HW 11 - Final Food Project One

Over the past year, one of the most crucial ideas I have learned in relation to this class is to never trust the first opinion you hear. Regardless if what the person is saying makes logical sense isn't an excuse to not explore the alternative stand point on the subject. Specifically in regards to the subject of food, after reading The Omnivore's Dilemma and watching Food Inc. I decided to continue to explore the company Monsanto and their relationship with the government and with the farmers. After understanding one view of the anti-corporation I thought in order to fully understand the subject I needed to see the full picture.

Before I began researching the pro-corporation I took a step back to make sure I completely knew all the facts of the other idea. I came to discover that, "The United States Government has been financing research on a genetic engineering technology which, when commercialized, will give its owners the power to control the food seed of entire nations or regions. The Government has been working quietly on this technology since 1983. Now, the little-known company that has been working in this genetic research with the Government’s US Department of Agriculture-- Delta & Pine Land-- is about to become part of the world’s largest supplier of patented genetically-modified seeds (GMO), Monsanto Corporation of St. Louis, Missouri." (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3082) Essentially the government wants the food out on the market as soon as possible. The quicker the production the higher the price. If they have the ability to speed up the growth they can create more quantities of the product.

As they said in Food Inc. former president Bill Clinton and his wife Hilary Clinton who now is our secretary of state, had a relationship with big food corporations dating back to the 1970's. Ten years later in the late 1980's friends of the Clinton's helped out George W. Bush's oil company. Is this to say that the food corporations predicted our presidential future? That behind our votes were actually supporters of G.M.O... even today Obama is endorsing Monsanto. If these significant leaders are for these causes that are hurting our health how can we trust anything they say? Is discussion of these crucial subjects over shadowed for reasons unknown to the public?

After collecting more specific information pertaining to one set of ideas I decided to see what Monsanto had to say. I explored their website and came to conclude that all of the messages that were being exposed by those not afraid to speak up were completely opposite the corporations stand point. First off the website seemed to appear pretty and shiny with images of "real" farmers doing "real" farming. It gave someone as myself a conception that what they were doing wasn't wrong at all. On their, Who We Are section they had a condensed version of their morals.

If there were one word to explain what Monsanto is about, it would have to be farmers.

Billions of people depend upon what farmers do. And so will billions more. In the next few decades, farmers will have to grow as much food as they have in the past 10,000 years – combined.

It is our purpose to work alongside farmers to do exactly that.

To produce more food.

To produce more with less, conserving resources like soil and water.

And to improve lives.

We do this by selling seeds, traits developed through biotechnology, and crop protection chemicals.

It seemed as though the information given in Food Inc. about the Monsanto spies was not touched upon in their campaign to encourage people to join the band wagon. It also did not mention the farmers being sued for trying to conserve seeds that were unused for next years growing. They didn't mention how they were shutting down seed cleaners. In Food Inc. they said how there used to be three in each town and now there were six in the whole country, and that was in 2008. The information being shared to the public about Monsanto doesn't seem like there is anything wrong with it, so the public doesn't question their true existence.

By investigating this underlying lie it essential proves that companies such as Monsanto are linked to political figures and are not in it to help the farmers but need the farmers to function. No where on their website do they mention the Clinton's or the Bush's, if they did mention the connection I wonder if people might begin to question it. Directly from farmers we know that they are not treated equally but in reality Monsanto owns them. People in this country don't think about two sides, they think about one, and if that one side is legitimate they don't find it necessary to find another side because they probably assume it doesn't exist.

Citations:

1. "Monsanto Buys ‘Terminator’ Seeds Company." GlobalResearch.ca - Centre for Research on Globalization. Web. 31 Oct. 2010. .

2. "Monsanto ~ Monsanto at a Glance." Monsanto ~ Home. Web. 31 Oct. 2010. .

HW 10 - Food Inc. Response

The food industry today isn't just damaging individuals, it affects our nation, the environment and the animals. Farming is no longer working in the fields, in the barns, it has turned into a factory system. Big corporations make sure it is kept that way, by inhibiting farmers that work for the companies to not have a voice. By doing this the customers are kept out of the darkness, and remain oblivious to the real conditions where the animals are being raised. If a farmer decides to speak up they are shut down, and left in piles of debt. If a citizen of the United States decides to speak up they are sued. The corporations do not want to leave foot steps of negativity that could and do affect their sales. The food industry is not honest with the people. Members of the government have close connections to these large corporations hence why no debate is brought up for public interest. Knowing exactly where are food comes from is rare, on average it is usually 1500 miles away. No longer do we have connections with basic necessities, diseases are rising, diabetes is rising and the link between our food and our health problems isn't often brought to the table.

