HW # 12-Final Food Project 2-Outline

Thesis: An individual striving to live a morally cogent life must act contrary to the common practices of our culture, which encompass nightmarish industrial atrocities.

Major Argument #1: The dominant food practices of our culture are harmful to our present and future world, and thus should be avoided by individuals who wish to exercise morality.  

                Supporting Claim #1: Our culture’s dominant food customs entail hurtful practices.

                                Evidence:  Annually (because of foodborne illnesses), 76 million Americans are sickened, 325,000 Americans are hospitalized, and 5,000 Americans die. (see hyperlink #1)

                                Evidence: One third of children and adolescents are obese or overweight. (see hyperlink #1).

                                Evidence:  Factory farming and industrial agriculture is popular, but inhumane, dangerous to workers and consumers, pollutant, and environmentally hurtful.  (See hyperlink #1).

                                Evidence: Genetic Engineering decreases the health of food and tampers with evolution’s logic (see hyperlink #1).

                                Evidence: Dominant discourses involve cruelty to animals, and it is worth noting when corporations strive to exercise passion (see hyperlink #6)

Supporting Claim #2: One can exercise morality by considerately and respectfully exercising alternatives to the atrocious practices of our culture.                                

                    Evidence:  Organic, sustainably grown produce is available at local Farmer’s Markets, farms and natural food stores, and more. (See hyperlink #1)

                                Evidence: It is possible to grow your own food, to an extent

                                Evidence: You can protest the lack of a healthful and humane agricultural system (see hyperlink #2, #12)

                                Evidence: We can vote for better food by pressuring our Department of Education (see hyperlink #3 and #5)

                                Evidence: We can request nutrition facts/labeling on food so that we know what we are eating (see hyperlink #4)

                                Evidence: Food Corporations respond to the demands of consumers (see hyperlink #6, #11)

                                Evidence: People are followers; be a leader (see hyperlink #7)

                                Evidence: The notion that food is dangerous has been acknowledged by many (see hyperlink #8, #11, #12)

                                Evidence: Current foodborne illnesses can often be reversed (see hyperlink #9)

                Alternate Supporting Claim #2: The dominantly accepted practices of our culture are worsening; ergo following our culture's common practices will hurt the world’s future.

                                Evidence: Our practices are worsening in that other cultures are becoming westernized, thereby globalizing disease and other food-related issues. (see hyperlink #9, #11).

                                Evidence: We are devolving (see hyperlink #9, #11).

                                Evidence: Stereotypical views of agriculture are no longer existent; they have become gruesomely worse over the past 50 years. (See hyperlink #10, #11)

Works Cited:

1)      http://foodincmovie.com/about-the-issues.php

2)      http://www.ciw-online.org/

3)      http://insideschools.org/blog/2010/10/14/going-green-good-for-the-planet-good-for-the-body/

4)      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/28/business/28label.html?_r=2&hp

5)      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/23/nyregion/23bigcity.html?_r=1&hp

6)      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/business/22chicken.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1288321326-iSi09lnIP1HEisgylJDy1Q

7)      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/dining/06tacos.html?src=me&ref=homepage

8)      http://www.ted.com/talks/mark_bittman_on_what_s_wrong_with_what_we_eat.html

9)      http://www.ted.com/talks/dean_ornish_on_the_world_s_killer_diet.html

10)   http://www.themeatrix.com/
11)  http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/jun/10/food-movement-rising/?pagination=false
12) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/opinion/10pollan.html?pagewanted=2

HW #11 - Final Food Project 1

     In response to what I learned during our Food Unit, reading Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan, reading Quantum Wellness Cleanse by Kathy Freston, and hearing vegans and vegetarians express their beliefs, I decided to stop eating food products that come from animals. In other words, I became a Vegan. The dominant food discourse in our society and country is embodied by eating industrially produced, fossil-fuel exhausting, and genetically modified food. I hate the fact that most of our food comes from a source that is not only unsustainable, but cruel to animals, pro obesity, pro disease, propaganda-filled, manipulative, and even disgusting. Most meat, milk, eggs, and other products that come from animals are a result of industrially producing food. Eating such animal products, in my opinion, substantiates the common discourse of America, which is something I wish to avoid for the sake of my own health and the overall health of my world.

           Some people can respond to industrial corporate monsters, and support different sources of food by buying strictly organically, even "beyond" organic. I hope that, for their own good, these people also live near a farmers market or a local farm, have space and time for a garden, control over where their family obtains food, and an excessive wallet. Unfortunately, I have access to a farmer's market, but not the other aspects of strictly organic food ways. What I do have is the power to vote: not for presidential candidates, but for nutrition that will benefit the environment, other people, animals, and me. I find that the wisest way to vote for such nutrition is by eating organic food when I can, and by obtaining comestibles that have never touched animals.

           For about 3 months, I have maintained a Vegan lifestyle, and learned much in the process. First of all, I learned that it is sometimes best not to command perfectionism of oneself, which in my case meant I should ease into a Vegan diet. I still occasionally have a splash of Half&Half in my coffee when my family is out of milk substitutes, indulge in a friend's birthday cake although its ingredients include eggs, or pick meat out of soup before eating it, even though residue from the meat is still there in the broth. I learned that one mistake does not constitute an excuse to go all the way and order a burger. Although mishaps in my Vegan endeavor are regrettable, occasionally permitting them enables me to sustain such a diet for a longer time, because it is a little easier and motivates me not to give up ultimately.

          I came to understand in a tangible way that I can help people and animals across the globe or country, albeit my inability to directly see what I am doing. Contrary to popular belief, forgoing animal products is not nearly as difficult or ridiculous as it would seem. It is possible, although comparably difficult, to give my body the right nutrition, protein, vitamins, etc. that it needs, even as a growing teenager. I also learned that no matter what paths I chose or what actions I take, there will be someone who disagrees with me. Depressing though it is, I cannot live by my values without meeting with opposition, even enemies. However, I can approach opposition from others with respect and patience, which makes Veganism, or simply thoughtfulness toward what we put in our bodies, more attractive to others. 

          In order to further educate myself on nutrition and find more vegan options, I am reading Vegetarian Beginner's Guide, published by Vegetarian Times, Inc. This book summarizes a lot of what is said in Omnivore's Dilemma and Quantum Wellness Cleanse. It also offers applicable nutrition suggestions in the form of recipes, exercise options, meat, dairy, and egg alternatives, and daily recommended intake of protein, iron, calcium, and various vitamins. My experience as a Vegan is one of learning and improvement rather than of superior feelings or spending lots of money. Like in any pursuit in life, it is a constant struggle to maintain balance, and I think the means are equally important to the ends.

