Do You Know What You're Eating?

What if I told you that the food you're eating comes from four main companies? That the meat is from animals from only thirteen slaughter-houses that house hundreds of thousands of animals in stifling conditions, surrounded by their own manure, with labor provided by illegal immigrants these companies exploit and abuse? What if I told you this is causing ridiculous outbreaks of new strains of E. coli in beef and spinach and an alarming rate of Type 2 diabetes in children and adults? That the food producers' solution is to bathe their meat-- the ones you buy in grocery stores and restaurants-- with ammonia instead of simply letting cows be grass-fed instead of corn-fed? What if I told you that about 70% or more of what you buy from the supermarket is genetical modified, technologically-engineered "food products" that our body has difficulty naturally absorbing in such large quantities (high-fructose corn syrup is in everything!)? And what if I told you that the government actually subsidizes corn production so that the big "food" companies can buy corn at a cheaper price and use it to make artificial "food products", resulting in bad calories and artificial food products (from chips to soda to candy to fast food) being cheaper than real food? (A fast food burger is cheaper than a head of broccoli!) What if I told you that the FDA and USDA close an eye to all this because many of the positions are held by former execs of those multi-national food conglomerates? Troubling, isn't it? And that's just the beginning. This isn't a "green" or "liberal" agenda. This is a stewardship issue: of the earth, of animals, and of our bodies.

For some fascinating research from brave journalist, read Michael Pollan. For some interesting thoughts from a Christian farmer who refuses to let his farms be too large to ensure the health and care of their animals or the quality of their product, check out Joel Salatin. Or if you want a 90-minute movie that encapsulates the relatively recent (the food industry has taken a turn for the worse only in the last 30 years or so) destruction of our food by rich, multi-national food conglomerates who face no consequences for their greedy, reckless decisions, watch "Food, Inc." It reports and articulates this subject far better than I could, and if you haven't seen it, you really should. The movie released last summer and is now available on DVD/Blu-Ray. Here is a preview:

 

Comments

[Tara DeMoss]

Very nice Glenn. We "loved" watching Food Inc. I changed us. My meat-loving husband hasn't had beef since we saw it - months ago. We look at food very differently now.

[Scott Harada]

Thanks, Glenn. I have eaten healthfully since I was in middle school. I had no idea that anything like this had been produced. I did research into this stuff (beef, dairy, chicken, and corn industries) in 2001-2002 and shared my findings with people. Many were intrigued. A few made lifestyle changes. I even taught some of this stuff to my sixth grade class and their parents, along with our health curriculum.

[Tina Thruston]

I can't beleive how much this is in my face this week. I am in a class where this is the topic for the whole week. One of my classmates was descrbing the grossness of a chicken farm she worked at and now I can't swallow the idea of buying chicken! My brother (Robby) and I were also discussing this video and plan on watching it with our families on Tuesday night. When we lived in California farmer's markets were more accessable. Now here I struggle to find good food from a local grower. I'm so glad you put this out there. third time this week. God is trying to tell me something.

Thanks Glenn

[Carol Prentiss]

That's why I do a lot of my shopping at Natural Grocer's. Thanks for the info.

[Leslie Holzmann]

I've spent the last year (since I read Pollan's books) hunting for grass-fed beef our family could afford. Sadly, while it seems that avoiding the expenses of feedlots and drugs should make the meat cheaper, in fact it's two to three times as expensive.

Is there a way the church could help, perhaps by linking interested parties with a rancher willing to do bulk pricing? I bet a number of New Lifers raise cattle.

Also, there are no farmer's markets near the church--maybe our parking lot could be put to this use?

Thanks for bringing up an important subject and correctly labeling it as a stewardship issue.

[Hillary]

Leslie, our family has been on the same hunt and has had a lot of success. In order to tackle it, we bought a chest freezer on craigslist and a half a beef from a local rancher, as well as a half hog, a whole lamb, and a few chickens. The meat lasted our family of four over a year. The beef ended up costing us only about $3.50/lb, but the hog was what we enjoyed the most. I would love to send you a list of the sources we have found in the area, if you are interested. Email me at hillary(dot)dickman(at)gmail(dot)com and I'll send it to you.