The movie visually showed the examples instead of deeply explaining them. Images are concrete facts and lead us to see the realness in the situation. Instead of trying to imagine the circumstances it was displayed in front of our eyes. I think for the average person this is more effective. Unfortunately in our country today people are more willing to believe real footage than words. If we have a certain opinion about a topic we are more likely to find more information that backs up those ideas than to find information that puts down our ideas. In the book, The Omnivore's Dilemma there is more room for disagreement. Although the facts are being laid out for the reader it really depends on how you interpret them. Since in a movie the audience is all being fed the same information there is less room for disagreement. While in the book even though we are all reading the same words, our minds may break down the meaning differently. The book does a good job of explaining the hidden truth behind the problems but the movie does a good job of showing the actual outcomes of these problems. Since in the movie many different experts on the subject shared similar opinions the audience is more convinced. In The Omnivore's Dilemma it is Pollen and the people he meets along his journey. However, I think both do a good job of trying to convince the mass of the situation we are dealing with and how we all need to join together to fight against the messed up system.

Food Inc. was a great film to see as we finish up the book. It gave the book even more life. When I was reading I created my own images of the conditions we are dealing with but the movie made those images more clear. Some chapters in The Omnivore's Dilemma felt very repetitious to me, it seemed like the concepts were going in circles. While in the movie there was enough information of a wide variety of different issues. I was in shock while reading but once I saw the images of it, I couldn't believe my eyes. I am even more certain now that the government is our main source behind this. There is a law that people cannot complain about products. Politicians are linked to these food corporations. There are "secret agents" running around and tracking down those doing "bad." People are being sued left to right for criticizing big corporations. Meat packing used to be one of the best jobs in the United States and now it is one of the most dangerous. Workers and animals are treated the same. Joel Salatin of the Polyface Farm said, "We have allowed ourselves to become so ignorant with something so intimate." A farmer from Purdue who went against her contract said, "This isn't farming, it's mass production in a assembly line in a factory... It is like being a slave to the company." And after she gathered dead chickens, threw them in her truck said, "That's normal." The chicken council isn't even denying the state of strangeness to the concept of food, "We are not producing chicken, we are producing food." Animals are no longer animals, they don't eat like animals, they don't live like animals, they don't taste like animals. They are here for what many of us would like to think a purpose to benefit us specifically. So we treat them like machines, that eat each other, eat corn, are injected with hormones, live a life of darkness, and then are killed for us. They no longer live on farms, they live in practically cells, innocent creatures living in tortured lives. We see this as normal because when we sit down for dinner we are not thinking of the lab coats, the gloves, the illegal immigrants or even the animals, we are thinking about ourselves.

HW 7D- Reading Response

Chapter 17: The Ethics of Eating Animals

Precis:

For most of us killing humans is completely unacceptable but killing animals seems quite normal. However a less dominant group of people in our society feel as if humans and animals should be treated equally. Their ideas and opinions give the animals voices (theoretically) to attempt to shift the larger group of people into understanding the difference between a happy animal and one whose life has no joy. And until they understand this idea, animal after animal will continue to suffer during both life and the ending of their life.

Gems:

"We tolerate this schizophrenia because the life of the pig has been moved out of view; when's the last time you saw a pig in person? Meat comes from the grocery store, where it is cut and packaged to look as little like parts of an animal as possible." (Page 306)

"All the one all-important interest humans share with pigs, as with all sentient creatures, is interest in avoiding pain." (Page 308)

"Humans don't need to kill other creatures in order to survive; carnivorous animals do." (Page 310)

"Animals are treated as machines-"production units"-incapable of feeling pain. Since no thinking person can possibly believe this anymore, industrial animal agriculture depends on a suspension of disbelief on the part of the people who operate it and a willingness to avert one's eyes on the part of everyone else." (Page 317)

"Tail docking and sow crates and beak clipping would disappear overnight, and the days of slaughtering four hundred head of cattle an hour would promptly come to an end-for who could stand the sight? Yes, meat would get more expensive. We'd probably eat a lot less of it, too, but maybe when we did eat animals we'd eat them with the consciousness, ceremony, and respect they deserve." (Page 333)

Thoughts & Questions:

As I was reading this chapter I kept thinking about the movie: Daily Bread... animals are longer seen as living breathing beings but merely their purpose is to get fat enough to serve us. The quicker they get fat the better...

On one of the first days of school Andy asked us to define a number of words, one of these words was sacred, I remember not really knowing how to define it, I thought something that is special or appreciated. Now I understand how far we are from being sacred about our food. We treat it without second thought, three times a day we eat, two times a day we brush our teeth etc. There is nothing special to eating anymore it is just something we do.

Two summers ago I worked at Mount Sinai Hospital, basically I had to walk around and talk to the patients. They gave me a list of topics to discuss, the first one was food. Food is something we can all relate to because we all need to do it in order to survive. It is also a subject that some people have the fondest memories of doing. However I think today it isn't looked at as something so wonderful, our obesity rates are high not only because people are over eating... they are over eating for a reason: depression, anger etc. If you are eating alone of course you are going to eat more, based on your emotions and lack of judgement.

Chapter 18: Hunting - The Meat

Precis:

Hunting is a technique that no longer represents survival. Over time hunting has turned into more of a recreational activity. Today people would rather inject hormones, abuse the animals throughout their lives, make them so obese they can't move and then slaughter them as if it is nothing, because they find the act of hunting to be too gruesome...

