Comment: It's difficult to know who to trust anymore. I was actually surprised to find this article in the NY Times. No beating around the bush, which I appreciate as honest journalism. I find the counter to untreated cows quite humorous. It seems that Monsanto has an obvious major profit motive to sell Posilac, yet this organizastion claims those who push for untreated cows have a profit motive in generating fear? It's Monsanto selling the Posilac. What financial gain could someone against Posilac have? Note they don't disclose this. The intent being to cast doubt and thereby discredit. It's a shame if anyone would fall for such a scheme. I'd love to chat with this Mr. Miller and ask a few questions.
"Afact believes that the push for milk from untreated cows is being driven by advocates like Consumers Union and PETA, "who make a profit, living and business by striking fear in citizens," Mr. Miller said in an e-mail message."
Fighting on a Battlefield the Size of a Milk Label
Posilac is the brand name of a Monsanto synthetic hormone used to increase milk production in cows. A new advocacy group closely tied to Monsanto has started a counteroffensive to stop the proliferation of milk that comes from cows that aren't treated with synthetic bovine growth hormone. The group, called American Farmers for the Advancement and Conservation of Technology, or Afact, says it is a grass-roots organization that came together to defend members' right to use recombinant bovine somatotropin, also known as rBST or rBGH, an artificial hormone that stimulates milk production. It is sold by Monsanto under the brand name Posilac. Dairy farmers are indeed part of the organization. But Afact was organized in part by Monsanto and a Colorado consultant who lists Monsanto as a client. <snip>
