Dear Mark: Cheap Meat?
Dear Mark,
I am curious what you recommend for people who either don’t have access to or can’t regularly afford grass-fed, organic, free-range meats? It [cost] is a lot of the reason we are mostly vegetarian – we could have organic meat on a regular basis, or we can have fresh fruits and veggies for us and, more importantly, our young sons, to snack on. I believe the fresh produce is more important, and our budget just won’t allow for both, so we stick to mostly vegetarian – and less expensive – sources of protein. I’d like to hear tips for how to actually apply some of this in these situations, and what you recommend then. Is it better to eat less meat and make sure what you have is organic, or keep eating the same amount of the conventional stuff (which is worse for our bodies and the environment)?
Judy, you raise a number of great points, and I know they’re common concerns. Ideally, we would all eat grass-fed/grass-finished meat all the time, but because of a variety of circumstances (budget, limited availability at home/during travel, etc.) it’s not always possible for people, myself included. For these reasons, the Primal Blueprint also looks at logical, reasonable compromises. If I can’t eat grass-fed meat, I look for the cleanest meat I can find (no hormones, no antibiotics, etc.). But I absolutely suggest that people include meat in their diets, even if they don’t have access to grass-fed.
First, let’s look at the issue of availability. Unfortunately, grass-fed and/or organic meats aren’t carried by many grocery stores. However, I think that trend is beginning to change. While Whole Foods, Wild Oats and community co-ops seem to be the most common sources for these items, more and more “regular” supermarkets are getting in the game. As always, the more people request it, the more likely stores will consider adding these options. That said, there’s a substantial mail order market for grass-fed and/or organic meats, many with competitive pricing.
Another option: small area farms that sell direct to consumers. You’ll usually get the best deal by purchasing 25 lbs. to half a cow, lamb, goat, etc. If you have a deep freezer, it’s ideal. Otherwise, find a few friends, neighbors, or family members who you can split an order with.
Also, just a note about labels… Meat that is labeled grass-fed isn’t necessarily “grass-finished.” Nearly all beef cattle eat grass at some point. Others, those usually labeled grass-fed, eat grass until the final few weeks before slaughter, when they’re switched to a grain diet. During this relatively brief window, the omega ratio reverses to pretty much that of mostly/entirely grain-fed cattle. Look for “grass-finished” or “100% grass-fed.” Though many farms that raise grass-fed cattle also follow other “clean meat” standards, not all do. USDA Organic uses the most stringent rules and certification, including the absence of any pesticides or herbicides on grazing land/feed and moderate animal treatment standards. But keep in mind, also, that USDA Organic doesn’t mean grass-fed. On top of all of this, we’re seeing a new class of “animal-welfare” labels offered by industry certification as well as animal-rights groups. (Whole Foods manages its own standards and labeling.) (I know, Judy, you’ve asked about this element as well.) Standards for these certifications vary considerably. If you buy direct from a farm, you may be able to get the most information about how the animals are raised.
While it’s true that “100% grass-fed, organic” offers the best of all worlds, it’s usually more expensive and more difficult to find. My advice for best compromises: first look for a label that says 100% grass-fed with “no hormones” and “no antibiotics.” This kind of meat encompasses important “clean” elements (in terms of an individual’s consumption) and offers the better grass-fed omega ratio. Next choice: clean, grain-fed meats. Just be sure to add more omega 3s from fish, fish oil supplements and vegetables sources to make up for the 6:3 ratio deficit.
Thanks, as always, for your questions and comments. Keep ‘em coming!
ILoveButter Flickr Photo (CC)
Further Reading:
Imitation Crab: What is That Stuff?
Dr. Michael Eades: Another Reason to Eat Grass Fed Beef
Typical North American Diet is Deficient in Omega-3 Fatty Acids
Sponsor note:
This post was brought to you by the Damage Control Master Formula, independently proven as the most comprehensive high-potency antioxidant multivitamin available anywhere. With the highest antioxidant per dollar value and a complete anti-aging, stress, and cognition profile, the Master Formula is truly the only multivitamin supplement you will ever need. Toss out the drawers full of dozens of different supplements with questionable potency and efficacy and experience the proven Damage Control difference!
