Scott Hernandez - Comment

February 18, 2008 Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 RE: Docket No. FDA-2008-P-086 To Whom It May Concern: As an interested consumer of both milk and cheese, I find that the proposed rulemaking strikes an appropriate balance between freedom in the market and public disclosure. Various dairy interests have a legitimate interest in distinguishing ?ultafiltered milk? (?UF milk?), from what is traditionally know as ?milk.? However, this interest should not interfere with the markets ability to provide greater consumer choice. Likewise, producers of cheese and other foods have an equally legitimate interest in sourcing different materials to reduce costs-- especially transportation/fuel. Again however, this interest should not tread on the public ability to know what substances they are putting into their bodies. In addressing the first issue of comment, the impracticability for cheese manufacturers to comply with labeling requirements, this issue seems a touch disingenuous. According to the National Cheese Institute?s 2005 FDA petition, one of the primary reasons for amending the rule in the first place would be to allow for reduced transportation costs. Since cheese makers must separate whey from the other milk components, it makes business sense to purchase only UF milk and save fuel, storage, and disposal costs because the removed milk components have already been separated out. Any additional costs due to amending the label would be offset by transportation savings. The next issue, regarding potential consumer confusion over whether or not UF milk is indeed milk, should turn on public disclosure. According to the notice in the Federal Register, of the 24 original comments, there was no disagreement that ?UF milk is significantly different than milk.? This distinction may be lost on the average consumer. However, an educated consumer should not be denied opportunity to know what is put into his or her body. When choosing between disclosure and non-disclosure, the FDA should err on the side of disclosure. The amended rule is a classic compromise--both proponents and opponents will walk away dissatisfied. However, it would be injustice not to include labeling requirements, as the proponents would leave this rulemaking without giving anything in return. Thank you for consideration of this comment. Sincerely, Scott Hernandez UC Hastings College of the Law ?09 Scott Hernandez, Hastings College of the Law ...As an interested consumer of both milk and cheese, I find that the proposed rulemaking strikes an appropriate balance between freedom in the market and public disclosure....