Supermarket meat label change surprises customers, USDA

WASHINGTON — Retired doctor Louis Offen and his wife have been shopping at the same Giant supermarket outside Washington for almost 40 years. Offen is in charge of buying the steak, which normally means lurking the meat section for New York strip sirloins with the label “USDA Grade Choice,” the midlevel grade for meat. The cut is ubiquitous.

But one day last month, Offen was stumped. He couldn't find any with a “Choice” level. He couldn't find lower-quality beef, called “Select,” either. All he found was an unfamiliar blue crest that read “USDA Graded” on every packet of beef. “Isn't all beef sold in stores USDA Graded, making that label useless?” he asked.

In recent weeks, Giant stores nationwide changed their labeling procedures so that it was difficult for customers to know the quality of the meat they were buying. Rather than providing different options, the company labeled meat simply as “USDA Graded” — a description that applies to all but a tiny amount of meat approved for sale in the United States.

A Department of Agriculture official, Larry Meadows, one of the people charged with overseeing the nation's meat supply, said in an interview that the action was problematic. “We've never seen anyone use anything like the ‘USDA Graded' label before,” said Meadows, associate deputy administrator of the USDA's livestock, poultry, and feed program. “The label is truthful, but it's also misleading.”

Meadows said one reason a company might use a more generic label is to save money, or to blur the impact of introducing an unusually high amount of lower quality beef.

Giant's corporate parent Ahold USA, which was ordered to stop the practice, acknowledged the change in labeling at its stores, which also include Martin's, Stop ‘N Shop and the grocery delivery service Peapod.

Tracy Pawelski, a top spokeswoman, said the new label was part of a brand rollout, but the firm later learned from regulators that it was “not permissible” because it did not tell customers the quality of meat they were buying. “We apologize to customers for any confusion caused by this labeling error,” she said in a statement.

As of late last week, the label in question were still in use. Pawelski said the company aims to put meat with new, compliant labels in place this week.

What transpired at Giant and its sibling companies reflects what food safety experts say is a growing concern about food and supplement manufacturers misusing labels. The experts say that labels are supposed to allow customers to make more informed decisions, often granting a distinction of quality or making claims about health and safety, but they have instead turned into advertising vehicles.

“Food labeling has become an incredibly powerful marketing tool,” said Bill Marler, an attorney and food safety expert, who regularly represents individuals in claims against food companies.

Food packaging, in particular, has been ground for alleged customer misinformation. Recently, PepsiCo decided to strip “all natural” claims from its Naked Juice line, saying the products are natural but it needed more regulatory guidance. Kellogg's did the same for some of its Kashi products, while saying it stood by its advertising. Both had faced separate lawsuits for misleading customers.

In 2010, the Food and Drug administration issued warning letters to 17 food manufacturers, mandating that they correct misleading labels, which made unfounded health claims. That same year, Dannon agreed to a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over claims it made about the health benefits of its yogurt.

The number of food labels has skyrocketed in recent years, often using dietary, nutritional, and cultural trends to nudge consumers into purchasing a specific good.

In 2010, nearly half of all new food and beverage products came with a health- or nutrition-related claim, up from 25 percent in 2001, according to a report by the USDA's Economic Research Service.

Today, the food industry sells $377 billion worth of food labeled with the 35 most common claims — which include “natural,” “organic,” and “carb conscious,” according to data from market research firm Nielsen.

“Companies have always tried to make their food sound as attractive as possible without violating any laws or regulations,” said Michael Jacobson, the executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Labels have become a battleground where companies use every trick they can muster, which is a problem because consumers tend to be naive.”

Food and beverage manufacturers disagree, insisting that labels reflect a desire to provide customers with better information about what they're buying.

“The primary purpose for claims and nutrition symbols used on food labels is to provide positive dietary guidance,” said Brian Kennedy, director of communications for the Grocery Manufacturing Association, which represents hundreds of food companies. “There is a robust regulatory system in place to ensure the proper use of claims and other symbols on food labels.”

The USDA received its first complaint about the new Giant label on Sept. 22, according to the agency's Meadows. More queries came flooding in.

The USDA both grades beef and regulates labeling practices. By law, all beef sold in the United States must be inspected for health safety reasons. For an additional fee, the USDA will also grade the product, based on a series of guidelines, which include tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and marbling (the distribution of fat).

The practice, while optional, is effectively an industry standard. Some 94 percent of beef sold in the United States is graded, according to Meadows.

“Choice” grade beef is high quality, and “very tender, juicy, and flavorful,” according to the USDA. “Select,” meanwhile, is less tender, has less marbling, and “may lack some of the juiciness and flavor of higher grades.”

Meadows said he didn't immediately have answers for those who complained, because, like them, he too was surprised.

When he reached out to Ahold, the parent of Giant and its siblings, the company's head of compliance pinned the labeling switch on Ahold's marketing team, Meadows said.

“He indicated to me that the marketing team came up with the brilliant idea, as he called it,” said Meadows. “But he also agreed that they weren't being as transparent as they were in the past.”

Within a matter of days, Ahold committed to address the issue. Giant is in the process of reverting back to its previous practice, whereby most beef is level “Choice,” and labeled as such. The retailer will also sell the lower quality “Select” grade.

Pawelski, the Ahold spokeswoman, said the new labels came on “Butcher Shop” brand meat. The new labels will be “clear to customers and in full compliance with USDA standards.”