

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Mark Kastel, 608-625-2042
Charlotte Vallaeys, 978-369-6409
A prominent organic industry watchdog filed a formal legal complaint today alleging that a newly introduced product, by the giant dairy conglomerate Dean Foods, includes a synthetic nutritional oil that is prohibited in organics. The product, Horizon Fat-Free Milk Plus DHA Omega-3, bears the USDA organic seal despite a ruling in 2010 by the USDA that the proprietary DHA oil, an ingredient derived from algae, is not legal in organic production.
"This is a willful and flagrant violation of the law governing organic foods," states Mark A. Kastel, Codirector of the Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group.
Federal law strictly prohibits synthetic additives in organic foods unless the additive appears on the USDA's National Organic Program's list of allowed substances. Ingredients are included on this list only after careful review and approval by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), an expert advisory panel, and the Secretary of Agriculture.
Synthetic materials on the list include benign substances like baking powder that are not available organically but important for commercial food production.
"The specific type of laboratory-produced DHA oil that Horizon adds to its milk has never been reviewed by the National Organic Standards Board or approved by the USDA," explains Charlotte Vallaeys, a Farm and Food Policy Analyst with The Cornucopia Institute.
Due to its past unauthorized use, federal regulators recently issued a statement confirming that adding these synthetic oils violates the Organic Foods Production Act. "It is therefore absolutely baffling that Dean Foods would introduce a product with synthetic DHA and have the audacity to label it organic, and it's even more disturbing that their certifier would allow this," Vallaeys added.
In addition to Dean Foods, a few other food processors and several infant formula manufacturers have included the synthetic additive, manufactured by Martek Biosciences Corporation, in organic products, despite their lack of approval.
From documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, Cornucopia discovered that the USDA, under the Bush Administration, had informally allowed the additives in organic foods after a backroom deal with corporate lobbyists.
After numerous appeals by The Cornucopia Institute, and an investigative article in the Washington Post that exposed corruption under the previous administration, new leadership at the USDA's National Organic Program publicly acknowledged, in April 2010, that the Bush administration had misinterpreted federal rules when allowing Martek's DHA algal oil in organics.
"According to the USDA ruling, companies should be in the process of phasing out the use of these unapproved additives in organic foods," states Vallaeys. "The last thing we expected was to see a marketer actually introduce a new product with these unapproved synthetic substances. With this move, Dean Foods seems to be stating that they do not care about organic integrity, and couldn't care less about complying with the organic law."
In August 2010, with the damaging coverage in the Washington Post, and the determination of its illegality by the USDA, Martek Biosciences finally petitioned the oils for approval in organic foods. The National Organic Standards Board, which reviews petitions and advises the USDA's National Organic Program on these matters, has yet to rule on Martek's request.
Due to the ongoing controversy, and questions about the safety and efficacy of Martek's nutritional ingredients, approval of their petition by the NOSB is far from certain.
Martek produces its patented DHA additives from microalgae species that have never previously been part of the human diet, and that are fermented in a medium including corn syrup that is likely genetically engineered (genetic engineering is banned in organics).
According to Martek's petition, the processing of their algal DHA additives includes hydrolysis with enzymes, extraction with petrochemical solvents, and other "non-organic processing aids" such as "food acids." Petrochemical solvents, including the neurotoxic compound hexane, are also explicitly banned in organic production.
Documents obtained from the Food and Drug Administration lead some researchers and healthcare providers to believe that these synthetic ingredients, when added to infant formula, cause serious adverse reactions in some infants, including virulent diarrhea and vomiting, sometimes resulting in hospitalization.
"When they buy organic, consumers expect wholesome, real foods without synthetic ingredients or manufactured with questionable processing aids," states Vallaeys. "Real organic milk contains healthy fatty acids. It makes no sense to replace them with synthetic oil that was developed in a laboratory and produced in a factory."
Dean Foods' Horizon brand is already held in low esteem by many in the organic industry because of its dependence on industrial-scale "factory farms" that have historically confined their cattle rather than promoting fresh pasture intake. Research shows that pasturing cows leads to milk that is naturally higher in omega-3 fatty acids.