Also, while there aren't year-round farmers' markets in our area, there are quite a few seasonal markets and, even more convenient, CSAs that deliver to locations all over the city. My family and I host a pick-up site at our house for Grant Family Farms (http://www.grantfarms.com) and have been extremely pleased with the organic produce, pastured eggs and meat, and all of the other goodies we have received. Grant Farms delivers their produce from the beginning of June through mid-December and we have found their prices to be very reasonable, especially considering the quality of what they deliver.

Glenn, thank you SO much for highlighting this problem. I have felt for a long time like this was a neglected topic not just in our church, but in churches everywhere.

[thirsty]

Are you saying that illegal immigrants are causing type 2 diabetes? Cow manure or stifling conditions? The four food companies or the 13 slaughter houses? Or the E. coli. Finding a causal relationship for diabetes between these issues is very difficult and hasn't really been done.

Corn is a problem? Isn't corn natural? Corn fed cows are bad? Genetically modified food is always bad? Is eating natural always better than unnatural?

But lets not demonize the food industry. Cheap food has helped the US continue to feed/over feed its growing population.

What exactly does the FDA and USDA turn a blind eye to? Is it that hamburgers are cheaper than broccoli? Should they regulate the price? If these are former execs that have a conflict of interest with the beef industry wouldn't they want the price to climb higher? How does their former relationship with the food industry impair their ability to make proper decisions in the FDA and USDA?

Corn has been subsidized for decades. This keeps many family farmers employed on their own farms. It is not just the evil corporations.

This is a very complicated issue. The arguments that you present here seem one sided, like many popular documentaries. There are not clear causal relationships, and the ag business holds a lot of political clout. This makes finding perfect solutions politically challenging. This causes uneven results.

But if you are making a moral argument there is a lot to be said about stewardship of planet and body. But keep in mind the economic realities of economies of scale, family farmers, and the necessity of a cheap food source.

Healthy food is better than unhealthy food, but unhealthy food is better than no food or inability to access the food.

Thoughts?

[thirsty]

Here is an example article that articulates some of the complexities of the issue.

http://www.grist.org/article/Farm-subsidies-bitter-and-sweet

[Glenn Packiam]

Hi Josh aka Thirsty! :)

Hard to have this discussion until you've watched Food Inc...but briefly:

1. Not implying a causal relationship in the way you listed it. But large food corporations are exploiting immigrants by recruiting them then turning them in, abusing animals by the conditions they are raising them in (far too many to list) and they are genetically modifying them (to the point where chickens collapse due to forced growth beyond what their bone structure can handle)...and the artificial sweetening of high fructose corn syrup is hard for our bodies to break down (not in small doses) in the kind of doses we're getting (it's in everything!)

2. Believe it or not, cows weren't meant to eat corn and they never have. My father-in-law is a farmer and an old school one at that. Yet feeding cows corn is what fattens them up quickly..Unfortunately, it also prevents a cow's digestive system from naturally shedding the bacteria it naturally carries. For example, if a cow were taken off corn for 5 days and given grass, it would naturally shed 80% of harmful bacteria and E. coli. In other words, feeding them corn not only makes them fat; it makes them sick. Many a vet would testify to that (and have...in Pollan's book and to my father-in-law). In fact, something like 80% of antibiotics made are given to animals....mostly as routine procedure-- before they even get sick, because they know that the conditions they are kept it (with manure up to their butts--- so much so it seeps back in!) and the corn they are fed.

3. The food industry has always been great. But in the last 30 years or so the pressure to mass-supply meat and produce has caused a serious deterioration. I know, there is also much to be grateful for...but the two extremes (no food or unhealthy food) are not our only options...even from a commerce standpoint.

4. The subsidizing of corn is not simply to benefit farmers. I know. Here again I reference my father-in-law. But the larger issue is that because many of the USDA and FDA officers are ex-VPs and such of the large food corporations, many important regulations are missing. Did you know the FDA/USDA can't shut down a meathouse (slaughter house or packing plant) even if they are repeat contamination offenders? Does that make sense to you? To have a rule and a rule-enforcer, but to give the rule-enforcer no means with which to enforce that rule?