Subscribe to Mark’s Daily Apple feeds
Posted By: Mark Sisson
I read The China Study, and Campbell impresses me as a rather bad scientist. A good scientist does not conflate correlation and causation; Campbell does. A good scientist designs and performs experiments that could prove his hypothesis wrong; Campbell does not do these kinds of experiments. A bad scientist will claim to have proven a hypothesis; good scientists know that hypotheses can never be proven, only supported or refuted. And he’s not really clear about what conclusions his research supports. As far as I can tell, he has shown that if you add fractionated casein to commercial rat chow, rats get cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. That doesn’t really say much about humans eating whole dairy products, and especially about eating whole dairy products that are not combined with starches (a key component of commercial rat chows).
I think that if you look at the body of evidence that purports to show that saturated fats cause heart disease, you’ll see similar bad science.
Check out, for example, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics (THINCS).
Cows and pigs do make a lot of manure, but this is only a problem if you treat manure like a toxic byproduct. Grass farmers treat manure as fertilizer.
to Migraineur: “It seems like you keep shifting your arguments.” I’m trying to respond to 3 people on this post – If I sound “inconsistent” it’s because I sort of am getting “ganged up on”…..
The grass fed cattle – Isn’t there a problem with grazing??? I seem to recall several “land grants” that the government is issuing – and a fight with wild Bison and their needs. Also, am I wrong that grass-fed animals also go to the feed-lot for a few months for “finishing”. At least that’s what M. Pollan’s articles lead me to believe.
I would have elaborated more about the “fox” – you chose to end the discussion: “you seem to resent my lowering humans to the standards of the animal kingdom. This position seems to me to be inconsistent – either we are equal to animals or we are not.” Animals like foxes, lions, cats, etc – have no choice…. the operate on instinct. Physically, we are the “same” as animals. We all feel hunger, pain, fear, etc. And we all have an interest in our own lives – Since man does trump animals intellectually (and spiritually) we are capable of making choice to kill or not…… At times, these choices actually improve man’s lot – health wise and environmentally. Certainly spiritually, as not many (omnivores) “enjoy” the killing part. I realize most who raise their livestock not only have a interests in their beasts for monetary reasons – but also because they are living beings. Ranchers, farmers (and omnivores) I believe would rather there was another way beyond the killing – I don’t think foxes give a darn either way.
I promise I will look closer at the Weston Price Foundation – Especially the website tour for vegetarians. I understand that “Wise Traditions” are not in favor of factory farming, de-beaking, and all the other attrocities “modern” agriculture has devised….. This is good. I am very much in favor of a return to traditional farm situations. I am attempting to build a chicken house (yes, for rescued factory birds) – I have no problem with consuming eggs – if they weren’t kept is such horrific conditions. Perhaps you and I aren’t that far from each other in thinking after all?
Also – Google “Diabetes vegan”….. I think we might reach an impasse’ here…..
To Anna: “Small, poly-cultural farms with plants *and* animals raised in a way suitable to their individual nature simply do not wreak a toll on the ecosystem, in fact they can support it, because they don’t extract resources, as industrial scale agriculture does (plant or animal).” I agree – I never had a problem till I learned the term “factory farm” – I think small farms are the best/only way for the land, the farmer, the animals and the economy….. Can we go back 50 years?
To All: No, I have not read this entire blog from the beginning…. sorry if this is an old argument – No one here is going to clean out their fridge of animal products….. I certainly am not going out for a steak any time soon – Can we all just agree to disagree? Maybe we’re all a little bit right & a little bit wrong.
I’m very familiar with every one of the arguments made to suggest that either meat eating is less health promoting or that abstaining from meat is more health-promoting. Anyone truly interested in seeing all sides of these arguments will quickly find that the references you cite are easily picked apart. If you look at them with a skeptic’s eye (for any side, really), they just don’t hold up very well.
I can’t decide were to begin, so I’ll just pick a couple that stand out. Yes, I’ll agree that sugar tends to fuel appetite, over-consumption, weight gain, cancer, diabetes, dementia, and a host of other problems. Incidentally, starch breaks down into sugar. Opiate substances might play a supporting role, but I think the strongest influence is the glucose/energy regulation system, driven by carbohydrate intake, which drives insulin. Insulin exerts powerful influences on the brain and through the body and especially on hunger. Rapidly falling glucose levels will start hunger cravings like nothing else. Try it with a glucose meter something. Illuminating. It is, of course, more complicated than that, but suffice it to say that if insulin levels are kept low to moderate with minimal sugar and starch intake, hunger and overconsumption are not big issues. Try really overeating on just fat and animal products and non-starchy veggies, with zero added sugar and no starch for a few days. You’ll find it just isn’t possible to do very long. Fat and animal protein on their own just don’t generate hunger, they satisfy it. You might even lose weigh, surprisingly.
