Why being a foodie isn’t ‘elitist’

Corporate Agriculture

There have been a lot of  ‘elitist’ accusations thrown around about just about anyone who is interested in learning more about the source of their food. We hear almost daily how ‘local food’, ‘organic growing’ and ‘sustainable methods’ won’t feed the world and we who are interested in any type of agriculture other than the status quo corporate chemical agriculture are choosing to starve the rest of the world.

To that end I present an article from Eric Schlosser, author of Fast Food Nation. My comments will be at the end.

By Eric Schlosser in Washington Post Opinions, April 29, 2011

At the American Farm Bureau Federation’s annual meeting this year, Bob Stallman, the group’s president, lashed out at “self-appointed food elitists” who are “hell-bent on misleading consumers.” His target was the growing movement that calls for sustainable farming practices and questions the basic tenets of large-scale industrial agriculture in America.

The “elitist” epithet is a familiar line of attack. In the decade since my book “Fast Food Nation” was published, I’ve been called not only an elitist, but also a socialist, a communist and un-American. In 2009, the documentary “Food, Inc.,” directed by Robby Kenner, was described as “elitist foodie propaganda” by a prominent corporate lobbyist. Nutritionist Marion Nestle has been called a “food fascist,” while an attempt was recently made to cancel a university appearance by Michael Pollan, author of “The Omnivore’s Dilemma,” who was accused of being an “anti-agricultural” elitist by a wealthy donor.

This name-calling is a form of misdirection, an attempt to evade a serious debate about U.S. agricultural policies. And it gets the elitism charge precisely backward. America’s current system of food production — overly centralized and industrialized, overly controlled by a handful of companies, overly reliant on monocultures, pesticides, chemical fertilizers, chemical additives, genetically modified organisms, factory farms, government subsidies and fossil fuels — is profoundly undemocratic. It is one more sign of how the few now rule the many. And it’s inflicting tremendous harm on American farmers, workers and consumers.

During the past 40 years, our food system has changed more than in the previous 40,000 years. Genetically modified corn and soybeans, cloned animals, McNuggets — none of these technological marvels existed in 1970. The concentrated economic power now prevalent in U.S. agriculture didn’t exist, either. For example, in 1970 the four largest meatpacking companies slaughtered about 21 percent of America’s cattle; today the four largest companies slaughter about 85 percent. The beef industry is more concentrated now than it was in 1906, when Upton Sinclair published “The Jungle” and criticized the unchecked power of the “Beef Trust.” The markets for pork, poultry, grain, farm chemicals and seeds have also become highly concentrated.

America’s ranchers and farmers are suffering from this lack of competition for their goods. In 1970, farmers received about 32 cents for every consumer dollar spent on food; today they get about 16 cents. The average farm household now earns about 87 percent of its income from non-farm sources.

While small farmers and their families have been forced to take second jobs just to stay on their land, wealthy farmers have received substantial help from the federal government. Between 1995 and 2009, about $250 billion in federal subsidies was given directly to American farmers — and about three-quarters of that money was given to the wealthiest 10 percent. Those are the farmers whom the Farm Bureau represents, the ones attacking “big government” and calling the sustainability movement elitist.

Food industry workers are also bearing the brunt of the system’s recent changes. During the 1970s, meatpackers were among America’s highest-paid industrial workers; today they are among the lowest paid. Thanks to the growth of fast-food chains, the wages of restaurant workers have fallen, too. The restaurant industry has long been the largest employer of minimum-wage workers. Since 1968, thanks in part to the industry’s lobbying efforts, the real value of the minimum wage has dropped by 29 percent.

Migrant farmworkers have been hit especially hard. They pick the fresh fruits and vegetables considered the foundation of a healthy diet, but they are hardly well-rewarded for their back-breaking labor. The wages of some migrants, adjusted for inflation, have dropped by more than 50 percent since the late 1970s. Many grape-pickers in California now earn less than their counterparts did a generation ago, when misery in the fields inspired Cesar Chavez to start the United Farm Workers Union.

While workers are earning less, consumers are paying for this industrial food system with their health. Young children, the poor and people of color are being harmed the most. During the past 40 years, the obesity rate among American preschoolers has doubled. Among children ages 6 to 11, it has tripled. Obesity has been linked to asthma, cancer, heart disease and diabetes, among other ailments. Two-thirds of American adults are obese or overweight, and economists from Cornell and Lehigh universities have estimated that obesity is now responsible for 17 percent of the nation’s annual medical costs, or roughly $168 billion.

African Americans and Hispanics are more likely to be obese than non-Hispanic whites, and more likely to be poor. As upper-middle-class consumers increasingly seek out healthier foods, fast-food chains are targeting low-income minority communities — much like tobacco companies did when wealthy and well-educated people began to quit smoking.

Some aspects of today’s food movement do smack of elitism, and if left unchecked they could sideline the movement or make it irrelevant. Consider the expensive meals and obscure ingredients favored by a number of celebrity chefs, the snobbery that often oozes from restaurant connoisseurs, and the obsessive interest in exotic cooking techniques among a certain type of gourmand.

Those things may be irritating. But they generally don’t sicken or kill people. And our current industrial food system does.

Just last month, a study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that nearly half of the beef, chicken, pork and turkey at supermarkets nationwide may be contaminated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. About 80 percent of the antibiotics in the United States are currently given to livestock, simply to make the animals grow faster or to prevent them from becoming sick amid the terribly overcrowded conditions at factory farms. In addition to antibiotic-resistant germs, a wide variety of other pathogens are being spread by this centralized and industrialized system for producing meat.

Children under age 4 are the most vulnerable to food-borne pathogens and to pesticide residues in food. According to a report by Georgetown University and the Pew Charitable Trusts, the annual cost of food-borne illness in the United States is about $152 billion. That figure does not include the cost of the roughly 20,000 annual deaths from antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

One of the goals of the Farm Bureau Federation is to influence public opinion. In addition to denying the threat of global warming and attacking the legitimacy of federal environmental laws, the Farm Bureau recently created an entity called the U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance to “enhance public trust in our food supply.” Backed by a long list of powerful trade groups, the alliance also plans to “serve as a resource to food companies” seeking to defend current agricultural practices.

