Contrary to what you may believe, Swine flu did not start at Cornell

"The Triangle of Doom"

While red meat is all the rage in America, most commonly in the form of cheap ground hamburger, poultry and pork ('white meats') are responsible for the majority of increased meat consumption in developing countries over the past few decades. These increase in meat consumption is the result of a shift away from traditional local suppliers towards large scale production. Large scale production means densely populated captivation for foul and swine alike, (increasing health risks in addition to the increased supply of meat). Large populations let diseases, such as H7 (avian) and H1 (Swine) influenzas, reek havoc on populations of livestock and mutate into forms that can be contracted by human. In March 2003, a strain avian flu was able to spread to humans. A variety of new strains of influenzas, from mutations evolving or combining previously existing strains, have had outbreaks in the U.S. in the past decade. The article puts blame on the present warning system for disease pandemics. Between the cover-ups of small scale flu outbreaks on individual farms and advertising certain subtypes of the flu as low risk, potential flu pandemics are a major concern in regards to public health.

"The Swine Flu Crisis Lays Bare the Meat Industry's Monstrous Power"

Similarly, "The Swine Flu" article also blames flu outbreaks on a lack of surveillance and prevention. It claims that the largely concentrated populations of pigs by today' suppliers of pork are also at fault. Only in such a large population of pigs, having weakened immune systems and being in such close contact with each other, could swine flu's evolution have been propelled to such an extraordinary rate.

??Questions??

1)What do the H and N in HXNY influenza's stand for? and what do the numbers (X and Y) mean?

2) Are there any laws requiring people to notify a health department or some other organization about a contraction of some of the types of influenza?

Industry Regulations

The Omnivore's Dilemma Chapter 12 and 'E.Coli Path Shows Flaws in Beef Inspection' Article

Both readings focus on regulations in the meat processing industry.

OD looks at the regulations from through the eyes of a small company. Joel Salatin claims that the regulations are designed with large companies in mind and keep small suppliers, such as himself, from being able to slaughter or preserve their own meat. Certain requirements such as a private bathroom for the USDA inspector are expenses that only large companies can bear the burden of. With such a large production, they can spread out similar costs of meeting regulations through all the meat they process. Small suppliers such as Polyface Farms can't afford these expenses. Characteristics that you think would matter, like bacteria thresholds, aren't taken into consideration, but facility layouts are.

The E.Coli article focuses on the U.S.D.A.'s regulations' effects on large companies. With an introduction through a woman who became paralyzed due E. Coli from a hamburger, this article suggests that regulations for large scale meat processors are not strict enough. According to the article, the U.S.D.A. does less actual regulating, and more suggesting. Large companies commonly don't test their incoming meat from slaughterhouses, have self imposed E.Coli safety programs, and even deviate from their own safety programs. When companies are caught breaking the rules, they are 'highly encouraged' to meet regulation standards, but meet no repercussions when they don't. Large slaughterhouses will refuse to sell to processing companies if they test the incoming meet for food born pathogens. With no fines or penalties, it usually takes an E.Coli epidemic, and ruined lives, to cause a company to make any changes.

??Questions??

1.)How can the U.S.D.A. be pressured by large meat companies to allow them to self impose safety programs?

2.)If these conditions and lack of enforcement are as bad as the E.Coli article says, why aren't food born pathogen epidemics a more common occurrence?

Intelligent Roast Beast

The Omnivore's Dillemma Chapter 17

In this chapter, Pollan looks at opposing arguments about eating meat. He examines views from both extremes, including those of strict animal rights activists and vegans to CAFO workers. Pollan struggles with a self-imposed status of temporary vegetarianism as he combs through all possible reasonings that would allow him to continue to eat meat guilt free.

Many people think that livestock and domesticated animals should be liberated from their restricted lives in cages and behind fences. However, life as a liberated chicken living in the wild may not be all its cracked up to be (No Pun Intended!). Captivation by humans results in longevity when compared to how long they would last facing the elements of the wild. Some evolutionists believe we are doing animals a favor by raising them (even if only for the purpose to be eaten at a later date), which controls their populations and shields them from the harshness of nature.

Animal rights activists' philosophize about individual animals' fates, with argument that being raised only to get slaughtered is an inhumane life for that single animal. This is difficult to refute, considering no individual would benefit from being killed. Others argue that humans have evolved to the point where we can obtain food to survive without the need to kill animals for meat, therefore it is wrong for us to do so, even if animals kill in nature all of the time.

Despite mentioning some convincing arguments supporting the consumption of meat, Pollan recedes to the fact that human beings are creatures intelligent enough to have the capability of reasoning, and therefore have the ability to reason themselves into thinking what they desire.

??Questions??
1) How can it be argued that a smart chimpanzee deserves more attention than a three day old infant. Although the chimp may have a higher capacity for understanding, the newborn has the potential to become more intelligent. Without caring for our young, the human species would die out. I could go on for days about how this makes no rational sense, logically or morally, for their side of the argument. To me, this comparison is the philosophers shooting themselves in the foot.