I’ll grant you that meat and fat are sometimes implicated in studies, but what those studies always fail to control for is simultaneous carbohydrate intake (additionally, whether the meat is produced naturally or from unnatural factory farm situations, which greatly changes nutritional profiles). Very few people eat large amounts of meat or fat without also consuming a lot of carbohydrate. It makes a huge difference in the body’s biochemistry! Nutrition science since WWII has not always been very rigorous, and these studies are just a few of the examples of failing to isolate variables (which is unscientific). And I haven’t even gotten into how epidemiological studies fail to show causation, only correlation or how studies are designed to show a desired outcome. One has to be very careful about nutrition studies. They are often worse than useless.
Check out the review of The China Study on Migraineur’s blog. It’s revealing.
Really look into the cholesterol theory, with hard science data from someone other than drug sellers who profit from the manufactured fear of cholesterol, the animal rights people, and others who push a vegetarian or “no cholesterol” agenda. Cholesterol isn’t causative. It may indeed indicate something is out of whack in the body (such as hypothyroidism, chronic inflammation, or too much insulin production caused by high sugar/starch intake, as well as well as other pathological conditions) but the rigorous science does not really support the theory that cholesterol *causes* heart disease. Like many other notions that turn out to be missteps by our “great thinkers” (flat earth?), this one is past ready for a paradigm shift. If the theory was right, we really should have beaten heart disease by now.
It is politically and nutritionally incorrect to say that eating animal products is actually healthy, plus the collective consciousness over the past half century has tended to reward those who toe the party line, and punish and silence those who question it. That is not how good, rigorous science is done, but politicl and social movements sort of stole the show and dominated what became accepted dogma. Question everything.
Let’s see what else you suggest? Animal products are not rich in vitamins and minerals? What planet do you come from? That’s just plain wrong. Ounce for ounce there’s far more density of essential nutrients in animal products, especially the organs and also in eggs, than in any plant food. Additionally, eating a diet high in grains actually increases the body’s requirement for some nutrients, B complex and Vit C in particular, as well as some minerals. We aren’t herbivores, eating leaves all day. Anecdotal I know, but just last Sunday I had a conversation with someone who proudly claimed to be a super healthy, 7% body fat marathon trainer, living primarily on whole grains, tofu, and lettuce, who had to sit down and put his head down because he was getting dizzy from standing too long. Hmmm, he ate several servings of the very lovely Easter cakes and strawberry tarts. He didn’t have any blackberries because the seeds exacerbate his diverticulitis. I had a bowl of blackberries with whipped cream and felt fine. Doesn’t prove anything I know, but I thought it was ironic, particularly because when he got dizzy, he was telling me about his carb-loading, insulin pump-using hard-core exercising cycling friend with T1 diabetes who inexplicably couldn’t keep his BG from roller coasting). Isn’t a mystery to me.
Animal products aren’t much of a source of fiber, ok, but quess what? The fiber requirements are highly overrated! That theory sure does sell a lot of surplus stuff, though, doesn’t it. It takes some digging, but once once gets past the circular reasoning of the fiber argument, there really isn’t much evidence that a lot of fiber is necessary or particularly beneficial. However, those that eat a lot of plant material, particularly grains, do get a bit addicted to fiber and find they cannot cut back. Plenty of fiber can come from non-starchy plants, but that they can’t provide the energy and nutrient density that animal products can, so a diet with both can be quite healthy without being excessively fibrous.
PDRM, an arm of PETA. They aren’t exactly unbiased, so I doubt they just gather the data and let the data speak for itself, like good scientists do (and most physicians aren’t scientists, anyway- they are practitioners). In fact, I would argue that medical training, which is generally risk averse, is oppositional to scientific theory, which tends to rigorously question what we think we know and take risks.
And for the last fallacy, I don’t doubt that most people who eat the typical crappy food in the American food supply wouldn’t see all sort of benefits from dietary changes that reduced processed foods and increased fresh foods, including vegetables. But that doesn’t mean that shunning animal products is the only way or even the best way to achieve those benefits. Crappy food is crappy, vegetarian or not. Reducing or eliminating crap always is better. Fresh regular food produced traditionally is better than anything processed in a huge factory.