Gems:

"Or it could be that hunting is one of those experiences that appear utterly different from inside than from the outside." (Page 337)

"Scientists still aren't certain what the evolutionary utility of such a system might be. Some researchers hypothesize that the cannabinoids, like the opiates, play a role in the brain's pain relief and reward system; others that they help regulate appetite, or emotion." (Page 342)

"Ortega believed that in hunting we returned to nature because "hunting is the generic way of being a man" and because the animal we are stalking summons the animal is still in us." (Page 343)

"The one emotion I expected to feel but did not, inexplicably, was remorse, or even ambivalence. All that would come later, but now, I'm slightly embarrassed to admit, I felt absolutely terrific-unambiguously happy." (Page 353)

Thoughts & Questions:

During the summer time especially there are always bugs crawling around. People seem to get very aggravated by them hence we have created fly swappers, and the basic use of the bottom of our shoes. Why do we feel the need to kill these creatures that are so small compared to us. Is it the thrill we get after we have done the deed? Do we feel satisfied? Ahah killed the little sucker... forgetting or not even thinking about the reason why we did it in the first place...

What would people in New York City think if hunters started looking for birds and squirrels to kill? Would socially it be acceptable? Or would the general public find it disturbing? How likely would it be for all of those people to go out after they saw such a horrid scene and eat meat? Probably quite likely...

Chapter 19: Gathering - The Fungi

Precis:

The problem with scavenging for mushrooms is that although sometimes you may know exactly what it is, there may be other times where it is a complete mystery. Individuals who participate in this activity don't read a manuel, they use their internal senses to lead them to the "treasure."

Gems:

"But that is apparently how it goes with hunting mushrooms: You have to get your eyes on, as hunters will sometimes put it." (Page 368)

"Wild mushrooms in general throw throw that dilemma into a particularly sharp relief, since they confront us simultaneously with some of the edible world's greatest rewards and gravest risks. Arguably, mushroom eating poses the starkest case of the omnivore's dilemma, which could explain why people hold such strong feelings, pro or con, on the subject of wild mushrooms." (Page 371)

"(Mexicans call mushrooms carne de los muertos-"flesh of the dead.") The fact that mushrooms can themselves be direct agents of death doesn't exactly shine their reputation, either." (Page 376)

"Mushrooms are hinges in nature, now turning toward death, now toward new life." (Page 388)

Thoughts & Questions:

It seems like it might be very interesting hunting for mushrooms. I didn't realize how complicated it actually was. In Costa Rica I went to a forest, and the tour guide could find animals, birds, little bugs without even looking. The way that Angelo was described reminded me of that. They are so comfortable with the world around them and they notice little movements that lead them to finding incredible things.

I would like to hunt mushrooms, I have a feeling I would have an advantage after reading this chapter. Although I am sure it would be difficult at first I would be more likely to look out for sudden movements of leaves, and spot the camouflaged mysteries.

This sort of reminded me of growing sprouts. Even though we were searching for sprouts. Each day we saw progress gave a feeling of accomplishment. Furthermore since I had never grown my own food in a jar the whole idea of it was quite a mystery.

Chapter 20: The Perfect Meal

Precis:

Perfection is not any easy task to complete. Especially when it comes to creating "The Perfect Meal", there are many elements within a perfect meal that must be considered. Depending on the time of year, we must gather foods according to what is available to us. We must then cook these "gifts" with love and appreciation. This allows us to be one with what is around us, and one with the people who brought the food to life. Knowing how something started creates a sacred ending.

Gems:

"Perfect?! A dangerous boat, you must be thinking. And, in truth, there was much about my personally hunted, gathered, and grown meal that tended more toward the ridiculous than the sublime." (Page 391)

"No, little if anything about this meal was what anyone would call realistic." And yet no meal I've ever prepared or eaten has been more real." (Page 392)

"But as the conversation at the table unfurled like a sail amid the happy clatter of silver, tacking from stories of hunting to mother lodes of mushrooms to abalone adventures, I realized that in this particular case words of grace were unnecessary. Why? Because that's what the meal itself had become, for me certainly, but I suspect for some of the others, too: a wordless way of saying grace." (Page 407)

"Without such thing as fast food there would be no need for slow food, and the stories we tell at such meals would lose much of their interest. Food would be... well, what it always was, neither slow nor fast, just food: this particular plant or that particular animal, grown here or there, prepared this way or that. For countless generations eating was something that took place in the steadying context of family and culture..." (Page 411)

"For we would no longer need any reminding that however we choose to feed ourselves, we eat by the grace of nature, not industry, and what we're eating is never anything more or less than the body of the world." (Page 411)

Thoughts & Questions:

By finishing the journey with a meal it ties in all of the factors Pollen learned throughout his experiences. From all of the things he observed he decides what is his best bet into a perfect meal. The simplicity of the meal lets the reader see how something that may seem so complicated is really just going back to original roots. We often assume that concepts that seem heavily complicated are actually underneath quite understandable. By exploring and discovering what lies beneath the surface we further our discoveries to something that could change us forever.

