Comments on: How Safe Is Our Food? http://www.marksdailyapple.com/food-safety-issues/ Serving up health and fitness insights (daily, of course) with a side of irreverence. Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:37:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Mark Sisson http://www.marksdailyapple.com/food-safety-issues/#comment-15967 Mark Sisson Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:24:30 +0000 http://www.marksdailyapple.com/food-safety-issues/#comment-15967 <I> Spot on comments, Joe. Although I'm not sure even a big catastrophe is enough to effect change (Katrina comes to mind). Hate to be cynical, though.

Spot on comments, Joe. Although I’m not sure even a big catastrophe is enough to effect change (Katrina comes to mind). Hate to be cynical, though.

]]> By: Joe Matasic http://www.marksdailyapple.com/food-safety-issues/#comment-15956 Joe Matasic Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:12:32 +0000 http://www.marksdailyapple.com/food-safety-issues/#comment-15956 I would agree that government intervention/regulation usually ends up being (pick your own description) corrupt. Though the best option, all things equal, would be for people (free market) to stop buying stuff from the companies that don't use safe practices, growing, etc. That would get the companies to change quickly. The problem is things are not equal and people don't know the real risks involved. You can pick why they're not equal. A good start would be government subsidies. Lobbyists would probably be better since they got the subsidies in the first part. I think it would basically take a big reformation of the government to be able to fix it their side. I know its going to sound bad but I think that only a big contamination/whatever with a lot of people getting sick/dying might be enough to effect some meaningful change. Maybe many small ones in a short period of time. Americans have a short memory and a shorter view of things that effect their health (readers of this blog withstanding). I hope it could happen another way, but I remain doubtful. Not sure the corn/livestock associations would ever let livestock go back to being grassfed and pastured where the infections such as E. coli are much less likely. I would agree that government intervention/regulation usually ends up being (pick your own description) corrupt. Though the best option, all things equal, would be for people (free market) to stop buying stuff from the companies that don’t use safe practices, growing, etc. That would get the companies to change quickly. The problem is things are not equal and people don’t know the real risks involved. You can pick why they’re not equal. A good start would be government subsidies. Lobbyists would probably be better since they got the subsidies in the first part. I think it would basically take a big reformation of the government to be able to fix it their side.

I know its going to sound bad but I think that only a big contamination/whatever with a lot of people getting sick/dying might be enough to effect some meaningful change. Maybe many small ones in a short period of time. Americans have a short memory and a shorter view of things that effect their health (readers of this blog withstanding). I hope it could happen another way, but I remain doubtful. Not sure the corn/livestock associations would ever let livestock go back to being grassfed and pastured where the infections such as E. coli are much less likely.

]]>