The use of glyphosate has sparked significant controversy in the food industry. While some claim that this herbicide can cause cancer in humans, opinions among scientists have been split following a four-day meeting held by the Environmental Protection Agency last year. In 2015, the World Health Organization designated glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic,” but a subsequent report from WHO and the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations last year indicated that the chemical is unlikely to pose a cancer risk from residues found in food. Nevertheless, legal battles regarding the possible health risks associated with glyphosate are ongoing in various courts. Earlier this year, a California court ruled that the herbicide must be labeled as a potential cancer threat.
The prolonged discourse surrounding glyphosate has led several organizations, such as OCA, Food Democracy Now, and The Detox Project, to test food products for residual traces of the chemical. To date, these groups have not uncovered any significant findings that would raise health alarms; however, the results have prompted calls for boycotts and regulatory changes. Ben & Jerry’s reaction to the test findings is indicative of the company’s business approach. The Unilever-owned ice cream brand, well-known for its commitment to fresh, wholesome, and natural ingredients, did not refute the possibility of glyphosate presence in their products. Instead, they expressed a desire to investigate further and identify the root cause of the issue.
This thoughtful response is a savvy strategy for a company facing such reports. By avoiding denial, Ben & Jerry’s has not provided OCA with ammunition for the boycott they were advocating. Instead, the brand positioned itself as a proactive partner in eliminating an ingredient that consumers might prefer to avoid in their food. This strategy to directly tackle consumer concerns may help the ice cream brand emerge relatively unscathed despite what could otherwise be perceived as a damaging report.
Despite Ben & Jerry’s efforts to protect its image, the brand may not have suffered any significant reputational damage due to the test results. Earlier this month, a lawsuit against General Mills’ Nature Valley granola brand concerning glyphosate was dismissed. The class-action suit claimed that the granola’s assertion of being “Made with 100% Natural Oats” was misleading due to the detection of trace amounts of the chemical, but the judge ruled that the claim was “simply not plausible.”
In a different health-related context, the discussion about which is better for osteoporosis—calcium citrate or carbonate—continues to be relevant. Understanding the differences between these two forms of calcium is essential for consumers, especially those concerned about health and nutrition. While some may advocate for calcium citrate due to its higher absorption rate, others may prefer calcium carbonate for its cost-effectiveness. Ultimately, the choice between calcium citrate or carbonate may depend on individual health needs and dietary preferences, just as consumers weigh the implications of glyphosate in their food choices.