But despite their talk of openness and trust, the giants of the food industry rarely engage in public debate with their critics. Instead they rely on well-paid surrogates — or they file lawsuits. In 1990, McDonald’s sued a small group called London Greenpeace for criticizing the chain’s food, starting a legal battle that lasted 15 years. In 1996, Texas cattlemen sued Oprah Winfrey for her assertion that mad cow disease might have come to the United States, and kept her in court for six years. Thirteen states passed “veggie libel laws” during the 1990s to facilitate similar lawsuits. Although the laws are unconstitutional, they remain on the books and serve their real purpose: to intimidate critics of industrial food.

In the same spirit of limiting public awareness, companies such as Monsanto and Dow Chemical have blocked the labeling of genetically modified foods, while the meatpacking industry has prevented the labeling of milk and meat from cloned animals. If genetic modification and cloning are such wonderful things, why aren’t companies eager to advertise the use of these revolutionary techniques?

The answer is that they don’t want people to think about what they’re eating. The survival of the current food system depends upon widespread ignorance of how it really operates. A Florida state senator recently introduced a bill making it a first-degree felony to take a photograph of any farm or processing plant — even from a public road — without the owner’s permission. Similar bills have been introduced in Minnesota and Iowa, with support from Monsanto.

The cheapness of today’s industrial food is an illusion, and the real cost is too high to pay. While the Farm Bureau Federation clings to an outdated mind-set, companies such as Wal-Mart, Danone, Kellogg’s, General Mills and Compass have invested in organic, sustainable production. Insurance companies such as Kaiser Permanente are opening farmers markets in low-income communities. Whole Foods is demanding fair labor practices, while Chipotle promotes the humane treatment of farm animals. Urban farms are being planted by visionaries such as Milwaukee’s Will Allen; the Coalition of Immokalee Workers is defending the rights of poor migrants; Restaurant Opportunities Centers United is fighting to improve the lives of food-service workers; and Alice Waters, Jamie Oliver and first lady Michelle Obama are pushing for healthier food in schools.

Calling these efforts elitist renders the word meaningless. The wealthy will always eat well. It is the poor and working people who need a new, sustainable food system more than anyone else. They live in the most polluted neighborhoods. They are exposed to the worst toxic chemicals on the job. They are sold the unhealthiest foods and can least afford the medical problems that result.

A food system based on poverty and exploitation will never be sustainable.

Eric Schlosser is the author of “Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal” and a co-producer of the Oscar-nominated documentary “Food, Inc.”

I find it really funny that the article opened with American Farm Bureau Federation president Bob Stallman’s accusation of local food advocates “hell-bent on misleading consumers”, when that is exactly what industrial, corporate agriculture is engaged in daily. The proof is in their advertising, with family farms, cozy, happy cows, strutting chickens and lush fields of green pastures. Where are the real photos of CAFO’s with animals standing in liquid excrement up to their hocks, in pens too small to turn around or even lay down in? It seems that the corporate agriculture world is increasingly under fire- rightfully so- for their methods of growing food and their lack of concern for the animals and their customers, with profit and shareholder returns as their main concerns.

Corporate misleading, misdirecting consumers and misstating facts seem to be a common response today to the growth of more localized, de-centralized food production. With food prices at all time highs, fuel prices rising, disruptive weather patterns damaging crops and food shortages becoming increasingly common, people are concerned about where their food comes from. Add to that the spate of food recalls, dangerously unhealthy food being openly sold to consumers and the increasingly apparent back-door partnerships between corporations and the regulatory or inspection agencies that are supposed to prevent exactly this type of behavior, and it is completely understandable why the common person is suspicious and questioning of their food supply. It also explains the tremendous growth of the more localized and de-centralized food production model, like Farmer’s Markets, Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs), farm shares and simply trading food with neighbors.

It is darkly interesting to see how far we have come in a generation or so- the past 40 to 50 years. Real income for many agriculture workers has dropped drastically, yet the cost of the food has risen just as significantly. Our food is less healthy and less nutritious than decades before, as is reported almost daily on food contamination and soil depletion. Corporate agriculture is very careful and effective to dampen any critics of the chemical food system while at the same time marginalizing the proponents of de-centralized food production.Perhaps this is why they are so surprised and threatened at the success of the local markets.

Something that is exciting to see is just how many people that are working on positive, beneficial changes to their own food supply that have a spillover effect to their neighbor, city and county. People are starting their own gardens, expanding their gardens and selling or trading the surplus, starting or joining Farmer’s Markets, CSAs and farm share programs. People getting to know each other, how they produce food, the safety, health, nutrition and flavors of that food creates a surprisingly strong and resilient community that forges its own unique and positive direction without wanting or needing government input, regulations or assistance.

At its’ heart, this is what corporate agriculture is afraid of- becoming unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted.

Acres USA originally published this article, and is used here from their Reprint Archives. This is the second of two segments. Our comments and notes will be inserted throughout.

Mary-Howell Martens is admired and recognized as one of the nation’s pioneering leaders in sustainable agriculture.

Together with her husband Klaas, Ms. Martens owns and operates Lakeview Organic Grain in Penn Yan, New York, one of the Northeast’s largest and most successful organic grain businesses.  Started in 1991, the Martens’ 1400-acre farm and feed mill, which they work with their children Peter, Elizabeth, and Daniel, and 10 employees, currently supplies organic feed and seed to over 300 organic livestock farmers in New York and Pennsylvania.

Is Organic Food More Nutritious Than Conventional Food? Part II

by Mary-Howell R. Martens

Animal nutritionists have noted a drop in nutritional quality of animal feed, especially corn and forages, over the past 25 years. Dave Mattocks of the Fertrell Company in Bainbridge, Pennsylvania, has been formulating animal rations for many years. He reports that he has had to continually increase quantity of protein sources in animal rations in order to maintain a constant level of protein. He feels that this reflects that the average protein level in grain has been dropping. When plants are induced to produce more quantity (higher yield), it is usually at the expense of something else, in this case, certain key molecules that affect quality and nutrition. Confirmation of this observation would probably be available if one took the time to sort through and analyze the reams of data that forage analysis labs have collected over the past 25 years.