HW #10 - Food, Inc. Response

            1) Precis: Those of us who eat every day and wish to continue doing so (in other words, everyone presently living in America) share a serious political, emotional, economical, environmental, even ethical conflict. The perspective and approach of food corporations has radically changed over the past 50 years - and not for the better. The majority of all food sold and consumed in our country has been genetically modified, unintelligently treated with pesticides and chemicals, supportive of animal cruelty (feeding all animals corn, antibiotics, and their own species, giving them torturous treatment and living situations), successful because of propaganda, and a result of political corruption.  America's struggles with healthy food (or lack thereof) is a result of the government's biases and lack of values, and monstrously large industrial food corporations. We can fight the power of the monster corporations by disputing the injust decisions of the government, which give those corporations their power, choosing healthy, organic food and spreading the truth about what we are eating.

              2) There were several similarities and differences between Omnivore's Dilemma and Food, Inc. The book had not just statistics, but explanations of studies behind the statistics, and more evidence in general. I found Omnivore's Dilemma to be less biased than Food, Inc., because it was generally more informative and thorough than the movie, which chose to add the evidence and footage that would best fulfill the authors' agenda. In some ways, the movie was more memorable because it provided effective visuals. Instead of using brain power imagining what was communicated in the book, the movie-viewer can focus on drawing inferences, because the visuals are already provided. For example, both the book and the movie described that chickens are now grown to have bigger breasts and more fat than chickens 50 years ago, but these new chickens mature and are slaughtered in much less time. The movie provided a visual of 2 chickens from both time periods, and the present chicken grew much faster than the chicken to its right, which represented chickens from 50 years ago. As they grew, the number of months corresponding their respective stages of growth increased; the months below the feet of the present-day chicken stopped at a lower number than that of the other. This visual helped demonstrate the disgustingly quick and unnatural speed at which the present day chicken grows, and unpleasant tendencies of industrial food corporations. The book did not have this visual, but instead described the facts with words - this was effective, but not as memorable. Food, Inc. had quotes from Omnivore's Dilemma, so they had some very similar food-related messages. both the book and the movie discussed truth hidden behind a veil and purposeful miscommunications, the major companies monopolizing the food system, food-causing illnesses, and evolution related explanations for our current diets. In both, the authors did a confusing thing: ate an industrially produced burger, despite their knowledge of its shortcomings. Both argue that industrial food corporations don't want us to know the truth about what we're eating, because if we did know, we wouldn't eat it.
           
               3) Watching Food, Inc. led me to realize that our country is full of irony. It is ironic that we are famous for accomodating those who wish to lead better lives; we are the "land of the free" and the "home of the brave". Sure, we are free to vote for a presidential candidate and some other government positions, but we do not have complete freedom to know the risks of what we are eating, or to choose what to eat based on our knowledge. The reason that other countries are not so "free", is because the US has manipulated or ignored their qualms. Many people from said countries immigrate to America in hopes of a better life, where they work the jobs that no one else wants to do, experience much prosecution from American police and citizens, and have no choice but to work for the very industrial food monsters that contributed to their sorry position in the first place. It is also ironic that the "home of the brave" does not have leaders that are brave enough to withstand some criticism or forgo a paycheck. If they had bravery and valued freedom, corporate conglomerates in the food industry would not have the power and success they did, and Americans would lead better lives.
               After watching Food, Inc., I feel helpless to maneuver the propaganda and industrialized food that dominates the city. I could obtain my food from food co-ops, local farms, farmer's markets, and my own garden (which I do not have), but this is an expensive endeavor, even if it is responsibly priced. I could plant a garden, but I personally do not have the funds to buy locally or truly organically, and my family is not interested in spending extra money on food, even if buying industrial food means voting for injustice, lies, monopolization of monster corporations, and using the world's quickly-diminishing supply of resources.

HW # 7d

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 17

Précis: In order to fully comprehend the ethics of eating animals, I read about the arguments that embody the controversial subject (the authors I read Peter Singer, Descartes, John Berger, Jeremy Bentham, Tom Regan, James Rachels, Steven M. Wise, Joy Williams, Matthew Scully, J.M. Coetzee, Kant, Danel Dennett, Stephen Budiansky, Tim Flannery, and Ben Franklin) and formed opinions and questions of my own.  Humans are addressing this topic more now than ever, because we are turning from Descarte's view that animals are machines, to the views of modern food-philosophers like Peter Singer, which support the individuality and rights of animals. All the material I read, especially Peter Singer's Animal Liberation motivated me to become a vegetarian (which I became) so that I could approach forming opinions about this topic without being overly defensive and biased. My questioning led me to feel that it is morally upright to eat meat if one is conscious and respectful about it; the animal must be raised in an environment like that of Polyface Farm, have lived without unnecessary suffering and killed humanely. However, there are many beliefs and approaches to meat, all of which can operate upon some shred of truth, except an approach that entails mindless animal slaughter and comsumption.

Gems: "Is it faculty of reason, or perhaps the faculty of discourse?...But a full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversational animal, than an infant" (page 308).

             "The great advantage of being a 'reasonable creature,' Franklin remarks, is that you can find a reason for whatever you want to do" (page 310).

             "We are the better for it, and they are never the worse...The death they suffer in our hands commonly is, and always may be, a speedier and, by that means a less painful one, than that which would await them in the inevitable course of nature" (page 328).

             "We no longer have any rituals governing either the slaughter or eating of animals, which perhaps helps explain why we find ourselves in this dilemma, in a place wehre we feel our only choice is to either look away or give up meat" (page 332).

Thoughts and Questions: What did Pollan mean when he said, "What's wrong with eating animals is the practice, not the principle" on page 328? After completing the chapter, I'm inclined to infer that, according to him, eating something that was once alive, even raised and killed as a means to making meat, is not wrong. Eating meat defensively (which means twisting or ignoring a premise like "all animals experience pain") or eating meat after looking the other way is wrong. Unfortunately, our society and government seems to favor those who eat animals without thinking, because this means more ease and money for it. This chapter has helped me realize that seeking out truth is necessary, and if you want to learn the truth, you must learn it in its entirety. Seeking it means admitting constantly that you know very little, and disposing your pre-supposed opinions, and possibly of the opinions of people around you. 

