Let's talk about milk — it's udderly contentious

The classic slam against millennials and Gen Z by our boomer parents is that “You created too many damn milks!” True, there is a plethora of milk and milk substitute options available at every coffee shop and grocery store. This is absolutely the best time in history to be a lactose intolerant person but somewhere between “we are so grateful for substitutes that are similar to milk” and “there’s just too many options” we stumbled across a new question of: What does it mean to call something milk?

People in this debate generally fall into two camps: Milk Truthers and Milk Abstractionists.

Milk Truthers are upset that non-animal products are being called “milk.” They believe that adulterating the term “milk” cheapens the unique goodness that is “real milk,” or milk that comes from any animal's udder.

This claim is similar the way all tissues can be identified as Kleenex, but not all tissues are Kleenex brand. Kleenex, like milk, has become a ubiquitous identifying term to describe a class of things. If water is dirty, or our visitation is temporarily blurred we would also describe these experiences as “milky,” with full, assumed understanding that there is not actually milk in the water or in our eyes.

Milk Abstractionists accept the term “milk” to describe drinks made from plants instead of a meaning specifically dairy or mother's milk.

Is this to say that Milk Truthers are over blowing the issue of milk substitute harm? No, because there is a very valid complaint that milk substitutes are being presented in popular culture as better for the environment and for the body when that still is being contentiously debated. It takes approximately 15 gallons of water to produce just 16 almonds, making almonds one of the most thirsty crops to produce. Oat and soy milk require slightly less water to produce, but both require more water to produce than traditional dairy milk.

There are studies that support the idea that even though the water investment in these dairy alternatives is very large, the environmental impact still is less than carbon producing cows. However, there has not been a conclusive body of research comparing the environmental costs and benefits of cow milk vs. various plant based milks and proving the definite superiority of one milk. Thus, the multitude of options persists everywhere from Whole Foods to Fareway.

A bill to prevent non-dairy products from using dairy terms was introduced in 2020 in both houses of Congress by Republicans and Democrats. The Dairy Pride Act would prevent the makers of beverages and other products made from nuts, seeds, plants and algae from calling the products milk, yogurt, cheese or other dairy terms. The legislation does not prevent the sale of non-dairy products, only their labeling as dairy products.

We’ve seen bills similar to this one before about what can be considered “beef” or “meat.” This year Texas voted on the Texas Meat and Imitation Food Act, to prevent makers of meat alternatives, such as plant-based burger, from using words “meat,” “beef," "chicken," "pork" or "common variation[s]" of them from being used on packaging. In 2019 Mike Rounds and John Thune tried to pass the “U.S. Beef Integrity Act,” which was very similar to the Texas bill.

There seems to be bipartisan support for protecting consumers from “fake milk,” and “fake meat.” But do we really think customers are so unobservant and unaware that they believe almond milk contains the same nutritional benefits as dairy milk when there is a large, FDA-regulated nutritional label on the package? Americans are responsible for buying their own groceries and making the occasional mistake by not reading a label closely enough. We don’t need the state or federal government to babysit us in the grocery aisle, we simply need assurance that the products are safe for sale and reasonably represented.

If someone thinks that almond milk comes from an almond’s udder, then there are bigger problems afoot than the packaging label.

Patricia Patnode is a Gazette editorial fellow. Comments: patricia.patnode@thegazette.com