tement regarding blended spirits regarding the use of neutral spirits; (4) prohibit statements that disparage competitor’s products or that are false, misleading, obscene or indecent; (5) shall prohibit deception by endorsement or trade name. Congress has since added regulations that specifically address health concerns. The first two warnings that were required to appear on the labels of alcoholic beverages were a result of the Alcoholic Beverage Labeling Act in 1988. Congress decided that the public should be adequately warned about the hazards of alcohol consumption. To avoid creating confusion, Congress decided the language of the warnings.
GOVERNMENT WARNING: (1) According to the Surgeon General, women should not drink alcoholic beverages during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects. (2) Consumption of alcoholic beverages impairs your ability to drive a car or operate machinery, and may cause health problems.
In 1993, BATF considered health claims on labels yet again, but this time the positive health effects of alcohol consumption was the issue. BATF addressed this in the first edition of the ATF Compliance Matters. At that time, BATF recognized there was scientific research showing a possible relationship between moderate alcohol consumption and decreased risk of heart disease. The Department of Health and Human Services advised BATF that the benefits did not outweigh the health risks and such information should be carefully considered in any policy on health effects labeling. The BATF announced that it would be in consultation with the FDA to determine the best approach for evaluating the health claims. The BATF intended to utilize the scientific and public health expertise of the Food and Drug Administration. Currently, the health claims on food are approved under the authority of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which will be discussed in further detail in the following section. In recognition that the FAAA’s mandate is only to prevent misleading statements on the labeling of alcoholic beverages and that this is more limited than the mandate of the FD&C Act, the BATF did not feel comfortable blindly adopting the FDA’s standard. Instead the BATF proposed to open up the debate for public comment. Although no specific action came out of that 1993 statement, the Treasury did announce approved health related statements in February of 1999.
In 1999, the Department of Treasury announced that approved two statements for wine labels. The two statements are (1) “The proud people who made this wine encourage you to consult your family doctor about the health effects of wine consumption.” (2) “To learn the health effects of wine consumption, send for the Federal Government’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, USDA, 1120 20th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036.” These statements for wine labels had been strongly supported by wine producers. This is the third example of how the industry has convinced BATF to create a policy that favors the industry. To illustrate the pressure of the industry, in 1998, the Robert Mondavi Corporation was convicted for trying to influence the Secretary of Agriculture with gifts. One of the policies that Mondavi hoped to influence was the USDA Dietary Guidelines. Every five years these guidelines are reevaluated, Mondavi hoped that moderate consumption of wine would be included as a health benefit that was worthy of the guidelines. The guidelines now include statement regarding wine consumption. Although that statement is not a direct influence of Mondavi’s action, the case does illustrate the lengths the industry will go to for a favorable policy.
The latest development on health claims on alcohol labels came in December of 1999 when the BATF announced that they would hold public hearing on the issue. The latest regulation would allow health claims to appear on alcoholic beverage labels as long as they were “balanced.” The BATF wants to ensure that any positive health claims are presented to the consumer along with negative health claims