You know, Provoked, at one time I also believed and said a lot, if not most of the things you are saying here. I accepted them on faith, because intuitively, they made a lot of sense at the time. The problem is, while ti did point out some problems with where things are headed with conventional industrial diets and food production, it wasn’t the whole story, either. Plus it probably just masked some better, more sensible, but old-fashioned ideas. I certainly think that my years of Jane Brody- following with a high whole grain, lower fat, and low animal product diet did me some harm, which a more omnivorous diet is correcting (luckily not too late). The past few years of really looking under the surface of everything that is commonly accepted about diet, nutrition, and health, has been really transforming. I check and recheck everything now and have a much more skeptical eye for all claims. I’m always learning and re-evaluating. Too much depends upon it.
Anna “It is politically and nutritionally incorrect to say that eating animal products is actually healthy, plus the collective consciousness over the past half century has tended to reward those who toe the party line, and punish and silence those who question it. That is not how good, rigorous science is done, but politicl and social movements sort of stole the show and dominated what became accepted dogma. Question everything.” – Thanks very good advice…..
Your friend with the blackberries – wouldn’t want him in my corner for veggies either…..
“Crappy food is crappy, vegetarian or not. Reducing or eliminating crap always is better. ” I agree – It’s just going to be VERY difficult to provide affordable “good” food when we’re pushing 7 billion on the planet.
“The past few years of really looking under the surface of everything that is commonly accepted about diet, nutrition, and health, has been really transforming. I check and recheck everything now and have a much more skeptical eye for all claims. I’m always learning and re-evaluating. Too much depends upon it.” Very wise indeed!
Migraineur:
“Check out, for example, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics (THINCS).”…… I will.
“Cows and pigs do make a lot of manure, but this is only a problem if you treat manure like a toxic byproduct. Grass farmers treat manure as fertilizer.”….. “good” for now – but how long will it/can it last?
“Can we all just agree to disagree?”
Absolutely! I guess by now, it is probably clear that none of us that have “ganged up” on you have come to our conclusions lightly. it’s interesting too, that you brought up Michael Pollan, who I have read as well. I have few nits to pick with Mr. Pollan* but overall, I like his work. I find it interesting that you only came away with the notion that grass-fed is something negative, though. Yes, he points out that all beef cattle start off grass fed but there is so much more to it, especially when taking a non-factory farm path.
*Mr. Pollan has a lovely writing style and for those new to thinking about their food in a deeper sense, his writing is a great start. But it is rather incomplete and not exactly on mark nutritionally in some ways.
I also recommend Real Food: What to Eat and Why, by Nina Planck. It’s a quick to read book, but chock full of ideas and well-researched reasoning. She grew up on a family organic farm (before organic was chic or commonplace), and became vegetarian (it was the trend) in her young adulthood, but found it didn’t jive with her health or her life experience. She became aware of the dissonance, if you will.
I suppose there isn’t much incentive for someone committed to not consuming meat to explore anything that suggests a more omnivorous path, but if you decide to do so for information’s sake, the suggestion for Joel Salatin’s books is also a great one. So is the Weston Price foundation website, as well as Jo Robinson’s book and Eat Wild website as well as Shannon Haye’s.
Best wishes to you.
Charles…. “one study (I think it was Framingham) demonstrated that if your cholesterol level was below 190, you had three times as great a risk of getting colon cancer as someone with a total cholesterol of 220, and twice as great a risk of all cancers as someone with a total cholesterol of 260.” Okay – now I’m VERY confused. I think it’s safe to say that all will argue the findings to the side they lean – Too many contradicting studies – I can only take care of this body (which does feel great) and has all the numbers in order. Everyone is different.
There is a British writer, Colin Tudge, with a book called So Shall We Reap, who has been studying population and food production since the early 60s. He knows little about nutrition sadly, but he makes a very good argument that population increase rates are slowing quite a bit and world population is going to level off (I don’t remember when he said but perhaps when my third grader is about 80?) and that the world actually *can* feed everyone both now as well as in the future if changes in food production get going (enough food *is* already produced now, but because it is about wealth-building, not feeding people, some starve and others waste, but that is another issue about how agriculture breeds inequity). I haven’t had time to further dive into this issue other data relating to feeding the world’s population but I plan to (rechecking).
Once again, I think that the worries and answers of the 60s and 70s when the pop increase rates were really rising, haven’t caught up with the unexpected slowing of population growth in the past two decades. One thing that *is* clear is that food production needs to be made more sustainable *now* no matter what happens to the population rates. What I don’t see is enough movement towards sustainability.
