The American Farmers for the Advancement and Conservation of Technology, a group that's backed by Monsanto, which markets rBGH, is asking for changes in labeling, because they say that just by calling out the fact that whatever's inside doesn't come from cows treated with rBGH implies that there might be something wrong with milk from cows that were treated with the drug. The Federal Drug Administration allows products made from milk that comes from cows not treated with rGBH to state it on the label only if the label does not claim or lead consumers to believe that it's safer or better than milk treated with rBGH. (The label must also have the following disclaimer: "no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rbST-supplemented and non-rbST-supplemented cows.")

Ben and Jerry's opposes any kind of label change based upon freedom of speech. Scientists have weighed in on the use of rBGH, which, although approved by the FDA for American cows, is not used in the European Union, Canada or Japan because it is felt that it might be harmful to the animals. Pennsylvania had passed a law that changed labeling rules, but after public outcry, it's been rescinded. Indiana proposed a bill that didn't have enough votes to pass, and Ohio passed a version of the bill that will only allow for rBGH-free labeling if it can be verified. Other states including Kansas, Utah and Missouri could possibly pass laws or introduce legislation.

Girlawhirl can't help but take sides on this one. She's all for knowing exactly what's in the food she eats. She clicked through to a special page on the Ben and Jerry's website to find out just what she can do to make sure that labels can continue to be as clear as they are when it comes to cows treated with rBGH/rbST.