A Citizen's Platform of the people, by the people, for the people.

Farm Women United

Click here to edit subtitle

Milk Protein Concentrate

Brief History of Milk Protein Concentrate (MPC and Ultra-filtered Milk


Following the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Milk Protein Concentrate (MPC) imports increased dramatically because they were not subject to tariff rate quotas since they were imported for industrial purposes such as glue and adhesives. Several dairy co-ops, including Dairy Farmers of America (DFA), began importing MPC which they used in dairy product manufacturing. Kraft boldly used MPC in Velveeta and Kraft Singles without GRAS status.


Domestic Production of Ultra-filtered Milk began in the 1990’s.


April 17, 1997, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its proposed rule on substances Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS), which allowed a manufacturer to “market a substance that the manufacturer determines is GRAS without informing the agency (FDA), or if the agency is so informed, while the agency is reviewing that information.”


February 10, 2000, National Cheese Institute (NCI) filed a “Citizens Petition” to allow Ultra-Filtered Milk to be used in standardized cheese and simply be labeled as milk or non-fat milk. FDA did not act in favor of this petition. Several other petitions and requests for GRAS have been filed since then.

Domestic production of MPC began in the early 2000’s.


March 6, 2001, General Accounting Office (GAO) released a report on Ultra-filtered Milk. The report cites MPC imports increased from 805 metric tons in 1990 to 44,878 metric tons in 1999. MPC was blamed for declining farm milk prices. FDA was also cited for “withholding enforcement.” FDA objected to this wording and it was replaced with “exercising enforcement discretion.”


December 18, 2002, FDA sent a warning letter to Kraft Foods North America Inc., charging them with violations of the Code of Federal Regulations for Standardized Cheese. Kraft changed the label from “Pasteurized Processed Cheese Food” to “Pasteurized Prepared Cheese Product” and continued to use MPC.


April 12, 2005, USDA published Proposed Rules to change the definition for Class I milk.


On January 1, 2011, new rules went into effect for “fluid milk product”, which applies to any milk product, fluid or frozen, containing 6.5% or more of non-fat milk solids or 2.25% or more of true milk protein. The rule also determines how milk-derived ingredients will be priced under all Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO) when they are used in products meeting the definition.


February 19, 2016, Leprino Foods sent a notice of GRAS to FDA for two MPC products.


September 20, 2017, Tamarack Biotics announced self-affirmed GRAS status for TruActive MPC 85.


August 11, 2017, FDA announced “enforcement discretion” for Ultra-filtered Milk in Standardized Cheeses and further stated “we do not intend to take action against companies that manufacture standardized cheeses and related cheese products that contain fluid ultra-filtered milk or fluid ultra-filtered non-fat milk without declaring them in the ingredient statement, as long as their labels declare milk or non-fat milk in the ingredient statement.”

Even though statistics are readily available for U.S. production of milk, butter, cheese, non-fat dry milk, etc., the total volume of domestically produced MPC, Ultra-filtered Milk, and other milk protein products, is viewed as proprietary information and is not publicly available.


After more than 20 years of the use of Ultra-filtered Milk and MPC and numerous requests for GRAS status, FDA has not officially granted GRAS status to MPC or Ultra-filtered Milk. It seems that there must be a reason for this. Even so, politicians and dairy industry leaders are damning Canada for not taking our MPC or Ultra-filtered Milk and blaming them for our low milk prices.


Prepared by Gerald Carlin, Chairman of Policy Development, Farm Women United


4/29/18

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Milk Protein Concentrate Facts


What is Milk Protein Concentrate (MPC)?

MPC is Ultra-filtered skim milk that goes through a number of membranes and pipes. The protein molecules are the largest so they are retained. MPC can be in either a sludge form (ultra-filtered milk) or a dry powder (MPC).


What are the concerns with MPC?

The health concern with MPC lies in the process which may damage or alter milk proteins. It is unknown whether the human body can utilize the proteins after they have gone through the ultra-filtration process in the same way that the human body can utilize normal milk proteins. The “dairy industry” has taken milk, a natural product, and turned it into industrial components. The long term health effects are not known.


Who uses MPC?

MPC is used in the making of some forms of cheese. It takes 100 pounds or 11 2/3 gallons of milk to make 10 pounds of natural cheese. When cheesemakers add MPC and other additives to the cheese vat, they get a yield of 14 to 18 pounds of inferior cheese.

