It’s important to have the truth show on meat labels
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced the availability of an updated guideline, that makes recommendations to strengthen the documentation that supports animal-raising or environment-related claims, on meat or poultry product labeling. The action builds on the significant work the USDA has already undertaken, to protect consumers from false and misleading labels.
“[The] USDA continues to deliver on its commitment to fairness and choice, for both farmers and consumers, and that means supporting transparency and high-quality standards,” said agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack. “These updates will help to level the playing field for businesses, who are truthfully using these claims and ensure people can trust the labels, when they purchase meat and poultry products.”
Animal-raising claims, such as “Raised Without Antibiotics,” “Grass-Fed” and “Free-Range,” and environmentrelated claims, such as “Raised using Regenerative Agriculture Practices” and “Climate-Friendly,” are voluntary marketing claims, that highlight certain aspects of how the source animals for meat and poultry products are raised, or how the producer maintains or improves the land, or otherwise implements environmentally sustainable practices.
The documentation submitted by companies to support these claims, is reviewed by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), and the claims can only be included on the labels of meat and poultry products sold to consumers, after they are approved by the agency. The FSIS last updated its guideline on these claims in 2019.
In the updated guideline, the FSIS strongly encourages the use of third-party certification, to substantiate animal-raising or environment-related claims. Third-party certification of animal-raising or environment-related claims, helps ensure that such claims are truthful and not misleading, by having an independent organization verify that their standards are being met on the farm, for the raising of animals and for environmental stewardship.
The revised guideline also emphasizes more robust documentation for environment-related and animal-raising claims.
Additionally, the updated guideline recommends that establishments using “negative” antibiotic claims, implement routine sampling and testing programs, to detect antibiotic use in animals, prior to slaughter or obtain thirdparty certification, that includes testing. The revisions were informed by sampling data, petitions, public comments to those petitions and feedback received from a wide range of stakeholders.
In light of concerns about negative antibiotic claims, the FSIS announced last year, that the agency would conduct a study in partnership with the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS), to assess the veracity of these claims. The FSIS collected liver and kidney samples from 196 eligible cattle, at 84 slaughter establishments, in 34 states, and ARS analyzed the samples, using a method that targeted more than 180 veterinary drugs, including various major classes of antibiotics.
The study found antibiotic residues in approximately 20 percent of samples tested from the “Raised Without Antibiotics” market.
The action the FSIS is taking through the publishing of this guidance, addresses these concerning findings and makes clear that the FSIS will take enforcement action, against any establishments found to be making false or misleading negative antibiotic claims. Additionally, the FSIS has informed the establishments with positive results from the ARS-FSIS study, and advised them to conduct a root cause analysis and implement corrective actions. The FSIS has also advised these establishments to determine how antibiotics were introduced into the animal and to take appropriate measures, to ensure that future products are not misbranded.
Further information on the study can be found in the Federal Register Notice, announcing the availability of the updated guideline.
The FSIS and ARS will publish a peer-reviewed paper, with complete results from the study in the near future. The study findings underscore the need for more rigorous substantiation of such claims. These sampling results may lead to additional testing by the agency.
The FSIS has the authority to collect samples any time it believes a product is mislabeled, with any claim covered by the guidance. Moreover, the FSIS may consider future additional actions, including random sampling and rulemaking, to further strengthen the substantiation of animal-raising and environment-related claims.