Oh yeah, manure – you *need* manure in a balanced biodynamic farm to balance the energy and nutrient cycle so you don’t extract more than you put into to the system. You won’t need manure lagoons, either. Joel Salatin explains the cycle system very well. My third grader gets it, so it isn’t too hard to comprehend, but it does take some time to think about it, since there is so little of this type of food production in the US anymore (and diminishing in other parts of the world).
Polyculture is about working with nature, not fighting it. Manure lagoons ignore nature at great cost. There are all sorts of new ways of looking at animal production with modern view (but based on very traditional methods that farmers aren’t taught in ag school any more) that go way beyond bad grazing techniques and factory farms. If anyone had told me 30 years ago that I would have been reading about farming this much I would have thought them crazy. But it is a huge part of the food issues.
I have some thoughts about affording the real cost of food but I think I’ll settle down now
. Enough for two day, yes?
Provoked:
It’s interesting that you are now saying that everyone is different. You started out implying that everyone was basically the same, and all could benefit from a vegetarian diet.
Actually the studies have been quite consistent. There is little if any relationship between cholesterol and heart disease, and often a negative relationship with overall mortality, particularly cancer and strokes.
Please go ahead and Google “low cholesterol and cancer” and you’ll come up with a number of links about studies that have nothing to do with arguing for one side or the other.
Certainly the Framingham researchers had no ax to grind, in fact they were looking for positive results from lowered cholesterol. Particularly in women, they found that higher cholesterol and saturated fat was protective.
Japanese studies also showed a significant (called “dramatic”) decrease in stroke deaths and deaths from cerebral hemmorhage with an overall increase in animal fats, saturated fats, and animal protein.
Again, Google “low cholesterol and stroke.” You will find some more confusing research. Confusing, but surprisingly consistent.
If you leave this discussion confused, that’s a good thing.
Charles….. I’m not a doctor, I’m not a scientist – We could both argue health till the grass-fed cows come home. Although I don’t think I ever said it…… I rescind: eating meat will NOT kill you – Can you concede that doing without will not either? I believe the human body is remarkably adaptable to many diets. I was wrong for making a generality. Pardon.
“If you leave this discussion confused, that’s a good thing.” Thanx – at least you didn’t say: “just leave”….:)
Anna: About the pop…… I’m not a researcher either – but taking 3 major studies: The UN, Pew and a National Geographic study – they all seem to point somewhere around 9 billion before it stabilizes – by the end of the 21st. Assuming this is so – is there enough for “all” to be well fed – on the premise that free-range chickens, non-warehoused hogs & grass fed cattle are the best nutritional (of the animal) foods? If that population needs houses, roads, schools, hospitals and all the other infrastructure – where do all the (food) animals live?…. Another monkey wrench: we’re loosing habitable land – There have already been environmental refugees caused by raising water and there’s also soil depletion to consider….. yes?
” If anyone had told me 30 years ago that I would have been reading about farming this much I would have thought them crazy.” I agree, I’m 53 and am learning more about beans and beef than I ever dreamed….. Who knows, maybe as more folks become veggies it will help with the free-range sustainability? That’s a bright side right?
M.Pollan – I got more than the perceived “negatives” – just no need to elaborate – this forum knows them all quite well enough…… He’s done much to show both sides of the dilemma…..
“affording the real cost of food” ….. am looking forward to it.
I sort of stumbled here…… maybe in search of some answers(?). Overall, it’s been quite an interesting debate – Great blog….. lots of enthusiasm and intelligence. Wish that some of the vegan/vegetarian sites had such articulate folks
And not meaning to ruffle any feathers…. these are just questions: And NOT my intent to offend anyone here…..
1. If there is a future that science will “grow” animal parts – as healthy and beneficial as grass-fed & free range animals meat – does anyone here think there will still be arguments – “it’s not as good as the real (living) thing” or the opposition: (beyond vegatarian, beyond vegan, beyond PETA):”it’s flesh, and still wrong to consume”. I think this is an ancient conflict – else why would so many versions of religions have special mandates, customs, rituals and rites surrounding man’s use of animals? Thoughts?
2. “We were all alot better not knowing where our sausage came from” – I’ve heard that said many times. Just curious – with Youtube, Hallmark/Westland videos, arbittior and slaughterhouse in the daily news – Are the people who can’t square up to the killing of something lacking? Why can’t some (like myself) distinquish between my frisky dog and the cute pink pig or my fluffy cat and the brown eyed cow? An honest question: is there something amiss (or defective) in us? And the cure is????
