAKING GOODSGUTWR 33141 F Vanilla Extract, Pure 767572-830328 32 OZ EA 95.08 95.08 123.99 BULK BEANSBEANS BULK
    [Show full text]
  • Ims List Sanitation Compliance and Enforcement Ratings of Interstate Milk Shippers April 2017
    IMS LIST SANITATION COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT RATINGS OF INTERSTATE MILK SHIPPERS APRIL 2017 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Rules For Inclusion In The IMS List Interstate milk shippers who have been certified by State Milk sanitation authorities as having attained the milk sanitation compliance ratings are indicated in the following list. These ratings are based on compliance with the requirements of the USPHS/FDA Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance and Grade A Condensed and Dry Milk Products and Condensed and Dry Whey and were made in accordance with the procedures set forth in Methods of Making Sanitation Rating of Milk Supplies. *Proposal 301 that was passed at 2001 NCIMS conference held May 5-10, 2001, in Wichita, Kansas and concurred with by FDA states: "Transfer Stations, Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants must achieve a sanitation compliance rating of 90 or better in order to be eligible for a listing in the IMS List. Sanitation compliance rating scores for Transfer and Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants will not be printed in the IMS List". Therefore, the publication of a sanitation compliance rating score for Transfer and Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants will not be printed in this edition of the IMS List. THIS LIST SUPERSEDES ALL LISTS WHICH HAVE BEEN ISSUED HERETOFORE ALL PRECEDING LISTS AND SUPPLEMENTS THERETO ARE VOID. The rules for inclusion in the list were formulated by the official representatives of those State milk sanitation agencies who have participated in the meetings of the National Conference of Interstate Milk Shipments.
    [Show full text]
  • NON-DAIRY MILKS 2018 - TREND INSIGHT REPORT It’S on the Way to Becoming a $3.3 Billion Market, and Has Seen 61% Growth in Just a Few Years
    NON-DAIRY MILKS 2018 - TREND INSIGHT REPORT It’s on the way to becoming a $3.3 billion market, and has seen 61% growth in just a few years. Non-dairy milks are the clear successor to cow (dairy) milk. Consumers often perceive these products as an answer to their health and wellness goals. But the space isn’t without challenges or considerations. In part one of this two- part series, let’s take a look at the market, from new product introductions to regulatory controversy. COW MILK ON THE DECLINE Cow milk (also called dairy milk) has been on the decline since 2012. Non-dairy milks, however, grew 61% in the same period. Consumers are seeking these plant-based alternatives that they believe help them feel and look better to fulfill health and wellness goals. Perception of the products’ health benefits is growing, as consumers seek relief from intolerance, digestive issues and added sugars. And the market reflects it. Non-dairy milks climbed 10% per year since 2012, a trend that’s expected to continue through 2022 to become a $3.3 billion-dollar market.2 SOY WHAT? MEET THE NON-DAIRY MILKS CONSUMERS CRAVE THREE TREES UNSWEETENED VANILLA ORGANIC ALMONDMILK Made with real Madagascar vanilla ALMOND MILK LEADS THE NON-DAIRY MILK bean, the manufacturer states that the CATEGORY WITH 63.9% MARKET SHARE drink contains more almonds, claims to have healthy fats and is naturally rich and nourishing with kitchen-friendly ingredients. As the dairy milk industry has leveled out, the non-dairy milk market is growing thanks to the consumer who’s gobbling up alternatives like almond milk faster than you can say mooove.