Indirectly related to observations about declining feed quality, an article in the March 25, 2000 issue of Science News described research that showed that plants growing with increased air CO2 levels (as is possible in the future with the greenhouse gas effect) do indeed grow faster and produce more carbohydrates, but the protein levels are lower. Insects feeding on these plants eat excessively but grow poorly. Sheep eating such plants eat less, grow poorly, and digest their food more slowly, probably because the essential bacteria in the ruminant gut are themselves protein deficient and malnourished. This is important research that needs to be considered for several critical reasons. First, of course, because the Earth’s atmosphere is changing and we need to anticipate how this may effect vegetation and the organisms that feed on the vegetation. Secondly, this research can offer valuable insight into the critical factor of genotype-x environment interaction, a factor which is largely being overlooked in the biotech and Green Revolution discussions.

Regardless of all the other issues involved with genetically engineered crops, it seems logical that unless we pay attention to the soil and other environmental factors first, efforts to improve yield, nutrient content, or pest resistance of crops through genetics alone will be far less successful than they might be. Results obtained on well-managed research farms may not be repeatable on poorer soils that are not being as intensively managed. Most crops have far more genetic potential than they are able to express already. Producing high yields on poor soils without maintaining fertility levels will only postpone famine until the soil becomes exhausted. We should not see genetics alone as the solution to management problems, as a way that allows farmers to continue poor production practices on their farms. Many American farmers face a corn borer problem because they don’t rotate properly and use other practices, such as no-till, that allow large pest populations to build. Bt corn makes it easier to continue poor management practices, at least until pest populations develop resistance. Obviously, new traits could then be engineered into corn to control the resistant pests, but the underlying problem is still not being addressed by this approach.

Often, when discussions of the relative nutritional merits of organic versus conventional food come up, someone will invariably quote a 1948 study by Dr. Firman Bear at Rutgers University. Unfortunately, using this research to support any such claims is quite incorrect, because this study did not compare organic and conventional food. Instead, it compared crops grown in mineral versus organic (muck) soils, it had nothing to do with use of chemicals. However, perhaps Dr. Bear did get it right on one point. The research showed that the composition of the soil has a major and readily detectable influence on the mineral content and the nutritional quality of food. By better understanding the role that a healthy, microbially active soil can make on nutritional quality of plants, perhaps then we then can design agricultural systems that will maximize this. On an organic farm, careful attention is placed on improving soil quality, increasing soil organic matter, and enhancing soil microbial life, crops are carefully rotated and soil is specifically amended to balance all aspects of soil fertility. It makes logical sense to conclude that plants produced under such a system could indeed be more flavorful and nutritious.

Copyright © 2000 Acres U.S.A.

All rights reserved.

Some comments and thoughts. First off, I agree with what is being said here, mainly that we shouldn’t be caught up in the “organic by default” trap that is so easy to fall into. What is meant by that is the simple absence of anything considered harmful does not equal healthy food. Simply because no pesticides, herbicides, fungicides,  chemical fertilizers, etc. etc. haven’t been applied, does not mean it is tasty and healthy. If nothing at all has been done to or with the soil, does that automatically mean all is well? Not really- there is much to be done in improving the fecundity of the soil including biological as well as structural improvements, organic matter, re-mineralization and nutrient balancing. Who would you want to eat produce from, one who has done nothing and calls it “organic” or one who has increased the biological health of their soil through careful and well researched amendments and inputs that are non-chemical in nature?

“There have been few studies that directly contrast the chemistry of conventional food to organic food.” Gosh, I wonder why… who normally funds such research? The Corporate Abgribusiness are not in the slightest interested if organic food is better, because that is not what they are in the business of.

“…over a two-year period, average levels of essential minerals were much higher in the organically grown apples, pears, potatoes and corn as compared to conventionally produced products. The organically grown food averaged higher in calcium, chromium, iron, magnesium, molybdenum, phosphorus, potassium and zinc, and lower in mercury and aluminum. A more recent study out of Australia showed a similar difference between calcium and magnesium levels in organic and non-organic food.” Yet when research is done, it conclusively shows that there are many more minerals that are essential for our health in organic, sustainably raised food.

“Weibel found interesting correlations between the microbial activity in the soil, a condition closely associated with organic management, and the nutritional status of the apples, especially the phosphorus level.” This is a perfect point of healthy soils equal much healthier produce. The correlation can be furthered to include healthier people from eating healthier produce… “This corroborates work done by Elaine Ingham at Oregon State University, who has shown that corn and grape plants grown in association with mycorrhizal fungi produce fruit with higher protein levels.” Mycorrhizal fungi are symbiotic fungi that greatly increase the nutrient uptake in plants and are essential to having biologically living, healthy soil.

“Regardless of all the other issues involved with genetically engineered crops, it seems logical that unless we pay attention to the soil and other environmental factors first, efforts to improve yield, nutrient content, or pest resistance of crops through genetics alone will be far less successful than they might be.” Really? Do ya really think? Common sense would dictate that to ignore the very foundation of agriculture- the soil- would be to invite disaster on the scale of many of the world’s other civilizations that ignored their soil. Almost without fail, they do not exist anymore. Those that do are on such a diminished scale in comparison to where they used to be in production as to be almost unbelievable. Who would call Iran, Iraq and Syria “The fertile crescent” or “Breadbasket of the world” today? These are just 3 examples of those that have managed to survived the loss of their soils.

This is a great article that not only introduces some reasoned, rational thought to the perennial question of nutrition, it also introduces many to the thought of what does the term “organic” really mean, and what is it made up of? I really hope this raises more questions than answers and sets you on a direction of learning more about what you eat, where it comes from and how is it raised. Only by answering these and many other questions can you be a true part of the solution of helping to create more demand for healthy, nourishing, sustainably raised food.

Yes, this is work, it takes time, thought and energy, but unless you want to just sit back and consume whatever is sent your way by the advertising and corporate agribusiness giants, this is the only way.

Organic or Conventional?

This question is often asked, not only by those who are starting their reading and research into healthier foods, but by almost everyone at some point who actually stops and thinks about their food. This exact question has been the center of debate between the chemical and biological or sustainable agriculture communities for some years now. Those with large advertising budgets have spent dump truck loads of cash selling the public on the idea that there is no difference between spraying a custom mixed chemical slurry onto the soil and using compost, re-mineralization, green manures, proper crop rotation and building the soil health biologically. In fact, the advertising has sold the public and many farmers that the biological method is simply a waste of time and money. We are beginning to know better now.

