Assistant Editor</b> </p><p>

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. — In a world of more than 11 million animal activists and concerned consumers, the agriculture industry continues to face increasing public scrutiny, particularly in relation to the need for and safety of biotechnology innovations such as rBST and cloning.<br>
According to Penn State Animal Scientist Terry Etherton, despite remarkable advances in biotechnology research, a public discussion has erupted concerning the safety of the U.S. food supply influenced by advances in agricultural biotechnology. Etherton claimed that misleading campaigns such as rBST versus rBST-free milk, is funded in large by animal activist groups and a considerable number of consumer activists." <br>
Activists such as the Farm Sanctuary, Humane Society of the United States, Food and Water Watch, PETA, Compassion Over Killing, “have a lot of money and free time to come up with campaigns to scare consumers.<br>
These people dominate the platform we’re standing on,” said Etherton, who spoke at the Indiana Cattle and Forage Symposium on Feb. 16.<br>
“At the core, one of our biggest battles right now is the issue of rBST-free labels, part of what I refer to as a smoking mirrors campaign,” said Etherton. “It’s all a huge lie, consumers aren’t asking for this, they barely know what rBST even is.”<br>
Etherton explained that rBST, a naturally-occurring hormone, was first approved in 1993, first used in 1994 and has shown to increase milk production by 10 to 15 pounds per day per cow.
The rBST campaign, Etherton spent the majority of his presentation discussing, features an abundance of “absence claims,” he said, a labeled statement claiming that the product does not contain certain ingredients.<br>
“When entering the dairy case at the supermarket, consumers are faced with three choices – conventionally produced, rBST-free and organic,” Etherton explained. “So with an excess of absence claims, such as no rBST or no growth hormones added, the automatic reaction is that it must be better, right … wrong!”<br>
On a carton of Horizon brand organic milk, Etherton pointed to an absence labels that insisted the milk contained no growth hormones, however, Vitamin A and D were added.<br>
“This is a perfect example of absence claims misrepresenting the truth, Vitamin A and D are steroid hormones,” he nearly shouted.
Further fighting the issue, Etherton said blankly, “milk is milk, there is no difference from all we can tell. The FDA and several independent organizations deemed this milk safe to consume nearly 15 years ago. This is a deceptive tap dance to get people to pay more for milk that they think is better.”<br>
In regards to price, Etherton said there is a 29 percent price advantage in a labeled milk good versus conventional milk, “a $.68 price difference for a half gallon of essentially the same milk.” In a side, but related note, Etherton pointed to an important element in this debate, related to consumers views on food safety.
He outlined a recent survey, asking over 2,000 consumers if and why they stopped eating specific foods or ingredients. Results showed that 36 percent stopped eating a particular food or ingredient because of containments/disease, 35 percent stopped eating because of handling/preparation and a surprising 3 percent stopped eating because of reasons related to biotechnology.<br>
“You can get surveys to be misleading fairly easily,” Etherton said, pointing to other surveys indicating opposing results, conducting by activists or using all surveyors who prefer organic or natural foods.
“We live in a culture that has forgotten agriculture, forgotten that food comes from agriculture,” lamented Wes Jamison, professor of public relations at the University of Florida, who also spoke during a session at the Symposium. <br>
One of the biggest worries moving forward, Etherton said, is not knowing what technologies will be attacked next, such as synchronization programs, other antibiotics/drugs, artificial insemination, genetic advancement/cloning, de-horning/tail-docking or even the animal itself. Remembering a trip to a Napa Valley vineyard, Etherton said he noticed clearly labeled grapes, claiming they were cloned grapes 1, 2 and 3.<br>
Advice for the future<br>

“Their primary goal is to eliminate animal agriculture all together, so we need to be proactive, unite and get our position in this mess,” he noted. “It’s a growing and scary threat to a lot of us, so if you’re not careful, you’ll get sucked down with the current and there will be no way to get out. My advice to you is to evangelize your way of life in a way that can save your industry, because no one else is going to stand up to do it, and if you don’t, your going to lose it,” he closed.<br>
For more on Etherton’s research on the topic, visit his blog online at http://blogs.das.psu.edu/tetherton