    [Show full text]
  • A Letter from Gregg Tanner, CEO
    JULY ’16 A Letter from Gregg Tanner, CEO As we entered 2016, I lauded our employees’ hard work and expressed the importance of keeping our momentum going by executing our new Strategic Plan. Now, halfway through the year, I am very encouraged by the steps we’ve taken toward delivering the initiatives in our plan. Already this year we made strides against every one of our pillars: • Under the Build and Buy Strong Brands pillar, we • We made great strides continued building our brands with the national launch of toward Enhancing Future Caribou Iced Coffee, TruMoo Calcium Plus, and DairyPure Capabilities with new leadership Lactose Free milk. We also extended our DairyPure training that further develops line into creams and creamers. Within the Buy Strong our people. We also added an Brands portion of the pillar, we officially closed on our extended shelf life line at our Lynn, Mass., facility and are agreement to acquire Friendly’s Ice Cream. This move fills focused on expanding our warehouse capabilities. Earlier a manufacturing and retail void in the Northeast, and the this year, we launched our Purpose, Strengthening Lives brand is a perfect fit for Dean Foods for many reasons. Through the Goodness of Dairy, with meaningful employee One of the goals established in our Strategic Plan is to events in Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Athens (Tenn.), expand our ice cream portfolio, and Friendly’s is uniquely Springfield (Ohio) and Woodbury (Minn.). I greatly enjoyed qualified to help us achieve that goal. In addition to the those visits to the field and the opportunity to strengthen iconic Friendly’s reputation and strong brand awareness, our communities with donations to local hunger relief manufacturing diversity is also a key part of Friendly’s programs.
    [Show full text]
  • STARBUCKS: from CROP to CUP APRIL 2015 the IMPACT of SOURCING INDUSTRIAL CONVENTIONAL MILK Updated January 2018
    COALITION POWERED BY GREEN AMERICA STARBUCKS: FROM CROP TO CUP APRIL 2015 THE IMPACT OF SOURCING INDUSTRIAL CONVENTIONAL MILK updated January 2018 A MILK COMPANY Starbucks is one of the world’s most popular and widespread coffeehouse brands. It has over 22,000 cafes in 66 countries.1 In Manhattan alone there are 9 Starbucks per square mile.2 Starbucks built its reputation on delivering specialty coffee, putting a lot of energy into telling the story of its coffee from field to café. But what the company fails to address is the fact that each year, it purchases over 140,000,000 gallons of milk— enough to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool 212 times.3 The fact is that Starbucks is a milk company as much or more than it is a coffee company. It is beyond time that it addresses the many negative impacts the industrial conventional dairy supply chain, from feed crop to cup, has on animal welfare and human and environmental health. If Starbucks’ goal, as stated on the company’s website, is to “share great coffee with [its] friends and help make the world a little better,” it is essential that the company transitions to organic milk.4 By setting the organic milk standard for coffee chains, Starbucks can demonstrate a serious commitment to providing environmentally and socially conscious products. Competitor com- panies like Pret A Manger are able to offer organic milk at a lower price than Starbucks charges for conventional dairy. It is our responsibility as consumers to vote with our dollars and use our voices to persuade the dairy industry to im- prove.
