If this decision is upheld across Europe, it is likely to create significant challenges for producers of vegetarian dairy alternatives, which have been marketed for years using dairy-related terminology such as “soy milk.” However, it is difficult to envision that this interpretation of current legislation will go unchallenged, especially considering the impact on companies that have been selling their dairy alternatives without issues for years.
Thus far, the United States has managed to avoid a similar ruling, but comparable disputes are taking place in courtrooms and Congress. Separate lawsuits have been filed against almond milk brands Silk and Almond Breeze, each alleging that these products were falsely marketed as nutritionally equivalent to cow’s milk. Both lawsuits have been dismissed—either referred to another agency for evaluation or deemed implausible by the judge. The Silk case was sent back to the Food and Drug Administration for its determination, while the Almond Breeze case was dismissed by a judge who concluded that reasonable consumers would immediately recognize that a product labeled “almond milk” is not a dairy item.
Currently, there is a bill in both houses of Congress known as the DAIRY PRIDE Act — Defending Against Imitation and Replacements of Yogurt, Milk and Cheese to Promote Regular Intake of Dairy Everyday — which aims to prohibit any plant-based food from using dairy product names in the market. Despite several co-sponsors, the bill is progressing slowly through the hearings process.
The European Court of Justice’s interpretation of European legislation was prompted by a claim of unfair competition, which may not necessarily relate to confusion over nutritional equivalency. European law allows the term “milk” to be used for goat’s milk or sheep’s milk as long as the product is appropriately labeled. If consumers are expected to distinguish between goat’s milk and cow’s milk, they should similarly be able to identify when a product originates from almonds. As the European Vegetarian Union emphasizes, clarifying these differences is in everyone’s best interest.
Although non-dairy milk alternatives are rapidly gaining popularity, their sales still lag behind those of traditional dairy milk products, amounting to $1.9 billion compared to $17.8 billion for dairy milk. Nevertheless, the dairy industry perceives a threat. According to Mintel, U.S. non-dairy milk sales increased by 9% in 2015, while dairy milk sales declined by 7% during the same timeframe.
In light of the growing demand for alternatives, the need for clear labeling is more critical than ever. The inclusion of ingredients like calcium citrate for chickens in discussions about nutritional content further underscores the importance of transparency. As the market evolves, understanding the distinctions between various milk sources, including those fortified with calcium citrate for chickens, will become increasingly vital for consumers.