Currently browsing posts about: Milk

A reader, Katya Bloomberg, suggested I take a look at Bored Cow, “animal-free dairy milk” pumpkin spice flavored, no less.

Animal-free dairy milk sounds like an oxymoron.  What could this be?  Mostly, the website says what it does not contain.

So what’s in this?  The website doesn’t say, but Target’s does.

Ingredients: water, cane sugar, whey protein (from fermentation), sunflower oil, less than 1% of: cinnamon, vitamin a, vitamin b2 (riboflavin), vitamin b12 (cyanocobalamin), vitamin d2, citrus fiber, salt, dipotassium phopshate, acacia, gellan gum, mixed tocopherols (antioxidant), calcium potassium phosphate citrate, natural flavor.

An ultraprocessed drink, for sure, with 20 grams of sugar per 12 ounces.  The whey (the main protein in milk) is made by microorganisms, not cows. 

The process is called precision fermentation.  It involves 5-steps:

• Genetic modification of bacteria or yeast (the Bored Cow website says nothing about this)
• Cell growth
• Protein production
• Purification (centrifugation, homogenization, filtration)
• Whey production

How precise is the fermentation?

Iowa-based Health Research Institute (HRI) tested a Bored Cow product, which is described as “a milk alternative made with milk protein from fermentation instead of cows.” Using full spectrum molecular analysis technology, HRI found 92 small molecules in the product that are unknown to science, according to John Fagan, chief science officer at HRI.

Katya points out:

People are still largely confused and have no understanding what a bio-identical whey protein created by means of fermentation is. Largely though people also think that fermentation is good for health. Many vegans think this milk is vegan since it’s animal free, but it wouldn’t be a good choice for those on a plant based diet as it’s identical to actual cow milk protein. Not to mention that it’s a mix of protein with water and added oil which is hardly good for anyone… It’s a milk information war at its finest!!! Just keep confusing the consumer.

So how does this stuff taste?  I went to the Ithaca Target to look for it but could not find it.  If you can and try it, let me know.

In February, the USDA proposed rules for sugars in school meals.  These meant:

Flavored milks would be limited to no more than 10 grams of added sugars per 8 fluid ounces for milk served with school lunch or breakfast. For flavored milk sold outside of the meal (as a competitive beverage for middle and high school students), the limit would be 15 grams of added sugars per 12 fluid ounces.

The International Dairy Foods Association says it can and will do this as part of an effort “to preserve flavored milk options as part of the National School Lunch and Breakfast programs. USDA currently has proposed one option to provide only unflavored milk for school-aged children grades K-8.”

Among milk options available in schools, low-fat flavored milk is the most-consumed beverage for students regardless of grade, IDFA says. Flavored milk products such as chocolate milk offered in schools today contain an average of just 8.2 grams of added sugar per serving.

The Sugar Association, no surprise, supports continued use of sugary milk in schools—for its own particular reason.

As the ‘Healthy School Milk Commitment’ moves forward, it is important that alternative sweeteners are not encouraged or deployed as a frontline sugar reduction strategy for flavored milk served in schools.

The use of low- and no- calorie sweeteners in products intended primarily for both children and adults has increased by 300% in recent years, and their presence in food products is easily cloaked from consumers because of FDA’s arcane and outdated food labeling requirements.

As the health effects of sugar substitutes on children are not adequately studied, we should proceed cautiously when it comes to initiatives that incentivize the use of these ingredients.

We support flavored milk products, which provide important nutrients and are always a fan-favorite among school students in our nation’s schools, and caution against the use of sugar substitutes to meet sugar reduction commitments in the milk consumed by our nation’s school children.

That is a new argument (to me, at least).  Here are some old ones (with my comments):

• Chocolate milk has lots of nutrients (it also has lots of sugar).
• Kids won’t drink plain milk (they will, actually)
• Kids won’t get those nutrients if they don’t drink milk (they can get them from other foods).

But New York City has a handout on why plain milk is preferable.  It’s worth a look.

According to USDA,

Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs) establish certain provisions under which dairy processors purchase fresh milk from dairy farmers supplying a marketing area. ..A marketing area is generally defined as a geographic area where handlers compete for packaged fluid milk sales…Federal orders serve to maintain stable marketing relationships for all handlers and producers supplying marketing areas, thus facilitating the complex process of marketing fresh milk.

USDA has a brochure on how the program works.

FMMOs establish monthly uniform prices paid to farmers by first classifying milk by its end use. The FMMO then pools the value of that milk and shares that value among the farmers participating on that marketing order. Pooling allows farmers to receive the uniform price of all milk in the pool regardless of what end product their milk was used for. In this way, pooling makes a farmer’s payment independent of how the milk was used.

Got that?