    [Show full text]
  • EXHIBIT ITEM 1 SMA010 Proponent Cooperatives
    EXHIBIT ITEM 1 SMA010 Proponent Cooperatives February 2004 Arkansas Dairy Cooperative Association, Inc. Floyd Wiedower, Manager P.O. Box 507 Damascus, Arkansas 72039 501-335-7204 501-335-7705 fax Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. Gary Hanman, Pres. & CEO P.O. Box 909700 Kansas City, Missouri 64190 816-801-6422 816-801-6423 fax Dairymen's Marketing Cooperative, Inc. Don Allen, General Manager 421 East State Street Mountain Grove, Missouri 65711 417-962-7460 417-962-6159 fax Lone Star Milk Producers, Inc. Jim Baird, Manager Route 1, Box 59B Windthorst, Texas 76389 940-378-2311 940-378-2751 fax Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers Cooperative Association, Inc. Jay Bryant, General Manager 1985 Isaac Newton Square West Reston, Virginia 20190 703-742-6800 703-742-7459 fax Southeast Milk, Inc. Calvin Covington, CEO P.O. Box 3790 Belleview, Florida 34421 352-245-2~,37 352-245-9434 fax EXHIBIT ITEM 2 SMA020 Producer Milk Deliveries Proponent Cooperatives and Others November 2003 F.O. 5 F.O. 7 Combined Total Order Producer Milk 507,412,336 593,836,792 1,101,249,128 Member Producer Milk Arkansas Dairy Coop. 13,933,382 13,933,382 Dairy Farmers of America 222,978,642 319,174,550 542,153,192 Dairymen's Marketing Coop. 6,235,057 6,235,057 Lone Star Milk Prod. 16,453,108 34,839,125 51,292,233 MD & VA Milk Prod. 80,473,502 22,119,702 102,593,204 / Southeast Milk 17,401,087 17,401,087 Tota___/I 319,905,252 413,702,903 733,608,155 Percent of Order Total 63.046% 69.666% 66.616% Other Cooperative Producer Milk Marketed Arkansas Dairy Coop.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Milk Order Distributing Plant Information for 2019 NOTE: "DIP" Indicates Debtor in Possession
    Federal Milk Order Distributing Plant Information For 2019 NOTE: "DIP" indicates debtor in possession Pool Distributing Plants State County Plant Name City State ZipCode FIPS FIPS Cl. I Dftl. Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-19 Agropur Grand Rapids MI 49548 26 081 1.80 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 Agropur Maplewood MN 55113 27 123 1.70 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Alpenrose Dairy Portland OR 97298 41 051 1.90 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 Andersen Dairy Battle Ground WA 98604 53 011 1.90 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 Anderson-Erickson Dairy Des Moines IA 50317 19 153 1.80 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 Aurora Organic Dairy Platteville CO 80651 08 123 2.45 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 Blue Kingfisher dba Walmart Fort Wayne IN 46819 18 003 1.80 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 Boice Brothers Dairy Kingston NY 12401 36 111 2.80 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Borden Dairy Cowarts AL 36321 01 069 4.30 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Borden Dairy Miami FL 33164 12 025 6.00 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Borden Dairy Winter Haven FL 33881 12 105 5.40 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Borden Dairy London KY 40743 21 125 2.90 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Borden Dairy Lafayette LA 70596 22 055 3.80 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Borden Dairy Hattiesburg MS 39404 28 035 3.80 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Borden Dairy Cincinnati OH 45215 39 061 2.20 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 Borden Dairy Cleveland OH 44111 39 035 2.00 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 Borden Dairy Charleston SC 29419 45 019 4.30 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Borden Dairy Austin TX 78702 48 453 3.30 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 Borden Dairy Conroe TX 77305 48 339 3.60 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 Borden Dairy Dallas TX 75221 48 113 3.00 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 126 Braum's Tuttle OK 73089 40 051 2.60 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 Broadacre Dairies Powell TN 37849 47 093 3.20 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Byrne Dairy Syracuse NY 13220 36 067 2.50 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Dean Foods Successfully Implements C2CRM for Their HR Program
