Consumer Group Files Complaint Over Pork Ads

A Washington-based consumer group recently filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission claiming that a pork industry promotional campaign is “deceptive.”

The controversy centers on an extensive program entitled, “The Other White Meat,” conceived by the National Pork Producers Council.

A pork industry representative strongly denied that there is anything inaccurate about the advertisements and charged the consumer group was itself guilty of deception.

The advocacy group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, has been critical of the advertising effort since its inception in 1987.

The center’s petition charges that the claims made by the industry, particularly those that discuss fat content, are “dangerously misleading.”

“If people think that they can substitute pork for chicken or turkey in a low-fat diet then they are seriously mistaken,” said Charles Mitchell, a senior attorney with the Center for Science. “That kind of diet could result in higher fat and saturated fat consumption and that can increase an individual’s risk of heart disease and cancer. The campaign goes to great lengths to imply that pork is the nutritional equivalent of chicken and turkey.”

The Center for Science is asking the FTC to halt the promotion and require the pork industry to run corrective advertising to counter “The Other White Meat” ads.

The commission has yet to take any action on the filing other than to acknowledge its receipt. However, the consumer group has frequently petitioned the FTC over food advertisements that it believes are exaggerated.

Of particular concern to the Center for Science are claims that fresh pork items are “low in fat,” “low in cholesterol” or “low in calories.” The consumer group claims that fresh pork does not meet established federal standards for use of these phrases on labels or in ads.

A pork industry representative said that the statements made in the advertising campaign, conducted through television commercials and in magazine ads, are factual.

“We can demonstrate through a whole pile of research that fresh pork is similar and, in some cases, superior to chicken (in terms of fat content),” said Barry Pfouts, a vice president for the Des Moines-based National Pork Producers Council.

(The comparison is not used, however, for processed pork items such as bacon, sausage or ham, which are generally considered high-fat foods.)

Fresh pork’s fat content has declined since the early 1960s as the industry has attempted to address the public’s heightened nutritional concerns. The reductions have been made possible by improved hog feeding and breeding programs, according to Pfouts. He said that between 1963 and 1983, for instance, fresh pork’s fat content was reduced, on average, by 50%. There has been a corresponding 42% reduction in the meat’s calorie level.

In the past seven years, there have been further reductions, but Pfouts refused to specify the actual decrease until the U.S. Department of Agriculture reviews the industry’s research.

Nonetheless, the council expects the USDA to revise the fat content figures for fresh pork downward after the current review. The change will be made in the USDA’s Agricultural Handbook No. 8, entitled “Composition of Foods,” a compendium of extensive nutritional information on the characteristics of raw, processed and cooked foods.

“The nutritional figures for pork were last updated in 1983, and we have submitted information that has been so compelling that the USDA has agreed that they will update (their data) and have the results available in October,” Pfouts said.

An example of the comparisons being used in the campaign show that a three-ounce pork tenderloin contains about four grams of fat. A similar-sized serving of chicken breast without skin contained three grams of fat. A pork producers document calls these two levels “comparable.”

The council’s “The Other White Meat,” program has been financed by annual assessments on producers’ meat sales at a rate of 25 cents for every $100 of income. Identical funding efforts also are used by beef, dairy and other commodity groups to promote their products.

About $24 million has been spent on the campaign in the past three years, Pfouts said.

The effort has met with some success.

“It’s been a very effective campaign,” he said. “In the first year--1987--we looked for a 1% increase in sales and actually got a 3% jump.”

A similar increase was experienced the following year, but 1989’s sales remained static, Pfouts said. The outlook for 1990 is uncertain because fresh pork prices are on the rise and there may be consumer resistance to the price hikes, he said.

The pork producers have made several efforts to mollify the Center for Science but have been rebuffed on each occasion, Pfouts said. The council has even offered the consumer group complete access to its research files in Des Moines. The center wasn’t interested, Pfouts said.

Mitchell said that the consumer group shouldn’t have to travel to Des Moines to “look at figures.” He also said that repeated requests for documention behind “The Other White Meat” claims have been unanswered.

“We have asked them for the data that they submitted to the USDA for the new nutritional figures on pork. We have also asked USDA for the figures. Neither would release that information to us,” Mitchell said. As a result, the Center for Science is using nutritional data from the 1983 version of the USDA handbook in its complaint to the FTC.

Mitchell, however, acknowledged that the pork industry has made progress in reducing the fat content of its fresh meat cuts.

“We would be pleased to see it,” Pfouts said, “but it would have to be a dramatic improvement to make these ads truthful.”

That wasn’t enough of a concession, though, for the pork council.

“We are getting bad publicity out of this; our producers are upset, and we think it is unfair,” he said. “The (Center for Science) places unfair pressure on organizations--such as our’s--without trying to find the facts. . . . They harass a lot of people, and we are now undergoing trial by press release.”