3. Back to the slaugherhouse (as I’ve conceeded the health & environment)…… Thousands of men work the kill floor – it has the highest turn-over rate in packing plants….. Also, the highest instances of suicide, divorce depression and alcholism – Will society ever reach a point where we will no longer ask (or offer) men to do such jobs? I don’t know, maybe an automated machine or something? They’re already gassing chickens – why not other animals?
Just questions – like I said, NO intent to criticize….. After all, you guys are the beef people – right? Peace
Provoked, I don’t have time right now to answer your very thoughtful questions, but I promise to think about them, and hopefully post some of my thoughts here, or on my own blog, which I invite you to check out. (I wonder what you’d think about my current post, which is about omnivory.) Or, you know, maybe Mark will turn your quesitons into an Ask Mark post (hint, hint) that we can use as a jumping off point for further discussion.
But I did want to come back and say a few things that have been turning over in my mind during my evening commute. First, you’re right; we do agree on many fundamentals. Second, I think you’re a good sport for coming into a group of apologetic meat eaters and asking questions and taking the answers seriously. Third, we’ve thrown a lot of information at you, and I hope it hasn’t overwhelmed you. The truth is, many of us have been reading widely on topics like nutrition, sustainability, fat and carbohydrate metabolism, diabetes, and so forth for many years, and here we are emptying our bookshelves on you over the course of a few days! Fourth, as self-assured as I act, sometimes I’m confused, too. Maybe Colin Campbell is right about cancer; it just happens that my more immediate concerns are obesity and diabetes, since they run in my family. Sometimes you just have to put the book down and eat, you know? (At least once a day, actually.) Today I have to make the best food decisions I can based on what I know today; tomorrow I’ll know more.
And finally, I’m afraid I got the discussion off on the wrong foot with my comment about ignorance and vegans. Truthfully, I’m not usually that crabby. I don’t like oversimplifications and absolute statements, though, even on my non-crabby days. And yet I’m not precisely sorry for my comment, since I think the discussion has been interesting and thought-provoking.
Oh, OK, I will attempt to answer one of your questions. Joel Salatin only slaughters chickens a few days a month, for the precise reasons you enumerate. He does it on his family farm with his adult son and a couple of apprentices. It’s nothing near like a full-time job, and it’s in the context of the social support of a family. The factory-slaughterhouse guys do it 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, with few if any other tasks to give them a reprieve, and then go home to families who know nothing about what their jobs are like and probably don’t really want to know. Seems like a big difference to me.
I wrote “I don’t have time …” and then launched into my typical 500 word comment. Heh. Someday I’ll shut up and, y’know, do the job I’m paid for. Which is not, sadly, commenting on MDA.
Migraineur…. you are a true gentleman – not too crabby at all – I did over simplify and generalize to the point of ignorance….. Well, at least I wasn’t “the other Vegan” who actually annoyed me too…..
Okay – Ask Mark….. that’s a good idea.
Sorry about the diabetes – I can understand how that of great concern and explains your knowledge of different foods. I’m very guilty of having taken so much of my excellent health for granted – It’s sickening in a way…… I’m a horse – never sick, ever (not even pre veg)- guess it will all come down on me at once. Now, that’s something to look forward….
Your mention of Joel Salatin – and the understanding of my concerns…… I once heard a story – (might have been a biblical event) – Maybe dealing with sacrifice, or teaching how to mercifully kill an animal. There were two students – each with the slain animal….. The second boy asked “how did I do? It was just like the one before”….The teacher replied “yes, but it was without a tear”….. Sounds like Mr. Salatin does not take his task lightly – this is good.
Thanks for explaining parts about this – I know when I think of the absolute horror – it’s always the large factory-slaughter houses – It’s so machine like and so removed from the value of life (however trite). I know that on a smaller scale (a small farm situation) it’s not taken so lightly. Another great reason to return to something more sustainable (and more sane).
You’ve been very kind to answer – Thank you…… and have a wonderful evening.
Glad to hear we are all back in discussion mode rather than debate mode.
Good questions, Provoked. I’m not sure if we will meet the needs of everyone by the time that population peaks. We certainly don’t now and it’s not for lack of total food produced. The bigger question, I think, is if anyone will even be trying in an effective way. I think there will always be relief efforts, but that is like a bandage on a cut to the artery. I don’t seem enough of the “powers that be” working it now so it’s har dot imagine something will change radically to that end. I do see many individuals and small groups trying to work on solutions, but at the same lately it seems the “powers that be” are working overtime to squash many of those efforts. Again, Joel is illuminating on that. I could suggest other places of online discussion where small family farmers are being stomped on big-time by the state and federal gov’t, but I think I’ve done enough reading suggestions, nor do I want to send anyone away from Mark’s generous and informative blog.
