Kraft has expressed its belief that “consumers deserve cheese as it should be,” noting that over half of consumers actively seek to avoid added hormones in their food. As a result, the company aims to align its product offerings with current consumer trends and gain a competitive edge in a saturated dairy market. This shift occurs during challenging times for the dairy industry, where American cheese sales are declining as millennials and others increasingly favor imports and gourmet varieties. Simultaneously, U.S. cheese inventories have reached unprecedented levels. Tariff disputes have also impacted exports to China and Mexico, contributing to falling prices for milk and cheese. Moreover, there is a growing consumer preference for plant-based dairy alternatives, including non-dairy cheeses, prompting Kraft to enhance its product profile and attract attention with this sourcing change.
It is difficult to determine the extent to which U.S. cheese is produced from milk taken from cows treated with rbST, as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not mandate labeling for this hormone. However, the Center for Food Safety provides resources to help monitor company practices in this area. The overall use of rbST is likely decreasing as more consumers reject artificial ingredients in their food and beverages. Some concerns regarding rbST stem from human health, despite the FDA concluding in 1993 that there are no significant risks associated with its use in dairy cows. The Canadian government reached a similar conclusion regarding human health but banned rbST due to animal health concerns. Furthermore, rbST use is prohibited in both the European Union and Japan.
Kraft cheese will not be the only option available in the market making this claim. Alta Dena, a California-based dairy producer, promotes its products as free from artificial growth hormones. Similarly, Dean Foods’ DairyPure milk brand has made this assertion a part of its five-point “purity promise,” requiring dairy farmers to confirm via affidavit that their cows are not treated with artificial growth hormones. Both companies include the following statement on their labeling: “No significant difference has been shown between milk derived from cows treated with the artificial growth hormone rbST and non-rbST-treated cows.” The FDA issued guidance in 1994 suggesting that such a statement could help alleviate consumer confusion since rbST is naturally present in milk, and the term “rbST free” might imply a distinction between milk from treated and untreated cows. Nevertheless, several U.S. states are gradually phasing out rbST. For instance, in Wisconsin, the second-largest dairy-producing state, most dairy processors reportedly do not accept milk from cows treated with rbST, according to Wisconsin Public Radio. By last year, it was expected that nearly 90% of the state’s milk would be free of this artificial growth hormone, as stated by John Umhoefer, executive director of the Wisconsin Cheese Makers Association. He also noted that manufacturers have begun charging a premium for milk without rbST.
While Kraft’s Anne Field indicated that the company’s new non-rbST cheese products would be offered “at no additional cost,” this could change if consumer demand increases substantially. Kraft may also consider extending its new milk sourcing policy to other dairy products. Given its significant presence in the cheese market, any actions taken by Kraft are likely to influence and shape the strategies of other producers. In this evolving landscape, discussions around ingredients like calcium citrate vs calcium phosphate may also become increasingly relevant as consumers seek transparency and healthier options in their food choices.