5. There is a way to keep local farms and yet leverage the economic muscle of Walmart....see my most recent post for that.

You really ought to peruse Pollan's "Omnivore's Dilemma" or watch "Food Inc" on Netflix streaming or something...I think you'd find it fascinating...and alarming.

[Hillary]

Amen.

[thirsty]

I just watched the movie.

First let me say I was not defending the mechanization and mass production of food. I was simply saying that the issue is very complicated. These modern “documentaries” are rarely balanced(Michael Moore’s flicks, “The Corporation”). Food Inc. is no exception. It has an agenda and does not deal with any of the complexities of the issue. It states only the bad of the industry, FDA, USDA, Government, BIG CORPS. It leaves watchers feeling like there is a conspiracy of the powerful to poison people/control people/destroy the world. That doesn’t mean that this documentary was full of untruths. In fact much of what it said was true and appalling. But there were too many logical fallacies. This movie took on everything...NAFTA, Illegal Immigrants, E Coli, Exploitation of Workers, Ethical Treatment of Animals, Ammonia to clean Beef, Chicken Farmers, Patent of Life, The Corrupt Justice System (Clarence Thomas), Corrupt Government (FDA, USDA, Senate, House), Power is Bad, Corporations especially Monsanto. Rather than digging in an focusing on one or two or even three of these issues and really proving the case, it takes the shot gun approach and briefly touches on all of these issue. It does so unfairly. Not a single farmer that does well from Monsanto soybeans was interviewed. Not a single FDA or USDA employee was interviewed. There were too many hasty generalizations. The mother of the son who died of e coli was very sad. But that represented one person. E coli has always been a problem. What the movie should have done was tell us how many more people have died of e coli from contaminated food 50 years ago and now. They needed to show an increase and not just an emotional appeal. Unfortunately children die all the time.

The movie did a number on the USDA. Apparently they are inept and don’t really care about the safety of the food. But the guy who got his organic products into WalMart complimented WM on its green organic signs. These were USDA signs. Obviously the Bad guys in the USDA did something right. But I thought they have a conflict of interest that kept them from recognizing the benefits of healthy food, because they come from the evil food industry?

The movie showed the Union guy not so subtly inferring that the INS was in collusion with the meat factory. They offered no proof, just unsubstantiated accusations. To the casual watcher, they will assume the case has been made. This kind of weak argumentation calls into question many of the other conclusions that have been drawn and can undermine the entire premise.

There was a segment about the exploitation of workers and talked about the minority or poor or illegal workers who work in the food processing factories. Later there was shot of an organic food factory. There were very few employees. Everything was mechanized. Zero(or rather very little) job creation for the poor, the minority, the illegal. Hmm. Also this organic movement is very white, suburban, educated. If the movement is so concerned about minorities and the problems with NAFTA, why don’t they hire more minorities?

How exactly do these bad food companies exploit workers? Can’t the workers choose to leave? The movie said that they cannot because of their economic situation. But then they show a very poor town has refused to work at the chicken plant anymore, so the company has to bus people in from other areas. Obviously people can leave. Inconsistent.

The movie seems to dislike uniformity and conformity of chain fast food. I like it. I live overseas and I like being able to walk into McD’s and get the exact same sandwich. I love being able to go to Starbucks and “go home” for the cost of a latte. Of course I ought not do this all the time.

It was said that 13 slaughter houses process the majority of meat. Well a majority is 50% plus 1. It did not actually tell me anything. They made it sound worse than it may actually be. 13 could process 50%+1, but 200 could do the other 49%. What of the 80/20 rule?

This program mentioned nothing about starvation or drought or natural disasters. If everything was only grown locally, then how do we help people/regions/nations that cannot help themselves?

How do people who live in Manhattan get oranges and pineapples? How would they get enough beef or chicken? Maybe they should not be able to get that stuff, but why not? Corn in Hawaii?

