Dive Brief:

The National Organic Standards Board voted unanimously on Friday to recommend that regulations designed to hold organic meat and poultry producers to higher animal welfare standards be enacted immediately, the Organic Trade Association reported on Twitter.

In order to receive organic certification, the rule requires animals to be able to exhibit natural behavior, such as the ability to sit, walk, stretch and stand without touching other animals or the sides of their pen, as well as having free and clear access to the outside. The NOSB, which provides recommendations to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, has proposed that the rule should become effective on May 19.

The recommendation has been a long time coming, with some NOSB proposals for the rule dating back to 1994. Following the unanimous recommendation from the NOSB in 2011, the USDA first proposed the changes in April last year, when Barack Obama was president.It prompted 6,711 comments on the issue.

A new Consumer Reports survey suggests the rule has overwhelming consumer support, with 86% of those who buy organic food saying they strongly support holding organic producers to higher animal welfare standards. Eighty-three percent of consumers said it was important that organic eggs come from hens that are able to go outdoors. The USDA under Obama has said boosting these standards was likely to increase trust in the organic seal.

Even though the rule has faced backlash from some producers, food manufacturers are taking note of consumer demand for humane treatment of animals. The latest annual report from the Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare found nearly three-quarters (73%) of brands assessed had a formal animal welfare policy in place, up from 46% in 2012. However, nearly 66% of companies had not implemented a strong system for monitoring animal welfare.

Its an increasingly important issue, as consumers tend to support brands known to have humane animal welfare standards, and are quick to boycott those that dont.

Whether the Trump administration's USDA will green light the rule remains to be seen. The department still doesn't have a permanent leader, with a confirmation vote on nominee Sonny Perdue scheduled for Monday evening. Without a secretary in place, big policy decisions have been put on hold.

While USDA generally follows the recommendations of the NOSB, it is not bound to them. Trump's administration, which favors less regulation overall, may choose to cancel this one through another executive order. At the time the regulation was published, in a written statement National Pork Producers Council President John Weber called these rules"precisely the type of executive branch overreach that Congress will reign in through regulatory reform."

Continued here:

NOSB supports higher welfare standards for organic meat and ... - Food Dive

With the tourist season rapidly approaching, it is a good time for a friendly reminder to raise awareness regarding the proper way to tip fairly and thoughtfully. So a review of the why, when, where and what you are tipping for may prove enlightening.

Why? The history of tipping in America goes back to the 1850s and 1860s, when wealthy Americans traveling in Europe brought back the custom of tipping to demonstrate how cultured they were. Since the custom of tipping became a fixture in the food service industry, a legal system has developed allowing restaurant employers to keep their labor costs and food and drink prices lower by paying their employees less than the minimum wage, thereby outsourcing a portion of their employee's wage to the customer.

How much? It is important to recognize that the customary tip has changed over the last 175 or so years. There was a time in the 1950s where the customary tip was approximately 10 percent. That percentage has increased over the last 50 years as people have adjusted the recommended tip to reflect that more of a tip is needed to allow servers to meet their day-to-day expenses. The standard tip is 18 percent for satisfactory service and 20 percent or more for exceptional service.

Where? It is also important to recognize the location where one is tipping. The cost of living varies across the nation, regionally and even within a few miles. A tip that may be sufficient for a waitress in Yoder, may not be sufficient for the waiter in Manitou Springs as the cost of living for the server differs according to where they live.

What? One of the most common mistakes in tipping is a lack of awareness of what the customer is actually tipping. The customer is tipping for the services of the server and for those things he or she is responsible. In its most basic form, the waiter is responsible for greeting the customer, taking their order and serving their food. However, they should not be held responsible for any waiting a customer must endure because of the volume of business.

These are but a few of the considerations customers should consider when dining or drinking out.

Sarim Thomas

Manitou Springs

Don't punish policemen

I am responding to your headline "ACLU, Colorado Springs agree to settlement on racial profiling lawsuit" April 20:

Racial profiling is not racist. Police departments don't profile people because of the color of their skin. Profiling is simply an acknowledgment of the economic fact that a shameful practice of slavery, reinforced by 200 years of abuse and prejudice, put a significant percentage of our black-skinned fellow citizens in such a collective "hole" that, for those still climbing out, crime sometimes seems the only way to survive.