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 18

Précis: My first experiences hunting by myself were marked by silence, solitude, alertness, loss of short term memory, a high that was similar to that of marijuana, and a connection with nature and the animal I was hunting. While hunting with Angelo and his three friends, my first opportunity to shoot a pig was unsuccessful because I was not ready, but the second opportunity marked the death of a 190 pound sow. "Dressing" (which is actually undressing) the pig was disgusting, and even more upsetting than the moments during and after I shot it; I decided that this was a result of evolution, an ancient tool for discerning what is and isn't poison, and probably the reason why so many people are disgusted by hunting yet support the killing of animals by eating meat.   

Gems: "The experience of hunting suggests another theory. Could it be that the cannabinoid network is precisely the sort of adaption that natural selection would favor in the evolution of a creature who survives by hunting?" (page 342).

              "In hunting you always need to be ready. So, okay, you learned something new today" (page 347).

             "So much of the human project is concerned with distinguishing ourselves from beasts that we seem strenuously to avoid things that remind us that we are beasts too - animals that urinate, defecate, copulate, bleed, die, stink, and decompose" (page 357).

Thoughts and Questions: Although I cannot remember a specific time when I felt the degree of guilt that Pollan felt upon seeing that picture (on page 362), I nevertheless felt his guilt and disgust as I read. The only time I can remember that I've negatively affected an animal in such a direct manner is when I was 7 and stepped on my relatives' dog's tail by accident, and I was told to tell him sorry as my relatives watched. I felt horrible, because I (albeit by accident) had stepped on his tail with such nonchalance and absentmindedness. Maybe I felt guilty as I read because I felt his pride and excitement when he described the pig's death, and was ashamed that I would probably have similar emotions to his. It is commendable that he was able to see both perspectives of hunting: the view that it is a beautiful, meditative past time, and the view that it it is a disgusting, savage sport. Why don't women hunt, I wonder? I have never read of or met a woman who hunts for sport as Pollan and Angelo did...Is our culture really that defined by gender roles?   

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 19

Précis: Foraging for mushrooms, or more appropriately called "mushroom hunting", is unlike any other way of obtaining produce because the location of mushrooms (forests and woods) makes it very easy to get lost while foraging, and the ability of mushrooms to camouflage is unlike that of any fruit or vegetable, which prospers from being picked. Fungi are also very mysterious because no one knows why they grow where and when they grow, the different genders of fungi, how to consistently distinguish between poisonous and non-poisonous, or the chemical properties that lead to hallucinations, to name a few unknowns. Although fungi are mysterious and hard to find, it is an extremely rewarding experience to forage for mushrooms, morels, or other kinds of edible fungi.

Gems: "Who's to say the day won't come when science will be able to measure the fungi's exotic energies, perhaps even calculate our minimum daily requirement of lunar calories?" (page 378).

            "It was such a feeling of empowerment, to feed yourself by figuring out the puzzle of nature" (page 380).

            "...I'd just won a round. This is not something I can ever imagine saying to an apple in the garden; there, it just wouldn't be news" (page 387).

Thoughts and Questions: This chapter reminded me of a couple I met at the Green Market in Union Square. When they first told me they made a living from foraging for mushrooms, I wondered why more people did not pursue such an easy job. Now I understand that it is quite a valuable and difficult way to make a living. I have a newfound respect for all who attempt to forage for mushrooms and other fungi. I wonder if mushrooms are really powerd by the moon? Is it possible to obtain energy from the sun, and yet still wilt and melt in sunlight?



The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 20

Précis: I spent all day Saturday, and many hours week before, preparing a meal (that was made entirely out of ingredients that I or a friend had grown, foraged, caught, or hunted) for Angelo, Sue, Anthony, Richard, Judith, Isaac, and myself. It included Fava Bean Toasts, Sonoma Boar Pâté, , Egg Fettuccine, Power Fire Morels, braised leg and grilled loin of Wild Sonoma Pig, Wild East Bay Yeast Levain, Very Local Garden Salad, Fulton Street Bing Cherry Galette, Claremont Canyon Chamomile Tisane, and 2003 Angelo Garro Petite Syrah Wine. This meal was not 5-star or "great" compared to my or my guests' standards for meals, but perfect? It was, because the transparency, thoughtfulness, opposition to fast or industrial food, and joy that went into and resulted from that meal was well worth its physical, intellectual, and emotional costs; It was a priceless reminder of what food has the potential and power to be.
Gems: "No, little if anything about this meal was what anyone would call 'realistic'. And yet no meal I've ever prepared or eaten has been more real" (page 392).

              "What this means is the calories we'd be consuming represent energy captured by trees rather than, as is typical now, by annuals in fam fields or grasses in pastures" (page 399).

             "Industrial and domestic, hard and soft, metal and meat: This place was a lot like Angelo himself" (page 400).
Thoughts and Questions: Pollan seemed a little overly sentimental about this meal at first, but I soon came to (at least partially) comprehend the beauty of such a dinner. It can be eaten without worry or guilt regarding its effects on the body or environment. It did not support industrialization, animal cruelty, biased food lobbyists, propaganda, oversubsidation of corn, etc. Also, if I had gone through all those experiences that Pollan did to arrive at that dinner table, I too would feel an inexplicable attachment to the different elements and meanings of the meal. This chapter, indeed this whole book, inspired me to attempt to grow my own food more, buy "beyond" organic when possible, appreciate knowing where my food came from, and value food as a sacred means of supporting my existence and connecting me to the earth rather than a commodity.

            

HW 9 - Freakonomics Response

            In Freakonomics, Steven Levitt and Stephan Dubner approach the "correlation proves causation" fallacy by tackling many active examples in our society. They help refute beliefs that operate upon the premise that correlation is causation. For example, many black people have unique, stereotypically "black" names. Many people think that having such a name from birth will lead to having a violent, permiscuous, poor, or lousy life. Levitt and Dubner counter this by arguing that the cause of a lousy, ghetto life is not someone's name, but the environment that so often accompanies their name. The type of mother to name her daughter Shaniqua is statistically more likely to be a single mom, live in a hostile domestic situation, and have a low income and minimal education. Thus, Shaniqua will probably lack a good example to follow, feel little love, and have little instruction. This environment, and not the name, will contribute to a lousy future. This is one example of how the authors of the movie proved acknowledged the correlation is causation fallacy.