The large Agribusiness companies are surprised and a little bit worried at the steady double digit growth of local and organic farming, and the reasoned, educated and dedicated support of that agricultural model through Farmer’s Markets, CSA’s, community gardening and farm shares. It can’t be ignored or brushed aside any more.  Many think that the Food Safety Modernization Act- S.510- is a large scale effort to seriously hamper the growth of  local biological agriculture. While a very small percentage of the total market share, the growth of local agriculture has the industry giants concerned, because if only 5-7 percent of the current market departed, that would mean losses in the tens of millions of dollars for them. That is completely unacceptable for the corporations, and their shareholders that control modern Agribusiness.

We wanted to present an article from one who is recognized as being quite knowledgeable in the field. From a basis of formal education leading to real world advisory positions in policy making governmental departments, she has the foundational knowledge to be able to speak authoritatively on the subject. Her own experiences as an award winning organic grain farmer who also educates others how to produce abundance without the chemicals now thought to be essential to successful large scale agriculture uniquely qualifies her to be able to speak on both sides of this question.

Acres USA originally published this article, and is used here from their Reprint Archives. This is a long article, and will be broken up into two successive segments. Our comments and notes will be included at the end of the article.

Mary-Howell Martens is admired and recognized as one of the nation’s pioneering leaders in sustainable agriculture.

Together with her husband Klaas, Ms. Martens owns and operates Lakeview Organic Grain in Penn Yan, New York, one of the Northeast’s largest and most successful organic grain businesses.  Started in 1991, the Martens’ 1400-acre farm and feed mill, which they work with their children Peter, Elizabeth, and Daniel, and 10 employees, currently supplies organic feed and seed to over 300 organic livestock farmers in New York and Pennsylvania.

Noted for her wide-ranging efforts to promote sustainable agriculture, Ms. Martens is equally revered throughout the industry for her innovation, leadership, and stewardship.  She  received the prestigious Patrick Madden Award for Sustainable Agriculture in 2008, and has testified before the United States House of Representatives.  She and her husband speak throughout the  United States and Canada on sustainable agriculture and have written many articles on the subject.

In addition to her agribusiness endeavors, Ms. Martens, a graduate of the Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, served on the USDA Advisory Committee on Agricultural Biotechnology from 2000-2002, and on the Cornell University’s College of Agriculture and Life Science’s Dean’s Advisory Committee from 2003-2009.  She is also a member of the New York State Department of Ag and Markets’ Organic Advisory Committee and the Yates County Farm Bureau Board of Directors, in addition to numerous community volunteer efforts.

Is Organic Food More Nutritious Than Conventional Food?

by Mary-Howell R. Martens

Is organic food more nutritious or better tasting than conventionally produced food? This is a question that many people are asking, but unfortunately, there is no simple answer. So much more is involved in the nutritional quality of food than simply comparing organic versus chemical agronomic practices. There is certainly quite a bit of incorrect information, confusion, and wishful thinking on both sides concerning this subject, and probably there is as much variation in food quality produced on different organic farms as there is in the quality of food produced on different conventional farms.

Many people do believe that they can taste a difference between organic and nonorganic food. I usually think I can, but that might be because organic food is often fresher and more likely to be locally produced. Margaret Wittenberg, of Whole Foods Inc., says that in their stores, when customers ask whether organic foods are more nutritious, the company policy is to say that there is no evidence to say that this is true. However, she says that many customers remain unphased with this answer due to their own experiences and perceptions.

Some animals apparently can detect a difference in organic crops by taste. Floyd Hoover, in Penn Yan, New York, grows organic corn. One night he left several ears of conventional and organic corn side by side in his barn. The next morning, the organic corn had been nibbled by mice while the conventional corn had been ignored. Floyd then rearranged the order of the cobs, but still the mice avoided the conventional corn. Finally, he hid the organic corn, but the mice refused to touch the conventional corn. Within a few nights, the mice found the hidden organic corn and had a feast. Anecdotal evidence such as this indicate that for many people and apparently animals too, detectable quality differences do exist. Scientifically, however, it is difficult to draw definitive comparisons about the nutritional quality of conventional and organic food. Many environmental factors influence the nutritional quality and flavor of any type of farm product, including soil type, soil moisture, soil microbial activity, weather and other climatic conditions. Cultural practices, such as crop variety, seed source, length of growing season, irrigation, fertilization, cultivation, and post-harvest handling, will also affect food quality.

There have been few studies that directly contrast the chemistry of conventional food to organic food. Research reported in the Journal of Applied Nutrition showed that on a per-weight basis over a two-year period, average levels of essential minerals were much higher in the organically grown apples, pears, potatoes and corn as compared to conventionally produced products. The organically grown food averaged higher in calcium, chromium, iron, magnesium, molybdenum, phosphorus, potassium and zinc, and lower in mercury and aluminum. A more recent study out of Australia showed a similar difference between calcium and magnesium levels in organic and non-organic food.

Simply knowing the absolute quantity of chemical elements in a food sample may not be particularly revealing if we don’t know what molecules those elements are incorporated into in the food product. The same simple chemical elements may be organized into nutritious and flavorful molecules or may be organized into toxic, unpleasant-tasting molecules, or even into molecules that render plants more susceptible to insects and diseases. Certain amino acids such as proline have been linked to increased insect feeding and egg laying behavior. A plant slightly deficient in potassium may lack enzymes necessary to convert free amino acids into complex proteins. Another plant with adequate potassium might not show detectable differences in overall nitrogen level, but would contain more protein, might be much different in food flavor and quality, and might be much more resistant to insect attack.