If profiling were truly racist, we'd be reading stories of far more Hispanics, Asians and American Indians being pulled over for no good reason. Bottom line: cops should not be punished for making reasonable inferences based on the very essence of human intelligence i.e., "The ability to cross-reference." Don't punish policemen for the unrelated sins of past slave owners. They're simply doing their job. And stop giving away precious tax dollars for "PC" purposes.

Gregory Olinyk

Colorado Springs

A place of respect and dignity

Why is it not surprising at all that in Donald Trump's White House there are people of the caliber of Sarah Palin, Kid Rock, and Ted Nugent, who pose in front of Hillary Clinton's portrait mockingly?

No matter who has been president in the past, the White House has been a place of respect and dignity, but when this man was elected it was obvious that those days were over. Ted Nugent is a vile, disgusting person, Sarah Palin is laughable. Leave it to Trump to associate with these people.

Sally Alberts

Monument

Organic food has many benefits

For the past three or four decades, the percentage of obese and people with health issues has been increasing in the nation. Because of this, concern for the well-being of neighbors and friends has increased. Organic food should be consumed more than nonorganic food.

Organic food is a concern due to its expense. Although it is hard on the wallet, it has many benefits and advantages for human health. Organic foods help maintain better health, give nutrition for the brain, have fewer artificial stimuli, reduce doctor bills - all leading to a more success in every aspect of life.

The solution for the high cost of organic food is to lower the price and gain support from the government and the public providing the same quality.

Research has shown that organic food has 17 percent more antioxidants than nonorganic food, which helps to lower the risk of stroke and cancer. Another problem is schools don't explain the benefits of organic food, so the people are not aware of what to buy to be healthy. There has been some progress towards instituting programs like SNAP, an alternative to food stamps, to encourage healthier food. Overall, organic food has many benefits for general health.

Benafsha Shakari

Colorado Springs

Read more:

LETTERS: The ins and outs of tipping; benefits of organic foods ... - Colorado Springs Gazette

#Ivanka Trump is a major supporter of #Organic Food. Being a mother of three beautiful kids, Ivanka prefers organic food over other food supplies. Being a hotel executive, she has also helped in shaping the Trump Institute of Wellness, which currently has only organic food for children.

According to Ivanka, a healthy menu for kids in hotels is really important. Being an entrepreneur herself she, along with a health coach, advises parents to take the organic route for their children. According to Maria Marlowe, it is the best option as it helps people remove toxic chemicals from their diet. Maria also stated that normally available apples are sprayed with many toxic chemicals such as carcinogens, and neurotoxins, which can cause severe damage to our brain cells..

Ivanka is the Presidential advisor for the White House. However, when the ban of the chlorpyrifos received a reprieve from the Trump administration, Ivanka remained 'mum' on the matter. This pesticide is seen as a threat to children and their brain development by scientists. Many early scientific studies found the pesticide to be a neurotoxin.

Though the pesticide was banned by scientists some 17 years ago, it is still being used as an important component in agriculture. However, many researchers including Virginia Rauh, who found the content of neurotoxin in the pesticide, clearly stated its potentially harmful effects. Chlorpyrifos, when consumed even in low quantities may cause problems during pregnancy which can harm the brain development of the child. According to the Environment Protection Agency (EPA), the use of chlorpyrifos must be completely banned in the U.S..

Despite knowing the possible side effects of pesticides and its harmful effect on children, the question which would be on most peoples mind is whether organic food is safe. Essentially, vegetable and fruits which are grown sans the use of herbicides or pesticides are organic.

According to the official health advisor of Ivankas official website IvankaTrump.com, people should purchase organic food after studying the Dirty Dozen plus list. This list details products that have a high pesticide content and advises what should be avoided. Ivanka has come under fire for not expressing her thoughts on chlorpyrifos. Critics have asserted that she should have voiced her thoughts on the use of the pesticide because of its known dangers. Ivanka, however, continues to champion the organic food cause and has stayed quiet on the controversy. #Ivanka Trump Advocates Organic Food

Here is the original post:

Ivanka Trump favors organic food for her kids - Blasting News

A customer picks up a product from a shelf featuring organic cosmetic products at a supermarket in Frankfurt. Photograph: DPA/Alamy

The makers of many organic beauty products have been accused of confusing and meaningless labelling, according to a new survey in which 76% of consumers admitted they felt misled.