            Levitt and Dubner use several forms of evidence in order to come to conclusions in Freakonomics. They look for patterns within huge collections of numbers to find certain evidence for hypotheses. For example, they observed students who had gotten the majority of the questions on tests wrong, except for the last 10 to 20 questions. The number of students was significant enough to support the hypothesis that teachers had helped them by going to the end of the test (where many questions are often blank) and filled in the correct circles. This was innovative, because most analyzations of answers on tests are of percentages of right answers, or races of test-takers. Most people do not think to observe and compare patterns within individual tests. Other forms of evidence are statistics, the word of experts and informed or involved people, and possible motives of wrongdoers. For instance, if it became apparent that a Sumo Wrestler had something to gain by cheating, then it is much more likely to the researcher that cheating occured. A names expert claimed that a name can not define anyone's destiny, thereby lowering the significance of names and their connotations. Statistics about "black" vs. "white" names revealed that employeers are more likely to hire people who they think are white, and that success is easier to obtain for caucasian people.
           I agree that Freakonomics serves as an inspiration and good example to our attempt to explore "hidden-in-plain-sight" weirdness of dominant social practices. The conclusions of Levitt and Dubner were not always completely un-biased and sometimes were not based on dynamic research and evidence. However, they succeeded in supporting several hypotheses and revealing their knowledge to the public; they began this process by asking questions and exercising distrust. They distrusted the integrity of those involved with Sumo Wrestling, asked if their was a correlation between crime, cheating, and winning, and researched until they answered those questions. This very process should be used when investigating US foodways. We should treat the food production industries of the US like the authors of Freakonomics treated Sumo Wrestling. We should question the integrity and processes of our current industrial agriculture, but we shouldn't stop with just questions. Like Michael Pollan, author of Omnivore's Dilemma, and the authors of Freakonomics, we should invasively research our foodways and reveal our findings to the public.

 

HW 7c

Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 11

Précis: Joel Salatin, with the help of his family and late father, has developed many ways of helping his farm to flourish; the extensive knowledge and labor of him and his father have transformed a deplorable, damaged piece of land into a multi-faceted gem of an ecosystem. The forest on the north side of the property (which helps de-stress the animals, provides compost, waters the farm, saves money, and helps the growth off the grass) the chickens (which save money, provide eggs, chicks and meals, and clean up after various animals), the cows (which trim the grass, and provide meat, manure, and milk), the pigs (which help aerobic decomposition to produce composot and provide meals and money), the rakens, the hummus, the grass, and the earth warms are a diamond of many facets, a wonderful holon when combined by Salatin. This farm presents a view very unlike the one-sided perspective used when approaching industrial agriculture.

Gems: "...Joel is able to use his cattle's waste to 'grow' large quantities of high-protein chicken feed for free; he says this trims his cost of producing eggs by twenty-five cents per dozen...Joel can tell you the exact economic implication of every synergy on the farm" (page 211).
            "'I'm just the orchestra conductor, making sure everybody's in the right place at the right time'" (212).
           "But in a biological system you can never do just one thing, and I couldn't add many more chickens without messing up something else" (page 213).

Thoughts and Questions: I would enjoy working on a farm like Salatin's one day. Cliche as it might seem, this chapter supports the idea that working with one's hands, and in an aware and thoughtful way, builds character. Judging from my own past experiences, I'd have to agree. Unfortunately, character is the least of the USDA's, government's, or CAFO managers' worries. They are more worried about making food cheap to consumers, even though it is ultimately an expense in so many ways. I wish there were more Joel Salatins in the world. He's not perfect, but he's got his heart in the right place and he's intelligent. Those two traits don't often acccompany one another in individuals. I wonder why that is? It's probably partly a fault of the propaganda and manipulation of the industrial food industry; acting with awareness and good intentions is difficult and uncommon when looking for food or producing it.

Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 12 



Précis: On Wednesday morning of my stay at the farm, I participated in the slaughter of 300 chickens, not because I wanted to, but because I felt that as a meat eater, it was fitting to participate in the action that is necessary for me to enjoy meat. The USDA inspectors always critisize Joel Salatin's unorthodox manner of killing, plucking, gutting, and cleaning chickens in the open rather than behind "white walls", but there are no regulations that prevent this type of slaughter. Salatin has found a way to live out his world-views, even by doing something as simple and seemingly inhumane as killing chickens and using their waste. He values integrity and transparency when selling to customers, as well as building his community and neighborly relationships; this is something that he finds industrial agriculture sinfully unable to do, because it cannot be regulated, and if that industry was transparent, consumers would lessen.

Gems: "You can't regulate integrity" (page 235).
            "Every government study to date has shown that hte reasons we're having an epidemic of food-borne illness in this country is centralized production, centralized processing, and long-distance transportation of food. You would think therefore that they'd want to decentralize the food system...they'd much rather just irradiate everything instead" (page 230).
            "You have just dined...and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity" (page 227).

Thoughts and Questions: The quote by Emerson can also be found in "Quantum Wellness Cleanse: The 21 Day Essential Guide to Healing Your Mind, Body, and Spirit" by Kathy Freston. (http://search.barnesandnoble.com/books/product.aspx?r=1&isbn=9781602861015&cm_mmc=Google%20Product%20Search-_-Q000000630-_-Quantum%20Wellness%20Cleanse-_-9781602861015). Kathy Freston reminds me of Joel Salatin and Michael Pollan in that they are willing to go against the flow in order to obtain truth, integrity, and transparency after doing substantial research. "The Omnivore's Dilemma" certainly added more meaning to this quote, because the slaughterhouse represents more than just animal cruelty and decreased health of individuals; it also represents a society that has been fed lies by its government, a world floating on petroleum, and the concept of agriculture percieved as a means for making money and approached in a one-sided manner. I wonder what Emerson knew that the people around him did not know, or pretended not to know? Why is kililng animals so "dehumanizing?" To dehumanize is to divest someone of a human quality. What human qualities do we loss by kiling chickens? How can a human become less of a human? I feel that dehumanizing is not really removing human qualities from a human, but rather transforming them into a not so stereotypical human.

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 13

Précis: The Polyface Farm only supplies eggs, chicken, beef, pork, and produce to local consumers, restaurants, markets, shops, and clubs because it saves the world's energy and resources, it reforms the global food system, and it preserves "relationship marketing". Polyface food costs a dollar or so more per pound relative to the industrial market's prices, but this a reflection of the government's regulations on processing food and the irresponsible prices of industrial food. If consumers payed (in dollars) for what they were getting, including the hidden costs to the environment , water pollution, antibiotic resistance, food-borne illness, crop subsidies, oil, and taxes, the aliments Joel Salatin offers would be the cheapest available; this is partly why Allan Nation claims that a business cannot be half industrial and half artisanal.  Between the two enterprises, the perspective people are empowerd to have of food (a commodity vs. "artisanal production) defines how they spend their money and treat food. 