As I furthered my reading I became more aware of what I was eating. I questioned where my food came from, how the food was raised. I am almost unsure if I want to continue eating fish. I told my parents that I would like to begin shopping at the Farmer's Market in Union Square on a daily basis. I never want to eat McDonald's again, and I am pretty sure that I never want to go back to eating meat. When we started this unit I talked about my daily dinners, of sitting around and talking. Although it is a drag sometimes, I now realize how important those moments are. It isn't about the food, it is about who you are sharing the food with, and the company you are surrounded by. It seems as if the food is just the base or the root as to why we are sitting there, and instead of just going through the motions of eating, you are appreciating the aspects of the food from all different angles. Praising it meal by meal, day by day.

HW 9 - Freakonomics Response

Imagine this: industrial farmers running around their corn mazes, laughing, giggling, and thinking about all of the subsidies they will be receiving shortly. As you step out of the maze there is going to be a fence and behind that fence will be all of the (very few) pastoral farmers. The expressions on their faces will probably be disgusted, they think to themselves, “wow, they don’t even realize what they are doing…” The industrial farmers have now invited their government friends to join the party, subsidies are being thrown in the air. “It’s subsidy party” one of them shouts and like piñata the subsidies are thrown, the industrial farmers run around frantically trying to get at least one piece of “candy.” The industrial farmers look at the unwanted guests behind the fence, very confused as to why they didn’t try to get on the guest list… Freakonomics serves as an inspiration and good example to our attempt to explore "hidden-in-plan-sight" weirdness of dominant social practices.

For some reason whenever we see a number we automatically assume it is correct. In the movie Freakonomics they question these original numbers, by using different new numbers. Levitt and Dubner who are well educated use other well educated people who have similar ideas on economics to further making a point. Through statistics and data though it is easier for the mass to comprehend exactly what point they are trying to make. For instance, Steve Levitt and other economists from University of Chicago decide to experiment in a High school in Chicago. “Incentives matter…if you have a good idea of people’s incentives, you know how they are going to act.” (Levitt) They focus on two kids who start with more or less similar grades. The African American student seems much more entranced by the bribe they are giving them. If they get above a C in every class they get $50 that month. The Caucasian student is less enthusiastic. By the end of the experiment though the African American student gets the $50 dollars and improves his grades, while the Caucasian student gets worse grades. Although their experiment only showed an increase slightly in the some of the students the incentive did work for a number of people. If money isn’t the right incentive to use as a bribe that may be a reason why it didn’t work for some students. However, if students are given a push to work harder, maybe there isn’t harm in that at all. School is defiantly a huge discourse in this country, since we are a nation who struggles in this field maybe if students had more realistic goals they would be more likely to succeed. If people were given a incentive to eat better, maybe they would. People are not completely oblivious to unhealthy food however, regardless of all the information until they are confronted personally how much of a change are they really going to make?

The authors of this book/narrators of the movie use an array of tools to make sure all of the pieces fit. They used the tool of bribery as I mentioned in my first argument. In other words, they give an incentive to try and see if it makes the people push harder to succeed. They look at how the crime rates dropped from the 1980's to the 1990's, why this happened, what the media said happened, and then conclude what probably really happened. They compare the statistics of the track record of wins and loses for the sumo-wrestlers. They see how it makes no sense that on the final stage people who have consistently won all of the sudden loose. They figure out that our names are only a part of who we are. That where we grow up and the encouragement we are given are much more crucial to our success. However 33% more people were hired in the job market probably due to the fact that they had stereotypical caucasian names, so the people hiring could assume their race. The touch upon the subjects that are so normal to us we don't think about. They show us that if we questioned these subjects we may uncover truth that surprised us. Dubner says: "What if this thing everyone thinks is so, really isn't so..." I don't even if think it has anything to us being scared of the truth, I just feel like we think things happen in life that we cannot control, so why bother trying to figure out what is so wrong with it? "Is it possible to free ourselves from our delusions?" (Yukki 10/14/10) In regards to that question, we won't ever be free until something so drastic happens that we probably won't be prepared for or see coming. If we were more informed by the alternative points of view of all these core subjects, if our delusions were one day ruptured we may be able to not be so shocked by the truth revealed. In regards to food though, people are not going to change. They will believe what they want to believe. Even if all the evidence is laid right in front of their eyes, on their plates, in their stomachs, in their fat, they are going to keep living... because we usually think we are right. We don't want to admit that someone else may have a good point. Humans hate being wrong but how can we all be right all the time? It is impossible, so the real question is, who is right?

This movie touches on more than just the problem of economics. It is a bold clear example of how oblivious our nation is. We are judgmental and ignorant, we get so aggravated if someone tries to question our ideas. We can't begin to understand how they don't understand them at the same level as we do. Is there any solution to this huge mess? Everything we say is a contradiction of what someone else is saying. All of us live so differently, have different morals. There is nothing wrong with difference but what is right anymore? What is our best bet to having a long life. If the people informing us and backing up our ideas are giving false explanations than who can we trust? Is the only way to solve this to live the way you want to, and if it doesn't go as smooth as you anticipated than there is only so much more you can do?

