FIXING A REASONABLE DEFINITION AND STANDARD OF IDENTITY OF CERTAIN DRY MILK SOLIDS

DECEMBER 18 (legislative day, DECEMBER 15), 1943.-Ordered to be printed

Mr. CLARK of Missouri, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 149]

Together with the

MINORITY VIEWS

The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 149) to fix a reasonable definition and standard of identity of certain dry milk solids, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

Extensive hearings were held on the bill by the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. The report of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce follows and is made a part of this report.

[H. Rept. No. 456, 78th Cong., 1st sess.]

This bill proposes to establish "a reasonable definition and standard of identity" for defatted milk solids. Under the definition proposed for the purposes of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, nonfat dry milk solids, or defatted milk solids, would consist of the dried product of sweet milk of cows from which the cream has in whole, or in part, been removed. Such product shall not contain more than 5 percent of moisture nor over 1 percent of fat, unless otherwise indicated.

Under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as now administered, by Government compulsion, dry milk solids containing less than the whole of the butterfat of milk is required to be sold under the designation of "skim."

The word "skim" is a term which stigmatizes the product to which it is applied because it carries the impression of inferiority or worthlessness.

2

DEFINE CERTAIN DRY MILK SOLIDS

Every article of merchandise is sold on its reputation, its good or bad name. The compulsory application of this bad name to a good product is inaccurate, unfair, and retards the use of this very valuable food product by millions of consumers of the country. The purpose of this bill is to remove that stigma from a valuable and wholesome food.

CONSUMER NEEDS

There are said to be over 30,000,000 people in the United States who do not directly use milk, either dry or liquid. Millions of these people are of the underprivileged class and suffer from malnutrition for the lack of a properly balanced diet, and particularly those qualities of a balanced diet that are contained in defatted milk solids. Of all the vast supply of separated milk in the United States, only a comparatively trivial amount of this valuable food product reaches the consumers who need it. There is probably no comparable source of an increased supply for human consumption of a food of so valuable a quality as that contained in defatted milk solids.

On account of its nutritional qualities, nutritive value, and its compact form defatted milk solids are in demand for military services and for lend-lease purposes. Ninety percent of the spray processed powder has been set aside by the Government for overseas shipment. The advantage of compactness in getting food to England, to Russia, and to our armies overseas by cargo ship, through submarine-infested waters is obvious. It is a great saver of ships. Dry milk solids are roughly a tenth the weight of the liquid product from which derived without loss in food value. Besides the dried milk is comparatively free of the deteriorating influences to which liquid milk is susceptible. The Federal Government also requires, by order of the Food Distribution Administration, that all white bread shall be enriched by the addition of milk solids.

CONSUMER RESISTANCE

The main use of dry milk solids in America has been in compounding them in the manufacture of food products rather than in their direct There is an important and more or less general resistance to a separate product required to be sold as skim milk.

use.

There has been a greatly increased use of dehydrated products due to war demands and our lend-lease policy; yet the price for dried milk products is entirely out of line with that of other dried food products. The Government buying prices for dried eggs, beef, and pork last year were on an average of $1.05, $1.04, $1.34 per pound. respectively, while the price for dried skim milk was 12.8 cents per pound. We are advised that on the basis of only the calories or energy furnished by these products, the prices for eggs, beef, and pork was more than five times as high as the price quoted for dried skim milk.

On the basis of both the energy and protein, the price paid for dehydrated beef was 11 times as high as the price for dried skim milk. The price for dried eggs was 14 times as high, and the price for dehydrated pork was 30 times as high.

The relative acceptance and use of dried milk by the consumer

was out of all proportion to its relative value as human food.

It is difficult for a good product to sell under a bad name.

DEFINE CERTAIN DRY MILK SOLIDS

ADMINISTRATIVE DENIAL OF RELIEF

3

Under section 401 of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the related Executive order, the Administrator of the Federal Security Agency, when in his judgment such action "will promote honesty and fair dealing in the interest of consumers," shall promulgate regulations fixing and establishing for any food, "under its common and usual name, so far as it is practicable, a reasonable definition and standard of identity."

Labels used in connection with the advertising or sale of such foods are required under severe penalties to conform to the definition so established.

On application of an interested industry, or a substantial portion thereof, stating reasonable grounds therefor, the Administrator shall hold a public hearing upon a proposal to issue, amend, or appeal any such regulation.

The original order fixing the definition and requiring the use of the word "skim" was made on July 6, 1940.

The dry-milk industry, with the cooperation of a large part of the dairy industry, has three times petitioned for a definition that would eliminate the word "skim" from the required name of dr ed-milk solids. Its petition has three times been denied. The first petition was filed on August 23, 1940, within 2 months of the original order. After the second denial, the industry came to Congress for relief, in the Seventy-seventh Congress. Under the suggestion that the industry and the Administrator get together and agree upon a satisfactory definition for this product, consideration of the matter by our committee was temporarily dropped. After a fruitless effort to secure relief by a satisfactory adjustment, the industry presented a formal petition requesting another hearing of the matter. The petition of the industry was alleged to be supported by 80 percent of the drymilk industry and was also supported by a very substantial portion of the dairy industry of the country.

Among other things the petition stated:

We request that any regulation that may be issued, or amendment of the present regulation, shall eliminate any provision for the compulsory use of the words, "dried skim milk," "powdered skim milk," or "skim milk powder." We suggest that a standard of identity include the words, "dry milk solids" or "defatted milk solids," or other words which accurately define the finished product; that the standard should define the product and not the method of preparation or what is misconceived to be the method of preparation.