I really liked the independent farmer who didn’t want to grow or get into Walmart. He had the best stuff to say. He was thoughtful and articulate. He had ideas, but the rest of the program did not really have any solutions. I loved his comment about glass walls on slaughter houses.

Make a product that WalMart wants? Is that the best idea? Don’t give cows chickens fish corn/hormones? Okay but what else?

This was not a policy piece. It was intended to invoke an emotional response and reveal the dark side of the ag business. Is it fair? I don’t know. Since I don’t live in the US, I haven't had to make these kind of organic decisions. I just assume that all food I ingest here in China is made in some lab whether it is labeled organic or not.

Ethically I think we are in agreement. Treat animals better. But what does that mean. They should not stand in their own crap all day. Should they be kept in a pin? Should they be eaten at all? Why not feed cows corn for 40 days and then do 10 days of grass to fix their system?

Do we need to concern ourselves with the quality of life of animals that are being grown for food?

Monsanto is the poster child for horrible corporate excess, but it is not different from other companies (Movie, Music, Microsoft, etc) trying to protect its intellectual property. How are farmers that steal seeds from Monsanto and violate their contracts any different from people who illegally share music? How is Monsanto’s pressure on the farmers and machine cleaner different from the prosecution of Napster? Now we can debate the morality of intellectual property laws and the tactics of enforcing them, but is that really central to the Food Inc.’s message? Why are we concerned about saving the job of the seed machine cleaner? Technology has advanced. He may not be necessary anymore. We didn’t save the blacksmith or the buggy driver. Times change.

Comparing the food business with the Big Tobacco companies is simply an emotional appeal and a false analogy. Tobacco was caught lying. Tobacco causes cancer. The food industry is not Tobacco. This reckless accusation demonizes many good people who strive to provide a safe, cheap and diverse food supply.

I agree with the statement that nobody is stepping back and asking WHY. The industry is just solving problems within the industry not society. I think it is good for us to ask why, but asking why is not enough. We must come up with sustainable, not just ecologically but socially sustainable, solutions. How do you convince Americans that have gotten very used to having strawberries year round or Pineapple in Maine and Lobster in Kansas to give up their choices? And is that necessary? We would need to get used to eating chicken with bones or smaller sizes of breast.

Hormones in Animals...Hmm. too much is bad..but what is too much..any?

We ought to eat healthier. We ought not digest much corn syrup. But this should be a personal decision. The food industry is broken and sick. It is not bad or evil.

This movie was effective in getting people to re-examine the food industry. Hopefully it can be effective in motivating people enough to change habits and therefor change the industry. But it was a piece of propaganda. It had an agenda and did not represent the issue in a fair light. The movie tried to attach every/many negative social issues to the Food industry. It used many misleading statements and logical fallacies rather than facts and solid argument in trying to make its point.

Good discussion Glenn!

Thanks.

any thoughts?

[thirsty]

This discussion has gotten me to start reading the book Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future by Bill McKibben. It contains a much more balanced and compelling argument to re-examining our eating habits. But it goes beyond that and also re-examines the whole idea that "more" is "better." I recommend you read it and let me know your thoughts.

I also think there are many useful comparisons of large vs. small farms and large vs. small churches. When Jesus was making his agricultural parables he was referring to very small family farms and farmers. Farmers who know their plants and the soil. Farmers who walk through the fields daily. This might be a good way to look at the role of a pastor. Ought not a pastor know his people? Walk among his people? Rather than cooped up in an office all day or in meetings? If churches are too big, is it possible that the people stand in their own sh*t all day long? Is it possible that parishioners are injected with too many "hormones" that they cannot stand on their own? Is it possible that too little is asked of The Church that many are simply getting fat for slaughter? Has the mega church culture become too focused on results or efficiency? Has it become industrialized? Streamlined? Inorganic? Even Toxic? Are there forces making decisions about church life that are torn by a conflict of interest? Is there a conspiracy to contaminate our spiritual food source?

Just some thoughts and questions I had.

[Glenn Packiam]

thirsty...you have no idea how much i've been thinking along those lines...just wrote a long email to you that got returned. email me at gpackiam@newlifechurch.org and i'll hit you back with my thoughts...