Just came back from my son’s guitar lesson and I see Migraineur has beat me to it on a few points (she and I seem to be like email twins sometimes – same places, similar views, at the same time).
Gotta get to the dinner simmering on the stove, but I have the same concern about the folks who work in the high speed -high volume processing plants. I don’t butchering itself is necessarily nasty work, but the factory condition under which many of those employees work is brutal. Often they are low paid, not especially skilled, not fluent in English, and grossly taken advantage of. It’s like the book, The Jungle, all over again, just 100 years or so later. Sorry to throw another book out there.
I’m working harder to make myself less of stranger to the production methods of my food so I can find ways to not support systems like that. I can see a point not to far ahead where I could participate more fully in the processing of an animal for my meat.
I have a grinder. Sausage is no mystery in this house.
So far, I’m skeptical of the ability of science to “grow our meat” for us. I guess I can sum it up with worries about the law of unintended consequences. It’s not that I don’t trust ever science – my husband is a research scientist – but the “science” behind that lab-created meat scheme isn’t very appealing to me at first blush. Perhaps I will learn enough to be pursuaded, though. But I kinda doubt it. It’s hard to truly improve on nature.
Ok, now I really have to get back to dinner before my squash is cooked into squoosh (leftover pot roast cubed and simmering into Coconut Curry Butternut Squash soup – sort of Thai style).
Migraineur…. I’m sorry – I will re-phrase: You are a true lady. Didn’t know “migraineur” sounded so masculine (but so does provoked huh?) – Anyway, online it’s impossible to tell the sexes apart – It should matter little, except that perhaps our life experiences are similiar as man or woman – but that’s another blog somewhere I’m sure…. “A true gentleman”…..sorry bout that!
Anna….. your dinner sounded (somewhat) similar to ours…. fried squash, snap beans & pasta with “vegan” cheese – It was very good – We’re fortunate here in Florida to be in the height of strawberry season – gosh they are yummy over hot biscuits!
Anyway, guess maybe the thing about trying to feed “all” will be a problem till “forever” – Para-phrasing here: “the hungry will always be with us. I just don’t see how the increased population will be able to consume all the “right” foods. I do agree though that there’s some major concentrations of big money in the food industries now. Names I know: Conagra, Tyson, Smithfield, Cargill, Monsanto…… and squeezed in between each of those is a little bit of “Wal-Mart”. It’s said 90% of our foods come from these mega-giants…. That’s a lot of power – I sympathize greatly with the small farmer and rancher…… I don’t know how they survive. This new farm bill of course is a joke – HA!
Yes, it’s strange how the ills Upton Sinclair concerned himself with a hundred years ago still surface today….. I know his thrust regarded the working conditions (and animals) – but got consumers more concerned with what was on their plate. Actually, I don’t think you can cure the later (safety part) without addressing the other issues. It’s terrible that the (mostly immigrant) workers get paid so little – but are responsible for so very much. When will we consumers (society) learn…. ya get what ya pay for? Unfortunately the animals don’t get much of a break either. In fact a very disturbing 10 year study was just released by the AWI – This is pre-Hallmark scandal. The information is disheartening – I won’t go into details, but if interested it’s called “Crimes without Consequence”.
Everyone here on this post is much better off with your grass fed – locally grown choices….. I know if I ever changed my diet – it would never, never be for factory farm anything!
Yes, hard to improve on nature….. it would have to be considered “artificial meat” though, right? I know they’ve grown an ear on a sheep – The whole cloned GMO “science” is too Franken-food to me…. Like the tomatoes that have genes from flounder – Thank goodness I live in a warm climate and can grow my own!
Well, it’s been wonderful chatting – I’ve got a trailer full of top soil to get unloaded…… my bones are gonna protest I know – but better get to it -
Take care, Bea
In response to the words I wrote over a year and a half ago: “If I ever changed my diet”… This is no longer a valid thought.
Those words I wrote then – “if”, are totally untrue today. With more information and experiences of a vegan diet, I’m certain this is how I will always eat and live.
And why not? I feel healthier, lost some pounds and have more energy than in decades! Even spiritually… being vegan has given me ethical grounding as well. I like living without harming.
So, there is no “if” to “factory-farm” meat, feedlot meat, free-range meat, organic meat, or, the most placating of all: “humane meat”. Nah… cross “meat” off my list entirely-
I do believe it is in our nature to evolve, and progress to our better world. Having respect for life, manifested in a vegan diet is the way.