Here are the current milk marketing regions:

I have to confess that Milk Marketing Orders are beyond me, but I am trying .  I understand the basics.  They are supposed to do three things: (1) establish minimum prices paid to dairy farmers, (2) ensure payments are accurate and timely, and (3) provide market information.

To try to understand how this works, I subscribe to AgriPulse News (“Providing balanced coverage of the food, fuel, feed, and fiber industries”).

From AgriPulse, I learned:

After more than two years of discussion and more than 130 meetings, the National Milk Producers Federation Board of Directors unanimously endorsed a comprehensive plan to correct shortcomings exacerbated during the pandemic regarding pricing regulations for milk.

Among the proposed changes, NMPF called for a return to the “higher of” Class 1 mover that was changed in the last farm bill.
NMPF also recommended that USDA update make allowances and review them every two years. Make allowances are based on estimates of what it costs to convert a hundredweight of raw milk into commodity dairy products such as cheese, butter, whey and nonfat dry milk.

NMPF plans to submit its proposal to USDA for a hearing and a potential producer referendum on the order’s modernization yet this year. The International Dairy Foods Association previously said it would request a hearing only on the make allowances request.

I looked at the comprehensive plan.  Here are NMPF’s requested changes to the Federal Milk Marketing Order System:

• Returning to the “higher of” Class I mover;
• Discontinuing the use of barrel cheese in the protein component price formula;
• Extending the current 30-day reporting limit to 45 days on forward priced sales on nonfat dry milk and dry whey to capture more exports sales in the USDA product price reporting;
• Updating milk component factors for protein, other solids and nonfat solids in the Class III and Class IV skim milk price formulas;
• Developing a process to ensure make-allowances are reviewed more frequently through legislation directing USDA to conduct mandatory plant-cost studies every two years;
• Updating dairy product manufacturing allowances contained in the USDA milk price formulas; and
• Updating the Class I differential price system to reflect changes in the cost of delivering bulk milk to fluid processing plants.

For starters, what is a “Class I mover?”  For this, I need help.

The USDA classifies milk into four categories:

CLASS I – Milk used for beverages including eggnog and ultra-high temperature (UHT) milk.

CLASS II – Milk used for soft products. This includes cottage cheese, ricotta cheese, pot cheese, Creole cheese, milk shake and ice milk mixes, frozen desserts, aerated cream, frozen cream, sour cream, half-n-half, yogurt, custards, puddings, pancake mixes, batter, buttermilk biscuit mixes, infant or dietary formulas packaged in hermetically sealed containers, candy, soup and bakery products for general distribution to the public including sweetened condensed milk used for manufacture of aforesaid products, and fluid cream or any product containing artificial fat or fat substitutes that resemble fluid cream.

CLASS III – Milk used in the manufacture of cream cheese and other spreadable cheeses, and hard cheese of types that may be shredded, grated, or crumbled. It also includes plastic cream, anhydrous milkfat, and butteroil.

CLASS IV – Milk used to produce butter, any milk product in dry form and evaporated or sweetened condensed milk in a consumer-type package.

But a Class I mover?  I cannot find a definition, although I can easily find examples of how it’s used.

The Federal Milk Marketing Order (FMMO) advanced Class I base price hit another eight-year high in March, but the change in the Class I mover formula implemented in 2019 reduced what might have been an even higher price paid to producers.

Announced by the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service on Feb. 16, the March I base price is $22.88 per hundredweight (cwt), up $1.24 from February 2022 and $7.68 more than March 2021. It’s also the highest since November 2014.

At $3.12 per cwt, the difference between the advanced Class III skim milk pricing factor ($10.59 per cwt) and the advanced Class IV skim milk pricing factor ($13.71 per cwt) grew substantially. That means producers will see a negative impact using the “average-of plus 74 cents” Class I mover compared to the old “higher-of” formula.

Based on Progressive Dairy calculations, the Class I mover calculated under the higher-of formula would have resulted in a Class I base price of $23.67 per cwt, 79 cents more than the price determined using the average-of plus 74 cents formula. That difference is up from 51 cents per cwt in February.

I give up.  If anyone can explain this to me, please do.

This is what you are up against if you want to understand why milk prices are rising at grocery stores.

*******

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

At long last, the FDA revealed its proposed decision about whether plant-based milks can be called milk.

• FDA’s draft guidance.
• The Federal Register notice
• For comment, post here 

As the FDA puts it:

This draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

What this is about

Simple.  The dairy industry does not like concoctions made from soy, almonds, cashews, macadamias, oats, peas, or other such plants to get to be called “milk.”  It argues that they are not as nutritious as milk and will confuse consumers into thinking they are the same.  Most surveys show that the public understands the difference quite well and has reasons for choosing plant-based alternatives that may or may not have anything to do with nutrient contents (think: animal welfare, dairy fat, environmental protection, industrial production, or what have you).

