retail news in context, analysis with attitude

In Wisconsin, the Journal-Sentinel reports that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has sent a letter to the makers of Muscle Milk, a fortified drink, saying that its name is misleading since it actually contains no milk.

The absence of actual milk - though it does include ingredients “derived from milk” - is noted on the product’s label, though in smaller typeface than other information.

According to the story, manufacturer CytoSport says on its website that it is addressing the concerns, though it suggests that the FDA’s concerns are being driven my the dairy lobby.

“Concerns like this have been raised before when the dairy lobby complained that other industries or products like Soy Milk, Almond Milk, Coconut Milk and Rice Milk are using the name 'milk' in connection with a product other than fluid dairy milk, all of which appeal to lactose intolerant consumers just as Muscle Milk does," CytoSport writes.

Indeed, the dairy lobby has welcomed the FDA move, the Journal-Sentinel writes.

“We are gratified that the FDA has finally gotten off its duff and done something with respect to at least one product," says Chris Galen, spokesman for the National Milk Producers Federation.
KC's View:
I have to be honest on this one. I don’t know what to think. On the one hand, milk is milk, and products that are not milk ought not be able to call themselves milk. After all, transparency is transparency.

On the other hand, does anyone really think soy milk comes from a cow?

Muscle Milk seems more egregiously deceptive - I’ve seen this stuff on shelves, but had no idea that it did not contain milk.