Gems: "Don't you find it odd that people will put more work into choosing their mechanic or house contractor than they will into chosing the person who grows their food?" (page 240).

          "These eggs just jump up and slap you in the face!" (page 242).

          " 'Why do you have to have a New York City? What good is it?' If  there was a dark side to Joel's vision of the postindustrial food chain, I realized, it was the deep antipathy to cities that has so often shadowed rural populism in this country" (page 245).

Thoughts and Questions: I was struck by Pollan's description of Art, Joel's brother. It seemed to reveal that cities are a cause for passing beyond the point of hope for improvement in this world or in human souls. But is this the case? Can life away from a constant abundance of people and their corresponding stress affect one's hope in the world? I suppose Joel more tangibly experiences the warmth, humor, and collaboration of his family and customers than Art does. I wonder if Art is ever annoyed by Joel's constant effort to stop the lies and evil in the world, rather than just live with it.

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 14

Précis: From the Polyface Farm I selected goods with which to make dinner for a family whose friendship I have valued for many years. I slow roasted two chickens, concocted a souffle, and prepared a salad and corn. This meal was nutritionally and piquantly of a higher quality because it was not a result of genetic breeding, feeding corn to animals, using pesticides or chemicals, or keeping organisms from expression their physiological individuality.

Gems: "There was nothing terribly subtle about this meal, but everything about it tasted completely in character" (page 270).

            "But souffle has a spiritual sense, too, as in the breath of life (in English the word "spirit" comes from breath), which seems fitting, for isn't the souffle as close as cookery ever comes to elevating matter into spirit?" (page 273).

            "When chickens get to live like chickens, they'll taste like chickens, too" (page 270).

Thoughts and Questions: This chapter made me both hungry and appreciative of the way details make a difference in a meal. The details (salt, pepper, butter, soaking chicken in saltwater before roasting, the time spent beating eggs, the diet and exercise of the animal) make a huge difference in the mood and quality of a meal. A culture truly is partially defined by the intricacies of its foodways. I am inspired to try making a souffle in the near future.  

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 15



Précis: I decided that it would be a beneficial learning experience for me to attempt to create a meal out of the shortest possible food chain; that is, foraging, hunting, and growing food myself. I wanted to experience firsthand the feeling of killing another creature, of being directly tied to other natural systems, of preparing and eating a meal in full conscioussness of what is involved. Alas, my childhood and recent move deemed this endeavor difficult, to say the least. With the help of a hunter education course and of my friend, Angelo, I will achieve my goal; in the meantime, I am content with observing what is and isn't edible looking in nature.

Gems: "...She made it sound like it wouldn't take much for a kid to get himself killed snacking in the woods" (page 278).

           "Agriculture brought humans a great many blessings, but it also brought infectious disease (from living in close quarters with one another and our animals) and malnutrition (from eating too much of the same thing when crops were good, and not enough of anything when they weren't" (page 279). 

           "Somehow I doubted I would feel quite at home stalking game in the woods, but it was reassuring to think that in doing so I would be contesting only my upbringing, not my genes" (page 280).

Thoughts and Questions: Pollan's desire to eat from the fruits of his own labor, literally, seems more typical of a child than of a grown man. Many children would be fascinated and romantizised by the idea of living in the wilderness, picking berries, possibly shooting animals, and making little fires with flint and steel. For over a year, my little sister has been taking a class that supposedly enables her and her classmates to survive in the wilderness. Because most children do not live in fear of having to survive in the wilderness with limited resources, this class, like Pollan's goal, is probably attractive because it is romantic in some way. However, Pollan has many endearing child-like qualities; he is inherently curious and unceasingly questioning. He is youthful in the best kind of way. Like my sister and the authors of Freakonomics, Pollan has a child-like approach to important parts of life that help him to live in awareness.

 The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 16

Précis: Humans, like rats, are very unique creatures when considering their eating tendencies. Humans have large brains relative to the size of their stomach and guts, which is an effect of requiring a varied diet in addition to superior cognition, memory-storage, food-selection, and sensory capabilities. Humans also require food that is not just good to eat, but culturally pleasing, ethical, environmentally friendly, affordable, or even popular; generally, we are prone to decide if a food is "good to eat" based on taste and familiarity. While Americans wonder why other countries succeed in being healthy minus an obsession with food, other cultures consistently feast upon combinations of foods that are nutritionally complementary (like eating soy sauce with rice), and maintain customs (like eating only when with other people).

Gems: "But rats and humans require a wider range of nutrients and so must eat a wider range of foods, some of them questionable. Whenever they encounter a potential new food they find themmselves torn between two conflicting emotions unknown to hte specialist eater, each with its own biological rationale: neophobia, a sensible fear of ingesting anything new, and neophilia, a risky but necessary opennness of new tastes" (page 288).

         "There does seem to be an evolutionary trade-off between big brains and big guts - two very different evolutionary strategies for dealing with the question of food selection" (page 290). 

         "Curiously, the one bodily fluid of other people that doesn't disgust us is the one produced by the human alone: tears. Consider the sole type of used tissue you'd be willing to share" (292).  

Thoughts and Questions: In many ways, evolved traits that once preserved our existence now seem to be causing our downfall. Our tendency for favoring sweetness once helped us to find good sources of sustainance; now it is causing numerous health problems. Similarly, we still avoid bitter food, thereby causing an unfortunate lack of vegetables and important nutrients in our diets. Will natural selection begin to favor people who lack strong the ability to taste well? Will the next several centuries procur a population of people who hate sweetness?  