This puts the FDA in the awkward position of trying to please the public and the dairy industry at the same time.  Its solution to this dilemma is to invoke nutritionism (the use of nutrients to stand for the whole food):

• Plant-based milks can use the word “milk” (the dairy industry doesn’t like this)
• But they have to say which nutrients they don’t have as much of (producers of plant-based milks don’t like this).

What this will look like

The FDA says this is a voluntary, non-binding recommendation.

In case that’s too small to see:

Really, people who buy plant-based dairy alternatives are not at nutritional risk and don’t need to be told about single nutrients in products that have a great many.  This is an out-and-out caving in to the dairy industry’s fears that plant-based alternatives will further cut into milk sales at a time when milk sales are declining.

It puts plant-based milk manufacturers at risk of lawsuits if they use Milk without confessing nutritional weaknesses (for an excellent discussion of this liklihood, see Elaine Watson’s account in AgFunderNews.  She quotes lawyer Rebecca Cross:

the draft guidance, “is actually quite shocking, as it treats plant-based milks unlike any other food product.  If finalized, the guidance should not survive a First Amendment challenge.”

She added: “Although the recommended nutrient statements are not mandatory—or finalized—the draft guidance here may, unfortunately, result in frivolous class actions [plaintiffs would claim brands are misleading reasonable consumers if they choose not to make the nutrient statements recommended in the guidance]. The FDA should recognize this as well, but it seems they have unfortunately succumbed to dairy industry pressure.

So it seems.

My opinion, for whatever it’s worth: The FDA should permit plant-based milks to be called milks.  They are what they are and most people should have no trouble telling the difference between them and dairy milk.

For the record, I like dairy products.  But the dairy industry is a mess (overproduced, increasingly consolidated, fighting public health and animal welfare concerns) and needs to get its act together.  The FDA is not helping it get there with this decision.

I read about this one in NutraIngredients.com.

While previous animal studies have suggested a significant impact of the gut microbiota on the development and maturation of brain networks that underlie emotional behaviour, fewer studies have been conducted on humans. Intake of a galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) prebiotic over 3 weeks has been shown to lower the secretion of the stress hormone cortisol and emotional processing in healthy adults, suggesting that GOS intake may be useful in modifying anxiety-related psychological mechanisms. However, reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy of prebiotics for reducing anxiety symptomology are mixed, calling for further well controlled trials in human participants.

I am always curious to know who pays for this kind of research, so I looked up the study.

Anxiolytic effects of a galacto-oligosaccharides prebiotic in healthy females (18-25 years) with corresponding changes in gut bacterial composition.  Nicola Johnstone , Chiara Milesi , Olivia Burn, Bartholomeus van den Bogert, Arjen Nauta , Kathryn Hart , Paul Sowden, Philip W J Burnet, Kathrin Cohen Kadosh.   Sci Rep 2021 Apr 15;11(1):8302.

The study: “We examined multiple indices of mood and well-being in 64 healthy females in a 4-week double blind, placebo controlled galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) prebiotic supplement intervention and obtained stool samples at baseline and follow-up for gut microbiota sequencing and analyses. We report effects of the GOS intervention on self-reported high trait anxiety, attentional bias, and bacterial abundance, suggesting that dietary supplementation with a GOS prebiotic may improve indices of pre-clinical anxiety.”

Conflict of interest statement: AN is an employee of FrieslandCampina, Amersfoort, The Netherlands. BvdB reports co-ownership of MyMicroZoo, Leiden, The Netherlands with no financial benefit from contributions to this manuscript. NJ, CM, OB, KH, PS, PWJB and KCK declared no financial or potential conflicts of interest.

Comment:  Probiotics are microorganisms that maintain a healthy microbiome.   They are typically found in fermented foods like yogurt.  Prebiotics are substances in food—or, in this case, supplements—that feed probiotic microbes.  This prebiotic supplement is GOS, a complicated chain of sugar molecules that is found in milk.

Why would an employee of FrieslandCampina want to do this study?  “Milk is the foundation of everything we do at FrieslandCampina.”

Why would a co-owner of MyMicroZoo be interested?  “The MyMicroZoo analysis shows the composition of your microbiota, and gives insight into how to improve your vitality.”

I’m all for eating yogurt (but watch out for the added sugars).  But GOS supplements?  Pardon my industry-induced skepticism.

The dairy industry, ever under siege, is doing its best to convince us to eat dairy foods.  Full disclosure: I eat and like dairy foods.  I do not, however, like the way the dairy industry funds research aimed at marketing its products.  Here are two examples.

Example 1: Full-fat dairy foods are good for you [yes, they can be, but in moderation]

The study: Potential Cardiometabolic Health Benefits of Full-Fat Dairy: The Evidence Base.  Kristin M Hirahatake, Arne Astrup, James O Hill, Joanne L Slavin, David B Allison, and Kevin C Maki.  Adv Nutr 2020;00:1–15.

