Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

key2thecup

Dairy industry rallying for Aspartame in milk without labeling

37 posts in this topic

Aspartame In Milk Without Additional Labels? New FDA Petition Asks For Rule Change

We could see aspartame in milk soon (with no additional labeling) should the dairy industry be successful in petitioning the FDA for permission.

The artificial sugar substitute is already used in a broad range of products like diet soda and yogurt. It also goes under the brand-name Equal, though Equal includes other ingredients as well.

Aspartame in milk without extra labeling became a possibility as of last week when the FDA acknowledged a petition from the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation(NMPF), which was filed in 2009.

The Huffington Post reports that the petition asks permission by dairy lobbyists to include artificial sweeteners in milk, along with other dairy products, without requiring a prominent label.

The petition immediately garnered criticism from those who oppose aspartame and other artificial sweeteners. The ingredient has been blamed for causing cancer. It was also the subject of a recent study that claims the ingredient causes changes in a person’s brain chemistry, making them crave high-calorie foods.

The research has been disregarded by dairy lobbyists, who claim that adding aspartame would actually make the milk healthier. The news that the FDA is considering allowing milk in aspartame made its way quickly through social media. It was so concerning to some that popular debunking website Snopes wrote an article to explain it is true.

The main difference that the dairy industry is asking for has to do with labeling. They are already allowed to use artificial sweeteners in milk as long as they are properly labeled. The new petition, however, would make it so that the industry can add artificial sweeteners, like aspartame, without a prominent label.

Instead of a large “reduced calorie” or “reduced sugar” label on the front of the milk carton, they would be allowed to put it on the back or simply add it to the list of ingredients on the nutrition label.

The petition is concerning, especially for people who like to know what goes into the products that they eat. There are already petitions in places like California and Washington to require more labeling on foods, specifically on genetically modified foods (GMOs). Therefore, a petition by the dairy industry to allow less labeling seems like a step in the wrong direction.

The petition would require someone concerned about the food they eat to look even closer at milk to make sure it doesn’t contain aspartame or another artificial sweetener. The petition specifically targets the attractiveness of milk to children. It reads, in part:

“IDFA and NMPF argue that nutrient content claims such as ‘reduced calorie’ are not attractive to children, and maintain that consumers can more easily identify the overall nutritional value of milk products that are flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners if the labels do not include such claims.”

They go on to say:

“Further, the petitioners assert that consumers do not recognize milk — including flavored milk — as necessarily containing sugar. Accordingly, the petitioners state that milk flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners should be labeled as milk without further claims so that consumers can ‘more easily identify its overall nutritional value.’ “

The petition, however, doesn’t just want the discrete labeling for milk. It also requests the labeling for a variety of milk and cream products not normally used by school children.

The FDA issued a 90-day notice on February 20, 2013, requesting comments, data, and information about the petition. The milk industry is facing a decline with the growing popularity of soy, rice, almond, and coconut milk. But it is not likely that the labeling change would help the dairy industry gain back its former customers, who have switched to the other milk products for a variety of reasons.

Several have switched over lactose-intolerance or a milk allergy, while others have switched because they believe the other options are healthier. Those who switched voluntarily would be even less likely to switch back if they knew the dairy industry was using artificial sweeteners with discrete labeling involved.

The full petition can be read here, along with a list of how the FDA is taking responses from the public.

http://www.inquisitr...or-rule-change/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well they couldn't very well label it as diet, seeing as it will still be the same number of calories (they are not going to be removing the natural sugars in the milk), i just don't see how they could claim it would be healthier...

edit: so this will only be in flavoured milk? i don't care nearly as much then, seeing as the only flavour of milk that enters my house is "milk flavour", but it should still require the "with aspartame" label on the front, at the very least.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

diet milk? WTF!

by medical recomendation I NEVER can eat/drink something diet. I need calories, I need sugar. and now what is going on? maybe if these kids do some thing instead pass all day on PS3 they will lose wheight, like, swim, walk/run, get a bike and just "go" to some place.

really. those kids today....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no need to add artificial sweeteners... unless they act as some sort of preservative to make the milk last longer. It just seems like another bully corporation literally shoving their poison down the mouths of the proletariat.

For anyone that doesn't know, any dosage over 80mg of aspartame a day can cause neural damage.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is why anyone would need to add artificial sweeteners to something like milk. This is fricking crazy, and not the good kind too.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is why anyone would need to add artificial sweeteners to something like milk. This is fricking crazy, and not the good kind too.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is importantly ONLY in the USA. Canada's dairy regulations are very different.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want "milk" and don't like soy milk, switch to goat's milk:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soy is loaded with estrogen mimickers

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are you say'n I will grow boobs if i drink soy milk?

I have actually read about this when looking for good sources of protein so i will not drink or eat anything Soy.

But i also read about Beer increasing Estorgen levels and that has not stopped me from drinking beer so i guess i just have no desire to us Soy.

Aspartame in any food is as bad as fluoride in our drinking water... why does our governments insist on allowing this crap to be consumed by the public and yet they complain about health care costs .

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to their flavoured milk, like strawberry or chocolate.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its quite alarming that they want to add aspartame to milk when it's not needed in any way and that they want to do it without it being on the label.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are you say'n I will grow boobs if i drink soy milk?

I have actually read about this when looking for good sources of protein so i will not drink or eat anything Soy.

But i also read about Beer increasing Estorgen levels and that has not stopped me from drinking beer so i guess i just have no desire to us Soy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about some "transparency and accountability" in the food distribution chain?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.