A study conducted by The Milkweed, a dairy industry newspaper, showed that Horizon brand milk tested lower in certain nutrients, including beneficial fatty acids, than almost all of its primary marketplace competitors.
In its previously published landmark report on infant formula, The Cornucopia Institute questioned claims, popular in advertising, that Martek's additives benefit brain and eye health for infants and children. Two scientific review studies substantiated Cornucopia's findings on the effects of DHA supplementation, revealing that only one of 18 included peer-reviewed scientific studies showed an advantage to development. Both meta-analysis studies concluded that DHA does not benefit cognitive and visual development in infants.
An additional study examining DHA effects on toddler development, applicable to Horizon's new supplemented milk, found no statistically significant results on tests of mental prowess between a group of children given DHA supplements and a control group. The study was funded by Martek itself, and published in Clinical Pediatrics.
Yet Dean Foods suggests, in its marketing materials, that its DHA-supplemented milk benefits children's brain health. "Even if this DHA oil were legal for inclusion in organic products, there is virtually no research, other than a small minority of industry-funded studies, to indicate that Martek's oil benefits children's development," Kastel added. "This is a marketing gimmick, plain and simple."
Cornucopia formally asked the USDA to take immediate action on this issue to protect the public and the integrity of the organic label.
"It appears that companies like Dean Foods and Martek think they are above the law," states Kastel. "It's time for the USDA to show that the organic regulations and standards are not a matter of interpretation by powerful corporations, but mean something and must be followed by everyone in the organic community."
MORE:
Certifier
Dean Foods' Horizon milk product line is certified organic by Quality Assurance International (QAI), San Diego, California. Although implicated in a number of other improper decisions, the accredited certifier has yet to be sanctioned by the USDA. QAI is the largest certifier serving corporate agribusinesses that have invested in organics.
Dr. Alan Greene
In its product launch, Dean Foods' Horizon spokesman, Dr. Alan Greene, stated, "Organic milk fortified with DHA is a great option for families looking to incorporate nutritious products in their diets with the proven benefits of DHA, including those for heart, brain and eye health," despite the obvious lack of scientific evidence to back up his statement. [Emphasis added]
"We have had it with The Good Doctor," said Cornucopia's Kastel.
Greene, formerly a highly-paid spokesperson for Horizon's key competitor, Organic Valley, initially angered organic proponents when he endorsed Dean Foods' first non-organic Horizon products -- milk and yogurt targeted to toddlers (prior to these products, Horizon had been an exclusively organic label).
"At the time, we felt it was unconscionable for someone who had developed his personal brand name, Dr. Greene, by promoting organics, to recommend dairy products containing conventional fruits and vegetables that have been proven to have some of the highest levels of pesticide residue contamination," Kastel added. "These products were targeted to developing children, who are most vulnerable to the deleterious impacts of pesticide residues. It was evidence that Dr. Greene was willing to sell his endorsement to the highest bidder, regardless of its virtues."
Greene, author of Feeding Baby Green, and the proprietor of a popular advertising-supported pediatrics website, also rankled some organic farmers when he appeared, in 2009, as the keynote speaker at the country's largest organic confab, the Upper Midwest Organic Farmers Conference in Wisconsin. When he made his speech before organic stakeholders, Greene was working as an undisclosed paid spokesperson for Dean/Horizon, a company embroiled in controversy for allegedly operating illegal factory farms, milking thousands of cows each.
"What really upset some people is that Greene spoke without declaring his financial relationship with Dean, a $12 billion dairy goliath, long known as a bad actor in the conventional and organic dairy communities," Kastel said.
The Cornucopia Institute stated it is preparing an ethics complaint against Greene for misrepresenting the body of literature that, the Institute claims, clearly lacks any scientific basis for the marketing claims he is helping his corporate benefactor articulate in the marketplace.