HW 7C - Reading Response

Chapter 11: The Animals: Practicing Complexity

Precis:

Intertwined and connected, naturally working together as if humans were not in the picture. Verses us humans taking apart their natural ways of living, for our benefit.

Gems:

"Industrial processes follow a clear, linear, hierarchical logic that is fairly easy to put into words, probably because words follow a similar logic: First this, then that; put this in here, and then out comes that." (Page 212)

"it is exactly the model God used in building nature." (Page 215)

"In nature health is the default," he pointed out. "Most of the time pests and disease are just nature's way of telling the farmer he's doing something wrong." (Page 321)

"One of the greatest assets of a farm is the sheer ecstasy of life." (Page 225)

Thoughts & Questions:

Why if something works perfectly fine we find the need to change it or improve it? We are only making it worse.

Especially in the United States most of us have a choice as how we go about living, so why do we feel superior to the animals? Just because some of us choose to eat them, shouldn't mean we change their paths of living and alter what is completely natural for them.

We don't just interrupt the animals, think about all the countries we try to "help", are we really helping them or is it to move our country further along in being ahead of the game? Do we think that if we have control of literally everything our lives will be better?

Chapter 12: Slaughter: In a Glass Abattoir

Precis:

The act of killing animals more specifically chickens is unavoidable in this world at least. The only way for them to enter our bodies is for us to end their lives. Farmers who are not directly linked to USDA are often criticized because of their alternative ways of slaughtering.

Gems:

"The fact that Polyface can prove its chickens have much lower bacteria counts than supermarket chickens (Salatin's had them both tested by an independent lab) doesn't cut any mustard with the inspectors, either." (Page 229)

"Make no mistake, we're in a war with the bureaucrats, who would like nothing better than to put us out of business." (Page 230)

"to come out to the farm, poke around, sniff around. If after seeing how we do things they want to buy food from us, that should be none of the government's business." (Page 235)

Thoughts & Questions:

The government is completely contradicting there philosophy's since they are the ones being so secretive about their preferences for slaughtering. While in the more natural way people are fully allowed to see exactly how the chicken ends up dead, the government has no such option. Is this to say they are trying to put down the good guys to make themselves look better?

What provoked the government to side with industrial farming? Was it because it was cheaper or too complicated for people to question it's imperfections?

If we were to see the way industrial farming actually operated how many of us would reform?

Chapter 13: The Market

Precis:

While big corporations are sending mass advertisements, a certain group of farmers are going directly to the people. By knowing where food comes from not only does it help the customer, but also the farmers message and promoting a better way of life.

Gems:

"A chicken-or steak, or ham, or carton of eggs-can find its way from Polyface Farm to an eater's plate by five possible routes: direct sales at the farms store, farmer's markets, metropolitan buying clubs, a handful of small shops in Staunton, and Joel's brother Art's panel truck." (Page 240)

"Greetings from the non-Barcode people," began one recent missive, before it launched into a high-flying jeremiad against our "disconnected multi-national global corporate techno-glitzy food system" well its "industrial fecal factory concentration camp farms." (Page 241)

"All of this meat comes from happy animals-I know because I've seen them." (Page 242)

"All of which is to say that a successful local food economy implies not only a new kind of food producer, but a new kind of eater as well, one who regards finding, preparing, and preserving food as one of the pleasures of life rather than a chore. One whose sense of taste has ruined him for a Big Mac, and whose sense of place has ruined him for shopping for groceries at Wal-Mart. This is the consumer who understands-or remembers-that, in Wendell Berry's memorable phrase," eating is an agricultural act." He might of added that it's a political act as well." (Page 259)

Thoughts & Questions:

Although I think it is great that farmers like Salatin are trying to help people lead better lives but think about the ratio of these farmers to the amount of people in the country. Big industries have advantages, while the farmers are practically solo, the industries are like an army.

If they got the president on board of this change of food, would it help? Or would they have to pay him a lot of money/benefits to endorse them?

We are all very scared of life... although we may not admit it or even realize it, we are. We conform all the time to new habits because we think it might help us in the long run. If we all respond differently though to food, shouldn't it be up to us how we want to eat? I am not saying I agree with Industrial ways of eating but at the same time in order for things to become known by the whole country by pattern they become industrial.

Chapter 14: The Meal - Grass Fed

Precis:

Although our meat appears relatively the same, underneath the skin, the fat, the bones lies the truth. The only thing that experiences the truth is our bodies, and by that point the skin and the fat have already made themselves at home.