Conclusions: “Emerging evidence shows that the consumption of full-fat dairy foods has a neutral or inverse association with adverse cardiometabolic health outcomes, including atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and associated risk factors.”

Conflicts of interest and funding (dairy groups are highlighted):

Example 2: Dairy foods can help reduce world hunger [of course they can]

The report: Dairy’s Impact on Reducing Global Hunger

Major finding: “The remarkable consistency of the positive association between dairy animal ownership,
milk/dairy intake, and child growth across the experimental and observational studies, and
the dose-response relationship between dairy consumption and child growth…provide strong evidence that, in rural
low-income settings, household milk production increases household milk consumption, and increased milk consumption results in improved child growth and reduced stunting.”

Recommendation: “dairy development needs to be accompanied by nutrition education of caregivers to ensure that milk is provided in the most critical phase of childhood, namely in the 0.5 to 2-year age group”

Sponsors: “Published by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global Dairy Platform and
IFCN Dairy Research Network.

Comment:  It’s interesting to compare the first paper to another one done by investigators who are not funded by the dairy industry.  They don’t disagree, exactly, but spin the results much less favoably.  See: Milk and Health, by Walter C. Willett and David S. Ludwig. N Engl J Med 2020;382:644-54.

…guidelines for milk and equivalent dairy foods ideally should designate an acceptable intake (such as 0 to 2 servings per day for adults), deemphasize reduced-fat milk as preferable to whole milk, and discourage consumption of sugar-sweetened dairy foods in populations with high rates of overweight and
obesity.

Dairy foods are foods.  Like any other, they are not essential.  If you like them, eat them—in moderation, of course.

Scott Gottlieb, Commissioner of the FDA, says his agency will take up the vexing question of what to call “milks” made from soy, almonds, and other legumes and nuts.

If you look at our standards of identity, there is a reference … to a lactating animal,” Gottlieb said during an interview at the POLITICO Pro Summit. “An almond doesn’t lactate, I will confess. So the question becomes, ‘Have we been enforcing the standard of identity?’ And the answer is probably not.”

The dairy industry does not want these products called “milk” (see discussion of the “war over soy milk,” in the New Republic).  It argues that they do not meet the standard of identity for milk, but also that they are less nutritious.

The Good Food Institute, which promotes plant-based meat, dairy and egg substitutes, petitioned FDA to set some rules for this.  Its view is that manufacturers of dairy alternatives have a First Amendment right to describe their products as they like (also see the Institute’s letter to the FDA).

Gottlieb says the FDA will soon open the question up for public comment.

If these products cannot be called milk, what can they be called?  On this, I defer to The Onion.

As for whether almond milk is milk, here is the ingredient list for the Almond Breeze product:

ALMONDMILK (FILTERED WATER, ALMONDS), CALCIUM CARBONATE, SEA SALT, POTASSIUM CITRATE, SUNFLOWER LECITHIN, GELLAN GUM, NATURAL FLAVORS, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, VITAMIN D2, D-ALPHA-TOCOPHEROL (NATURAL VITAMIN E).

I always am interested in Michele Simon’s provocative reports.  Her latest, Whitewashed, is no exception.  It’s about how the government promotes dairy foods, no matter what kind or where they appear.

Read her blog post here.

Download the full report here.

Read the executive summary here.

Here’s are some of the surprising (to me) findings detailed in the report:

• About half of all milk is consumed either as flavored milk, with cereal, or in a drink;
• Nearly half of the milk supply goes to make about 9 billion pounds of cheese and 1.5 billion gallons of frozen desserts–two-thirds of which is ice cream;
• 11 percent of all sugar goes into the production of dairy products.

Where the government enters the picture is through the “checkoff programs” for promoting milk and dairy.  These are USDA-Sponsored programs, paid for by dairy farmers through checkoff fees, but run by the USDA.

U.S. Department of Agriculture employees attend checkoff meetings, monitor activities, and are responsible for evaluation of the programs. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the legality of the checkoff programs as “government speech”, finding: “the message … is controlled by the Federal Government.”

The report has some interesting findings about the checkoff.  Although checkoff funds are supposed to be used for generic marketing, the dairy checkoff helped:

• McDonald’s make sure that dairy foods play an important role in product development.
• Taco Bell introduce its double steak quesadillas and cheese shreds.
• Pizza Hut develop its 3-Cheese Stuffed Crust Pizza and “Summer of Cheese” ad campaign.
• Dominos add more cheese to its pizzas as a result of a $35 million partnership.
• Domino’s “Smart Slice” program introduce its pizza to more than 2,000 schools in 2011.
• Promote “Chocolate Milk Has Muscle” and “Raise Your Hand for Chocolate Milk.”

I like dairy foods, but should the government be doing this?