- The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced on June 14 that it would improve its standards for vetting animal-raising claims made by meat and poultry producers.
- The action comes after the agency’s vetting process had come under scrutiny by animal welfare groups and researchers.
- Many meat and poultry products labeled as “antibiotic-free” have been found to contain antibiotics.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is taking steps to help protect consumers from misleading labels on meat.
Many consumers opt for meat raised without antibiotics for health reasons or personal preference. But some producers may be misrepresenting their products with false marketing claims on their product labels.
On June 14, the USDA announced that it will strengthen its processes to substantiate claims made by producers about the raising of livestock and poultry.
The initiative dovetails the USDA’s efforts to “protect consumers from false and misleading labels,” according to a news release.
For instance, lawsuits against companies mislabeling foods as “all-natural” have increased in recent years.
“Consumers should be able to trust that the label claims they see on products bearing the USDA mark of inspection are truthful and accurate,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in the release.
“USDA is taking action today to ensure the integrity of animal-raising claims and level the playing field for producers who are truthfully using these claims, which we know consumers value and rely on to guide their meat and poultry purchasing decisions.”
Claims like “free-range,” “grass-fed” and “no antibiotics ever,” are marketing claims found on a growing number of animal products, which should be approved by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).
In 2022, research conducted by the animal welfare group Farm Forward found that meat labeled as having “no antibiotics ever” contained antibiotics and other drugs. These products were sold at Whole Foods locations around the United States.
Another 2022 study found that 42% of beef cattle labeled “raised without antibiotics” had been administered antibiotics despite being USDA-certified.
In addition, claims about animals that are “humanely” or “ethically” raised have come under scrutiny by animal rights advocate groups.
For instance, a 2023 report from the Animal Welfare Institute tested nearly 100 different meat and poultry products and determined that over 80% of their claims were not fully substantiated.
Earlier this spring, the FSIS has been asked to reconsider how it evaluates animal-raising claims, after receiving a number of petitions and even a letter from U.S. senators that have questioned its vetting process.
As such, the USDA states that FSIS will partner with the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service to assess antibiotic residues in cattle that will be eventually sold as meat “raised without antibiotics,” and decide the best next steps for its vetting practices.
According to the USDA, FSIS will also revise its current industry guidelines, which were last updated in 2019, to “recommend that companies strengthen the documentation they submit to the agency to substantiate animal-raising claims.”
The USDA also states that it intends to “strongly encourage use of third-party certification to verify these claims.”
In the meantime, mislabeled products may still be available.
“Mislabeling occurs to some degree within the meat and poultry industries; its frequency varies widely,” Melissa Wasserman Baker, a registered dietitian nutritionist with FoodQueries in Greenville, NY, told Healthline.
“While accurate data on how often this happens is hard to come by, regulatory agencies such as USDA work tirelessly to enforce labeling regulations and protect consumers.”
Wasserman Baker said mislabeling may include inaccurate claims ranging anywhere from the source, origin, processing methods, or additives in products, but said most meat and poultry products on the market now comply with labeling regulations.
“To ensure accuracy, it’s important that consumers choose reputable brands, seek third-party certifications, and stay updated about regulatory updates from trusted sources,” Wasserman Baker noted.
“
Still, there may be some health benefits to choosing grass-fed or organic over conventional farming practices.
Dilley noted that grass-fed beef tends to be leaner than beef from conventionally raised cattle that have been fed soy, corn, or both. Grass-fed beef may also have lower total fat and calorie content a different fat profile.
“USDA certification for the ‘Organic’ seal requires that cattle must have access to a certified organic pasture for grazing for the entire season, be fed 100% organic feed and they must also be managed without the use of antibiotics,” Dilley said.
In addition, other
“100% Grass-fed beef is
“Grass-fed does not necessarily mean organic; these are two separate categories,” Dilly clarified.
Kelsey Costa, a registered dietitian nutritionist in Boston with the National Coalition on Health Care told Healthline that both organic and grass-fed meat may also contain higher levels of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA).
According to Costa, consuming meat raised without antibiotics could also lower the risk of antibiotic resistance.
“
“Eating meat from animals raised without antibiotics decreases exposure to these resistant bacteria, which can benefit human health. However, overall meat consumption should be minimized to reduce the risk of chronic diseases such as heart disease, stroke, and certain types of cancer,” Costa added.
Wasserman added that the overall health benefits of meat consumption depend on variables like diet, portion sizes, and cooking methods.
“A diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean proteins such as fruits can promote optimal health outcomes,” Wasserman Baker said.
Of course, nonconventional livestock practices are healthier for the environment, too.
The USDA announced that it will reevaluate and strengthen its processes for substantiating animal-raising claims made by cattle and poultry producers.
The announcement came after the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service came under scrutiny by animal welfare advocates and researchers, which prompted a letter to the agency by the U.S. Senate.
The USDA states that it intends to start sampling cattle for antibiotic residue and decide the best course of action, which may include ongoing monitoring of meat and poultry products.
“The USDA’s current efforts toward cracking down on mislabeling are a step in the right direction and will hopefully ensure that consumers can rely on the truth of meat and poultry product labels,” Costa said.
