4 ms·

> free trade alleviates these issues but only if you're not in global bottleneck Which we are not with regard to infant formula; as the article notes, there's

by pdonis 5y ago

> free trade alleviates these issues but only if you're not in global bottleneck Which we are not with regard to infant formula; as the article notes, there's plenty in Europe that meets standards at least as stringent as US standards, the FDA just won't let US customers buy it because of stupid labeling requirements. Also, your implication that in a global bottleneck, free trade doesn't work as well as other solutions, is not correct. Free trade has the least severe failure modes in global bottlenecks, precisely because there are no artificial impediments that get in the way of producers adjusting to market conditions according to straightforward economic incentives.

devman0 5y ago
It likely isn't the FDA's choice, there are a lot of statutory requirements under 21 USC 350a that requires inspections, audits and specific quality control measures that can't be set aside via CFR with an emergency rule making process. Changing these would require Congress to act, but bilateral food regulations on something as sensitive as baby formula is not a topic that lends itself to quick resolution.
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  It does if the baby starves otherwise.
- nostromo 5y ago
  You'll notice most of that law is giving authority to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, which is the same person that runs the FDA.
8note 5y ago
Isnt that a really easy to spin up business slapping stickers on bottles and shipping them to the states?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  IDK why are you getting downvoted. This is precisely how things are often done in Europe. On a continent with fortysomething major languages, you cannot possibly fit all descriptions in all languages onto the preprinted packaging. If I go to a Bulgarian store in Prague, all the ajvars, jogurts and kjufteta will simply have a Czech instruction label slapped on them.
jonahhorowitz 5y ago
> there's plenty in Europe Is that actually true? I would expect formula to be the kind of thing that has a very consistent demand profile, and there wouldn't be a lot of surge capacity in the European manufacturing plants.
Beltalowda 5y ago
> the FDA just won't let US customers buy it because of stupid labeling requirements. The labelling requirements don't strike me as that stupid; the Reason article links [1] with the text "formula available in Europe tends to meet or exceed the FDA's nutritional requirements, but not the labeling requirements", but it actually provides some good reasons: "It was found that European formulas do not meet all FDA label requirements, including many not being in English, which may lead to the incorrect mixing of formula [mixing tends to be different for European formula]. The average listed nutrient levels of all but one of the identified imported European formulas fell within the minimum nutrient level requirements of the FDA. As the nutrient levels on the labels of European formula represents an average and not a minimal level, it is difficult to compare the actual contents with US formulas. In addition, it is important to note that hypoallergenic is defined differently in Europe than in the United States. Therefore, partially hydrolyzed European formulas may be labeled as ‘‘hypoallergenic’’ or HA, which is not appropriate for infants with CMPA and may lead to improper treatment of an infant with CMPA." Expiry dates as being in EU formats (i.e. for the US' weird m/d/y thing) was also mentioned, as well as using US measurements rather than metric (whether the US date style and imperial units are a good idea is besides the point here: fact is it's what people use). There were also some other much more minor issues, but these don't seem entirely unreasonable or "stupid" to me, especially the requirement that labelling should be in English, but also the different definition of hypoallergenic. These problems are fairly minor and can be fixed without too much effort though. [1]: https://naspghan.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/October-2019-Article-B.pdf https://naspghan.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/October-2019...
- runeks 5y ago
  I don’t believe labeling requirements are preventing anyone from exporting to the US. Printing a new label and slapping on top of the existing one isn’t something that would hold anyone back from exporting. Labeling requirements are common practice everywhere. And the solution is for exporters to print a new label that conforms to the requirements and place it on the product.
  - Beltalowda 5y ago
    As I understand it it's not so much the labelling requirements per se, but rather that the FDA needs to approve the formula, including the label, and that takes times. For example the FDA probably wants to test that the nutritional content on the label matches what's actually in the product, or that it's not adulterated. This is fairly reasonable under normal circumstances IMO. Some other requirements (like not having enough linoleic acid or iron) are perhaps more problematic than just the labels, and allowing formula which doesn't quite meet the requirements is a kind of unfair competition (that they happen to be imported from the EU is not really important as such).

by pdonis 5y ago

devman0 5y ago

It likely isn't the FDA's choice, there are a lot of statutory requirements under 21 USC 350a that requires inspections, audits and specific quality control measures that can't be set aside via CFR with an emergency rule making process. Changing these would require Congress to act, but bilateral food regulations on something as sensitive as baby formula is not a topic that lends itself to quick resolution.

mensetmanusman 5y ago
It does if the baby starves otherwise.
nostromo 5y ago
You'll notice most of that law is giving authority to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, which is the same person that runs the FDA.

8note 5y ago

Isnt that a really easy to spin up business slapping stickers on bottles and shipping them to the states?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
inglor_cz 5y ago
IDK why are you getting downvoted. This is precisely how things are often done in Europe. On a continent with fortysomething major languages, you cannot possibly fit all descriptions in all languages onto the preprinted packaging. If I go to a Bulgarian store in Prague, all the ajvars, jogurts and kjufteta will simply have a Czech instruction label slapped on them.

jonahhorowitz 5y ago

> there's plenty in Europe Is that actually true? I would expect formula to be the kind of thing that has a very consistent demand profile, and there wouldn't be a lot of surge capacity in the European manufacturing plants.

Beltalowda 5y ago

> the FDA just won't let US customers buy it because of stupid labeling requirements. The labelling requirements don't strike me as that stupid; the Reason article links [1] with the text "formula available in Europe tends to meet or exceed the FDA's nutritional requirements, but not the labeling requirements", but it actually provides some good reasons: "It was found that European formulas do not meet all FDA label requirements, including many not being in English, which may lead to the incorrect mixing of formula [mixing tends to be different for European formula]. The average listed nutrient levels of all but one of the identified imported European formulas fell within the minimum nutrient level requirements of the FDA. As the nutrient levels on the labels of European formula represents an average and not a minimal level, it is difficult to compare the actual contents with US formulas. In addition, it is important to note that hypoallergenic is defined differently in Europe than in the United States. Therefore, partially hydrolyzed European formulas may be labeled as ‘‘hypoallergenic’’ or HA, which is not appropriate for infants with CMPA and may lead to improper treatment of an infant with CMPA." Expiry dates as being in EU formats (i.e. for the US' weird m/d/y thing) was also mentioned, as well as using US measurements rather than metric (whether the US date style and imperial units are a good idea is besides the point here: fact is it's what people use). There were also some other much more minor issues, but these don't seem entirely unreasonable or "stupid" to me, especially the requirement that labelling should be in English, but also the different definition of hypoallergenic. These problems are fairly minor and can be fixed without too much effort though. [1]: https://naspghan.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/October-2019-Article-B.pdf https://naspghan.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/October-2019...

runeks 5y ago
I don’t believe labeling requirements are preventing anyone from exporting to the US. Printing a new label and slapping on top of the existing one isn’t something that would hold anyone back from exporting. Labeling requirements are common practice everywhere. And the solution is for exporters to print a new label that conforms to the requirements and place it on the product.
- Beltalowda 5y ago
  As I understand it it's not so much the labelling requirements per se, but rather that the FDA needs to approve the formula, including the label, and that takes times. For example the FDA probably wants to test that the nutritional content on the label matches what's actually in the product, or that it's not adulterated. This is fairly reasonable under normal circumstances IMO. Some other requirements (like not having enough linoleic acid or iron) are perhaps more problematic than just the labels, and allowing formula which doesn't quite meet the requirements is a kind of unfair competition (that they happen to be imported from the EU is not really important as such).