It is possible to identify the specific chemical molecules that cause the typical characteristics we call “flavor” or “quality.” These generally are large, complex molecules, such as sugars, proteins, enzymes, esters, and organic acids. In a preliminary study, Dr. Franco Weibel at the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture in Ackerstrasse, Switzerland, compared a variety of parameters in apples grown under organic and conventional conditions, such as mineral elements, sugars, phenols, malic acid, selenium, dietary fiber, and vitamins C and E. Organic fruit also had significantly firmer flesh and better sensory taste evaluations. Weibel found interesting correlations between the microbial activity in the soil, a condition closely associated with organic management, and the nutritional status of the apples, especially the phosphorus level. The actual chemical soil phosphorus level had little impact on fruit nutritional status. This research also found that organic fruit was considerably higher in phenols. Plants naturally synthesize phenols for defense against pests and diseases. Possibly, the unsprayed organic plants were stimulated to make higher levels of these critical molecules in response to pest attack. These phenolic compounds that protect the plant also have been shown to be disease protectants in humans. This corroborates work done by Elaine Ingham at Oregon State University, who has shown that corn and grape plants grown in association with mycorrhizal fungi produce fruit with higher protein levels.

Research conducted at Ohio State University by Dr. Larry Phelan has shown that European corn borer insects given a choice between organic and conventional corn plants avoid the organic plants. His research is continuing to test two hypotheses for these observations. He feels that the organic soils, with a rich microbial population, may release  plant nutrients more evenly over the season, resulting in slower, sturdier plant growth that is more resistant to insect attack. He also believes that the mineral balance of the soil and the plant plays a key role in insect resistance. In either case, the levels of complex molecules and water content in the plant tissue probably determines how tasty the plant is to an insect.

Copyright © 2000 Acres U.S.A.

All rights reserved.

We will continue this article tomorrow.

Can one person really make a difference, especially in today’s over-hyped, conflicting informational overload, technologically paced world? The real question is to whom do we want to make that difference- the world at large, the major international agribusinesses, or to our own community- however we define it? We are talking about our food system, by the way! That question and the following responses will hold true for just about any difference in any area you care to mention.

On a larger scale, most individual people will not be able to influence the status quo in any system. We don’t really work that way anyway, we work in smaller groups, or communities- at work, at home, with our circle of friends, our neighbors, social or church groups, etc. This is how we as humans really work and interact, as we have for tens of thousands of years. Large corporations also work in smaller groups- the board of directors, senior management and marketing are all much smaller groups of the corporate body. They simply have much more reach to a broader audience from a pre-supposed position of authority and power than most individuals do.

We all know stories of  how a single person has changed their community by their actions. These usually happen over some period of time by continuing their actions to affect positive changes, educating and empowering others to help and being the example to everyone. Do you know of a similar story where you are, someone who has made a difference around you? This is one of the single most powerful examples of how we can make the difference we seek come to be. The benefit of technology today is that this can happen in many different geographical locations simultaneously, while at the same time being within a community both locally and virtually. Look at how the Farmer’s Market concept has spread and grown. In 2009-2010 there was a 16% growth in the number of operating Farmer’s Markets in the US. This is the result of not only dedicated and self-educated people locally, but online as well. Ideas were shared from completely different markets and approaches, and integrated into other ideas that helped the whole grow much faster than just the sum of the parts. One of the other main reasons for the sustained growth is the focus is positive- better, local food instead of shutting down big Agribusiness.

Now, take this to another level. Use this principle to its fullest. Get to know more about your local food pathways. Get to know your food better. Your relationship with your food should be significantly shorter than the 1200  miles that most food travels from the grower to your plate, yet significantly longer than the fork traveling 12 inches or so from the plate to your mouth. Many people’s sole relationship with their food is via their fork. Deepen your relationship with your food. After all, it is the third most important ingredient in your life, behind air and water!  The local Farmer’s Market is only the starting point. You will find things, people, groups and opportunities that you didn’t know existed. It’s not like this is something entirely new, as most of you involved with local food, Farmer’s Markets, CSA’s, community gardening, and farm share programs have already spent considerable time reading, searching and learning how to find better, fresher, more healthy and nutritious food. As you search deeper and make more connections, you become the difference!

Once you get to know your local farmer, beyond the weekly visit to the farmer’s market, you will be amazed at the doors that open up. We offered to make pasta sauce and salsa for our friends Cory and Shanti at Whipstone Farm in Paulden, AZ. This came about from a visit to him at his Saturday Farmer’s Market stand, and seeing a sign for blemished tomatoes by the flat for a good price. After we said that we wanted to make pasta sauce and salsa, he stated that he didn’t have time, as the farm was way too busy. I offered to make the sauce for him, and he gave us the produce and let us keep half of what we made! If we hadn’t spent the time to talk with him, to engage with him, this win-win situation would have never come about.

Learn all you can about what you’re interested in, how it works and why it is good. As you gain knowledge, assume responsibility for that new knowledge and make the changes in your life that need to be made. Remember that actions speak much, much louder than words! After you have gained some experience, share that with others in your communities, both local and online. Few like to be preached at, so temper your enthusiasm with brevity. Give your experiences, as they are real and cannot be denied. Share positive impacts, as most people are interested in improving their lives and becoming part of a vibrant community. Create an interest in them to learn more. Gently introduce them to your community, and share some learning resources.

This is how strong communities are forged, lifelong friendships are started and how one person can truly make a profoundly positive and lasting difference in the world today. Start with where and who you are and move forward!

Read it, think about it, then read it once again and let me know what you think!

Do you have the balls to really change the food system?

BY Rebecca Thistlewaite

9 SEP 2010 12:49 PM

You watched Food, Inc. with your mouth aghast. You own a few cookbooks.

You go out to that hot new restaurant with the tattooed chef who’s putting on a whole-animal, nose-to-tail pricy special dinner. You bliss out on highfalutin’ pork rinds, braised pigs feet, rustic paté, and porchetta.

Later that weekend, you nibble on small bites as you stroll down the city street, blocked off for a weekend “foodie” festival.

Then you go back to your Monday-Friday workaday routine, ordering pizza and buying some frozen chicken breasts at Costco (“Hey, at least they’re ‘organic’!”) to get you through your hectic week. (You make time for at least two hours a day of reality TV.) You manage to get to a farmers market about once a month, but the rest of the time your eggs and meat come from Costco, Trader Joe’s, and maybe Whole Paycheck now and again.

Guess what? You are NOT changing the food system. Not even close.