HW 7b

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 6:

                    

                  Précis: Parellels can be drawn between the early nineteenth century and present day in that the corn was cheap and plentiful; thus, Americans consumed much of it in the form value-added commodity. We consumed alcohol (in the nineteenth century) and a variety of processed, high-calorie foods. In both time periods, this corn consumption (which is necessary to maintain the economy and be rid of corn's excess biomass) has indirectly led to drunkenness, violence, family abandonment, alcohol related disease, an obesity epidemic, Type 2 diabetes, overnutrition, malnutrition, and various other health and environmental complications. More specific causes of these such issues (which are ultimately the effect of corn) are Americans' greed, more sedentary lifestyles, affluence, poverty, high cost of healthy food, technology, and superior advertising; evolution has also inclined humans to seek out sweet and fatty foods.
                  Gems: "Much as today, the astounding productivity of American farmers proved to be their own worst enemy, as well as a threat to public health...Sooner or later, clever marketers will figure out a way to induce the human omnivore to consume the surfeit of cheap calories" (page 101).
                              "Deep cultural taboos against gluttony - one of the seven deadly sins, after all - had been holding us back. Wallerstein...had discovered the secret to expanding the (supposedly) fixed human stomach" (page 106).
                              "While the surgeon general is raising alamrs over the epidemic of obesity, the president is signing farm bills designed to keep the river of cheap corn flowing, guaranteeing that the cheapest calories inthe supermarket will continue to be the unhealthiest" (page 108).
                  Thoughts and Questions: David Wallerstein is decidely loyal to the success of movie theaters and McDonald's, and disgustingly cruel for turning healthy decisions into even more of a struggle and myth for Americans. It is hard to consider that he may have contributed to America's collective expanding waistline for noble reasons. 
Evolution used to favor those who had a sweet tooth and an eye for fatty foods. It is going to reverse now? Currently, people who don't esteem such comestibles are enjoying better health than those who do. This is one in many examples of how our society is backwards.  

Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 7:

                   

                     Précis: Fast food, a huge part of America's diet, is a tasty sort of comfort food, well liked by children, and inexpensive. Unfortunately, these are the only redeeming qualities of the fast food industry. Although meals at restaurants like McDonald's seem dynamic, they are far from it. The majority of the products there has something in common: A dependence on, or many ingredients containing corn and synthetic ingredients (some of which are toxic) like sodium aluminum phosphate, monocalcium phosphate, sodium acid pyrophosphate, calcium lactate, dimethylpolysiloxene, tertiary butylhydroquinone, and pesticides. Thus, fast food not only unhealthy, but requires significant amounts of fossil fuel and corn which could serve much more productive purposes.

                     Gems: "The marketers have a term for what a salad or veggie burger does for a fast food chain: 'denying the denier'. These menu items hand the child who wants to eat fast food a sharp tool with which to chip away at his parents' objections" (page 110).

                                "When I asked Isaac if the new nuggets tasted more like chicken than the old ones, he seemd baffled by the question. 'No, they taste like what they are, which is nuggets...duh.'" (page 112).

                                "But then, this is what the industrial eater has become: corn's koala" (page 117).

                     Thoughts and Questions: I've heard it said that people now serve their technology rather than vice versa, but I think that this is even more true of corn. Humans, specifically those in our country, serve corn and make sacrifices to it in so many ways. Why? Even though it's a plant that presents many uses and serves many purposes, it is nonetheless boggling that we can see signs of its success so thoroughly incoporated into our environment, animals, bodies, grocery stores, research, and economy. I am going to try harder to "eat low on the food chain" as Michael Pollan says. Hopefully when my body encounters corn in the future, it will mostly be directly from the cob. Although this seems simple, it is certainly dreaming big considering America's infatuatino with corn.

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 8

                    

                    Précis: Classic pastoral beauty, an picture that we are currently enamored of (due to the effects of evolution), cannot be found in most farms in America. Joel Salatin still holds true to that picture by having a truly organic farm; it is a little community in which each organism - grass, animals, hummus, worms - has a purpose and serves the productivity of the farm. This is very unusual relative to most farms in America, even those that are considered organic. Because of the politics and controversy concerning farming, the term "organic" is very loosely defined, and thus farms can claim to be organic without changing their industrial methods.

                     Gems: "Salatin is the choreographer and the grasses are his verdurous stage; the dance has made polyface one of the most productive and influential alternative farms in America" (page 126).

                                  "The way I produce chicken is an extension of my worldview. You can learn more about that by seeing what's sitting on my bookshelf than having me fill out a whole bunch of forms" (page 132).

                                "That's all the Indians ever wanted - to keep their tepees, to give their kids herbs instead of patent medicines and leeches....the Western mind can't bear an opt-out option. We're going to have to refight the Battle of the Little Bighorn to preserve the right to opt out, or your grandchildren and mine will have no choice but to eat amalgamated, irradiated, genetically prostituted, barcoded, adulterated fecal spam from the centralized processing conglomerate" (page 132).  

                     Thoughts and Questions: I thought it interesting when Joel Salatin referred to food as "fecal spam" that is "genetically prostituted". These terms seem overdramatic (it is only dinner, right?), but a part of me hugely respects him for going against the flow and living by his opinions and reasoning. I love that he believes that the way he lives is an extension of his worldview - if only industrial companies took the way in which they produce "fecal spam" as seriously. I wonder if Joel Salatin has another job, or if his wife or children help support him by working somewhere other than the farm?

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 9

                  

                    Précis: In our current society, we like to fall back on terms like "certified organic," "free range," "sustainably farmed," "humanely raised," "range-fed," "natural," "green pastures" and "authentic" to make ourselves feel better about the food we are putting in the grocery cart, feeding to our families, spending our money on, using fossil fuel with, and supporting. In reality, such terms used to embody a movement of growing uncontaminated food, and a philosophy that all aspects of growing food and diet decisions are connected to the world and to a bigger community then the immediate one around us. Now, the meaning of organic has been dramatically changed. Companies like Whole Foods Market use that word to cater to organic-hungry consumers, but obtain their goods from farms that operate not on a philosophy or world view, but on the basis that changing a tiny, ineffective aspect of the way they farm and advertising it as more healthful to humans and the earth will gain money. Although organic food has more potential to be healthy, environmentally friendly, tasty, risk-free, and kind to animals and farmers, it still (more often than not) corresponds to animal cruelty, petroleum use and chemical intake.

                   Gems: "The organic movement, as it was once called, has come a remarkably long way in the last thirty years, to the point where it now looks considerably less like a movement than a big business" (page 138).

                            "...organic milk comes from factory farms, where thousands of Holsteins that never encounter a blade of grass spend their days confined to a fenced 'dry lot', eating (certified organic) grain and tethered to milking machines three times a day" (page 140).

                           "Well, at least we didn't eat it in the car" (page 183).

                  Thoughts and Questions: It would seem that eating is no longer as simple as I thought it was. Organic once was an expensive alternative to the horrid complications of buying industrialized, "normal" food. Now, it's apparently better, but not best. The question is: What is best? Is it possible to eat food that benefits the world, or do we have to settle with just partially harmful, partially cruel or partially wasteful food?

