The controversy shows no signs of moving
toward the question of values. Instead, the science will continue to be
debated, as will the portrayal of science. At the moment, Monsanto and
the citizen organizations are stuck in the legal arena over issues of
labeling. In 2007, Monsanto succeeded in convincing the state of
Pennsylvania to ban the ‘rBGH-free’ label on milk products. In other
states, the citizen organizations have been successful in ensuring that
the rBGH-free label remains an option for producers who choose that
route. Monsanto has argued that labeling products as rBGH-free unfairly
discourages consumers from buying their product, which they would
incorrectly view as unnatural. There is no basis for labeling on human
health grounds, Monsanto argues, because the chemical composition of
the milk has been shown scientifically to be nearly identical
(Monsanto, Statement on Oakhurst). Therefore, the debate is once again
about the authority of science, and how that science should be
and rBGH supporters continue to argue that anti-rBGH groups are
portraying science inaccurately, and citizen organizations
continue to debate the science by claiming the FDA decision was
fraudulent.Hopefully, one day, we will have a
discussion of our values and then establish effective scientific
inquiry to complement the debate.
video to the right to see the accusations commonly thrown at citizen
organizations by rBGH supporters
Physicians for Social Responsibility explain what they believe to be a fraudulent FDA decision in Video 6.
Video 5: From FeedStuffs FoodLink claiming that rBGH-free labels are misleading and hurt producers and consumers.
Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility explaining what they
believe to be the FDA's corrupt decision to approve rBGH.