Gems:

"There was nothing terribly subtle about this meal, but everything about it tasted completely in character." (Page 271)

"the actual and direct sensation of a need being satisfied," a sensation we share with the animals-and the uniquely human "pleasures of the table." These consist of "considered sensations born of the various circumstances of fact, things, and persons accompanying the meal"-and comprise for him one of the brightest fruits of civilization." (Page 272)

"The pleasures of the table begin with eating, but they can end up anywhere human talk cares to go. In the same way that the raw becomes cooked, eating becomes dining." (Page 272)

"All such transformations were very much on my mind that evening, coming at the end of the week of farmwork that had put me in much closer touch with the biology of eating than the art." (Page 272)

Thoughts & Questions:

As someone who only eats fish, I often feel like I have chose a better way of feeding myself. I guess not.

I wonder what real food tastes like... I have never seen a label that says. "grass fed animal", my parents who eat meat are always so excited when it is free range. It is even a double bonus when it is organic. My mom thinks eating like this is so obscure but I don't think she realizes that she is not alone. However if she brought home a grass fed animal, I would be impressed.

Are there any grass fed stores in New York City? If there are not, I think someone should open one soon.

Chapter 15: The Forager

Precis:

Unconsciously or consciously depending on how you look at it, dominantly in the United States the human race has adopted and conformed eating habits. No longer do we gather our berries, search for our animals. The most searching we do is filling our shopping carts right to the top. By examining our ancestors it is quite easy to see their connection with the food. A method that we no longer practice. This unknown leads us to believe a strong reasoning behind the food disaster we have created for ourselves.

Gems:

"Why go to all this trouble? It's not as though the forager food chain represents a viable way for us to eat at this point in history; it doesn't. For one thing, there is not enough game left to feed us all, and probably not enough wild plants and mushrooms either." (Page 279)

"So even if we wanted to go back to hunting and gathering wild species, it's not an option: There are far too many of us and not nearly enough of them." (Page 279)

"... so I threw it out. I didn't realize it at the time, but I had impaled myself that afternoon on the horns of the omnivore's dilemma." (Page 286)

Thoughts & Questions:

There is quite a obvious connection between current food ways and our countries informal way of life but we always want to be two steps ahead. We want our cows to get fatter faster, so we can eat them quicker, we want to be the number one country, who has control of the world. However, our ancestors lived a life of connection to the world around us, the animals around us and instead of thinking and doing so fast (as many of us do today) they understood where things came from, and their importance and significance.

I wonder what it would be like if New York City converted back into a hunter-gather way of life. Would Central Park be our forrest? Would there be enough wild animals for us?

I think the only way to change your lifestyle is to do it on our own. If we can't convert a nation right now, the only way to start is to make the choice to change the way we live. Eventually people will catch on, if not everyone a large group of people, who will probably be happier and healthier people who live longer more full lives.

Chapter 16: The Omnivore's Dilemma

Precis:

Unlike quite a number of species we have the ability to eat whatever our little hearts desire. However, throughout our lives we figure out through the process of eating what affects us positively and what affects us negatively, and by doing so we create our own menu's. To some of us though, deciding what to eat may be some of the hardest decisions we make in life...

Gems:

"The omnivore's dilemma is replayed every time we decide whether or not to ingest a wild mushroom, but it also figures in our less primordial encounters with the putatively edible: when we're deliberating the nutritional claims on the boxes of in the cereal aisle; when we're settling on a weight-loss regimen (low fat or low carb?); or deciding whether to sample McDonald's newly reformulated chicken nugget; or weighing the costs and benefits of buying the organic strawberries over the conventional ones..." (Page 289)

"The fact that we humans indeed omnivorous is deeply inscribed in our bodies, which natural selection has equipped to handle a remarkably wide ranging diet." (Page 289)

Last but not least, cooking abruptly changed the terms of the evolutionary arms race between omnivores and the species they would eat by allowing us to overcome their defenses." (Page 293)

Being an omnivore occupying a cognitive niche in nature is both a boon and a challenge, a source of tremendous power as well as anxiety." (Page 295)

"The success of food marketers in exploiting shifting eating patterns and nutritional fashions has a steep cost. Getting us to change how we eat over and over again tends to undermine the various social structures that surrond and steady our eating, institutions like the family dinner, for example, or taboos on snacking between meals and eating alone." (Page 301-302)

Thoughts & Questions:

The act of eating is such a person to person basis. We all eat differently, both food and setting. However, regardless of the differences we all have the ability to adapt to whatever our circumstances may be. This makes me think of anorexic people, they are hardly eating anything but the human body has the ability to realize the situation and hold on to all of the important parts of what they are putting in their body. Therefore they are gathering and saving up for whatever might happen in the future, just like many animals do in the winter, as well as humans do as well.

When we are babies our main food source is baby food... is this to say that we are unable to recognize the food entering our body, so we have to start with mushed up soft food at first? Or is this mainly due to the fact that we don't have teeth at that point in life?

