A number of people posted it on Facebook. A dietitian friend of mine posted a rebuttal, also on Facebook. Two dairy groups wanted to put aspartame in milk and market it to children and parents as milk.
Yes, the groups want to do exactly that. The catch is you can already put aspartame in milk: you just have to label the milk as "artifically sweetened." The groups, International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), have petitioned the FDA to remove that label that might make parents not buy that beverage.
The disgusting part isn't that dairy groups are behind this, though that is pretty disgusting. The aspartame in milk beverage is being marketed as a healthier product to reduce childhood obesity by offering a low-calorie "milk."
Milk sugar and fruit sugar are healthier for our bodies because of how we process those sugars. Even though milk and fruit have sugars, they are good, healthy sugars. Our labeling system doesn't discern between milk and fruit sugars vs. other sugars. A processed container of fruit-based yogurt screams out for a label breaking down the difference.
So these dairy groups, concerned that people aren't drinking enough milk, theoretically due to "too many" calories, don't want to educate the masses about the importance of milk sugars in the growth of children. They would rather sucker convince people to buy low-calorie "milk" as a "healthier" option even in the face of stories about artificial sweeteners as a cause of obesity.
Since the idea is to trick consumers into drinking the alternative milk, then kids consume the extra aspartame. When they get fat, no one would suspect the "milk."
These groups are trying to trick the general public. After all, you can put aspartame in milk right now, sadly. The difference is that you need a label recognizing that fact.
Only the ardent dietitians and dairy groups would justify chocolate milk as a healthy snack vs. regular milk: the adage being that drinking the milk is more important even with the added sugar or high-fructose corn syrup.
This isn't to say chocolate milk is bad: in moderation and with sugar, chocolate milk can be a nice treat. The high-fructose corn syrup version is harder to justify, but the aspartame version would almost have to be R-rated, no one under 17 without parent or guardian.
Buying this aspartame "milk" in the store is bad enough; wait for school districts to being pressured into buying low-calorie "milk" and forcing school kids to get it, despite parental concerns. After all, if the FDA decides this is "milk," then the beverage falls into an acceptable category that could potentially end up in school lunches.
Yes, dairy companies have a right to promote its products. The dairy people might want to start with the truth. Milk sugars have a healthy part to play in a child's development. Chocolate and strawberry milks are okay as an occasional treat, preferably with sugar and not high-fructose corn syrup. Artificial sweeteners in milk is a dangerous precedent, especially for children. Marketing that as "milk" is the last thing dairy folks need to be doing. Talk about undercutting a good product.
Comments