2) If we do have to treat the more intelligent animals with more consideration, where do we draw the line? Chimps, Dolphins, and Pigs would be included. What about Horses and Cows. Deer and Sheep? Rabbits and Turkeys. Chickens and Fish? We would have to draw the line somewhere, and what would the determining factor be?

Ignorance is Bliss

The Omnivore's Dillemma Chapter 13

In Chapter 13, Michael Pollan shifts gears away from the process of conventional agriculture and begins to focus on the market for and consumption of these goods. Just as Joel's Polyface
Farm is self-sustaining with energy initially from the sun, conventional agriculture is as big of an industry as it is because of the the gigantic market demanding cheap food.

Pollan points out that people don't buy cheaper food just because they can't afford the more expensive, yet higher quality, foods. Today, people of the U.S. choose to indulge in luxuries such as TV, iPods, and designer clothing. The shift in spending on food is due to choice, not financial instability.

Over simplification of agriculture has led to the diminishing health of food sources. Cramped monoculture farms leave crops and livestock susceptible to disease, while diminishing the land. This is why so much chemical fertilizer and pesticides are used by the agriculture industry. However, most Americans are not concerned with this, usually because they are unaware. With nothing more than a price communicating some of the food's history, customers are able to remain in the dark, as many of them prefer. Customers today are less concerned with how their food was grown and where it came from, and more concerned with being the availability of out of season dishes. Ignorance is Bliss.

Even though all of Joel's colorful euphemisms for describing an increasingly globalized economy may suggest otherwise, he is not aiming for the downfall of conventional agriculture. All he wants is consumers to have the option of alternative foods sources like local markets.

?? Question ??
1) Is reverse industrialization of food sources noticeable with the growth in localized farming and markets?

2) What are the drawbacks of local suppliers and markets for food?

If you can't find organic food in your produce section.. then where can you find it?

The Omnivore's Dillemma Chapter 8

In this chapter, Pollan's primary focus is the word organic, and the many misconceptions about its value. Foods labeled organic are done so to add what he calls pastoral value. Its the type of thing where customers think the food is better quality because they imagine produce being grown in "well composted soils on small farms", or animals being raised in open rolling hills of grass. Pollan reveals that there are not that many requirements to be able to label your food organic. Besides the absence of certain chemical pesticides and antibiotics in feed, many organic foods are grown/raised in environments not so different from that of their conventional counter parts.

The organic movement and the organic industry are two completely separate entities. The organic movement is the attitude that mimicking the polyculture of nature is the best way to grow produce. This includes chemical free farming and alternative modes of consumption. The organic industry is a combination of farmers that were previously a part of the organic movement but have now drifted away due to the tug of capitalist values, and large conventional food corporations that are attempting to make a profit on the market for organic foods. "The organic label is a marketing tool," Secretary [of Agriculture] Glickman said.

After reading this chapter, Organic makes me think of the Verbal section of the SAT I test. If someone asked me if I know what the word organic means, I would confidently answer 'yes'; but if they asked me to define it, I'd probably have a considerably tough time finding the right words.

??Questions??
1)Since plants grown using chemical pesticides are not considered organic, is there a better word to describe them? They're obviously more 'organic oriented' than the infamous twinkie so often mentioned.

2) Whenever a new nutrition fact is unveiled, its seems a new phad diet is in hot pursuit. Why isn't this the case with the polyphenols mentioned?

Cheap Red Meat

Chapter 4 of The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan

In an attempt to continue his tailing of corn to the dinner table, Pollan introduces the beef industry, the biggest destination of the plentiful biomass. Pollan's recollection of a visit to Poky Feeders feedlot in 'nowhere', Kansas is part of his observation of the raising of a young black steer, referred to throughout the chapter as 534. Pollan had bought 534 when it was eight months old, knowing it's destiny was to be a protein-rich meal.

Pollan continually refers to his steer as 534, never giving it a name after purchase. He also packs the chapter full of statistics: it takes ten acres of land to produce a calf ready for the feelot, a steer can grow from 80 lbs to 1,100 lbs in 14 months, 534 will convert 32 lbs of feed into 4 lbs of gain everyday up until his slaughter. Pollan continually uses numbers in order to objectify cattle, specifically 534. All of this is a setup to enable the reader to see the steer the same way the industry does, "as a most impressive machine for turning number 2 field corn into cuts of beef" (pg 80).

After the first two chapters, it was easy to be left with questions about the backwards relationship between corn prices and corn production. Pollan continually connects back to corn in order to demonstrate its intertwining relationship with feedlots and beef production. By demonstrating the dependency of the feedlots on corn, it is easier to see the slippery slope cheap beef has made farmers a part of.

The path the book seems to be following is the efficiency of the food industry in supplying cheap food.. but at what other costs? How many of you are willing to eat meat from cattle that has been pumped full of food unnatural to their diet and then antibiotics to deal with that foreign diet, if it costs half the price as grass fed beef? You answer this question every time you go to the grocery store and purchase cheap red meat. Although it may not be monetarily expensive, you are paying a price in terms of the petroleum used during production and possible health effects later in life.

?? Questions ??
1) Is beef sold in grocery stores labeled with where cattle came from or some other way to determine how the cattle were raised?

2) Are there similar health concerns with chicken, salmon, and other animals raised on corn?