You’re no better or different than the average American. You pat yourself on the back, you brag about your lunch on Twitter, you pity your Midwestern relatives eating their chicken-fried steak and ambrosia salad, but you secretly loathe your grocery store bill — which consumes only 8 percent of your income while your car devours 30 percent. Your bananas and coffee may be Fair Trade, but everything else is Far From It. The dozen eggs you splurge on once a month may be from local, outdoor-roaming birds, but all the other eggs you eat come from a giant egg conglomerate in either Petaluma, Calif., or Pennsylvania.

And even that pig in that nose-to-tail fancy dinner came from a poor farmer in Kansas or Iowa because the restaurant is too cheap or lazy to find local, pastured pork. And the ingredients for that foodie festival touting itself as local and sustainable? They mostly came from other states except a few ingredients they highlight as being “local.” But those restaurants, caterers, and food trucks just go back to using the low-cost distributor once the event is over.

So. Want to make a difference?

Here’s what a sustainable food system actually needs you to do, in no particular order:

Educate yourself:

• Don’t take anything at face value — read, listen, observe, research. Look at both sides of an issue and all points in between.
• Read not just the Omnivore’s Dilemma, but also Silent Spring, Sand County Almanac, and anything you can find by Wendell Berry.
• Learn why farmers and ranchers who don’t earn enough to cover their costs are not sustainable and that something has to suffer as a result, whether it be quality, animal welfare, land stewardship, wages, health care, mental & physical health, or family life.
• Understand why sustainable food should actually cost 50 to 100 percent more than industrial, conventional food. Figure out how to buy food more directly from farmers and ranchers, if you want to avoid some of the transportation/distribution/retail markup costs.
• Know the names of more farmers and ranchers than celebrity chefs, including at least one you can call by first name — and ask how their kids are doing.
• Understand that if you want to see working conditions and wages come up for farming and food processing workers, that you will have to pay more for food. Be OK with that.
• Learn about the Farm Bill and plan to write a letter/make a phone call when it comes up for re-authorization.

Chill out:

• Don’t expect a farmer to have year-round availability and selection. Alter your diet to match the seasonal harvests in your area. Get used to not eating tomatoes until at least July, apples in late August to December, citrus in winter, greens in spring. Don’t complain.
• Realize that even animal products are seasonal because animals have biological cycles. Know that chickens produce much less eggs in winter when days are shorter and even come to a complete stop when they are replacing their feathers (molting). Consequently you may have to eat less eggs and pay more for them during that time. Don’t complain.
• Don’t expect the farmer/rancher to sacrifice the health and welfare of the animal for your particular fad diet du jour (no corn, no soy, no wheat, no grains, no antibiotics ever, even if the animal will die, no irrigation, no hybrid breeds, no castrating, no vaccines … what is it this week?)
• Understand that the tenderloin/filet is the most expensive muscle on the animal and that there is very little of it. Don’t expect there to be filet every time you go to market. There are finite parts to an animal. Be OK with that. Embrace it. Learn to cook other parts.
• Understand that there are not enough USDA-inspected slaughter and butcher facilities, which makes special orders difficult and limits how the meat can be processed. If you want a particular cut, organ meat, or process, then buy a half- or whole animal so you can ask the butcher to make that happen yourself.
• Don’t call a farmer a week before you’re having a pig roast to ask for a dressed-out pig, delivered fresh to you, for under $300. We are not magicians, just farmers.

Get your hands dirty:

• Sweat on a farm sometime.
• Participate in the death of an animal that you consume.
• Successfully cook a roast. You don’t need steaks and chops to make an amazing meal.
• Get a chest freezer and put some food away in it
• Cook and enjoy at least one of the following: chicken feet, gizzards, liver, heart, kidney, sweet breads, head cheese, or tripe.
• Save your bones for soup, beans, stock, or your doggies!
• If you own land that’s not being farmed, tell some farmers about it. If you rent land to farmers, offer a fair rental price or fair lease (long-term is better), and then stay out of the way and don’t meddle or hinder the farmers. They are not your pet farmers nor your landscapers.
• Throw your consumer dollar behind a couple beginning farmers or lower-income farmers. Be concerned about how landless, lower-income producers are going to compete with the increasing numbers of wealthy landowners getting into farming as a hobby.

Help your local farmers do their job:

• Bring your kids/grandkids/nieces & nephews to the farmers market and to real farms as often as possible
• If you ask to visit the farm, also offer to help out or spend some decent money while you are there. Otherwise, wait patiently until the next group farm tour. Don’t expect a farmer to drop everything just to give you a special tour.
• Consider making a low-interest loan, grant, or pre-payment to a farmer to help her cover her operating expenses. Stick with that farmer for the long haul, as long as he continues to supply quality product and can stay in business.
• Give more than just money to a farmer or rancher — maybe a Christmas card, invitation to a party, offer to spiff up their website, or watch their kid for an hour at the farmers’ market.

Really put your money where your mouth is:

• Don’t complain about prices. If price is an issue for you on something, ask the farmer nicely if he has any less expensive cuts (or cosmetically challenged “seconds”), bulk discounts, or volunteer opportunities. But don’t ask the farmer to earn less money for his hard work.
• Don’t compare prices between farmers who are trying to do this for a living and those that do it only as a hobby (and don’t have to make a living from what they produce and sell).
• Share in a farmer’s risk by putting up some money and faith up front via a Community Supported Agriculture share. And then suck it up when you don’t get to eat something that you paid for because there was a crop failure or an animal illness.
• Buy local when available, but also make a point of supporting certified Fair Trade, Organic products when buying something grown in tropical countries
• Buy organic not just for your health, but for the health of the land, waterways, wildlife, and the workers in those fields
• Figure out the handful of restaurants that buy and serve truly sustainable food and become loyal to them. Occasionally give them feedback and thank them.
• If your budget doesn’t allow you to eat out often, eat out infrequently but at the places with the best integrity that may be more costly.
• Ask the waiter where the restaurant’s meat or fish comes from, and how it was raised before you order it.  If the waiter gives an insufficient answer, order vegetarian and tell them what you want to see next time if they want your business again.
• Don’t buy meat from chain grocery stores, not even Whole Paycheck. Understand that for them to get meat in volume with year-round selection and availability, they have to work with large distribution networks and often international suppliers, and don’t pay enough to the producers for them to even cover their costs.
• Get the majority of your produce, meat, eggs, dairy, bread, dried fruit, nuts, and olive oil from farmers markets, CSAs, U-pick farms, and on-farm stands. Try to buy from the actual farmer, not a middleman. Get the rest of your food from the bulk section, dairy case, or bakery of your local independent grocer.
• Pay for your values. If it hurts, don’t have fewer values, just eat less food (sorry, but most Americans could stand to do a bit of this)

I admit, this is a lot to digest.