"This kind of questionable behavior, and overt conflicts of interest, has been condemned in the pharmaceutical industry when physicians partner with companies for promotions," Kastel stated. "The organic industry is successful because it was built by farmers and consumers partnering in an ethical, values-based approach to food production. We will not tolerate these antics by someone, by virtue of a medical degree, looking to cash in on the goodwill and trust of the organic consumer."
Organic Trade Association
In addition to the ethical concerns about Dr. Greene's position as a spokesperson for Dean/Horizon, Cornucopia is calling on the Organic Trade Association (OTA) to remove Dean Foods' representative, Ms. Kelly Shea, who is Dean's Vice President of Industry Relations and Organic Stewardship, from the OTA board of directors.
"For too long the OTA, an organic industry trade and lobby group, has looked the other way when their powerful members have willfully violated federal law," Kastel attested. "We call on them now to respond forcefully to the apparent willful violations of law by Dean Foods by disassociating themselves with the company."
Subsequent to a 2007 USDA finding that Aurora Dairy, another organic factory farm operator, which supplies private-label milk to major supermarket chains such as Wal-Mart and Costco, had "willfully" violated 14 tenets of the organic law, Aurora's president Mark Retzloff was elected as chairman of the OTA's research arm, The Organic Center.
The Cornucopia Institute said in its letter, "It's time that the Organic Trade Association recognizes its responsibility to take action against its membership when they jeopardize the reputation and integrity of the organic label."
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
"Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday implored his Democratic colleagues in Congress not to cave to President Donald Trump and Republicans in the ongoing government shutdown fight, warning that doing so would hasten the country's descent into authoritarianism.
In an op-ed for The Guardian, Sanders (I-Vt.) called Trump a "schoolyard bully" and argued that "anyone who thinks surrendering to him now will lead to better outcomes and cooperation in the future does not understand how a power-hungry demagogue operates."
"This is a man who threatens to arrest and jail his political opponents, deploys the US military into Democratic cities, and allows masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to pick people up off the streets and throw them into vans without due process," Sanders wrote. "He has sued virtually every major media outlet because he does not tolerate criticism, has extorted funds from law firms and is withholding federal funding from states that voted against him."
If Democrats capitulate, Sanders warned, Trump "will utilize his victory to accelerate his movement toward authoritarianism."
"At a time when he already has no regard for our democratic system of checks and balances," the senator wrote, "he will be emboldened to continue decimating programs that protect elderly people, children, the sick and the poor while giving more tax breaks and other benefits to his fellow oligarchs."
Sanders' op-ed came as the shutdown continued with no end in sight, with Democrats standing by their demand for an extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits as a necessary condition for any government funding deal. Republicans have so far refused to negotiate on the ACA subsidies even as health insurance premiums skyrocket nationwide.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, is illegally withholding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding from tens of millions of Americans—including millions of children—despite court rulings ordering him to release the money.
In a "60 Minutes" interview that aired Sunday, Trump again urged Republicans to nuke the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate to remove the need for Democratic support to reopen the government and advance other elements of their agenda unilaterally. Under the status quo, Republicans need the support of at least seven Democratic senators to advance a government funding package.
"The Republicans have to get tougher," Trump said. "If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want. We're not going to lose power."
Congressional Democrats have faced some pressure from allies, most notably the head of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), to cut a deal with Republicans to end the shutdown and alleviate the suffering it has inflicted on federal workers and many others.
But Democrats appear unmoved by the AFGE president's demand, and other labor leaders have since voiced support for the minority party's effort to secure an extension of ACA subsidies.
"We're urging our Democratic friends to hold the line," said Jaime Contreras, executive vice president of the 185,000-member Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ.
In his op-ed on Sunday, Sanders asked, "Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?"
"If the Democrats cave now, it would be a betrayal of the millions of Americans who have fought and died for democracy and our Constitution," the senator wrote. "It would be a sellout of a working class that is struggling to survive in very difficult economic times. Democrats in Congress are the last remaining opposition to Trump's quest for absolute power. To surrender now would be an historic tragedy for our country, something that history will not look kindly upon."
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."