Provoked:
“1. If there is a future that science will “grow” animal parts – as healthy and beneficial as grass-fed & free range animals meat – does anyone here think there will still be arguments – “it’s not as good as the real (living) thing” or the opposition: (beyond vegatarian, beyond vegan, beyond PETA):”it’s flesh, and still wrong to consume”. I think this is an ancient conflict – else why would so many versions of religions have special mandates, customs, rituals and rites surrounding man’s use of animals? Thoughts?”
It’s not really an ancient conflict. Religious rules surrounding animal consumption were mainly about giving priests power over meat consumption, a source of considerable power.
Jason….. couldn’t agree more! Power isn’t in weapons, votes or money. It’s who controls the Food. Food = Life
Hey!
I just stumbled upon this site (literally via Stumble Upon) and while I didn’t read all the posts, I did notice the one about the beyondveg website. I wanted to add that westonaprice.org is another great one. Ok, I’ll be honest, the westonaprice.org site changed my life, my health, my future for the better. Most definitely worth checking out for anyone concerned about health, nutrition, etc etc etc etc!!!
Thanks!
Bye,
Ann
Weston Price — please no! They are sister to Center for Consumer Freedom –who are the biggest lobbiests who have supported the supporting tobacco, sugar/corn, alcohol, meat/dairy industries. They are against any kind of social awareness that effects corporate (mono & GMO) foods or consumer interests associated with these products…
And that they are not fond of PETA – good for them… but they dislike peta for all the wrong reasons.
They do not adocate healthier or more sustainable food… They advocate *not questioning* the bad foods that exist!
They particularly dislike Obama’s choice of Cass Sunstein for Office of Oversight and Regulation because Sunstein encourages open debate in public forums… About issues that would concern a community — so that they may be resolved in a grass-roots manner. Thus restoring some say in our immediate government.
And if one of the issues or “problems” that might be discussed would be… OF ALL THINGS – what we eat!!! Oh then the sparks would ignite!
But isn’t it about time that social gatherings included the open discussion about all the issues regarding animals, meat, sustainablity and ethics?
There’s good reason organizations like Weston Price and CCF would discourage such open debate… Knowledge always leads people to smarter choices. It discloses secrets and gives rise to better solutions.
Power only exists with ignorance and apathy. And I assure you CCF & WP operate under some very powerful strings.
“who are the biggest lobbiests supporting tobacco….”
WOW ALL THIS TIME WASTED ON A SINGLE BLIND VEGAN??? IF HE IS HAPPY; LET HIM BE.
MORE PORK, CHICKEN, FISH AND BEEF TO GO ARROUND.
BESIDES, IF GOD DID NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT WHAT WAS GOOD FOR US TO EAT; WHY THE HECK DID HE ALLOW US TO DO IT??? DUHHHHH
Thank you for a very educational discussion folks – very reassuring too how a warm finish can blossom from such bitter opening salvoes. This will be remembered next time I nearly yell at someone! This topic of feasting on the cheap particularly piqued my interest because I am a typical broke student (a fresher) contemplating how to square Mark’s magic bullet philosophy with finances even Gordon Brown would think a bit dodgy. Having read this however, I think I may branch out next term and press my casserole dish into service to make sure I can eat lots of tasty animals (ethical, quality ones!). Beef shanks? Liver? I think so. And a special appreciation for Anna’s posts which greatly opened my eyes in this regard
I’ve only enjoyed 2 days of primal eating but I can certainly attest to the point made about over eating. I tried to cram down carrots, omlettes, ham, tomatoes; mostly out of curiosity – and it just didn’t work. I was completely sated, and probably nowhere near the carb level of last week. Tomorrow is a fast day, but dinner will be a feast if I have anything to do with it
Thank you Mark for teaching me your very promising eating habits. I can’t yet wax lyrical over the benefits, but give me a few months and I may be joining the revolution. If it means anything I finally pressed my 20kg kettlebell today after weeks of negatives and assists. I will keep at it (both the diet and the lifting of heavy things) and will tell you all if anything interesting happens.
Peace,
Ayad
I don’t know if Aussie beef is inexpensive in America or not, but it’s relatively inexpensive here in Japan and the tenderness and taste are really good. According to this article, Aussie beef is predominantly grass-fed (as of 2007). When it comes to beef or lamb, Aussie meat is all I eat.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Production+practices+for+red+meat+in+Australia-a0169311707