usda: a model of integrity (yeah, right)

The following article was borrowed from the Organic Consumer Association's website. It's never surprising when big companies figure out a way to get over on consumers, and here is a blatant example.

ALERT: ANOTHER SNEAK ATTACK ON ORGANIC STANDARDS: USDA TO ALLOW MORE CONVENTIONAL INGREDIENTS IN ORGANICS
USDA & INDUSTRY TRY TO SNEAK BANNED CONVENTIONAL INGREDIENTS INTO ORGANIC BEER, SAUSAGE, & PROCESSED FOODS
Send a Letter to USDA Now
(note: scroll to the bottom of this webpage to send a letter to USDA now).The USDA has announced a controversial proposal, with absolutely no input from consumers, to allow 38 new non-organic ingredients in products bearing the "USDA Organic" seal. Most of the ingredients are food colorings derived from plants that are supposedly not "commercially available" in organic form. But several of the proposed ingredients, backed by beer giant Anheuser-Busch, and pork and food processors, represent a serious threat to organic standards, and have raised the concerns of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA).
ALERT UPDATE (6/23/2007): Despite receiving more than ten thousand comments from consumers and family farmers opposing various aspects of a late May 2007 proposal, the USDA has approved an interim rule that will allow 38 new non-organic ingredients to be allowed in products bearing the "USDA Organic" seal. The USDA's passage of this proposal has resulted in the following: -Anheuser Busch will be allowed to sell its "Organic Wild Hops Beer" without using any organic hops at all. -Sausages, brats, and breakfast links labeled as "USDA Organic" are now allowed to contain intestines from factory farmed animals raised on chemically grown feed, synthetic hormones, and antibiotics. -Products labeled as "USDA Organic" and containing fish oil may contain toxins such as PCBs and mercury (note: nonorganic fishoil products have this same risk, but despite the USDA ruling, it is against the National Organic Standards to allow such toxins in organic foods). YOUR HELP IS STILL NEEDED The USDA has responded to OCA's demands to repoen re-open the public comment period on this issue. Industry was given two years, and the public was initially only given 7 days. But the USDA has agreed to accept public comments for 60 additional days while giving interim approval to the proposal. It's important that consumers, farmers and organic producers use this period to share their opinions. .
(note: scroll to the bottom of this webpage to send a letter to USDA now).
OCA PETITION TO USDA REGARDING PROPOSAL TO ALLOW 38 NEW CONVENTIONAL INGREDIENTS IN ORGANIC PRODUCTS
Speaking from the perspective of organic consumers, we support the NOP for clarifying to producers that if an item is not on the National List, it cannot be used in conventional form. However, we do not support all of the NOSB's 38 recommended additions to the National List. Notably, we are opposed to the addition of casings from processed intestines, hops (without specific listings), fish oil, beet juice, lemongrass, rice starch and whey protein.AMS-TM-07-0062 claims that these exceptions must be added to the list to offer concessions to countless companies who have violated the National Organic Standards in the past by using conventional ingredients that were not on the National List. These same companies have been given months to petition the NOSB for inclusion of desired conventional ingredients on the National List. In contrast, the general public has only been allocated 7 days to comment.Specifically, we are opposed to allowing the following conventional ingredients in organic production:1) FOOD COLORINGSWe believe additional criteria should be added to any of the added food colorings to the National List. Food colorings should be treated in a manner similar to flavors by the NOP. Before a food coloring is added to the National List, it should be stipulated that there are no synthetic solvents, preservatives or additives.2) CASINGS FROM PROCESSED INTESTINESThe proposed addition to the National List is focused on bovine, ovine and porcine animal intestines used as sheaths for products such as sausage links. Surveys of organic consumers find that a high percentage of beef eating organic consumers choose organic products to avoid diseases associated with conventional meat production. Specifically, the organic beef industry has enjoyed a considerable boom as more consumers are concerned with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) which has only been detected in animals raised conventionally. BSE is transmitted via the consumption of prions in infected body tissue. There is no scientific evidence that excludes bovine intestine as a possible source of BSE transmission.In short, many consumers are choosing to pay notably higher prices for organic beef based meats to avoid conventionally raised beef. By allowing conventional casings on the National List, these consumers will be misled into believing that the meat product they are eating was raised in accordance to the National Organic Standards, when, in fact, the intestinal casing may be from an animal that lived its life on a factory farm in intensive confinement, consuming pesticide laden foods, and treated with an assortment of antibiotics and drugs.A meat labeled as "organic" should truly be organic, and the allowance of conventionally produced intestinal casings violates consumer rights.3) HOPS Hops (Humulus lupulus) should not be included on the National List in such general terms. Only specific low-supply varieties should be listed. Although organic hops is in high demand, there are over a dozen varieties of organic hops available on the market (available in both pellet and whole flower form). Hops is one of the main ingredients in beer. It is misleading to allow a beverage to be labeled as "organic" when its main ingredient was grown with pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. By including hops on the National List, consumers will not be able to distinguish truly organic beer from a beer with a main ingredient that is conventionally grown.Also, putting hops on the National List offers unfair advantages to large-scale breweries. There are many micro-breweries now selling truly organic beers (with organic hops). These companies cannot compete with the prices of larger companies stepping into the "organic" beer business, like Budweiser, who will be allowed to use less expensive, conventionally grown hops (non-organic hops costs less than half as much as organic hops). Breweries need to put more effort into developing organic hop resources here in the USA before they try and make organic beer with inorganic hops.We believe specific varieties of hops that are in well documented low supply on an organic level could be listed here, but including all varieties of hops on the National List is unnecessary and harmful to organic hops producers.4) FISH OILWe do not agree with the recommendation of listing fish oil on the National List. Fish oil has not undergone any TAP review, which is required for any substance proposed for the National List. Also, there are no organic standards for fish under the USDA NOP. Also, there must be criteria for the fish oil when/if it is allowed. For example, is it solvent extracted, and has it been tested for contamination from heavy metals, PCBS, and dioxin. This is a substance that is still undergoing review and definition and should not be considered for listing until it has gone through these required processes.5) Lemongrass, Rice Starch, Beet Juice & Whey Protein Concentrate We believe the above ingredients are available in quantities sufficient enough to serve the organic industry. These ingredients should be re-evaluated using the criteria established by 7 U.S.C. 6517 and 6518 of the OFPA and NOP criteria (72 FR 2167). We ask that you remove each of the above ingredients from the AMS-TM-07-0062 proposal. Thanks for your consideration,Sign our petition below, or click on the "Learn more" link to read the full USDA proposal. You can also send written comments. DATES: Comments must be received by May 22, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may comment on this proposed rule using
any of the following procedures:
Mail: Comments may be submitted by mail to Robert Pooler,
Agricultural Marketing Specialist, National Organic Program, USDA/AMS/
TMP/NOP, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 4008-So., Ag Stop 0268,
Washington, DC 20250.
Internet: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.regulations.gov.
-->>>Learn More