According to the Soil Associations recent market report, sales of organic health and beauty products swelled by more than 20% in 2016, with the market now worth about 61.2m in the UK.

But the industry has put money into marketing products it claims are green rather than spending money on formulating environmentally friendly, toxin-free products that are not harmful to the skin, the Soil Association warns.

Unlike organic food, which must adhere to strict EU regulations, there are no legal standards for the use of the terms organic or natural on beauty products. In practice, any brand or beauty product can be labelled as natural or organic even if it contains virtually no organic or natural ingredients.

Faced with this lack of legislation, expert organisations have created a series of robust, independent, voluntary standards to encourage responsible use of the term organic. Cosmos and NaTrue are two well-known examples, with the NSF-ANSI standard from the US also appearing on some products on the UK high street.

This is the tip of the iceberg, said Soil Association policy director Peter Melchett. The labels on products we encountered were littered with confusing terms. Our consumer research shows that it is very difficult for consumers to know they are making the right choice when doing their shopping.

New research to support the Soil Associations Campaign for Clarity which aims to clean up greenwashing in the beauty industry reveals that 72% of people say they would lose trust in a brand that made misleading claims about being organic.

The Soil Association published a league table on Monday revealing a cross-section of brands and beauty products on the market which make potentially misleading organic claims on the label. The brands include the word organic on some labels, even though the products are not certified as organic.

Emeritus professor Vyvyan Howard of the Centre for Molecular Bioscience at Ulster University, who assessed the ingredients, said: I was shocked to find ingredients which could contain human carcinogens in products with labels which could misleadingly suggest that they might be organic. Genuine organic products are independently certified and I would encourage consumers to choose those.

View post:

Consumers being misled by labelling on 'organic' beauty products, report shows - The Guardian

The Big A: Experts from the University of Texas suggest feeding young children Organic foods whenever possible to limit their exposure to pesticides.

Adults should make their primary goal to eat healthy in general.

Add Organic foods as the food budget allows. Some Organic fruits and vegetables are only a bit more expensive than non-Organic varieties, so focus on them.

Patronize your local Farmers Market, often Organic fruits and vegetables are less expensive there and direct Farm to Table!

Look for foods on which Organic has the most impact.

Generally, produce that you peel before eating will have less pesticide residue so it makes more sense to spend money on organic cherries than on organic bananas, Yes?

Limiting exposure to pesticides is Key, add taste to the idea of putting fewer chemicals in the soil, that may influence you to go Organic and eat Real Food, eat it raw when ever possible.

Good health is a personal decision.

Eat healthy, Be healthy, Live lively

Go here to see the original:

Choosing Real (Organic) Food - Live Trading News

Nearly a year ago, I received a phone call in my office from Sean Muldoon, chief ingredient officer for Papa Johns Pizza. Sean explained to me that Papa Johns was interested in sourcing organic vegetables for its world-famous pizza.

The conversation continued and evolved through several meetings between my team, the Papa Johns staff, and even Papa John himself (John Schnatter, the founder, chairman and CEO of Papa Johns Pizza).

Through the partnership, Papa Johns is launching a pilot program for its Lexington, Kentucky, market, using organic vegetables sourced from Green Bean Delivery for pizza toppings. Those organic vegetables include Roma tomatoes, green peppers, yellow onions and mushrooms. While most people might think the sloganBetter ingredients. Better pizza.is no more than marketing fluff, Papa Johns stands true to its promise and continues on its quest for a clean label.

I could see Papa Johns commitment toward this goal the second I entered its corporate research and development center.

The pizza familys test kitchen demonstrates a timeline of events for how its better ingredients have evolved over the years to now include antibiotic-free chicken for pizza toppings and poppers, cage-free eggs and menu ingredients without MSG, high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, artificial flavors and synthetic colors.

This is a bold and significant move, as food-service businesses have largely ignored the organic and all-natural marketplace, despite the industrys continued growth and demand from consumers. Many buyers are tricked into thinking convenient food cant possibly be grown using sustainable methods, and furthermore, that the sustainable-food industry cant support the weight of everyday American diets.

However, leaders in the food-service industry, such as Papa Johns, are starting to change the trend of conventional convenience, and their competition is paying attention.This same phenomenon has been present in grocery stores for nearly two decades, and it has proven there is real opportunity in tried-and-true growth in healthy, all-natural and organic food.

