In Washington DC, a group of 10 consumers have filed a lawsuit on behalf of all the citizens in the district who are lactose intolerant and don't know it. They are demanding that the defendants in the case, which include supermarkets like Safeway, put warning labels on milk cartons, stating that milk could cause health problems in people who are lactose intolerant.

This seems fairly obvious, but the plaintiffs insist that most people don't know that they are lactose intolerant - the onset is gradual and can occur any time in life - and continue to experience negative side effects from the ingestion of dairy.

Fortunately for dairy producers, sellers and even milk drinkers, their case brought an unfavorable ruling by the US District Court that heard it, though the group plans to appeal. Dairy producers seem to think that labels would hurt sales, but if people are not put off by experiencing negative side effects such as abdominal pain and other gastrointestinal disturbances, it doesn't seem all that likely that most consumers would alter their buying habits when it comes to milk.

On its way to the Senate, after getting approved by the house, is a bill that would require all states to have uniform food labeling laws. In addition to the standard information that is nationally regulated, like calories, fat and trans-fats, states can currently pass laws to require food produced in their state to have additional information on the packaging. Uncommon allergens, potentially toxic substances and various food additives are commonly required to be revealed in this way.

Food producers and grocers support the bill because they would have a standard set of expectations to meet, but some consumers are unhappy that some information currently on their state's food labels will be removed. Opponents of the bill say that it will affect as many as 200 state laws across the country. While an amendment has already been added to keep mercury warnings in place, there are 16 states that have shellfish regulations and Arkansas and Illinois have egg-safety laws, none of which would still be required. On the surface, it seems to be a certainty that any regulations stripped from the states will be reinstated at a later time, but going through the federal process is likely to take longer and face more opposition from large lobbies than with in-state legislation. Some warnings may not make it back onto labels for a number of years, if ever, even though consumers in some states will find themselves with new warnings on their packaging.

One is every five calories in the American diet comes from a liquid and the biggest component of that set of liquids is soda. Groups of researchers are now working to prove that such sugary drinks are the leading cause of obesity. This isn’t to say that there aren’t other factors at play here, including genetics and overall health, but if soda is reliably shown to be one of the largest contributing factors it could radically change the soda market. Some scientists working on the project hope to see warning labels on cans of soda that are similar to the warnings on cigarette packages.

Others believe that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to prove this theory. Obesity has only recently been considered a disease and it is a disease with a plethora of diverse symptoms and causes. Pinpointing one factor at this stage may not be realistic. This is especially true if researchers really hope to model their campaign against the “empty calories” of soda on the campaign against tobacco products, which took decades to achieve results.