Got milk? Or, better yet, do you know if the milk in your refrigerator came from a cow injected with growth hormones?

The Kansas Department of Agriculture currently is debating whether to allow dairy producers who don't utilize production-boosting techniques such as recombinant bovine growth hormone to label their products as such.

On its face, it makes sense to have labels touting "rbGH-free" or "rBST-free" dairy products. After all, sales of "free range" chickens, "all-beef" hot dogs and "farm fresh" eggs all benefit from being able to highlight such "natural" production techniques.

But one doesn't need scratch too far beneath the surface to find solid reasons to oppose such labels.

First and foremost, cows apparently produce such growth hormones naturally. So even analysis in the laboratory cannot distinguish milk that comes from a "normal" cow or an artificially stimulated cow. So any label would be meaningless.

"We believe in consumer choice, but what we are doing is trying to level the playing field for everyone with some level of guidance about what is and is not acceptable," said Lisa Taylor, spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Agriculture.

And if such acceptable guidance is determined, it more than likely would require extensive paper trails and an additional cadre of enforcement personnel to visit individual dairy farms. Since it is estimated more than 80 percent of state farmers do not use the artificial production boosters, those additional costs likely would be shared by consumers to monitor a minority of producers.

A spokeswoman for the Kansas Rural Center said it is that minority behind this labeling system.

"This is really just an attempt by industry to make things difficult for those who aren't using this artificial hormone and who don't want to use it. We do oppose the rules," said Mary Fund of the KRC.

While we believe in full disclosure to consumers, we're not sure the proposed label will serve any real purpose. We get the feeling the Kansas Department of Agriculture doesn't either. In fact, it is accepting public comment at this time and will have a public hearing Dec. 2 in Topeka to discuss the matter. We hope KDA officials only endorse labeling systems that actually can benefit the public, not merely offer competitive advantage unfairly to a small group of dairy farmers who can't prove their milk is any different from the rest.

Editorial by Patrick Lowry

plowry@dailynews.net