Should Milk from BST-treated Cows be Labeled as Such?

FDA requires warning notices only when foods undergo significant changes that, for example, reduce the nutrients or introduce allergens. Genetically engineered BST is identical to the naturally occurring form, and so is the milk from cows treated with BST. There is no difference in the protein, milk solids, fat content or level of BST in milk from cows receiving supplemental BST. The FDA therefore does not require a warning. Some individual states have labeling laws regarding rBST.

On November 5, 1993, FDA was satisfied that the necessary safety and efficacy tests had been met, and therefore approved the BST product made by Monsanto. Because Congress mandated a 90-day moratorium on the sale of bST, commercial sale of the product did not begin until February 3, 1994. On February 8, 1994, FDA published interim guidelines on the voluntary labeling of milk and milk products from cows that have not been supplemented with rBST. The highlights:

• A "BST-free" labeling statement would be false since no milk is "BST-free."
• FDA accepts the statement "from cows not treated with rBST," with an accompanying statement that "No significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rBST-treated and non-rBST-treated cows." This qualifying statement clarifies that milk from untreated cows is neither safer nor of higher quality than milk from treated cows.
• FDA intends to rely primarily on state enforcement to ensure that rBST labeling claims are truthful and not misleading.

  ---

Back to bST Q and A

Prepared Summer 1997 by Bernadene Magnuson, Ph.D.
University of Idaho, Dept. of Food Science and Toxicology - EXTOXNET FAQ Team.