The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

110 the world according to monsantoAt the time she wrote the FDA opinion on labeling, she was still publishingpapers with Monsanto scientists on BST. It appears to us that this is a directconflict of interest. As you know, if milk is labeled as being from BST-treatedcows, consumers will not buy it and Monsanto stands to lose a great deal ofmoney.”Although Michael Taylor did not draft the guidance, his former law firminspired its content. The guidance apparently drew on a confidential documentsent to the FDA on April 28, 1993, by King and Spalding. Recall thatMichael Taylor had served for seven years as counsel for Monsanto, working,says his CV, on food labeling, particularly of transgenic origin. Entitled“Mandatory Labeling of Milk and Other Foods Derived from Dairy CowsSupplemented with Bovine Somatotropin Would Be Unlawful and Unwise,”the memorandum from King and Spalding, which was “submitted on behalfof Monsanto Company for the Food and Drug Administration,” presents argumentsquoted directly in the FDA guidance: “In addition to being unlawful,such a requirement would be unwise. Consumers would be misled intobelieving that there is some difference between milk and other foods derivedfrom BST-supplemented dairy cattle and foods from untreated animals. Infact, there is no significant difference.” 3“This FDA guidance takes the cake,” said Michael Hansen, the ConsumerPolicy Institute expert who sent a detailed critique to the agency onMarch 14, 1994. “First—and the FDA knew this very well—milk fromtreated cows is not identical to natural milk; second, it has long since authorizedlabels such as ‘organic product,’ ‘cheese from Wisconsin,’ ‘producedby Amish,’ or ‘Angus beef,’ and it never thought that might mislead consumersby implying a difference in terms of quality or food safety. Whywould it be different for milk labeled ‘rBST free’? Once again, the documentwas tailor made for Monsanto, which knew very well that if milk was labeled,consumers would do everything to avoid products from the transgenichormone.” He referred to eleven surveys conducted in the 1990s, all ofwhich confirmed that the vast majority of consumers preferred to buy milkwithout rBGH if they had the choice.*In the meantime, the guidance had thoroughly benefited Monsanto,*These surveys were conducted by the Department of Agriculture, Cornell University, the Universityof Wisconsin, Dairy Today, etc.