It will be noted that this petition asked for the elimination of the word "skim" from the definition and suggested the words "dry milk solids, or defatted milk solids, or other words which accurately defined the finished product." With the word "skim" eliminated, the industry was satisfied to leave to the Administrator the selection of proper words to define the product. This proposal was rejected. The effort to secure this relief proved futile and the supporters of this legislation then turned to Congress as the only available source of relief from the injustice of the present stigma cast upon this product by existing regulations.

Prior to denial of this petition, the industry had sought an adjustment in the matter by conferences with the representatives of the Administrator. No adjustment was secured.

The last petition to the Administrator was presented January 13, 1943, and denied February 2, 1943.

4

DEFINE CERTAIN DRY MILK SOLIDS

A COMMON NAME SO FAR AS PRACTICAL

An attempt was made at hearings to justify the refusal of the Administrator to relieve the situation by the claim that it was his duty to designate the common name of the food and that skim milk was the common name of the product from which dry milk solids are produced. In the first place, the law gives a discretion to the Administrator. In the second place the name selected should be an honest one and not deceptive.

There are two commonly used names which identify segregated milk solids. One identifies milk segregated by the process of skimming-skim milk-and the other, segregated by the use of the modern cream separator-separated milk. Each of the common names describes the product by the method of segregation. These processes will be described in more detail later.

From a practical standpoint there are no milk solids on the market produced by the skimming process. The only dry milk solids on the market are derived from the product which comes from the cream separator.

The two terms in contrast clearly identify the difference between skimmed milk and separated milk. In contrast, they not only indicated the difference in the method of segregation but also the more important difference in quality.

A true and accurate common name to apply to the product made by the cream separator was "separated milk.'

"Skim milk" and "separated milk"-here were two names which commonly defined the two products respectively. If the administrative agency was contented to describe these products by the mere method of segregation, why did it not apply to milk solids segregated by the separator process the name of "separated milk" instead of the inaccurate and out-moded name of "skim milk"? A name essentially false was thus imposed on a product that was otherwise free from the stigma of skim milk. The common name accurately applicable was rejected.

AN HONEST NAME

As indicated above, there are two commonly recognized methods of segregating the fat of milk from its other solids. One is the old method, hand skimming, and the other is by the modern cream separator. Each method resulted in a common name describing the product from the mechanical method of separating the solids rather than by a description of the qualities of the resulting products.

Skin milk, secured by the process of skimming, was ordinarily the residue product after milk had stood in pans for 1 or 2 days, then was hand skimmed. Ordinarily it was not under refrigeration. Pacterial changes promptly set in, breaking down the normal qualities of the residue of the milk. The skim milk thus secured was not only inferior in the sense that it was inferior to the whole milk. It was an inferior product also because of the deterioration suffered before the skimming took place.

Very frequently skim milk was handled under the most unsanitary conditions and was used principally for log feed. In this manner the word "skim" in its historical origin, and in practice, came to designate an inferior article and much of it was unfit for human consumption. The prejudice against the name had its foundation in the facts.

DEFINE CERTAIN DRY MILK SOLIDS

5

Separation of solids from milk by the modern cream separator is an entirely different process. The milk, taken while fresh, uncontaminated and unchanged by bacterial action or unsanitary conditions, is placed in a separator and in a few minutes passes through the separator and is converted into cream and separated milk. Then this separated milk is placed in a modern dehydrator and in a few seconds it pours out of a machine in a stream of pure dry milk solids.

In each of these cases there was a segregation of the fat solids from the defatted milk solids, in the one case by skimming and in the other by separation. The effects upon the resulting product were radically different.

To apply to the product of a modern dehydrator that same name as was applied to the antiquated and discarded method of skimming milk is practically an absurdity, urtruthful in its inferences, inaccurate in fact.

"SKIM" CARRIES A STIGMA

The Century Dictionary states:

Skim milk: Milk from which the cream has been skimmed; hence, figuratively, that which lacks substantial quality, as richness or strength; thinness; inferiority. A large baker customer, about to launch an extensive advertising ampaign on the fact that he enriched his bread with dry milk solids, on learning that the Food and Drug regulations prevented him from doing so unless he used the term "dry skim milk," abandoned his campaign.

The stigma of the term "skim" is so generally recognized as to furnish a very practical barrier to retard the use of the product. The Compulsory use of that term is an injustice to the consumers of the ountry. The unfavorable reaction is reflected in the limited sales, or demands, for the product and the resulting injustice to the producers of the product.

The terms "dry milk solids" and "nonfat dry milk solids" are now extensively used in educational publications issued by universities, colleges, and experiment stations throughout the country and even in United States Government publications and orders. So that the word "skim" as widely recognized in educational and governmental, as well as dairy industry circles, is not fairly descriptive of the nonfat dry milk solids.

"Defatted milk solids," or "nonfat dry milk solids," are accurate descriptions of the product, without deception, without stigma and without injury to anyone.

The demand for the change of this unfortunate regulation comes from an important industry whose legitimate activities should be encouraged instead of handicapped by unwarranted administrative regulations.

PRACTICAL NUTRITIONISTS SUPPORT BILL

Among others, two of the most famous nutritionists of the country gave their impressive support.

One was Dr. E. V. McCollum, professor biochemistry, at the Johns Hopkins University, and the other, Dr. Ralph M. Wilder, a member of the staff of the Mayo Clinic, who is Chief of the Branch of Civilian Requirements of the Food Distribution Adininistration. Dr. Wilder is also a member of the Council of Foods, American Medical Associa