HW 8 - Growing Our Own Food

The morning I walked into class ready to water my seeds and noticed they were starting to grow, I was beyond excited. I went around and told everyone, showing them the progress the sprouts were making. Although I have worked in gardens before I thought the idea of growing food in a glass jar seemed impossible. When I think of life growing I think of dirt, sunlight and water. However for this plant to grow all it needed was water. I sort of felt like the sprouts were a baby, and seeing first signs of life seemed similar to a scenario of a mother seeing her babies imagine in a sonogram. When we had to bring our sprouts home mine were almost finished growing. I wrapped up my glass jar in layers of paper towel, making sure nothing was going to happen to them as we headed home. I placed the jar of sprouts under a lamp, and watered them before I went to bed. The next morning they were bigger than the night before! I decided that I was going to eat my sprouts that night. I was slightly nervous to eat them though, for some reason the idea of a glass jar seemed more dirty than dirt. I made a tuna fish sandwich and put the sprouts on top. I took a bite, I eat sprouts from the supermarket all the time but my very own sprouts tasted much better. I felt a little sad that I wasn't going to be able to water them anymore since my body was in the process of digesting them. It was cool that part of my meal wasn't brought by a stranger but by me! The whole process was much more simple than I had anticipated. I never felt stressed as I do sometimes figuring out what I am going to eat but I felt calm and excited every watering to see the progress of my sprouts. I knew exactly where my food was coming from and I had control on how I wanted it to effect me. I didn't pour chemicals on my sprouts (hopefully SOF water is chemical free) and I felt very satisfied after I finished my tuna sandwich. By trying a different way of doing things you are exposing yourself to new opportunities that you may end up appreciating.

HW 7B - Reading Response

Chapter 6: The Consumer

Precis:

For a large majority of us eaters we are unknowingly having our taste buds hypnotized by big food corporations. Once the food enters our body it essentially taps into our brains, and allows us to recreate memories over and over again. We become immune to the sugars, salts and fats, and don’t see the harm in having these ingredients. Since we are so naïve the idea of a consequence seems much more distant, little do we know the hypnotizing is ticking slower and slower every time we consume these products.

Gems:

"Three of every five Americans are overweight; one of every five is obese. The disease formerly known as adult- oneset diabetes has had to be renamed Type II diabetes since it now occurs so frequently in children." (Page 102)

"Yet since the human desire for sweetness surpasses even our desire for intoxication, the cleverest thing to do with a bushel of corn is to refine it into thirty pounds of high-fructose corn syrup." (Page 103)

"Researchers have found that people (and animals) presented with large portions eat up to 30 percent more than they would otherwise. Human appetite, it turns out, is surprisingly elastic, which makes excellent evolutionary sense..." (Page 106)

Thoughts & Questions:

The way we eat is as if we are sitting at the last supper every meal of every day of our lives. We are so worried that the world is going to end or we are going to die, so we better sneak in that extra piece of cake...

If we keep eating like this will we be able to live at all? How can we all live with diabetes? The movie Wally isn't so far off, at a certain point we are going to get so big we won't be able to move around, we are slowly creating the end of the world for ourselves.

Even though the general public is given warning signs, how much change is really happening? What will it take for everyone to drop the bad stuff? How much more can we tolerate?

Chapter 7: The Meal

Precis:

Most of our clothes and technology comes right from China. However, when we are buying a new coat or a flat screen TV are we honestly thinking of its original origin? The answer for most of us is probably no. So why when we order our fish fillet or cheeseburger from McDonald’s would we think about the fishes or the cows? Unfortunately we don’t which is probably the main reason why we are in so much trouble, and furthermore we no longer associate food with the animals they come from because in all honesty how much is it really a fish or a cow anymore? We are living in a all you can eat corn buffet.

Gems:

"My eleven-year-old son, Issac, was more than happy to join me at McDonald's; he doesn't get there often, so it's a treat. (For most American children children today, it is no longer such a treat: One in three of them eat fast food every single day.)" (Page 109)

"Like other comfort foods, it supplies (besides nostalgia) a jolt of carbohydrates and fat, which, some scientists now believe, relieve stess and bathe the brain in chemicals that make it feel good." (Page 111)

"Where does it come from? It comes from McDonald's." (Page 115)

"And so it goes, bite after bite, until you feel not satisfied exactly, but simply, regrettably, full." (Page 119)

Thoughts & Questions:

Regardless if you eat at McDonald's the information given to us makes me feel like we are drenched in corn, dripping from our pores making up our entire being. We no longer have a voice. The corn does, what the corn wants the corn will get. Fortunatly the corn drips from our cars, from our food and from practically everything around us.

Why is junk food classified as comfort food? If from a early age people thought of carrots or celery as comfort food would are body adapt to this concept as we do with junk food? Are our brains programed to recognize this taste and link it to a specific area of feeling?

Chapter 8: All Flesh is Grass

Precis:

Within the concept of organic are subsets. Many farmers claim they are organic but yet they still have similar methods of farming as those who are truly industrial farmers. There are very few people who bring purpose into the picture and involve every little thing around them.

