“Can you please pass the soy creamer?”
Among the
definitions for “milk” in The New Shorter
Oxford Dictionary (Clarendon Press, 1993) we find: “A milky juice [like
many lexical definitions, circular in construction] or latex secreted by
certain plants, e.g. coconut milk.” And among the figurative uses of the word,
“milk” is “[s]omething pleasant and (supposedly) nourishing,” the parenthetical
qualification no doubt appreciated by dairy lobbyists. Finally, our dictionary
defines milk variously as a “culinary,
pharmaceutical, cosmetic, or other preparation of herbs, drugs, etc., resembling milk” [emphasis added].
Within the category of phrases, our dictionary cites “almond milk” and “rice
milk,” and among several terms with “milk” in them we discover “milk stout” (‘a
kind of sweet stout made with lactose’) and “milk-tree” (‘any of several trees
having a milky juice’). Not mentioned is “mother’s milk” in the sense of
something “absolutely necessary or appropriate,” not to be confused with the
milk of a particular child’s own mother, although that can be equally
characterized as absolutely necessary or appropriate!
Well, you
get the picture. I doubt existing or prospective consumers of soy milk or
almond milk are confused or misled by the labels on the growing list of
“alternative to (dairy) milk” products, at least no more than they would be
startled upon reading the entry on “milk” in our dictionary. Of course lexical
definitions are not necessarily legally
dispositive (cf. discussions of
‘ordinary meaning canons’ or references to ‘a new jurisprudence of
dictionaries,’ in part inspired by the late Justice Scalia’s frequent cites to
dictionaries).
Being—for
sundry reasons—a vegan (I like to think that at least one motivation has
something to do with the ‘milk of human kindness’) for close to seven years now
(most of my adult life I was a vegetarian), it’s not surprising I
wholeheartedly agree with Marion Nestle that The National Milk Producers
Federation’s attempt to introduce into both bodies of Congress “Dairy Pride
Acts” requiring “the FDA to rule that anything labeled milk, cheese, or yogurt
has to come from cows,” has everything to do with “marketing, not science,” an
attempt to (further) protect the dairy industry from market forces. As Anahad
O’Connor writes in The New York Times,
“Facing growing
competition from dairy alternatives like almond, soy and coconut milk, the
nation’s dairy farmers are fighting back, with an assist from Congress. Their
goal: to stop companies from calling their plant-based products yogurt, milk or
cheese. Dairy farmers say the practice misleads consumers into thinking that
nondairy milk is nutritionally similar to cow’s milk.
A bipartisan
group of 32 members of Congress is asking the Food and Drug Administration to
crack down on companies that call plant-based beverages ‘milk.’ They say F.D.A. regulations define milk as a ‘lacteal secretion’ obtained by milking ‘one or
more healthy cows.’ Proposed legislation from Representative Peter Welch,
Democrat of Vermont, and Senator Tammy Baldwin, Democrat of Wisconsin, a state
known for its cheese, suggests a slightly broader definition. Their bill would
require the F.D.A. to target milk, yogurt and cheese products that do not
contain milk from ‘hooved mammals.’ ‘The bottom line for us is that milk is
defined by the F.D.A., and we’re saying to the F.D.A.: Enforce your
definition,’ Mr. Welch said.
But critics
say consumers know exactly what they are buying when they choose almond or soy
milk instead of dairy milk. ‘There’s no cow on any of these containers of
almond milk or soy milk,’ said Michele Simon, executive director of the Plant
Based Foods Association, a trade group representing 70 companies. ‘No one is
trying to fool consumers. All they’re trying to do is create a better
alternative for people who are looking for that option.’
And what
about other nondairy products with dairy names? Will [M]ilk of [M]agnesia,
cocoa butter, cream of wheat and peanut butter have to change their names as
well?” [….] The remainder of this article is here.
See too Beth Kowitt’s article in Fortune, which
begins by noting that “For 40 years, Americans have been drinking less of the
traditional stuff—37% less since 1975, according to the most recent USDA
figures.”
Incidentally,
there’s a bit of irony in the fact that “[i]ncorporating soybeans and their byproducts in the rations for dairy cattle is a fairly common practice. They
are an excellent source of essential amino acids and complement most forages.
Depending on how they have been processed, soybeans can provide high quality
degradable, undegradable and soluble protein, energy, fat, and fiber.”
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home