    Case Study Dean Foods Successfully Implements C2CRM for Their HR Program Fluid Dairy Giant Streamlines Employee Change Request Management System Headquartered in Dallas, Dean Foods is a leading food and beverage company and the largest processor and direct-to-store distributor of fluid milk and other fluid dairy products in the United States. Their products are processed with the help of approximately 17,000 dedicated employees working in approximately 70 plants and close to 100 total locations across the U.S. The Business Problem The Human resources organization is responsible for managing and accurately keeping employee records up-to-date. The administration of these records were handled locally, typically by the 1 to 2 Human Resources personnel and a Business Partner coordinator at each location until the company evolved to a more centralized program. In an effort to better track all of the employee requests, a “Shared Services Center” was then implemented. Although all the requests were aggregated to one centralized location, there were still inefficiencies because the data entry process was manual and if key personnel were out sick or on vacation, critical work would not get done. According to Jessica Kosty, HRIS Manager at Dean Foods, “What was needed was a software that could automate data entry into a system that easily tracks all of their requests while notifying all the stakeholders of the completion of every stage in the process.” Why C2CRM? Leveraging the support module in C2CRM, HR is able to create allocate resources to address the increase of ticket processing. Once various types of tickets via the use and identification of multiple it was determined how successful the application was to their unique email boxes and track the history of work done during the life request process, the team expanded the use evolving from 1-2 of the ticket.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Codes on the Table More on Methodology Where Did They
    Where did they go? Three companies depart the list this year, having been ac- quired early enough in 2007 to not be listed. Alto Dairy was Key Codes on the Table purchased last year by Saputo, Cass Clay was acquired at in 2007 by Associated Milk Producers, and Crystal Cream and C=Cooperative Pu=Public company Pr=Private company Butter was bought out early last year by HP Hood. Joining the P=Parent company S=Subsidiary T= Tie in rank list for the first time are BelGioso Cheese (No. 75), Ellsworth Creamery (84) and Roth Kase USA (96) all from Wisconsin. Next year Winn-Dixie will come off the list, having divested its dairy processing capabilities (some of it recently to Southeast More on Methodology Milk Inc.). Supervalu tells a similar story, with the final plant of While sales figures represent the most recently completed fiscal the former Richfood Dairy having been sold to Dean Foods year, company descriptions, facilities descriptions and person- this year. Finally, Wilcox Dairy of Roy, Wash., has given up the nel reflect recent changed where possible. Some entries will dairy business for eggs, and its listing will be gone next year. include an explanation of recent changes. U.S. & Canadian Index (No. in parentheses is last year’s rank) A Foster Farms Dairy ....................................... 50 (48) P Agri-Mark Inc. .............................................. 29 (29) Friendly Ice Cream Corp. ...............................55 (56) Parmalat Canada .........................................12 (13) Agropur Cooperative .........................................6 (9) G Perry’s Ice Cream ........................................ 97 (97) Anderson Erickson Dairy Co. ......................... 66 (71) Glanbia Foods Inc. ........................................ 23 (32) Plains Dairy Products ....................................95 (99) Associated Milk Producers Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Milkweed May 2006 Salvage
    The Milkweed “Float like a butterfly, Dairy’s best information and insights sting like a bee.” Issue No. 475 • February 2019 This issue mailed on February 13 — Muhammad Ali Lost Export Markets Boost U.S. Cheese Inventories & Erode Prices by Jan Shepel focus on American-style cheeses, which include Cheese inventories in warehouses across the Cheddar – dairy’s price-setting benchmark variety. United States were being lowered in the early part of American cheese inventories started last year 2018, but after retaliatory tariffs were imposed by below 2017 levels – a perceived good indicator for trading partners late in 2018’s second quarter, those rising milk prices in the country. American cheese inventories jumped to levels significantly above year- inventories climbed less dramatically than in the pre- earlier levels. vious year, up to a July peak. American cheese in- The critical data for cheese inventories must ventories then dipped in August, before rising significantly above 2017 levels through November, Table 1 which is the last month for which data was available. Inventory numbers for 2014, 2015 and 2016 Cheese Inventories Versus were well below both 2017 and 2018 for the entire Exports After Tariffs year. In terms of total U.S. cheese production, 2018 data shows the numbers to be higher throughout the 2017 2018 year than all of those preceding years. But that’s not (Mill. lbs) (Mill. lbs) necessarily a a problem – due to solid, demand-driven output gains posted by Mozzarella and pizza cheese Jan. 752 740 during 2018. Comparing total January production in Roundup® herbicide’s active ingredient is Feb.