The “dairy industry” has figured out a way to extend cheese yields by making cheese that retains more water. This process creates a false surplus which results in lower farm milk prices paid to dairy farmers and greater profits for the non-farm sectors of the “dairy industry.”

The “industry” does not want the consumer or the farmer to know how much MPC is being used.


Where does MPC come from?

MPC is both imported and produced in the United States. No statistics are available on how much MPC is produced in this country since it falls under the same classification as other milk powders including the traditional non-fat dry milk. It is also unclear whether all users of MPC are listing it on the ingredient label.


How does MPC use relate to declining fluid milk sales?

Fluid milk consumption has declined for two main reasons: 1) the promotion of plant based drinks that are labeled as milk and are being falsely portrayed as being healthier. 2) The Federal Dietary Guidelines encourage the consumption of low-fat or skim milk which are less appetizing and this has led to the decline of fluid milk consumption. The “dairy industry” has gone along with the promotion of low-fat and skim milk because there is more profit in retaining the butterfat for other purposes, including, using it with MPC to make inferior cheese.

Cheese consumption has increased dramatically over the past 50 years. Will declining cheese quality reverse this trend and hurt dairy farmers even more?


Characteristics of cheese made with MPC

Cheese made with MPC tends to be rubbery, slimy, and does not melt or stretch like natural cheese.


What is the solution?

Search out cheese manufacturers who make cheese the traditional way without using MPC. There are many artisanal and small family farm cheese plants that still make cheese the traditional way. Also, enjoy drinking whole milk because studies have shown that there is no positive benefit from drinking skim or low-fat milk compared to whole milk.


Farm Women United

P.O. Box 113

Laceyville, PA 18623

(570) 267-7405

4/24/18

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Website Sources pertaining to
Milk Protein Concentrate

Flexport (Information that you cannot find on the USDA website.

https://www.flexport.com/data/hs-code/040490-products-of-natural-milk-constituents-nesoi



July 29, 2018


Dear Editor,


Are the “milk glut” and low farm milk prices being caused by the use of Milk Protein Concentrate (MPC) and Ultra-filtered Milk (UF) in cheese and other dairy products? No one really knows how much milk MPC/Ultra-filtered Milk is displacing since the Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO) do not collect data on MPC/UF Milk production and use. This is considered proprietary information. MPC/UF Milk are now being used in all four classes of milk products.


MPC and UF Milk are not approved ingredients in standardized cheeses, but Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has “exercised discretionary enforcement” in this area, as reiterated on August 11, 2017. FDA went further and stated, “. . . we do not intend to take action against companies that manufacture standardized cheeses and related cheese products that contain fluid Ultra-filtered Milk or fluid Ultra-filtered Non-fat Milk without declaring them in the ingredient statement, as long as their labels declare milk or non-fat milk in the ingredient statement.”


We can, however, look at cheese production compared to Class III utilization in the FMMOs and California Class 4b (cheese) utilization to gain some insight. The traditional yield factor for cheese is 10.01 lbs. per 100 lbs. of fluid milk containing 3.5% butterfat and 2.99% true protein. Higher average components may yield 11 lbs. of cheese per 100 lbs. of milk. National cheese production last year (2017) for cheese falling under Class III or California Class 4b was approximately 12.4 billion lbs. Class III utilization (weighted average) in all Federal Orders was 41%. If this rate of utilization is true nationally, the average cheese production would be 14.1 lbs. per 100 lbs. of milk. The Class 4b utilization in California for 2017 was 46.2%, making an average cheese yield of 13.66 lbs. per 100 lbs. of milk. Given this information, it seems unlikely that the national average cheese yield is less than 13.5 lbs. per 100 lbs. of milk. This translates into at least 20 billion pounds of farm milk being displaced by the use of MPC/UF Milk in cheese.


Low-fat and Non-fat dairy products are being promoted. Declining fluid milk sales may be due in part to people not liking the taste of low-fat or non-fat milk. It is even getting harder to find full-fat yogurt and cottage cheese. The fat that traditionally would go into these products is used with MPC/UF Milk to produce substandard cheese. Much of this use violates cheese standards. How much milk is being displaced in other dairy products because of MPC/UF Milk? More profit is pocketed by cheese manufacturers when MPC/UF Milk is used than when cheese is manufactured the traditional way. Besides, creating a false milk surplus keeps farm milk prices low and dairy manufacturing profits even higher.


Any discussion of supply management that does not consider the farmer’s cost of production and deal with the displacement issues is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.


Sincerely,

Gerald Carlin, Meshoppen, PA