Dairy Industry Claims “Low Calorie” Milks Are Not “Attractive” to Children

chocolate-milk

At first glance, you won’t be able to tell the difference between this milk and milk with artificial sweetener substitute.

5th Graders Really ARE Smarter than the Rest of U.S.!

by Kimberly Hartke

The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) recently sent a petition to the FDA. The petition is asking for FDA green light on switching from sugar to artificial sweeteners in dairy products, without having to add  “low calorie” or “reduced calorie” on the label.

The FDA websites says these dairy industry groups claim that “lower-calorie flavored milk would particularly benefit school children who, according to IDFA and NMPF, are more inclined to drink flavored milk than unflavored milk at school.”

But will they really benefit? And, why is it that children instinctively rebel against low fat milk products. Could it be animal instinct?

It strikes me after working on nutrition issues and food policy for over 6 years, how easy it is to ‘train’ grown adults away from their natural instincts regarding nutrition.

sugar-sweetened-milk

Ingredients label for a Sugar Added Milk.

But, we can discern the truth from this  industry petition to the federal agency. Children need to have their skim milk sweetened and flavored in order to entice them away from the natural leanings! As Dr. Weston A. Price discovered, indigenous tribes instinctively ate high fat animal parts first, and the lean meats were of secondary interest. The same dietary habit is found in the animal kingdom. For instance, the wild cat starts eating his kill with the fatty organ meats.

Misguided USDA Guidelines are to Blame

The new USDA dietary guidelines are really behind all this. As state and federal programs start implementing the guidelines, there is pressure on institutions like schools and hospitals to move toward reducing calories in their menu ingredients. Thus, the push for manufacturers and food processors to replace food based sugars with substitutes like aspartame and sucralose.

According to journalist D.L. Dewey, sucralose is chlorinated sugar.  I ask you, how can industry add a toxic chemical to sugar and have it still be considered safe?

Dewey also says more than 100 studies have called into question the safety of aspartame. See his article, Deadly Food Additives for more details.

How can hundreds of studies go ignored by the FDA, USDA and public health officials?

Check out the words of the Executive Summary of the 2010 dietary guidelines (which were so controversial they were actually released in 2011–the deluge of criticism kept bureaucrats scrambling and sorting for months)!

Maintain calorie balance over time to achieve and sustain a healthy weight. People who are most successful at achieving and maintaining a healthy
weight do so through continued attention to consuming only enough calories from foods and beverages to meet their needs and by being physically
active. To curb the obesity epidemic and improve their health, many Americans must decrease the calories they consume and increase the calories
they expend through physical activity.

The Executive Summary goes on to say:

“focus on consuming nutrient-dense foods and beverages. Americans currently consume too much sodium and too many calories from solid fats, added sugars, and refined grains.”

This is why the push for reduced calorie dairy products. Flavored milks, in particular, have sugar and high fructose corn syrup as sweetener. Because these are regarded as food, no nutrient claim is required on the front of the package.

I also want you to take note. Industry doesn’t have a whimper of a problem declaring their products as Low FAT. But Low CAL? They seem to balk at this label. Is it because of the preponderance of negative hype about cholesterol and fat that gives them incentive to proudly label food products that way? Would love your thoughts on this!

What other Food Policy Wonks have to Say

Dr. Mercola, a leading health advocate on the internet has this to say about the petition to forgo nutrient claims,

“If the amendment goes through, that would mean anytime you see the word “milk” on the label, it could include aspartame, sucralose, or any other dangerous artificial sweetener, but you could never be quite sure, since there will be no mention of it — not by listing the artificial sweetener used, nor with a no- or low-calorie type label, which is a tip-off that the product might contain a non-nutritive sweetener.”

Sylvia Onusic, Ph.D. analyzes research for Weston A. Price Foundation, she says,

“In the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (HPFAS), researchers found that men drinking 1 daily serving of diet soda had more than 1.3 times increased risk for developing non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs) and more than two times the risk of developing multiple myelomain compared with men who did not consume diet soda but found no increased risk in women.”

In our press release yesterday, I did, however, mention a study that found the prenatal fetus can be damaged by aspartame consumption of female mice and rats. And, as we know, women of childbearing age are frequent consumers of aspartame  containing foods.

Sylvia says, “As an alternative to aspartame -laden milk. Why not drink raw milk direct from the farm? Even though you may be a bit cautious about the raw milk, you can always heat it gently, then cool if that is what keeps you from buying the milk. At least you will know what is in, or NOT in, your milk! And get to know your local farmer. Most proudly show their barns and cows!”

For a comprehensive look at the dangers of artificial sweeteners, see the Sugar-Free Blues article on the Weston A. Price Foundation website. See also, the press release issued by the Foundation about the issue: Nutrition Non-Profit Leads Protest of Dairy Adulteration Proposal.

Kimberly Hartke is the publicist for A Campaign for Real Milk, a project of the Weston A. Price Foundation. She is a featured blogger on Village Green Network.

 

 

 

Comments

  1. wow. very interesting and sly. thanks for researching this.

  2. Kimberly Hartke says:

    Here is the podcast Sally Fallon Morell, Cathy Raymond and I did with Wardeh Harmon on the subject!

    KYF #025: They Want to Hide Toxic Sweeteners In Your Child’s School Milk
    http://KnowYourFoodPodcast.com/25

    Give a listen, it is worth sharing, too!

  3. When you go to the store to buy MILK (just plain old milk), they will
    have the right to still call your gallon of milk, MILK even if it has
    aspartame in it. Sure, it will be on the ingredient list in the back,
    but do you want to have to examine every milk carton you buy to make sure
    it doesn’t have artificial sweetener in it? I don’t..

Trackbacks

  1. […] Dairy Industry Claims “Low Calorie” Milks Are Not Attractive to Children — Kimberly’s blog […]

  2. […] See also, Hartke is Online’s previous post on this issue, Dairy Industry Says Low Calorie Milks Unattractive to Children […]

Speak Your Mind

*