In the five years since the FDA began developing guidelines for labeling plant-based milk, significant changes have occurred in the industry. As plant-based milk sales surged—accounting for 16% of the entire milk category in 2021, according to data from SPINS, the Plant Based Foods Association, and the Good Food Institute—the attempts from 2016 and 2017 to compel the FDA to prohibit dairy terminology for alternatives now seem almost insurmountable. Even comments from former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, who notably stated in 2018 that plant-based alternatives likely breached the standards of identity for milk since “an almond doesn’t lactate,” appear somewhat extreme.
The draft guidance released on Wednesday acknowledges the current scale and consumer perceptions of the plant-based milk market. Nevertheless, it still proposes numerous labeling changes for certain plant-based milk products. Essentially, the recommendation includes a straightforward language label disclaimer indicating when a plant-based alternative contains lower amounts of calcium, protein, vitamin A, vitamin D, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, riboflavin, or vitamin B12 compared to dairy milk. “The draft recommendations issued today should help provide consumers with clear labeling so they can make informed nutritional and purchasing decisions on the products they buy for themselves and their families,” stated FDA Commissioner Robert Califf in a written statement.
However, this guidance is not final. There is a 60-day period for stakeholders to comment before the FDA considers finalization. Even after the guidance is finalized, any suggested labeling will not be mandatory. Nonetheless, Good Food Institute senior regulatory attorney Madeline Cohen noted in an email that the guidance reflects the FDA’s perspective on the laws and regulations it enforces, and companies that ignore this guidance may expose themselves to class action lawsuits from consumers alleging misleading labeling.
No organizations have fully endorsed the draft guidance yet, but the International Dairy Foods Association remarked that its members have been seeking nutritional information similar to what the FDA is proposing. “IDFA will strive to ensure this draft guidance clarifies any persistent confusion regarding the nutritional quality of plant-based beverages. It is essential for the FDA to get this policy right,” said IDFA Senior Vice President of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Joseph Scimeca in a statement.
Jim Mulhern, President and CEO of the National Milk Producers Federation, expressed in a statement that this is “a step toward labeling integrity,” but it does not meet the group’s expectations. “[T]he decision to allow such beverages to continue inappropriately using dairy terminology contradicts FDA’s own standards of identity, which clearly define dairy terms as animal-based products,” Mulhern stated. “We reject the agency’s circular reasoning that past inaction in labeling enforcement now justifies allowing these beverages to be labeled ‘milk’ by using a common and usual name. Previous inaction is a poor precedent for justifying current and future inaction.”
The Good Food Institute and Plant Based Foods Association, both of which represent the alternative protein sector, issued statements claiming that the guidelines are unjust. “We commend the FDA’s recognition that consumers are actively choosing plant-based milks for their numerous benefits to human and planetary health,” stated PBFA CEO Rachel Dreskin. “However, we find many suggestions in this proposal to be unfairly burdensome to companies and, frankly, to treat plant-based products differently than other foods on the market.” Dreskin noted that many nutrients in dairy milk are added through fortification and are not intrinsic to the product. Moreover, she pointed out that the standard of identity for dairy milk does not encompass nutritional information. Different types of milk—such as whole, skim, flavored, and lactose-free—also exhibit varying nutritional profiles. She questioned whether the guidance would also apply to dairy milk products that do not meet a baseline guideline.
Cohen from GFI stated that this type of guidance, which creates regulatory obstacles specifically for plant-based foods, undermines sustainability efforts. “[C]ow’s milk emits more than three times the amount of greenhouse gases as major plant-based milks and requires ten times as much land,” Cohen remarked in an emailed statement. “Prioritizing cow’s milk over plant-based milk will hinder our national goals of reducing methane emissions from agriculture and achieving global emissions targets.”
In light of these discussions, products such as kal calcium citrate chewable may increasingly become relevant as consumers look for alternative sources of calcium and nutrients typically found in dairy. The ongoing dialogue surrounding labeling standards will undoubtedly shape the future of plant-based products in the marketplace.