What I am saying is that we can’t be casual about the food system we want to see. If more people don’t show some commitment, and take part in some of the hard work that farmers, ranchers, and farmworkers do on a daily basis, then we cannot build a sustainable food system.

You don’t have to be a passive consumer. You are part of this system, too. Don’t just eat, do something more!

Link to the article from Grist Magazine.

For several years now I have faithfully cooked the French Onion Soup recipe from the Le Cordon Bleu Home Collection cookbook, and as you would expect, the results are fabulous. It does take some time and preparation, but the results are wonderful. If you have any desire to learn even a small part of the French traditional cooking, and the techniques and reasons behind the techniques- get this cookbook!

This time, I didn’t have quite all of the ingredients or the time or maybe the inclination to spend over an hour at the stove. So I started looking for a good but tasty alternative to the hallowed French Onion Soup.

And found it in a Southwestern recipe from the Roaring Fork restaurant in Scottsdale, AZ. The premise of the restaurant is “Upscale Campfire Cooking”. In Scottsdale.

The thing that I like is that most of the cooking is done in cast iron. Wonderful stuff, lasts forever and if seasoned correctly can cook anything. I tried it, with some modifications that I’ll share, along with the original recipe so you can make both and see for yourself which you like best. Both are great, with different flavors and different approaches.

Here goes-

French Onion Soup from Le Cordon Bleu Home Collection cookbook.

3 Tbs unsalted butter

1 small red onion, thinly sliced- Rossa de Milano is perfect here

3 white onions, thinly sliced

1 clove garlic, finely chopped

3 Tbs all purpose flour

3/4 cup white wine

6 cups brown stock- (I used Better Than Bouillon- beef flavor.)

1 bouquet garni- (Leek outer wrapper, bay leaf, sprig of thyme, celery leaves, few stems of fresh parsley tied together)

1 Tbs Sherry

12 thick slices French baguette

1 1/2 cups finely grated Gruyere cheese

Melt the butter in a large heavy bottomed saucepan over medium heat. Add the onions and cook for about 20 minutes, stirring often, until caramelized and dark golden brown. This is the most important step, as the color of the onions at this stage will determine the color and the ultimate flavor of the final soup!

Stir in the garlic and flour and cook, stirring constantly for 1-2 minutes.

Add the white wine and stir the mixture until the flour has blended in smoothly. Bring to a boil slowly, stirring constantly. Whisk or briskly stir in the stock, add the bouquet garni and season to taste with salt and freshly ground black pepper. simmer gently for 30 minutes, then skim the surface of any excess fat if necessary. Add the sherry to the soup and adjust seasonings to taste.

To make the croutes, toast the French baguette slices until dry and golden on both sides.

Ladle the soup into warm flame proof bowls and float a few croutes on top. Sprinkle the top of each bowl with Gruyere cheese, place under preheated broiler until cheese melts and turns golden brown. Serve immediately.

Serves 6 as a first course. Double ingredients for main course.

The first thing I would say is to use heirloom, locally grown onions and garlic, as the flavor will be exponentially better- fresher, deeper and with more dimension than onions and garlic that have been grown and shipped halfway across the country, having sat for who knows how long before you bought them. Don’t believe me? Please try it both ways, and let me know!

You will be sold on the first bite of the local soup…

If you haven’t ever tasted truly hand made from scratch French Onion Soup, you are in for a taste treat. It is heavenly on a cold winter’s evening with some fresh made bread and butter on the side, with a glass of wine.

Very satisfying.

Worth the time to make it.

Shiner Bock Onion Soup from The Roaring Fork restaurant, Scottsdale AZ

3/4 cup chopped bacon- smoked is better, imparts a depth to the overall flavor

6 cups finely sliced yellow onions- Walla Walla or Sweet Spanish Utah are great

1 Tsp minced garlic- a robust flavor will stand up to the chiles and beer

1 Tbs finely chopped serrano chile- optional. I used 1 chopped Chipotle en Adobo chile; great flavor and smokieness

3 Tbs butter

1/4 cup flour

1 12 oz bottle of Shiner Bock or light microbrew ale

4 cups veal or chicken stock- again I use Better Than Boullion- chicken flavor

Salt and fresh ground black pepper to taste

Pinch of cayenne pepper

Cook the bacon until crisp in medium hot cast iron pot or heavy deep saucepan. Reduce heat to medium low, add onions, stir well and cover. Cook for 10-12 minutes then add garlic, chile and butter. Stir until onions begin to caramelize, about 10 minutes.

Add flour, stir to thicken and do not allow to stick to bottom of pan/pot. Once flour has blended in, add beer and stir to completely mix in. Increase heat, slowly bring to a boil and add stock. Return to a boil, then reduce heat to low and simmer the soup for 5-10 minutes.

Season to taste with salt and pepper, simmering until the beer has smoothed out and incorporated with other flavors- about 10-15 minutes. Soup should just be starting to thicken. Add pinch of cayenne, stir in well.

Ladle into warm soup bowls and serve immediately.

The flavor of this is completely different, but incredibly delicious. It is easier to make and do something else in the kitchen, as you are not over the pot for most of the time. I used a Chipotle en adobo chile, chopped fine and added some extra adobo for the smoky flavor and it was a great addition. A smoked bacon adds a lot of flavor as well. I doubled the garlic, as it roasts in the onion mixture and mellows its flavor.

Again, a locally grown garlic and onion will make all the difference in the world with both of these soups.

I’m hesitant to experiment too much with the French Onion Soup, as it is an established classic, and also the flavor is so definite and distinct that to start to change it might result in something less than where we started. The Shiner Bock Onion Soup I will most definitely experiment with, as the flavor is wonderful, but almost begs to be taken in a new direction, as the flavor is bold and new.