The worlds largest food companies have been forced to reinvent the very brands and product ingredients that drove their profitability for decades because of consumer demand for cleaner foods. Grocery stores have also changed. They are now stocking their shelves with all-natural and organic products. This natural progression is starting to take place in the food-service industry, and its only going to continue to grow.

For all of you who have worked so hard to create this positive change in our food system, I commend you. Farmers, farm-to-table chefs and food entrepreneurs have created brands of integrity that have helped cultivate change and put hope back into our food system.

The organic and all-natural food industry has grown year after year and is showing no signs of slowing down. One thing is certain: The consumer will create the demand, and the farmers and food companies will fill the supply. Choose wisely, even when eating conveniently. Your food dollar matters.

__________

Ewer is CEO of Green Bean Delivery.

See the original post here:

EWER: Organic produce gets a piece of the pie - Indianapolis Business Journal

By Mischa Popoff | April 21, 2017

Opinion

And By Jay Lehr

President Obama tripled the budget and staffing at the offices of the USDAs National Organic Program (NOP), only to see American organic acreage flatline during his tenure.

The $9.1 million might seem like a rounding error for Washington D.C. But what 43 organic staffers actually did during Obamas tenure will surprise you. Did they weed out fraud, make organic food better and encourage more domestic organic production? Sadly, no, no and no.

Organic imports from countries like China and Turkey grew steadily during Obamas years, a trend that, not surprisingly, coincided with increased incidents of organic foodborne illnesses. Alas, Obama tripled the NOP budget and staffing, but failed to require field testing.

Roughly 40 percent of the organic food sold in America tested positive for prohibited pesticide residue during Obamas years, in two separate studies by the USDA. Just 0.7 percent of American farmland is organic, but organic sales accounted for 4 percent of total food sales, more than five times the amount of land under organic management. This means American grocery retailers now rely on imported organic food somewhere around 80 percent of the time.

This tripling of NOP budget and staff did absolutely nothing to help American organic farmers. In fact, it hurt them.

Worse than this embarrassing organic trade imbalance is the fact that organic foods accounted for a whopping 7 percent of all food recalls in America last year, almost double what one would expect according to organic sales and 10 times what one would expect from Americas flatlining organic acreage.

Meanwhile, organic inspections and certifications all occur independently of these 43 federal organic staffers. People are often surprised to learn that the USDA does not employ any organic inspectors. Staff only keep an eye on those that do by randomly auditing files generated by USDA-accredited certifying agencies, most of which are private certification businesses. These certifiers number just 80, and employ just 160 independent organic inspectors on contract. They pay the USDA for the privilege of being audited. So, what was $9 million spent on every year? And, again, what did these 43 people do every day they went to work?

The 160 inspectors working for 80 certifying agencies. Together they account for all oversight of every American organic farm, processor, distributor and broker/trader, including the importation of certified-organic goods from abroad. Theyre being overseen by 43 federal staffers? Yes. Thats the sum total of it.

Miles McEvoy, Obamas man in charge of Americas organic program, claims the increases were necessary to ensure the integrity of the USDA-certified organic label. But with organic food recalls and imports both going up, and the number of American organic farmers and acreage flatlining, it would appear McEvoy was totally, completely and undeniably wrong. Yet, he remains in command at the NOP.

Only organic end-products are tested under McEvoy, and just 5 percent of the time at that, and only for pesticides, not for pathogens from manure, thus accounting for the organic industrys shamefully high record of foodborne illness outbreaks. Costs of this pesticide testing are, again, covered entirely by the private sector. Many farmers make use of manure, but usually not on crops for human consumption. Only in the organic industry is manure routinely applied to fields used to grow food for humans, a practice which can be detrimental to human health, sometimes permanently, when manure is not fully composted.

And yet, the only across-the-board organic testing in Americas multibillion dollar organic industry is for GMOs, even though no one anywhere in the world, not human or animal, has ever fallen ill from consuming GMO foods. Costs, again, are borne entirely by you guessed it the private sector.

So where did all that money go if not to field testing? Perhaps to fund the hundreds of anti-modern-farming NGOs that run a constant barrage of anti-GMO, anti-pesticide, anti-fertilizer, anti-animal-confinement campaigns? On that question, there are two more troubling points to make.