    [Show full text]
  • (202) 514-2007 Tdd (202) 514-1888
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE AT TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2001 (202) 514-2007 WWW.USDOJ.GOV TDD (202) 514-1888 JUSTICE DEPARTMENT REQUIRES SUIZA FOODS AND DEAN FOODS TO DIVEST 11 DAIRY PROCESSING PLANTS Divestitures in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, Utah Will Protect Competition for Milk Sold through Schools and Retail Outlets WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Justice today announced that Suiza Foods Corporation and Dean Foods Company have agreed to sell 11 dairy processing plants in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, and Utah to resolve antitrust concerns about the companies’ pending merger. The Department said that without these divestitures, the merger would have reduced competition in markets for milk sold through schools and retail outlets in the areas around these plants. Suiza and Dean compete in these areas to provide milk to grocery stores, convenience stores, and other stores that sell directly to consumers. In many school districts, Suiza and Dean are currently the only two--or two of just three--companies that bid to deliver milk to schools. “These divestitures ensure that consumers of milk, an American staple, continue to get the benefits of competition--increased choices for consumers resulting in lower prices and better service,” said Charles A. James, Assistant Attorney General of the Department’s Antitrust Division. “Maintaining competition in the dairy industry is important for American consumers.” The Department is requiring the companies to divest seven Suiza and four Dean dairy processing plants. The Suiza dairies being divested are: Barber/Meadow Gold Dairies in Huntsville, AL; Velda Farms in Miami, FL; Velda Farms in Winter Haven, FL; Burger Dairy in - 2 - New Paris, IN; Flav-O-Rich in London, KY; Dairymen’s in Cleveland, OH; and Flav-O-Rich in Bristol, VA.
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota Dairy Plant List
    Minnesota Dairy Plant List Dairy Plant Name Plant Plant City Product Number Category Agropur Inc. - Maplewood 27-421 Maplewood Fluid Agropur, Inc. - LeSueur 27-341 LeSueur Dry Agropur, Inc. - LeSueur Cheese 27-242 LeSueur Dry, Cheese Agropur, Inc. - Nicollet 27-339 Nicollet Dry Alemar Cheese 27-715 Mankato Cheese All American Foods - Waseca 27-671 Waseca Dry All American Foods Inc - Mankato 27-161 Mankato Dry All American Foods Inc - Mankato 27-670 Mankato Dry All American Foods Inc - Mankato 27-160 Mankato Dry Alto Cheese Inc 27-730 Pine City Packaging Cheese AmTech Ingredients LLC 27-721 Albert Lea Dry Associated Milk Producers, Inc. - New 27-031 New Ulm Butter Ulm Associated Milk Producers, Inc. - 27-506 Paynesville Dry, Cheese Paynesville Associated Milk Producers, Inc. - 27-355 Rochester Dry, Cheese, Ice Rochester Cream Autumnwood Farm LLC 27-974 Forest Lake Fluid, Ice Cream Bluegrass Proteins 27-171 Dawson Dry Bongards - Norwood 27-046 Norwood Cheese Product Bongards - Perham 27-777 Perham Dry, Cheese Dairy Plant Name Plant Plant City Product Number Category Buffalo Creek Creamery LLC 27-977 PLATO Cheese CityFoodStudio, LLC 27-174 Minneapolis Cheese Concept Processing LLC 27-100 Melrose Fluid, Butter Consolidated Containers 27-936 Moorhead Containers Dahl Tech 27-935 Stillwater Containers Dairiconcepts LP - Zumbrota 27-646 Zumbrota Dry, Cheese Dairiconcepts. - Dalbo 27-949 Dalbo Cheese Dairy Farmers of America - Winthrop 27-260 Winthrop Packaging Butter Dean Foods - Thief River Falls 27-378 Thief River Fluid, Ice Cream Falls Dean Foods - Woodbury 27-180 Woodbury Fluid Donnay Dairy 27-925 Kimball Cheese Eichers Farmstead Cheese 27-121 Avon Cheese Eichten Hidden Acres 27-701 Center City Cheese Faribault Dairy Co Inc.
    [Show full text]