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 10

                  Précis: I spent a week at Joel Salatin's home, learning about and helping him with his work as a grass farmer. I came to understand that grass farming entails a number of things: raising cattle and chickens, making hay, and growing vegetables without using any synthetic or toxic substances. Joel Salatin calls his way of living "beyond organic". The most energy efficient and productive way to obtain nutrients and energy for ourselves is by picking a plant and eating it, or eating an animal that feasted upon such a plant; Salatin's grass farm does this and adds to the world rather than diminishing the world like industrial farms do. The reason grass farms like Salatin's are a rarity in our society, is because industrial agriculture is more convenient and cheaper.   

                  Gems: "...Grass Productivity documented that simply by applying the right number of ruminants at the right time pastures could produce far more grass (and, in turn, meat and milk) than anyone had ever thought possible" (page 188).

                             "All other methods of harvest and transfer require higher capital and petroleum energy inputs and these necessarily lower the return to the farmer/rancher" (page 188).

                            "Grass farming doen well depends almost entirely on a wealth of nuanced local knowledge at a tiem when most of hte rest of agricultrue has come to rely on precisely the opposite...the grass farmer must continually juggle the various elements of his farm in space as well as time, relyingo n his powers of observation and organization to arrange the appointed daily meeting of animal and grass in such a way as to ensure maximum benefit from both" (page 191).
                   Thoughts and Questions: Salatin's farm reminded me of a farm I once visited in middle school. It had acres of green pasture, chickens, cows, puppies, full grown dogs, and a myriad of other organisms. The adults who owned the farm homeschooled their children and ate eggs and produce from their own land. I find it strange that I left the farm not with the knowledge that this type of farm was rare, but with memories of feeding calves and and cuddling big-eyed golden retriever puppies, and seeing comfortable and healthy cows being milked with machines. How odd that nearly everyone, even many "organic" farmers, avoid the subject of turmoil and controversy that different types of food-production cause. So many people would rather go along with the idea that their food did not come from a cruel, wasteful, petroleum-dependent way of farming. Why?

                

HW #8

               My experience nurturing the growth of sprouts by watering them in class and at home was un-exciting, even monotonous, and yet so suprisingly gratifying. Planting a seed, giving it "loving care", and watching it grow is a fairly fundamental and essential part of plant life; it's an experience shared by many young children.  However, this knowledge made it no less exciting. Before nurturing these sprouts with water and shade, I'd helped my aunt with the garden in her backyard in Westchester. Daily witnessing the constant growth of a plant was a new experience for me. It is encouraging to find that I am capable of such as simple and wonderful act, especially when I can enjoy the fruits (or in this case, vegetables) of my labor. (These veggies tasted rather spicy. I do not know if this is a result of planting the seeds in a former salsa jar, or if certain kinds of sprouts are naturally spicy). The sprouts were small, the time spent caring for them was short, and the space they filled in my stomach was insignificant. Nevertheless, these little plants reminded me that I do not need to depend on the work of others for every raw material in my diet, that getting results requires effort and perseverance, and that I have one more opportunity to help the world in the midst of its many areas of despair - particularly environmental issues.  I think that Americans have ceased to see the sacred aspect of food because they are not involved with the growth and development of their foods' ingredients. If food production was not such a mysterious process and if Americans felt a more personal connection to their food, the American perspective of and approach to food would change.
                                                            
                               As seen below, I put my sprouts on a veggie-burger with pickles and ketchup.

HW #7: Reading Response Monday

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan–Introduction:

                Précis: The unstableness and of America’s food culture and the collective inability to eat something without consulting a journalist, dietician, or scientist reveals that America is in deep distress regarding food.  Our omnivorous nature and brain size contribute to our complications when deciding the where, what, why, and how of food; we can no longer easily base our eating decisions on our abilities to recognize and remember food, because there are so many mysterious aspects of food that are changing in many ways. Different diet fads, research on food, the continual increase in options, the growth of agricultural civilization, the preferences of our taste buds, the variety of historical and cultural back-grounds around us, and the efforts of marketers to further confuse contribute to the paradox of Americans.   Because we as humans share and influence the world with eating tendencies, it is important to understand (by reading this book) the different ways we can and should affect the world.
              Gems: “Daily, our eating turns nature into culture, transforming the body of the world into our bodies and minds” (page 10).
I was also particularly interested by his opinion that “Eating…defines us” (page 10).
              Thoughts and Questions:  I found the first qutoe from page 10 to supply particular interest and help to me, because I have read books that attempted to explain a profound connection (via food) between humans and the rest of the world, but did not completely understand the authors’ collective point of view. In the introduction, Michael Pollan’s words hint at a deep, multi-faceted union we have with our world, and everything in it.  Additionally, although Pollan's opinion that food defines us seems drastic and far-fetched, the knowledge that Pollan has invasively researched this topic and came to that conclusion encourages me to have an open mind.  I was also fascinated when Pollan discussed the similarities between humans and rats; he revealed that in a major way, rats are more like humans than most animals. How hypocritical, uncanny, typical, and psychologically intriguing that our culture is commonly disgusted by an animal with which we share so many similarities. Might we be inadvertantly disgusted at our own tendency to eat a variety of things for our own gain (like rats), but like our steak, chicken, cheese and sushi too much to admit it? Perhaps it is just the rats' beady eyes...Regardless of our disgust, I think Americans are living by the statement, "Ignorance is bliss." Somehow, I fail to see the bliss in our ignorance; instead i see obesity, diseases that arise from eating unhealthily, confusion, a hurt ecosystem, and a nation-wide eating disorder.

               

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan-Chapter 1:

               Précis: The common consumption of an American is industrial food, which is any food with such a complicated, obscure history that only experts can understand its provenance. In tracing food back to its original ingredients, it can be said that corn is arguably the most major ingredient found in American supermarkets and American bellies; it can be found in a huge variety and number of foods. Every meal and morsel in the typical American grocery store relates in some way, shape, or form to corn. This plant has many different purposes and uses, and it has the capabilities to withstand elements, undergo genetic engineering, and grow in huge quantities.

               Gems: “Corn is in the coffee whitener and the Cheez Whiz, the frozen yogurt and the TV dinner, the canned fruit and the ketchup and candies, the soups and snacks and cake mixes, the frosting and gravy and frozen waffles, the syrups and hot sauces, the mayonnaise and mustard, the hot dogs and bologna, the margarine and shortening, the salad dressings and the relishes and even the vitamins…the Twinkie, too” (page 10).  