First, many of the 80 certifying agencies that grant USDA organic certification to farmers, processors, etc., receive anywhere between 1.5 percent to 3 percent of gross revenue from their clients. This royalty from an industry worth roughly $46 billion a year more than Major League Baseball has proven highly lucrative just for doing paperwork. And people from these agencies, and sometimes the agencies themselves, can be found at the forefront of anti-modern-farming campaigns throughout all 50 states. Certifiers only collect royalties on shipments they approve, while being left to decide whose products theyre going to test for pesticides, just 5 percent of the time. No wonder so much organic food is being imported, with an astonishing 40 percent of it testing positive for prohibited pesticides, and with so many cases of organic foodborne illness.

Second, it turns out $9.1 million per-annum to run the office is just the tip of this organic iceberg. Another quarter of a billion $256 million to be exact was spent by the Obama Administration on subsidies to the American organic industry.

So, if American organic farm acreage flatlined over the past eight years while organic food recalls went up, along with imports, in a nation that has exported food throughout its history with one of the worlds top food safety records, what do we call this? This profligate spending not only failed to deliver, but delivered precisely the opposite of what anyone who works for a living expects from Washington.

Make no mistake. This was not simply a case of yet another program gone awry in the nations capital. The price tag for Americas new F-35 fighter is, unfortunately, a typical example of such incompetence and waste. But if the F-35 flew backwards instead of forwards, and Obama knew about it for the past eight years and funded it anyway, thatd be fraud. Fraud against American organic farmers, American consumers of organic food, and taxpayers.

Lets hope the next administration fully reverses this trend.

Editors note on the authors: Mischa Popoff is a policy advisor at The Heartland Institute, and is the author of Is it Organic? The inside story of the organic industry. Jay Lehr is the Science Director at the Heartland Institute and is the author of more than 1,000 magazine and journal articles and 30 books.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

More Headlines from Opinion

Go here to read the rest:

Should the boost in funding for organic farming survive in the new ... - Food Safety News

As market demand grows for organic products, innovation is driving the industry to reach more consumers. In this session at Natural Products Expo West 2017, join nine industry leaders as they discuss what their organizations are doing to think ahead, problem-solve and disrupt.

"This industry today is unrecognizable from what it was just a few years agocertainly a few decades ago, and it's grown by people continually disrupting." Ken Cook, Environmental Working Group

Highlights: Olu Beck, Wholesome, talks innovations in fair trade and empowering communities of farmers. Melody Meyer, UNFI, addresses the need for industry leaders to continually give feedback to UNFI and USDA. Thea O'Carroll, Yield Organic, uses a comprehensive digital platform to connect organic farmers with buyers.

Highlights: Matthew Dillon, Clif Bar and Company, talks funding research of resilient seeds to improve organic crop production. Ian Justus from Driscoll's discusses successful innovations in plant breeding, field innovations and container production. Monique Maraz, Organic Trade Association, delves into the topic of inclusivity and connecting consumers to farms through augmented reality applications.

Highlights: Tonya Antle, Organic Produce Network, is helping to provide allied resources to help farmers connect with distributors and scale their operations. Steve Lykken, Applegate Farms, suggests that addressing animal welfare is essential in moving the organic industry forward. Ken Cook, Environmental Working Group, challenges the state of California to be 25 percent organic in 15 years.

Highlights: How do we get the consumer to recognize the value in purchasing organic food? How do we simplify all the information and make it simple for consumers? What's next for organic?

This session Organic Innovation Conversations was recorded at Natural Products Expo West 2017.

This piece originally appeared on New Hope Network, a Supermarket News sister website. Visit the site for more Natural Products Expo West session recordings.

See the original post here:

9 industry visionaries discuss the future of organic food - Supermarket News

The National Organics Standards Board on Wednesday opened public hearings in Denver to gauge whether producers of organic meat and poultry should be held to higher animal welfare standards.

Anew Consumer Reports surveystrongly suggests that the issue is important to consumers. About86 percent of consumers who buy organic food said they strongly cared thatthe animal farms their food was raised on were held to high standards. About a quarter of American shoppers always or often buy food labeled organic.

