Advertisement
Dear Editor:
Despite the fierce opposition that was raised by consumers and the dairy industry at a March 12 public hearing, I was disappointed to learn that the Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) and Governor Strickland still plan to limit the use of ‘rBGH- free’ milk labels.
As a concerned mother, pediatric nurse, and Ohio citizen, I do not want my family drinking milk from cows treated with rBGH, a synthetic hormone that is already prohibited in over 30 countries, including Canada and the European Union. rBGH is banned so widely because studies have shown the potential health risks to humans (and cattle) to be too great. Cows injected with rBGH have increased levels of IGF-1, which plays a significant role in breast, prostate, and colon cancers in humans. Why would we want to drink these products and increase our risks and our children’s risks? The ODA should respect, not restrict, my right as a consumer to know whether this synthetic hormone is in the milk I purchase for my family. Families and Ohio’s sustainable dairies need these “rBGH-free” labels to continue as they have under FDA guidelines, helping mothers like myself make informed choices about the foods they purchase. Taking away these labels as the ODA currently recommends will only mislead and ultimately hurt Ohio’s families and dairy industry as more and more concerned consumers choose other drink options rather than subject their families to the risks associated with rBGH laden milk products. Consumers need these "rBGH-free" labels for our own protection. Ohio dairy farmers have the right to inform consumers when they choose not to use rBGH and can do so by following the FDA guidelines on labeling these products. These guidelines have served us well for fourteen years, and should not be superseded by the ODA and Governor Strickland. The restrictive new guidelines proposed by the ODA do the additional harm of potentially misleading Ohioans with an unwaranted disclaimer statement - a statement that may lead the consumer to believe there is no difference whatsoever between products and the way they are produced and most importantly, no potentially different health outcomes from consuming these products. While this new labeling guideline delights Monsanto executives, it misleads consumers into believing that their health risks will not increase when they drink milk from cows injected with rBGH. Playing with semantics will not change the fact that much of the world community and Ohio's families feel these potential health risks are far too great to ask our children to bear them.
I find it strange that Governor Strickland, who says improving the health of Ohioans is one of his top priorities, would side with Monsanto, the producer of this drug, instead of with the growing number of Ohio consumers who are worried about its effects on human health. As the ODA completes the rule-making process, I sincerely hope that Governor Strickland will respect consumers’ concerns and rescind this milk label rule, just as other states governors and legislators have done. Concerned consumers are encouraged to attend a public hearing to voice their opinions on April 8th at 10a.m. at the Ohio Department of Agriculture in Reynoldsburg.
Mitzie McElhaney, RN
Columbus, Ohio
Despite the fierce opposition that was raised by consumers and the dairy industry at a March 12 public hearing, I was disappointed to learn that the Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) and Governor Strickland still plan to limit the use of ‘rBGH- free’ milk labels.
As a concerned mother, pediatric nurse, and Ohio citizen, I do not want my family drinking milk from cows treated with rBGH, a synthetic hormone that is already prohibited in over 30 countries, including Canada and the European Union. rBGH is banned so widely because studies have shown the potential health risks to humans (and cattle) to be too great. Cows injected with rBGH have increased levels of IGF-1, which plays a significant role in breast, prostate, and colon cancers in humans. Why would we want to drink these products and increase our risks and our children’s risks? The ODA should respect, not restrict, my right as a consumer to know whether this synthetic hormone is in the milk I purchase for my family. Families and Ohio’s sustainable dairies need these “rBGH-free” labels to continue as they have under FDA guidelines, helping mothers like myself make informed choices about the foods they purchase. Taking away these labels as the ODA currently recommends will only mislead and ultimately hurt Ohio’s families and dairy industry as more and more concerned consumers choose other drink options rather than subject their families to the risks associated with rBGH laden milk products. Consumers need these "rBGH-free" labels for our own protection. Ohio dairy farmers have the right to inform consumers when they choose not to use rBGH and can do so by following the FDA guidelines on labeling these products. These guidelines have served us well for fourteen years, and should not be superseded by the ODA and Governor Strickland. The restrictive new guidelines proposed by the ODA do the additional harm of potentially misleading Ohioans with an unwaranted disclaimer statement - a statement that may lead the consumer to believe there is no difference whatsoever between products and the way they are produced and most importantly, no potentially different health outcomes from consuming these products. While this new labeling guideline delights Monsanto executives, it misleads consumers into believing that their health risks will not increase when they drink milk from cows injected with rBGH. Playing with semantics will not change the fact that much of the world community and Ohio's families feel these potential health risks are far too great to ask our children to bear them.
I find it strange that Governor Strickland, who says improving the health of Ohioans is one of his top priorities, would side with Monsanto, the producer of this drug, instead of with the growing number of Ohio consumers who are worried about its effects on human health. As the ODA completes the rule-making process, I sincerely hope that Governor Strickland will respect consumers’ concerns and rescind this milk label rule, just as other states governors and legislators have done. Concerned consumers are encouraged to attend a public hearing to voice their opinions on April 8th at 10a.m. at the Ohio Department of Agriculture in Reynoldsburg.
Mitzie McElhaney, RN
Columbus, Ohio