Gems:

"And none of it happens without the grass. In fact, the first time I met Salatin he'd insisted that even before I met any of his animals, I get down on my belly in this very pasture to make acquaintance of the less charismatic species his farm was nuturing that, in turn, were nuturing his farm." (Page 117)

"For half a century now, which is to say for as long as industrial agriculture has held sway in America, the principal alternative to its methods and general approach has gone by the name "organic," ... Before my journey through the organic food industry I would of thought that virtually any organic farm would belong on the Polyface side of this ledger. But it turns out that this not necessarily the case." (Page 131)

"... the organic food chain couldn't expand into America's supermarkets and fast-food outlets without sacrificing its ideals. I wondered if this wasn't a case of making the ideal an enemy of the good, but Salatin was convinced that industrial organic was finally a contradiction in terms." (Page 133)

Thoughts & Questions:

A large portion of the food in my kitchen is labeled organic. However, how much worth does that word even have anymore? Just because something appears good on paper doesn't mean it is going to live up to its standards once you see it up close and personal... This commercial: http://wn.com/Happy_Cow_Commercial is a perfect example of a company who may or may not be telling the complete truth. Now read this, the truth revealed... but who has time to look up this information? http://www.johnrobbins.info/blog/the-dark-side-of-happy-cows/

Does the idea of organic help people sleep better at night and not worry?

Andy made a point a couple of days ago saying how if a family is peacefully eating a meal of McDonald's and enjoying ones company they will probably live longer. However if a family eating a complete meal of organic and no corn but they are arguing they might not live as long... How important is the label in the long run...?

Chapter 9: Big Organic

Precis:

Don't judge a book by it's cover... just because something appears to be good on the surface doesn't mean that once we start unfolding the truth everything is going to be just as great. In our country today many of the big influences of organic food are actually industrial organic. And what lies underneath their "great" purpose isn't as great as we would think.

Gems:

"Yet the organic label itself-like every other such label in the supermarket-is really just an imperfect substitute for direct observation of how a food is produced, a concession to the reality that most people in the industrial society haven't had the time or the inclination to follow their food back to the farm, a farm which today is apt to be, on average, fifteen hundred miles away." (Page 137)

"To the eye, these farms look exactly like any other industrial farm in California-and in fact some of the biggest organic operations in the state are owned and operated by conventional mega-farms." (Page 158)

"And so, today, the organic food industry finds itself in a most unexpected, uncomfortable, and yes, unsustainable position: floating on a sinking sea of petroleum." (Page 184)

Thoughts & Questions:

This summer when I went to Costa Rica we visited an organic coffee farm. The tour guide had us taste two different cups of coffee, one was organic and one wasn't. There was no difference in the taste.

If we are forcing animals to change their natural eating habits, isn't it weird that we are also changing our natural eating habits... the way we eat is one thing after another. We are constantly expanding our personal menu's... has or was there ever a normal meal plan for the human species?

Is there any solution to this problem? If the food that is organic is coming from far away places regardless how much better is it for the planet, the people, the animals? Why do we trust everything that is said to us? Why are we so lazy to go into depth to really understand where everything comes from?

Chapter 10: Grass: Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Pasture

Precis:

The sun may be very far away physically from us but it's purpose to us is very close. This idea may seem crazy but that small yellowish-orange sparkle that glistens (almost) everyday in the sky, is a huge source of energy. It feeds the grass, which feeds the cows, which feeds us. Unfortunately most farmers today have conformed to the industrial methods and very few use the natural techniques.

Gems:

"They had largely detached their household from industrial civilization, and not just eating from land that had virtually no economic or ecological ties to what Joel variously called "the empire," "the establishment," and the "Wall Street." ... wanted nothing to do with "institutional anything," but especially the institutions of government." (Page 203)

"Grass farming with skill involves so many variables, and so much local knowledge, that it is difficult to systematize. As faithful to the logic of biology as a carefully grazed pasture is, it meshes poorly with the logic of industry, which has no use for anything it cannot bend to its wheels and bottom line. And, at least for the time being, it is logic of industry that rules." (Page 202)

"Why did we ever turn away from this free lunch in favor of biologically ruinous meal based on corn? Why in the world did Americans ever take ruminants off the grass? And how could it come to pass that a fast-food burger produced from corn and fossil fuel actually cost less than a burger produced from grass and sunlight." (Page 199)

"This productivity means Joel's pasture will, like his woodlots, remove thousands of pounds of carbon from the atmosphere each year; instead of sequestering all that carbon in trees, however, grasslands store most of it underground, in the form of soil hummus. In fact, grassing over that portion of the world's cropland now being used to grow grain to feed ruminants would offset fossil fuel emissions appreciably." (Page 197-198)

Thoughts & Questions:

The concept of industrial farming seems so much more complicated to me than natural farming. Maybe I am not alone in this, and maybe the complicated method is over looked because people don't think they will ever understand it. Therefore the government is making the surface of the situation to thick for us to dive in and really see what is actually going on.

Is stopping industrial farming the answer to end/slow down global warming?

Who is controlling the cheap aspect of industrial farming? Is the government purposely putting price tags that are lower on these items for a specific reason?

If natural farming is our answer why is it not mentioned more frequently? Are the media and government working side by side to sensor the information being given to us?