Consumers expect organic farms to adhere to strong and consistent standards, including high standards for animal welfare, said Charlotte Vallaeys, a senior policy analyst with Consumer Reports who will testify at the U.S. Department of Agricultures organic standards meeting Wednesday. That includes letting chickens outdoors where they can move around freely, rather than continually cooped up indoors.

The USDA in Januaryissued a final rule for livestock and poultry producers that, among other things, added requirements for organic animal living conditions, transportation and slaughter. It set standards, for example, for minimum indoor and outdoor pace for organic chickens and requires soil and vegetation for outdoor poultry spaces. The intent, the agency said, was to boost consumer confidence in the products sold under the USDA organic seal.

Eighty-three percent of consumers thought it was highly important that organic eggs come from hens who are able to go outdoors, the Consumer Reports survey said.

But a strong push back from some agriculture businesses prevented the new rules from taking effect in March.

Powerful agricultural interests, especially organic egg producers who raise hens in indoor confinement with no meaningful outdoor space, oppose the rule, a release from Consumer Reports said.

The USDA should make the organic animal welfare rule effective without further delay, Vallaeys said. Producers shouldnt be allowed to pick and choose which organic requirements they will meet. This new rule for organics makes clear that outdoor access for animals is not negotiable.

The NOSB meets twice a year to hear from the public anddiscuss regulation issues. Meetings are scheduled for Wednesday, Thursday and Fridayat the Sheraton Denver Downtown Hotel with a public hearing from 1 to 4 p.m. Wednesday and 8:30 a.m. to noon on Thursday.

Read more here:

86 percent of shoppers care about animal welfare in organic meats and poultry, Consumer Reports says - The Denver Post

NSF International

Kashis certified transitional Dark Cocoa Karma Shredded Wheat Biscuits.

You may have started noticing a new certification mark on some of the foods you buy. The certified transitional designation essentially means that the product is on its way to becoming organic. For example, boxes of Kashis Dark Cocoa Karma Shredded Wheat Biscuits bear a green seal with a small t and the words transitional, certified by QAI. Quality Assurance International is one of a group of national certifiers of organic, and now transitional, products.

Think of certified transitional as the on-ramp to organic, says Nate Lewis, farm policy director of the Organic Trade Association. The organization developed the standards for the National Certified Transitional Program, which was approved by the USDA this year. The goal of the designation is to increase certified organic farm acreage in the US, which stands at a meager 1 percent of all farmland. Domestic supply is not keeping up with organic demand, says Lewis.

Advertisement

The transitional designation tackles one of the primary obstacles growers face when converting their land (or considering conversion) from conventional to organic: cost. It takes three years of rigorous organic farming and compliance for a farm to become eligible for organic certification, during which time it cant charge more for its crops or livestock. This lengthy period of increased operating costs and lower yields (without the use of conventional fertilizers or weed- and pest-control chemicals) is particularly prohibitive for small farms.

What the NCTP program and certified transitional mark do is allow farms in transition and food manufacturers using those crops to realize premium pricing not as much as organic foods would command, but higher than conventional during the second and third years of transition. (Transitional certification can be achieved after one full year of not using prohibited substances.)

Get The Weekender in your inbox:

The Globe's top picks for what to see and do each weekend, in Boston and beyond.

Lewis says not to expect a USDA transitional label. Each certifier will have its own seal; QAIs was one of the first to hit packaging on store shelves. The USDA oversees the national program by overseeing the certifiers, explains Lewis.

For a company like Kashi, which is working with two farms transitioning to organic wheat production, increasing its sources of organics is critical. We need organic ingredients to grow the supply chain for our own company, says Nicole Nestojko, senior director of supply chain and sustainability. It will extend to other brands, she says. We see this as a way to support the growth of organic agriculture.

And organic (food and other) products grown without pesticides, fertilizers, antibiotics, growth hormones, GMOs, and with minimal impact on the environment are clearly in demand. In 2015, the OTA recorded organic product sales of $43.3 billion, an 11 percent increase over the prior year.

Advertisement

Its a win-win for all: Growers are encouraged to transition to organic farming because theyll receive some premium pricing during the transition period; food manufacturers can support farms prior to their becoming full-fledged organic; and consumers have greater choice when it comes to produce, meat, and packaged foods made with organic ingredients.

See the original post here:

What does 'certified transitional' mean? - The Boston Globe