             Thoughts and Questions: It struck me as crazy and frustrating that one cannot completely escape corn in America, even if they want to. Corn has monopolized our food industry, and there seems to be nothing we can do about it. This is a scary, disheartening thought, because if corn proved to be somehow antagonistic to the health of human bodies or the environment, I would be quite powerless to help. I wonder if Pollan will provide a way to avoid being hurt, and hurting the environment by corn. 

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan–Chapter 2:

                      Précis: The most productive people in America are farmers - particularly corn farmers like George Naylor, because they provide resources in the form of corn for more people than in any other career in America. Over the years, government involvement and political and economic fluctuations have caused farming to grow from a respectable, popular, and environmentally friendly line of work to a harsh, unjust agribusiness. Those who chose to farm are practically slaves to the government's demands for more corn for less money. 

                     Gems: “Government farm programs once designed to limit production and support prices (and therefore farms) were quietly rejiggered to increase production and drive down prices” (page 48).

                    Thoughts and Questions: This statement struck me because it reveals that the government truly does control and mistreat those whose food production and service to our country is considerable. This explains why media typically does not allow he voices of farmers to be heard; if they were heard, potentially, the economy, and ease with which the government obtains resources would be drastically changed. The secretivity, and injustice of the government is saddening. The idea of farming, once seemingly attractive and noble, is not longer favorable on my list of potential future careers. However, it is has not been made unnattractive for the reasons I would choose. I wonder what would happen if all farmers suddenly dropped their line of work and chose to be employeed at Walmart instead. I wonder how the economy and environment would change if farming became even more technological and less laborous.

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 3:

                      Précis: The only people who do not apparently view corn as a form of capital are a collective minority: consumers (many of whom do not know that corn products make up so much of their foodways), compassionate agronomists, Mexicans (whose culture has knowinlgy been made up of corn for many years) and ancient Aztecs, who saw fit to worship corn. The present day harvest of corn is mixed in a grain elevator with many other harvests from other farms, and shipped to companies that will put it to use as an export, pesticide, fertilizer, food for livestock, ethanol ingredient, and high-fructose corn syrup, to name a few uses. The more corn is produced by farmers, the lower corn's price is, and the more money the government makes from the laborous lives of poor corn farmers. As a result, more than enough corn is produced, and thereby wasted or destructive to our environment in some way. 

                     Gems: "What's involved in absorbing all this excess biomass goes a long way toward explaining several seemingly unconnected phenomena, from the rise of factory farms and the industrialization of our food to the epidemic of obesity and prevalence of fodo poisoning in America" (page 62). 

                  Thoughts and Questions: I was rather frightened by the idea of "extra biomass", and its need to disappear. The "disappearance" of corn's biomass occurs only if it is wasted, consumed by animals that are not genetically disposed to other diets, a cause of obesity and health complications, and/or negatively affecting the environment. I fail to see how the government could not only allow, but promote such a crisis. What sane, intelligent group of politicians ackowledges but fails to tackle a problem that is destroying the very foundation of their lives? Are they hoping to wait the problem out? Are they in denial? Are they hoping to hold off utter economic, political, domestic and environmental chaos until they are all dead, so that their children can deal with it instead?

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 4:

                    Précis: Beef, something that used to characterize an expensive, precious meal for the typical American, now represents one of the biggest downfalls of our country. The life of a cow is more destructive than that of any other species (besides humans); CAFOs cruelly feed cows corn instead of their natural diet of grass, which sickens the cows, thereby creating a need to inject them with copious amounts of medicines and store the resulting toxic manure. CAFOs and the FDA collectively choose the least expensive options regarding beef, which pertain to hurting the environment with toxic manure, abusing farmers and cows, contributing to the demand for wasteful food production, inspiring obesity and disease in consumers, using propaganda and secrets to sell their products, inflicting permanent damage on the ecosystem, and mindlessly using the world's limited petroleum.
                   Gems: "The short, unhappy life of a corn-fed feedlot steer represents the ultimate triumph of industrial thinking over the logic of evolution" (page 68).
                             "So then why is it that steer number 534 hasnt' tasted a blade of prairie grass since October? Speed, in a word, or, in the industry's preferred term, 'efficiency'....Fast food, indeed" (page 71).
                  Thoughts and Questions: A feeling of helplessness overcomes me when I observe the facts behind what my country is eating and doing to its world. Clearly, our habits are profoundly ingrained in us and will not change unless all of America suddenly acts against its well known tendency of being unhealthy and lazy. (In other words, we won't stop acting in a way that hurts our environment, health, animals, and who-knows-what-else.) If all of America turned to environmentally friendly food, organic farmers would grow rich, while everyone else's wallet would suffer. More farms would appear, and there would not be enough space on the continent for all the "old-fashioned farms" taking up precious space. However, old-fashioned farms are the seemingly the only alternative to the current diet of America. As Kevin Wagner said, "We cannot go backwards, and we cannot go forwards." To me, food in America represents a lose-lose situation. I wonder if people 50 years from now will look back on the past 20 years as a time of relative paradise. How fitting that this paradise is essentially caused by ignorance. I suppose ignorance really is a sort of superficial bliss.

The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan - Chapter 5:



                     Précis: Corn, in our present society, represents the most crucial aspect of the industrial food chain. Every part of a corn kernel is extracted, refined, and processed to become an ingredient in nearly every "food" that Americans currently enjoy. The meaning of food is changing from "real" and "natural" to "processed" and "fake". Scientists and Crops Utilization Researchers are growing continually willing to sacrifice water, energy, health, and money so that the annual excess biomass of corn can be consumed and provide a profit.  
                Gems: "The food industry has gazed upon nature and found it wanting - and has gotten to work improving it" (page 97).
                                "We could eat things designed by humans for the express purpose of being eaten by people - or eat 'substances' designed by natural selection for its own purposes: to, say, snooker a bee or lift a wing or (eek!) make a baby' (page 98).
                                "So we break down the plants and animals into their component parts and then reassemble them into hight-value-added food systems" (page 98).
                   Thoughts and Questions: Food is becoming increasingly complicated - it is hard to understand the ingredients of any packaged product without the help of an expert. If our society continues on this track, we will shun the "logic of evolution" ever more. I have the foreboding sense that one day the lifespan of Americans will defined by the aptitude of their livers and bodies to withstand poison. This poison is in the form of processed foods. (Foods like artificial sweeteners that are not metabolized, and thus probably poison the liver over time.) Who is at fault for such horrendous foodways? Is there something I can do to reverse or change these for the better, or must I just sit back, watch the foolishness of the American Paradox, and enjoy my good health before the foodways of my country damage it?