I could see adding some purple or fingerling potatoes to the mix at the point where the stock is added and brought back to a boil. The texture of the purple potatoes will thicken the soup, as they will cook into it quickly, while the flavor will add a completely new dimension. Fingerlings won’t cook into the soup nearly as much, but will add a nutty creaminess that I think would be amazing. The combination of bacon, onions and really flavorful potatoes would make this pretty much a one dish winter meal with some fresh hearty sourdough bread, butter and a dark beer.

So there you have it, a trans continental journey with the simple ingredients of onions. The flavors are almost as distant from each other, yet perfectly wonderful in each separate way.

Please try these and let me know what you think!

Fresh Vegetable Salads Provide Maximum Nutrition for Each Food Dollar Spent

The first finding is that fresh colorful vegetables have the most nutrition when compared to prepackaged and prepared foods. The second is that naturally grown chemical free vegetables have more minerals and nutrients as compared to conventional chemically grown ones. The third is that the dollar return on money spent for seeds to grow a vegetable garden- even a modest one- is staggering. Several articles I’ve read put the return from $100 in seeds at anywhere from $1000 to $1800 in fresh produce!

“Salads that offer the most nutrition for the money are made with fresh, unprocessed vegetables. Color is the key. Those veggies with the bright, vibrant colors are trying to tell you something. The more colors added to the bowl, the more the salad can keep you looking and feeling young, and put a bounce in your step for the rest of the day. That’s because vibrant colored veggies are loaded with antioxidants, plant compounds that slow the aging process and ward off disease.”

The more colors in the vegetables you eat, the more different types of nutrients, minerals and other vitamins that you get. This is a great start!

“All of these varieties are excellent sources of Vitamins A, E and K. Vitamin A supports eye and respiratory health, and makes sure the immune system is up to speed. It keeps the outer layers of tissues and organs healthy, and promotes strong bones, healthy skin and hair, and strong teeth. Vitamin E slows the aging process, maintains positive cholesterol ratios, provides endurance boosting oxygen, protects lungs from pollution, prevents various forms of cancer, and alleviates fatigue. Vitamin K keeps blood vessels strong and prevents blood clots.

Greens are also excellent sources of folate, manganese, chromium, and potassium. Folate prevents heart disease, defends against intestinal parasites and food poisoning, promotes healthy skin, and helps maintain hair color. Manganese keeps fatigue away, helps muscle reflexes and coordination, boosts memory, and helps prevent osteoporosis. Chromium helps normalize blood pressure and insulin levels. It prevents sugar cravings and sudden drops in energy. Potassium regulates the body’s water balance and normalizes heart rhythms. It aids in clear thinking by sending oxygen to the brain.”

Now if we take this a step further and grow these vegetables ourselves, or at least buy them locally- from the farmers market or “our” farmer/gardener/neighbor that grows way too much to eat themselves- we can stack the advantages of the nutrition in our favor.

Several recently released studies show what is at first glance somewhat common sense- naturally grown vegetables have more nutrients, vitamins and minerals than those grown in the conventional chemically grown manner. The common sense part comes from the fact that chemical agriculture on any scale depends on very few chemicals- NPK familiar to anyone? Nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium are important, but they aren’t the only elements that plants need to grow and produce healthy fruits and vegetables. One study I’ve read showed that a naturally grown vegetable had 84 minerals and elements that were identified as opposed to 8-10 in the same exact vegetable planted from seeds from the same seed packet but grown conventionally with the standard chemical fertilizers and pesticides/herbicides. Something to note- the test didn’t identify the negative elements in the vegetables- such as chemical residues.

Which do you think has better nutrition, which has better taste, and which would you want to eat or serve as dinner to your family?

Continuing the stacking of benefits idea- this is the introduction to the article:

“It looks like food prices will continue to creep steadily higher throughout 2009, even in the face of an economic crisis that has reduced the purchasing power of most Americans. This makes it more important that ever to get the best nutritional value for every food dollar spent.”

I agree completely with this, and seeing this at the end of 2009, the truth of the cost of food vs purchasing power is apparent. What if we can turn this truth around, and make it pay instead of save money? That’s an exciting idea, as saving money is good, but saving in this case is only a stop to spending money. Growing a garden can actually pay you! It is truly not very difficult to grow a garden that produces more than you and your family can eat. Sell the excess, make some money! Farmers and local markets are the fastest growing segment of agriculture for the past several years. Most have a booth just for the backyard gardener to sell/trade their abundance.

Or trade it to your neighbor in return for services or something you need. This won’t give you dollars, but will give you something of value that you didn’t have to spend dollars to obtain.

Or donate some to your local food bank/soup kitchen/Meals on Wheels/etc. Again, not dollars, but karma is good too. So is the increased community that you’ve just created that can help you in ways unforeseen right now.

Now please don’t misunderstand me. I really like the article! I think that there are some ways to capitalize on a good idea and great benefit to achieve much greater results for all of us. Please take the time to read the entire article.

We’ve been busy with the new catalog and inventory. The catalog goes to the designer this week to be professionally designed,  so we can incorporate all of our changes and additions for the 2010 seed season. I think that you will like this design!

We have some pretty neat new offerings in the works for this fall and next years growing season. Some we’ll be able to share soon,  others you’ll have to wait and see with the new catalog. We’ll be doing some peeks into the catalog as the time gets closer, so if you are interested go to the eNewsletter signup page to get the scoop.

The following is an eNewsletter that we subscribe to and I wanted to share with you. If you have read this blog at all, you know how against Genetically Modified or engineered seeds and food we are.  This group feels the same, and there is mounting scientifically researched evidence that GMO’s are seriously harmful for us. It’s a bit of an eye opener, but one I feel that we all need to be aware of in our food choices. The big picture is that we will probably have to make the major choice of  scrutinizing everything that we eat; a sad position to be forced into, as there are no requirements for labeling GMO content in foods. One option is to move to more locally and sustainably produced food- farmers markets, trading/bartering with your neighbor and growing as much as you can yourself.  What’s more fresh or more local than the food you pick in your own garden? This is a trend that is growing by leaps and bounds; we are seeing this happening in just about every locale across the country. This gives us great hope that we can grow into a post-industrial petro-chemical agriculture that values nutrition, flavor and health over profits.

Here it is.
Subject: Spilling the Beans Newsletter – Lyme/Autism Group Blasts Genetically Modified Foods as Dangerous