The Omnivore's Responsibility

     Remember the famous granny who demanded, "Where's the beef?" She should have asked, "Who packs the beef?" We should all ask who is packing our beef, pork, or the chicken. It is amazing that in one generation a nation that once thought chicken was a Sunday dinner fit for guests, has grow such an oversized desire for cheap red meats. Also of interest is how such desire translated into a multi-corporate gang focused on gratifying and encouraging that desire.
     For most meat eaters, how their meat gets from hoof to grille is of little concern. They worry more about getting large amounts, from hand to mouth, as fast as possible. What gets their attention is when a favorite grille cut is sold out, burger prices increase, or the fast food window is closed for repairs.
     Even those outside of Chicago cannot forget the meatpacker's story, told in the 1906 by Upton Sinclair in his novel, "The Jungle." Meatpacking, like most industries then, overworked their people. Meatpackers worked with poor sanitation and the danger of injury. In many cases today, that has not changed.
     Sinclair exposed the underbelly of meatpacking and focused lawmakers' attention as the workers, usually new immigrants and African Americans, organized. Today, the meatpacking industry no longer feels compelled to operate near rail hubs or large cities. As they relocate closer to ranchers and farmers in more rural locations, some protections of the union organizations have weakened. Today, the meatpacking industry is, once again, operating almost unfettered by regulation. See Smithfield workers seek justice.
     Another casualty, in the loosely regulated meatpacking industry, is the animals. As the industry developed multimillion-dollar operations, they began gobbling up producers. The result is that the condition in which an animal lives is of little importance as reflected in the industry's inhumane confinements and treatment of livestock. Once livestock was categorized as production units, their lives changed in the cruelest of ways.  In America, production became another name for greed and the animal/human relationship, which honored the well-being of the animal soon to give its life for human consumption, was lost.  How we treat our animals speaks to who we are as a society. 
     In the past 120 years, the meatpacking industry marketers have successfully developed strong appetites in the public for meat and an even stronger desire for it to be cheap.  They encourage eating fast, making real taste irrelevant. Filler and chemicals are added to make less genuine product  look good and voluminous and, voila, you have the modern Western Diet and sick, fat Americans.  Increased production and taxpayer subsidies have resulted in increased meat production and the product sold artificially cheap.  As the industrial animal operations grow, greater profit is achieved at the cost of the short-lived miserable reality of the animals. See Smithfield's pig operation.
     Coincidently, in the past 120 years, the numbers of major meatpackers has dwindled, or more precisely processors have been gobbled up so that there are now just four; Tyson, Cargill, Brazil-based JBS, and National Beef. These four represent 80 percent of the U.S. beef market, Smithfield Foods is the largest pork producer/processor and Tyson remains the largest chicken meatpacker.  This consolidation has more than doubled the meatpacker's power and is slowly putting the small and middle-sized ranchers out of business.  See Ranchers petiton for enforcement of the 1921 Packers and Stock Yard Act - Feb. 2011
     How does fewer meat packers and inhumane treatment of livestock affect the omnivore with spatula in hand, wearing the grille apron? When fewer meatpackers control production and packing, choices are limited and broad scale contamination risks are more likely. Omnivores who oppose inhumane treatment of animals, want to know what meatpacker's brands to avoid. When spending precious food dollars, responsible omnivores want all the nutrition available, in reasonable amounts, at fair prices.
     This month it was reported that over half of all grocery market meats were contaminated with drug resistant bacteria.  Another good reason to try to buy local. Many small farmers humanly raise livestock and are open to the public. Some deliver into larger metropolitan areas and participate in neighborhood Farmer's Markets. Many have eggs and chickens available as well. 

     Education and responsible consuming are the best defenses for protecting you and your family's well-being.

Attitude Over Aptitude Will Change Food System

As consumers, we would like to believe that “somebody” is looking out for our welfare. As enlightened consumers, however, we know the goal of business is not the welfare of people but the welfare of their profits. Doctors make more money treating illnesses and businesses make more money convincing people to buy things they do not want or need at prices that exceed their worth. Often we feel defenseless in the face of power, however, we can make change happen through our personal choices.

A consumer, who buys directly from the hand of a producer, avoids being a statistic, a profit or loss figure on paper. Buying direct from a producer invokes trust. It honors the consumer and producer by creating a personal relationship connected by the product exchanged. That relationship is the “somebody” who is looking out for our well-being as a society. Old fashioned? Yes. The way it used to be? Yes. The way it could be? Yes.

What makes us feel unable to make change happen? We have been lead to believe that we do not have the education needed; we are too young or too old; our voice lacks the strength required; we are without power. None of this is true.  I suggest that attitude far outweighs aptitude.

This eleven-year-old boy represents the power of attitude. He is changing lives as his TED presentation has gone viral on the internet. Watch and listen to his simple but profound message. Birke Baehr, a young man before his time.

A Food Industry in Sheep’s Clothing Is Still A Wolf

The Corn Refiners Association has asked for high fructose corn syrup sweetener (HFCS) to be renamed, “corn sugar” for labeling purposes.  HFCS has been revealed as problematic in the weight and health of those who eat it in large quantities.  Unavoidable as that is in today's industrialized food supply.  The FDA can ease confusion about HFCS by requiring all corn sugars, including dextrose and maltodextrin, to be given the same name. People would then be able to understand the reality of the amount of “corn sugar” being stuffed down their throats.

Renaming products has worked but has left the public skeptical. After all, when sheep watch the wolf dress in sheep’s clothing often enough, there is little pretense left.

The 1938 the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act imposed rules requiring the word “imitation” to appear on products that were imitations of standard foods. For example, margarine is an imitation of butter and Velveeta is an imitation of cheese. Commonsense dictated, people should know what to expect from their milk, cheese, butter, beef, etc. The Act required an “imitation” label on imitation foods. It took the food industry until 1973 to get this rule tossed out. Congress did not write a new law; rather, the FDA simply repealed the Act.

For years, the FDA and the industrial food industry have herded the public down a path for industry profits while the nutritional content of our food has deteriorated and chemical additives increased. When we peek below the sheep’s skin and find corn syrup is making us obese, increasing medical costs, and refuse to buy it, the industry answer is to change the name, increase advertising and wait for the dust to settle.

Businesses practice salesmanship, persuading people to buy what they do not need, and do not want, for more than it is worth. In terms of food, that means that the public desires cheap food in large sizes. Slap a ‘sale’ tag on it and, nutritious or not, needed or not, it sells. The orthodoxy “newer and more is better”, which is born from propaganda authored by greed, entices mindless spending.  Spending, which many would have us believe grows our economy but which has, instead, grown the percentage of poor in America to over fourteen percent and almost eradicated the middle class. In terms of food, it has alarmingly increased the number of morbidly obese and under nourished Americans.

Name changing and smaller packages are but a few of the tactics used by the industrial food industry to increase profits and fool the public. However, between recalls and new food awareness campaigns, the industrial food industry is losing the public’s trust and that, by any name, should be the game changer.