I share your concerns.  In fact, what you are pointing is due to - in my opinion - having cows reached peaked efficiency.  An analogy would be an athelete that tries to push his/her body to the max, only to end up with health issues down the road.  At the same time, this does not say that milk from cows treated with rBST is unsafe to drink. 

My bigger concern is what the use of rBST has done to the dairy industry economy.  I do not believe that the increase in milk production, combined with the drop in consumption due to consumer fears, has been good for the industry.  But again,  I still believe that milk from cows treated with rBST is safe to drink.

1) I believe that dairy farmers should have the right to choose whether or not to use rBST.

2) I believe that consumers should have the right to choose whether to buy milk from cows treated with rBST, or to buy milk from cows not treated with rBST.

3) I believe the milk processors and retailers should have the right to label whether any individual container of milk came from cows treated with rBST.  This allows the consumer the ability to choose what they want to buy.

4) I believe that the above labeling needs to be accurate.  It cannot make false and misleading claims.  I support the action that has been taken against certain retailers who use labeling that is false and misleading.

I had hoped that dairy farmers who choose not to use rBST would have benefited financially from this decision, but I am not sure this is happening.  I guess that is how agriculture works, isn't it? If dairy farmers want to benefit more, they are going to have to find ways to do more direct marketing to the consumer.  Unfortunately.