Tag Archives: links roundup

Nibbles: What We Didn’t Eat This Week

3 Feb

Quite a variety of happenings in the world of food this week.

The Good

An illuminating new report out by the cooking & nutrition charity Share Our Strength provides concrete evidence that low-income families do cook at home more often than they eat fast food, and would like to be able to do so even more. I like Marion Nestle’s coverage, as she’s not afraid to nod towards some of the corporate influence the report contains. Good news, nonetheless.

Colorado is considering a state-wide ban on trans-fats in school lunch programs. Colorado is also, interestingly, the least-obese state in the nation (you can’t really say “thinnest” in a country where obesity is over 30% across the board). Coincidence?

In more school lunch reform news, the USDA announced this week its new rules (yes, actual rules here) that will increase the amounts of fruits and vegetables, and eliminate some meat requirements in its school lunch program. As Mark Bittman says, imperfect as the new rules may be, 32 million kids are about to start eating better.

Jane Black has a nice piece in The Washington Post discussing the rise in flexible CSA options. While I think her editorial brushes off the consumer benefits of a regular CSA too dismissively, I’ve loved my past flexible CSAs for the access they provided someone who couldn’t afford a full share.

The Bad

This article isn’t bad so much as slightly annoying. A new study out of the Washington State University purports to help reform the beef industry’s image by claiming cattle ranches are significantly more environmentally-friendly than thirty years ago. File under — yes, and…?

I mentioned one lawsuit Monsanto is currently facing. Here is another! A class-action case that claims the company spread toxic substances all over a town in West Virginia in the course of producing a chemical component of Agent Orange. The toxic substances listed are mainly dioxins, which have been linked to cancer.

and the (very) Ugly

The Humane Society of the United States (which has, in the last few years, done a really impressive job ramping up its advocacy of livestock animals along with homeless pets) released a new undercover video documenting standard pork industry practice for raising pigs.

Graphic images included.

Tom Philpott’s analysis cuts to the core:

The remarkable thing…is how banal it is. What we have here is the everyday reality of pigs’ lives on a factory farm, without regulations flouted or spectacular violence committed. It is abuse routinized and regimented, honed into a profitable business model.

The video even got NYTimes sustainability blogger Andrew Revkin interested. He’s got a response from the Oklahoma Pork Council (which suggests that images were “taken out of context,” leaving me to ask — is there a context in which these practices are acceptable?) and takes the opportunity to wonder if this might continue to make the case for test-tube meat. Not if the omnivores here on We*Meat*Again have anything to say about it, right?

Happy Weekend, All!

 

The Myth of the Not-So-Green Revolution

30 Aug

There’s increasing evidence that genetically-modified, herbicide-resistant crop breeds are going down in flames, producing super-resistant weeds and insect species that are decimating crop yields and land. Add to that the fact that much of the industrially-produced crop in the world is commodity, not food crop, and the notion that the so-called “Green Revolution” which wasn’t so green, ever actual increased crop yields starts to fall apart.

But at that point, most people’s minds turn negative and imagine that, while increasing crop yields with industrial techniques might not be great for the planet or for our waistlines, there’s simply no way to feed more than six billion people (and growing) without those methods.

Luckily for us, there’s evidence to suggest that organic production, which tends to be an integrated system, can actually have higher yields per acre that industrial agriculture. And a U.N. special report earlier this year found that agro-ecology(that is, agricultural practices that work with, rather than against, the natural cycles of an ecological system) could actually double production on small-scale farms.

But that’s not all! Such methods would boost production, all while creating new jobs, preserving species’ biodiversity, protecting the global food supply from natural disasters by decentralizing production, and adapting well to drought-like and hot growing conditions. Of course, these are traits, both economic and environmental that make sense for the planet and the politics we now face.

Like it or not, we now live in the world after oil, and will not, for much longer, be able to rely either on fossil-fuel intensive growing methods, nor on practices that harm the planet and require oil-thirsty shipping practices. We need to find a way to grow food smaller and closer to home — so isn’t it great news that it’s this kind of farming that might best serve us?

Plus, we might even find ourselves enjoying it.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 40 other followers

%d bloggers like this: