Now comes the slow process of rebuilding, one with which Joan Gussow is  familiar. Who is Joan Gussow (forgive the terrible photos from that post – that was one of our first articles before we learned how to do this better!)? She is the “matriarch of the local food movement,” mentor to many like Michael Pollan, and an incredible leader activist. She is one of the few professors who changed the way I look at everything, and her class was one of the best I have ever taken.

Leslie Hatfield from Civil Eats wrote a great piece on Professor Gussow. A year ago, a horrible storm destroyed the garden she and her late husband had built. This was no ordinary garden – it’s a small plot on the Hudson where she grows all her own food. In this video, she shows the before/after photos – showing the toughness and love for the Earth to slowly rebuild something that seemed so lost.

Check it out:

Like most Americans, I was once a sprinter. I like things done fast for an immediate result. I mean this both literally and metaphorically. As I’ve matured, I’ve found that I’ve evolved in both domains. Running-wise, once a short sprinter in my youth, this weekend I completed my ninth half-marathon. Quick and immediate have been traded for slow and steady. For a significant part of my life, I avoided longer distances, unsure of my body and what it could endure. A not unsubstantial part of me was a little afraid I didn’t have a longer distance in me.

The rest of my life isn’t that different- what I ate being a good case in point. Like many Americans, I went by a number on the scale or a size on my pants and as long as I didn’t start to pop buttons on my clothes, I thought little of what I was actually consuming beyond calories. I didn’t *want* to know what I was eating. Platitudes such as, “Well, something will kill you,” or “There are chemicals in everything, you can’t avoid them,” were two of my common excuses in avoiding thinking more deeply about what I ate. I remained a sprinter (only concerned about the “now” of ‘will it make me fat?’), not yet prepared to metamorphosize into someone ready to go the distance with food.

And then, things changed. I read Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma, and it occurred to me that although I wouldn’t go on even one date with a guy who treated me badly, I consumed foods EVERY DAY that, quite possibly, treated me worse. What was I afraid of finding out?! Suddenly, I felt like a wimp. I’d taken on many long road races, but I cowered when it came to learning about where my food came from and of what it was composed?! Why? I think it was because I imagined eliminating processed/convenience foods was impossible. And learning about how everything I consumed was produced…well, that seemed insane.

Then, I paused. I thought about running. I didn’t go from the track to the marathon course in a day, or a month, or even a year. I started with a 5k, then got comfortable with the 10K, and so on. I learned what worked for me training-wise; what was too much; what was too little. Why couldn’t I do the same thing with food?

And so, I began training my diet. Not for a quick, short term, immediate results fix. Not to be a certain size or meet an aesthetic result. I began training for the long haul. To empower myself with the knowledge that I understood what I was consuming and why and to know that it was all completely in my control, not that of some unknown corporation or factory farm. Just like with love (or short distance sprinting), I reminded myself I did not have to settle. I deserved the best fuel for my body I could provide. (And I deserved a little pleasure, too.)

I’m still on this journey. I’m training to be a stronger and smarter eater every day. Want to train with me? After all, you’ll never know what you’re capable of, if you don’t even enter the race.

Strawberry Vinaigrette

Here are a few easy ways to start:

• Pick a heavily processed food each week to cut out of your diet. (I started with candy, snack crackers/cookies and deli meats.)
• Try to eat meals you make at home at least 4-5 days of the week.
• Eat vegetable/fruit/whole grain-based meals (as close to vegan as you can get) at breakfast/lunch most of the week. (You’ll be surprised-it’s not as hard as you think.)
• Eat only whole wheat grain products (look for the word “whole” before the grain on labels to make sure this is what you’re getting), not white.
• Stop buying anything that has an ingredient you can’t pronounce or define.
• If you can’t envision how you would make it from scratch at home, don’t buy it. (Could you make your own Froot Loops™?!? Me either.)

And, of course…Frequent your local Farmer’s Market and learn how to use new fruits and vegetables!

Watercress with Strawberry Vinaigrette and Cheddar Croutons

Watercress with Strawberry Vinaigrette and Cheddar Croutons
adapted from a recipe in Simply Organic
Makes 2 entree salads or 4 small side salads

I’ll admit I used to judge watercress. It seemed both snotty (as in watercress sandwiches of “ladies who lunch” fame) and unruly (tangled like my waist-long, 3rd grade hairstyle). Then, I tried this salad.

Forgive me, watercress?

Vinaigrette Ingredients
1 – 1 1/2 pints strawberries, washed and hulled
1 tablespoon olive oil
1-2 tablespoons balsamic vinegar (depends on how tangy you prefer dressing)
1 garlic clove
Salt/pepper

1. Place all but about 4 of the strawberries in blender or food processor. (Save the extras to slice and garnish the salad with.) Blend until liquid. Add garlic and pulse again.
2. Add olive oil and 1 tablespoon vinegar along with a sprinkle of salt and pepper. Pulse again. Taste and adjust as needed.

Cheddar Crouton Ingredients
4-6 ounces cheddar cheese or other sharp/smoked cheese (I used a white cheddar from a FM vender), shredded (use the largest holes)
1/4 cup unbleached flour
Red pepper, salt

1. Heat oven to 350 degrees F.
2. Line a cookie sheet with parchment paper or rub with a little olive oil.
3. Toss shredded cheese with flour and a sprinkle of red pepper and salt in a bowl.
4. Place a thin, cookie-size pile of cheese in 8-12 clumps on the sheet.
5. Bake for about 10-15 minutes (check every 5 minutes), until cheese has melted and browned to form a cracker-like substance. (Don’t worry if they crack…you can break them up on the salad.)

Salad
4 cups watercress (run a knife through it once or twice, just to make it a bit tamer)
1 avocado, pitted, peeled and cut into slices
1 green onion, chopped
Remaining strawberries

1. Drizzle watercress with dressing and toss. (Save extra dressing in the refrigerator for another use.)
2. Arrange remaining ingredients and croutons and serve.

Check us out on Tasty Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, and Potluck Friday!

Braided heirloom corn from family fields. This corn will continue to dry and be used as a food source.

The answer to this is complex. There is much to be said of popular journalists like Pollan whose work has reached many in the U.S. who otherwise may not have become conscientious about the role of industry in food production, which has had damaging social, economic, environmental and health results. Understanding food sources and processes is undeniably a good thing—to know where your food comes from and to teach others, like your own family and children, to also question and explore.

Harvesting white corn at my family farm in Peru

However, while watching a recent Oprah episode where Pollan was a guest and Oprah staff were challenged to go vegan for a week, I was struck by two thoughts, like little lighbulbs going off above my head. Mind you, these thoughts are tangents that actually have very little to do with Pollan whose investigative approach to some of the biggest diet problems of our time is highly influential. The first thought I had was when Pollan asserted that American tradition has historically included eating meat—“we are big meat-eaters in this country, we always have been”—which is why he believed many Americans struggle with the idea of not eating meat. Pollan’s personal choice was to eat meat provided by sustainable farmers who could offer naturally-raised alternatives to the current standard of hormone-infused, questionably raised animals. While the number of conscientious farmers in both rural and urban contexts grows, hopefully setting a new standard, the notion of any singular American historical tradition begs the question—whose tradition?

A meat rack in Little Italy, New York (I think for St. Anthony's celebration)

The second issue I was struck by was that in making an argument for veganism, Oprah’s guest Kathy Freston pointed out that Pollan’s selection of meat was not affordable for many—to which Oprah responded jokingly that she could afford it. The problem is that many of us, especially those with large families, single-parent households and others struggling with the ups and downs (and waaaay downs) of our economy, cannot consistently afford these options.

In no way is this intended to be a diatribe against Pollan, Oprah or Freston. But what these little lightbulbs intend to point out is that 1) There is a disparity between good food and cost and 2) There is a long history of food practices often swallowed up or marginalized by the notion of any singular American tradition. For example, in the Americas, which include Canada, the U.S., Central and South America, there are long-standing cultural traditions where meat was historically not the staple of daily diets. While we are all impacted in some way (some more than others) to issues of access, affordability and conscientiousness about food, I believe we also need to look for the strengths in all of our communities that are reminders of existing and potential resistance to industrial food monocultures. It’s important to be aware of and open to the understanding that conscientiousness comes in many forms and traditions that are part of the fabric of these lands.

Bison at Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming. Wild bison was an ancestral food source for many American Indian peoples.

For example, many Indigenous communities represent sites where the worst violations of human relationships with food have occurred and where the best practices in food conscientiousness can be found side by side. Working with Indigenous communities in North and South America, and being an Indigenous person from Peru, I have seen how our disconnect from food traditions for various reasons has resulted in our deteriorating physical, mental, emotional and spiritual health. But I have also seen food traditions maintained and revitalized where conscientiousness is ingrained in amazing cultural practices. For example, in my community in the highland Andes, we raise animals from birth, care for them, love them, work alongside them. Children in my community are raised with a sense of responsibility for small to large animals and develop empathy as a result. We believe that every living thing merits our respect and attention—from our water sources to our trees and mountains, to the very crops we plant. Furthermore, in my community, eating meat is not a daily affair. We prefer grains, corn, vegetables, legumes, potatoes. Meat is reserved for special occasions.

Anishinaabe fishermen will set out to spear walleye during spring each year, exercising their treaty rights with the U.S. government.

In other parts of the Indigenous Americas, the process of hunting for meat is seasonal, carefully planned and involves various traditions that bring together family and community and where respect is demonstrated through offerings made to the animals. Nothing is ever supposed to be just taken. For example, among Algonkian peoples, stories are told of the beautiful gifts of life that each living creature, from plants to animals, made at the time of creation of human beings. These stories serve as cultural markers for Indigenous people that remind us of the instructions provided to us by our ancestors—how to live well with everything around us.

Amazing artwork by Ojibwe painter Rabbett Strickland. Title: Assimilation. Citation: http://www.rabbettstricklandgiclees.com/artwork.htm

These beliefs were prevalent prior to the subjugation of Indigenous peoples in the Americas, and understanding this history shows us just how deep attacks on food traditions can be. For example, during different periods in history, Indigenous peoples in the U.S. were forced to give up their lands, religious practices, their lifestyles and even their children to make way for settler expansion and domination where Indigenous people were considered sub-human. Starting in the 19^th century, entire Indigenous hunting, fishing, farming and gathering societies were forced onto reservations where they were not allowed to leave and made to be dependent upon government rations of processed foods. Known as commodities, these foods, many of which were given to starving people, were not only often rotten, but also a complete departure from the natural way of living Indigenous people had known for thousands of years.

The proposal for Indigenous people to reclaim their foods has been strongly made by Indigenous scholars, researchers and community members, as instrumental to a process known as decolonization, or resisting, reclaiming and rebuilding Indigenous communities.

Given these histories, it’s not hard to see why the notion of what is American tradition needs a lot of work. We need to understand how diverse cultures, including Indigenous communities, have been impacted by past and present attacks on their food systems, while simultaneously recognizing that “tradition” is made up of lots cultures—European, Asian, Latin American, African, and so forth—that carry histories and lessons that we can all share.

My absolute favorite: Indian pies and cookies made by my dear friend's mother for a Jemez Pueblo feast day

Today, in spite of our difficult histories, Indigenous communities in the Americas still exercise traditions that assert strong beliefs about land and foods. We offer our prayers and our actions to demonstrate that we still remember how to live carefully. Yes, we have been invaded for a very long time by non-foods, Western chemicals and now GMOs, but we also have within our communities generationally-perpetuated ways of nurturing foods. And these ways do not cost a lot, just our time, just our participation.

Wild rice just harvested by canoe by Wisconsin Anishinaabe men. The rice is considered one of the sacred foods of the Anishinaabe and will nourish many families throughout the year.

You may be thinking that regardless, it does cost more to produce real food in the U.S., especially with an organic label. But isn’t it interesting that what is considered normal (as in naturally-produced foods) in Indigenous communities like mine, is so prized now by wealthier post-industrial societies? Just as important as asking how we’ve gotten away from these practices is asking why we’ve gotten so far away. We have only to examine our histories, including both how we’ve been targeted and how we’ve resisted, to start learning some answers.

I would argue that it’s not necessarily about the price tag. Our food issues require more than trying to be conscientious about food through learning about its sources and critiquing unsustainable agribusiness. What is required is a re-examination of our history, our humanity, our cultural philosophies, and our own daily practices where our beliefs are enacted in order to remember that we all have instructions rooted somewhere that remind us how to live well with each other and our earth.

Can you believe it? I can’t.

Over the last several years, the issue of what is real, authentic food has surfaced, oftentimes loudly with great passion on all sides. I loved the discussion y’all brought on about my post about being a snob and eating organically. It definitely isn’t easy, and sometimes, just too expensive for me. But as some of you raised, even the food industry has corrupted that word – labels sometimes show up that says organic, but is not.

A U.K. food company director was jailed for fraud – he stuck “organic” labels on food that was pumped of synthetic additives.

Organic foods from China are not always what they seem, according to a Public Radio International report. But the organic food industry is a $26 billion one in the U.S. Lots of money to be had.

The Cornucopia Institute, an advocacy group promoting family-scale farming, filed formal complaints against Target in 2009 that some of its products labeled organic were not really organic. According to the complaints, some of the companies that sell through Target, like Dean Foods, quietly shifted away from organic ingredients taking advantage of consumer confusion of “organic” and “natural” labels.

Meanwhile, many local, small-scale family farms may grow and harvest everything organically and according to the guidelines of the Organic Trade Association, but don’t want to or have the resources to go through the hoops and costs of getting the pretty little certified organic label.

Yet everywhere we turn, we see “REAL FOOD,” “PURE,” “NATURAL,” “AUTHENTIC,” “ORGANIC.” What does it all really mean? Kelly the Kitchen Kop just raised a most fascinating discussion about whether Qorn and other “meatless meat” products are real food.

How do you define food versus foodstuffs?

What I do know is that I’m confused and wary of what’s out there.

I’m not obsessive – I do like my Bojangles once or twice a year, and I won’t say no to the peanut M&Ms at the movie theatre. But I find myself having a hard time sometimes describing how I want to eat – food that my great-grandmother would recognize, food that tastes right because it hasn’t been invented in a test tube, food that I don’t have to wonder will give any children I have two heads or an extra finger (though that COULD come in handy in some cases, the finger, not the head). I want plums that don’t make my lip to swell up anymore because it was washed in “good for me” pesticides. I want beef jerky made with nothing but beef and spices, and not that beef stick stuff you find in roadside convenient stores.

I want good food, but since I can’t seem to call this food, “real” or “authentic” or “pure” anymore, as these words have been corrupted, I’m making up a new word.

I’m calling the food I want frank food.

Why frank food? Frank means: forthright, honest, blunt, truthful, candid, aboveboard. Frank foods by definition cannot be adulterated. It is aboveboard. Frank food unabashedly tells you what it is, and it will tell you truthfully when you’re lying.

Frank food is a real, goodness apple that is guileless, unadulterated and uncorrupted with pesticides. Frank food is butter, made with frank milk, free of rBGH and hormones – not margarine or Crisco or something else created out of a laboratory. Frank food is the grass-fed, free-range roadmeat that Hunger and Thirst harvests, fresh and local.

Frank food is what our dear friend at Eat Well, Eat Cheap raised as a great new year’s resolution, inspired by Salon’s Francis Lam who vows to no longer eat “cheap chicken.” Instead, frank chicken is well, frankly, chicken. Nothing added. Since frank chicken costs more, for me, that also means less chicken and meat, which is not a bad thing.

Another frank food is dal, a traditional thick stew usually of lentils or or beans, found in many South Asian cuisines. This Dal is courtesy of Zomppa Tsering, a recipe passed down for generations in the Indo-Tibet region. This frank food is also fairly inexpensive to prepare – hooray! The measurements may be a bit off, I tend to be very generous with my spices – I throw them in until I like the color and keep adding. This dish is chock full of protein, healthy, easy, and can last for days – just freeze any leftovers. I made this in my fancy new Christmas present!

Truly, a frank food without much pretense. It is what it is, and what it always has been.

Zomppa’s Dal with Spinach

Dal with Spinach (courtesy of Zomppa Tsering)
1 cup dry red lentils (soak for at least an hour)
1 red onion, chopped
2 TB ground ginger
3 cloves garlic, chopped
2 TB turmeric
2 TB cumin powder
1/2 tsp chili powder or chili flakes (optional)
2 large tomatoes, finely chopped
1 bag baby spinach
3 cups water, chicken or vegetable stock
Oil

1. In large pot, saute onions in 2 TB oil until translucent
2. Add garlic and ginger, saute for 30 seconds
3. Add turmeric for 30 seconds – do not burn
4. Add tomatoes and saute until well mixed and soft
5. Add cumin
6. Add lentils and combine well, add additional spices if so desired, constantly stir for 2-3 minutes – do not burn
7. Add water or stock. Adjust according to thickness desired (lentils will soak up liquid)
8. Salt to taste
9. Cook over medium heat until lentils are soft (about 20 minutes)
10. Add baby spinach in last 5 minutes of cooking

Check us out on Hearth n Soul Hop, Simple Lives Thursday, Tip Day Thursday, and Full Plate Thursday!

For many people, eating a tarantula would be an unusual, grotesque, and even torturous act. It, by no means, would be considered a food. In contrast, eating a fast food hamburger would be a very normal, and for some people, daily activity. Well I’ve had both, and confess that the eating of a big hairy spider, while uncomfortable, did inspire me to re-orientate my own perception of food.

Objectively speaking, one could consider the tarantula as more of a food[1] than many fast food hamburgers.[2] No preservatives, no colours, no other additives, the tarantula is actually a wholesome edible substance. A fast food hamburger on the other hand, like a great deal of our food, may turn out to be less of an edible substance than we realise. It arrives at the fast food restaurant completely cooked, having already been manufactured across a factory line. Like a piece of Ikea furniture, it requires only assembly at the restaurant.

And because it has already gone through so much processing and cooking, but still needs to travel far and wide and be placed in storage, the individual components of the burger have preservatives added in order to maintain their palatability and increase their shelf-life. The meat in the burger usually comes from an animal whose natural diet of grass has been replaced with grains, hormones, antibiotics and sometimes other dead animal meat.[3] The bun has had extra sugar added to make it tasty. The cheese has no doubt been derived from a dairy cow fed hormones to regulate its ovulation and milk-producing cycle.[4] Each ingredient has had preservatives, colours, and flavours added, to ensure the assembled food product is so familiar and tasty that it has you coming back for more. And although it probably does more harm to us than good, we eat it – because it’s “food”.

The personal experience we each have with food is an ongoing lifelong event where our perceptions are influenced through a web of many factors, including genetics, biology, age, education, income, environment and culture, just to name a few. As children, our perceptions are moulded by our parents and caregivers. Later, our perceptions are shaped by our own experimentation, knowledge and response to external and internal stimuli. This would be fine, if we were working within the boundaries of safe, sustainable, nutritious food. Unfortunately, however, the majority of us are provided food from within a framework of profit. Food industry goals such as mass production, increased yields, and brand loyalty, leads to food produced in an unsustainable manner, with added pesticides, hormones, flavours, preservatives, and more. It is here that the problem begins, and where our food perceptions become critical in navigating the approximately 47 000 “food” products that are available in the average supermarket.[5] See the following ingredient list of a “fruit snack” with “no artificial colours or flavours”:

Maltodextrin (maize or wheat), concentrated fruit paste (22%), modified starch (1412), food acid (citric, malic), dietary fibre (inulin), apple juice concentrate (2%), vegetable oil (emulsifier (lecithin) (soy), antioxidants (304, 306)), sugar, emulsifier (471), natural flavours, natural colours extracted from fruit, vegetables and plants (chlorophyll, anthocyanin), vegetable gums (410,415).

Can we really call this a fruit snack?

As a dietitian, I take full responsibility for all the people I myself have seen over the years and suggested the use of ‘moderation’ as an eating framework. It’s a shame that even professionally trained foodies can get lured into this logic. We need to stop thinking that ‘everything in moderation’ is the answer. Moderation is the response that the food companies supply when asked about their unhealthy products. Just recently, over the furor of food advertising to children, the senior vice president for global nutrition at Kellogg, upon being asked why candy qualified as a healthy choice for children, responded that “with balance and moderation all foods can have a place in the diet”. This is simply not true. Some ‘foods’ have no place in the diet at all.

Since digesting that most delicious tarantula I’ve realized that one of the most powerful actions we can take to divert the path of our current food system trajectory is to turn our own perception of what food is on its head. While nature and nutrition increasingly move further apart, many individual consumers still maintain a traditional understanding of food sources to make their choices, thanks to clever advertising and poor understanding of food industry practices. We need to be vigilant about our choices and remember that our foods increasingly originate from a mechanized and manipulated factory line. Be aware that there are laboratories that deal only with chemically generated flavours that add palatability to your food. These chemically generated flavours are used under many circumstances. For example, added beef flavours are why the taste of french fries from McDonalds did not alter when their frying oil was changed from beef tallow to vegetable oil.[6]

As Michael Pollan says in his book In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto,[7] many of our ‘foods’ are not really foods, but in fact “edible foodlike substances”. Too often we accept foods into our diet without enough critical examination. But I ask you to honestly examine, which one is more dangerous: the tarantula or the fast food hamburger?

[1] Oxford Dictionary definition of food: any nutritious substance that people or animals eat or drink or that plants absorb in order to maintain life and growth.

[2] I choose the hamburger as the archetypal fast food for arguments sake. Many other foods could equally be represented here.

[3] In Fast Food Nation, authored by Eric Schlosser (2001) he outlines that until 1997, the rendered remains of dead sheep, dead cattle, dead cats and dead dogs were fed to cattle. Since then, and currently, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations in the United States allow dead pigs and dead horses to be rendered into cattle feed, along with dead poultry. Poultry is also allowed to be fed dead cattle.

[4] If you want to learn more on this issue, there is an Australian-based website that contains further information: http://www.foodlegal.com.au/.

[5] Food, inc. 2008 (a great documentary to  watch it if you haven’t seen it already).

[6] Schlosser E. 2001. Fast food nation: the dark side of the all American meal. Houghton Mifflin Company. New York.

[7] Pollan M. In defense of food: an eater’s manifesto. Penguin Press. USA. 2008.

How is it that my very popular brand of organic soft wheat sandwich bread can sit at room temperature for so long before expiring into a dark green, fuzzy mass of mold?

One major part of the processed food supply (for both industrialized organic and conventional food) chain includes something most of us are familiar with – the addition of preservatives and other additives to both lengthen the shelf life of most food items found in the center isles of our grocery stores and/or make it taste ‘better’ (a relative term).  The idea of the preservation of food has been around for centuries, but it really wasn’t until the 20th century that human beings started adding synthetic chemicals to our food, making our lives far more efficient and convenient.

To be very honest, I didn’t realize there were synthetic chemicals in my food.  All I knew is that the food tasted good.  By default, I also didn’t have a problem eating synthetic chemicals.

That is, until I started looking at the ingredients list on all my packaged foods.  Ignorance really is bliss (sometimes).

Sometimes, I buy my chicken stock, pasta sauce and bread, ready made, from the local grocery store.  It’s just easier.  Out of sheer curiosity, I started reviewing the ingredients list on my favorite ready-made food items, thinking that I could maybe save myself some extra bucks by recreating the same flavors at home – from scratch.  But…how do you make xanthum gum in your kitchen?  Or lactic acid?  Or soy lecithin?

Hummm….very strange, indeed.  At least to me.  While I now make most things from scratch, I have one more thing I’d like to make from scratch.   And that brings us back to the earlier reference to sandwich bread.

In a sad attempt to make my family some whole-wheat sandwich bread, I instead made two light brown bricks, appropriate for building a home and less appropriate for making grilled cheese sandwiches.  While I continue my efforts to make a less dense/sandy sandwich bread, I’ve done a bit of research and found a local bakery that makes deliciously soft, organic, preservative-free bread.  Now, I don’t’ have to obtain a PhD in chemistry to decipher my ingredients list and I get to still eat sandwich bread.  Fantastic.

These are often the very communities that are disproportionately affected by the unhealthy and potentially deadly consequences of an unhealthy food system. Low-income urban areas especially often have limited access to health fresh food and physical exercise. Studies show: African-American and Mexican-American children have exceeded Caucasian children in obesity rates as much as 12%. While about 15% of Caucasian boys were considered obese between 1999 and 2002, 19% of African-American boys were and almost 25% of Mexican American boys were. For girls, these numbers were 13%, 24% and 20%, respectively.

Obesity rates for low-income children are also far greater regardless of ethnicity, and statistics show that this gap is increasing. In Colorado, a study found that 25% of children from low-income households were obese, compared with 8% of children from more affluent households. But when a $3 fast food menu can feed a family, the 1,000 calorie meal with a day’s worth of fat with no fruit or vegetables is not a deterrent. One must eat.

Statistics show that the rate of childhood obesity rate has more than doubled for preschool children aged 2-5 years and 12-19 years in the last three decades. For those children 6-11, this rate has tripled. Approximately, 9 million children (6 and up) are considered obese. That is 16% of children.

We know the long-term implications about childhood obesity. According to the Healthy Eating Guide, an estimated that 1 in 3 children born in the year 2000 will develop diabetes at some point in their lifetime. They have higher risks of asthma, sleep apnea, bone problems, gastro-intestinal diseases, early puberty, and psychology problems. This will affect the healthcare system, the Earth…the list goes on and on.

What can we do about this? One movie you MUST watch about the current industrial food system to give you some ideas. I missed it in the theaters and finally got it on DVD: the much-acclaimed Food Inc.

Many of you have seen it. If you haven’t, SEE THIS MOVIE. I knew I wanted to see it but since I am already a Michael Pollan and Polyface Farms fan (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, I URGE you again to read this book

(there’s a young reader’s version) AND watch this movie), I didn’t think it was as urgent that I see this movie. I was wrong. I am glad I saw it and I recommend you watch it as soon as possible.

There have been many reviews about it and the movie’s site has great information on how to support healthy foods and a much-needed change in our current industrial food system.

Rather than summarize the movie or talk about how we all need to really know where our food comes from here (the movie was a vivid reminder of why this is so important), however, I’m going to focus on something that I realized as I watching this movie.

There were only two stories that reflected people of color in the movie.

In the first example, it was about a family who know fast food is unhealthy but cannot afford the healthier options. In the second example, it was about illegal migrant workers working in industrial feedlots.

Is the issue of eating organic/healthy divided along a color line? A class line?

There have been numerous local and regional programs to address this issue within low-income and minority communities, from The Food Project in Boston to SEEDS in Durham. But more must be done. More attention must be given to those communities who have historically been overlooked. We cannot be so focused on debating local versus organic versus conventional that we forget that everyone should have a voice in these discussion and in the reform to make our food systems healthier and more accountable.

We are all hungry for change. We all have a voice.

This is definitely a dilemma for me. I love animals. I love dogs. I think pigs are really smart animals. I care about the environment. I recycle. I reuse bags. I pay extra for the recycled business cards.

Am I a hypocrite?

For those of you who eat meat, I’m sure you understand. For those of you who don’t, please don’t prejudge me yet. I have tried to go vegetarian, but I really like meat and my body doesn’t really do well with only vegetables (or only grains).

A few weeks ago, we joined Blog Action Day on the issue of climate change. BTW, I thought I was so clever today and made up the word “carbon fooDprint.” Turns out, there’s a neat organization – Cool Foods Campaign –  where you can learn more about how to reduce your carbon “foodprint” via your food!

ANYWAYS, this issue just gets more interesting…let’s see a run-down just the last couple weeks…

Lord Stern of the UK (not a vegetarian himself) warned the public they need to turn vegetarian in the Times October 27, 2009. You’re probably familiar with the argument that cattle and pig emissions (i.e. farts and stuff) are more dangerous than carbon dioxide to global warming.

The first country to take this connection seriously is Sweden. In Elisabeth Rosenthal’s October 22, 2009 article, she reports that the Swedish  government is taking steps to literally track their food by labeling the carbon dioxide emissions on food products and menus, from pastas to burgers.

Has this changed anything? Well, it seems that restaurants have found up to 75% of their carbon footprint attributable to meat. But even when they put these labels on their menu items and the more “climate-friendly items” have seen an increase in sales, some people just want a burger. They may feel a bit guilty ordering it, but they do anyways.

Moreover, she notes that the environmental cost is not just because of meat. Rosenthal notes that there are other factors like the type of soil used to grow the cattle’s food. So if we cannot cut meat entirely out of the human diet (which I don’t anticipate happening), then as Michael Pollan and others argue, we really should be paying more attention to where the meat comes from and how the animals are raised.

Rancher Nicolette Hahn Niman wrote in the New York Times on October 30, 2009 about this exact dilemma and raises some provoking points, affirming Rosenthal’s contention that it’s not as simple as meat/no meat, but how the land and surroundings are cared for in the raising of said meat. She points out that smaller, traditional, local farms don’t really have these carbon emissions that lead to global warming whether it is because of distance to market or little reliance on machinery (which sucks up energy).

And can vegetarians eat completely guiltless? Niman points out the reliance on soy for protein…and the most common soy and tofu found in supermarkets are from deforested lands overseas. Between large agribusiness emitting carbons to ship soy from overseas to large agribusiness companies like Monsanto destroying entire ecosystems in the Midwest to grow soybeans, we might have to think again whether meat is the only culprit to massive carbon “foodprints”.

Photo Source: Ecolitics Now

So what does this all mean? As Michael Pollan says, eat less meat. Eat more locally. By buying organic and local meat (which is also more expensive), I naturally buy and eat less. If I can’t get to the farmer’s market, I buy my meat at Whole Foods, where I know they have actually walked the walk with their involvement with the Animal Compassion Fund and Animal Welfare Standards.

I’m not sure I can ever fully resolve this dilemma. I sleep on organic cotton sheets, but my towels are not. I bike or walk where I can, but my car still gets lots of usage. But if Elisabeth Rosenthal is right that “”changing one’s diet can be as effective in reducing emissions of climate-changing gases as changing the car one drives or doing away with the clothes dryer,” then is it possible for me to care about the planet and animals, but still eat a little locally-, organically-, humanely-raised meat once in a while?

Starting today, I’ll start by cutting out meat 3 days a week.

Source: CNN

Ah, yes, the outburst heard ’round the world. What is it about health care that leads our politicians, who are supposed to be erudite, well-behaved, and level-headed (stop laughing), to act like 3-year olds in the sandbox? Make that 2-year olds.

Unless you haven’t turned on the news or been traveling, you probably cannot ignore the recent debates/fights/nasty fights over our health care system. I don’t think anyone – Republican, Democrat, Alien – can argue with a straight face that our health care system doesn’t need some overhauling. But what and how are other questions.

I don’t purport to know all the details, but I have been reading some of the op-eds and comments. One of the most popular articles that have been circulating is by one of my favorite heroes, Michael Pollan.  In his piece, he writes that we are arguing on the the wrong premise: while we fight about health care reform, we continue to promote a food system that encourages fast food and poor diets, “probably because reforming the food system is politically even more difficult than reforming the health care system.”

My interpretation of his essential argument is that without bringing into the national debate FOOD SYSTEM reform, health care reform is like putting on a bandaid over a scab you just keep picking at. Bigger scab, bigger bandaid. Scab is still there.

But not everyone agrees with this interpretation. The Center for Consumer Freedom posted a short response accusing Pollan of “fuzzy math” that misleads readers, raising alarm where alarm is not warranted.   Others, such as Don Hoyt Gorman, argue that pesticide issues aside, there is no nutritional difference between organic and conventional foods.

So who is telling the truth? Is Pollan just a fanatic who is freaking us out to sell books? Is there really no linkage between the American diet and food system and our health care system?

Well, while the debate on organic versus conventional and what our health care reform should look like rages on, my little brain reminds me of the adage, “You are what you eat.” Intuitively, I strongly believe that eating healthier, having more accessibility to organic foods, and living more actively can prevent many conditions, such as diabetes or hypertension. Granted, much of this is hereditary, but I’m not so sure I want to think that the guy-who-eats-a-Big-Mac-a-day-and-has-a-cholesterol-level-of-a-20-year-old is the rule and not the exception.

Not to mention, I would rather have my funny-looking, juicy tomatoes that taste like tomatoes from my local farmer than to eat a perfectly round, red, tomato-like tomato from who-knows-where.

While the country is mired in angry lies and arguements born out of fear of the unknown, I hope that my own little mission to eat productively, locally, and healthily (most of the time) will help me to be less of a burden to our health care system – however it will end up looking like. Inshallah.

Like many of you who support eating and living healthier while supporting community, shopping farmer’s markets or looking for that “local” stamp in supermarkets on a bushel of cherries or tomatoes have become necessary habits. For me, one of the people who played a role in instilling this habit was Michael Pollan. Pollan’s famous The Omnivore’s Dilemma changed my life and the way I eat and the way I shop; the way I engage with food.

While I have since read his other books, this one still remains a turning point for me. Now many of you may have read it, and may have or have not had a similar reaction to it as I did. If you haven’t read it yet, I highly recommend it. His observations and stories about farming underscores the reliance we have on oil…and on corn…corn in everything, and not always good for your health. When he talks about how distant we have gotten from our food, I’m ready to get up, and rally and protest against all big, industrial farms.

But are they all really awful examples of corporate greed?

This interesting article by Blake Hurst, a farmer in Missouri, was recently published in The American (supported by the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute). His article, The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-intellectuals, gives a stern admonition to people like me (I suppose) who spew about the big bad farms but don’t farm for a living. As a farmer, he discusses the realities he has had to face, from economic factors to animal nature (i.e. the stupidity of turkeys). He argues that many parts of industrial farming are owned by family farmers. He also argues that:

“Pollan thinks farmers use commercial fertilizer because it’s easier, and because it’s cheap. Pollan is right. But those are perfectly defensible reasons.”

Source: The American

While I am not wholly convinced, I do think Hurst raises some critical questions (i.e. how do you feed the world non-industrially?) and about the need to listen to all sides and perspectives, lest we all run around like stupid turkeys (I happen to love turkeys).

In the meantime, I’ll continue to ponder these questions as I shop at the farmer’s market, support my local farmers, and look out for unnecessary pesticides in my food.