"Knowing That Meat is "Humane" Makes it Taste Better"
"Food, Inc" and other similar investigative documentaries, articles and films have been crucial in creating conversation and dredging up awareness for the need for Americans to understand the food they are eating by essentially exposing the food industry. "Food, Inc" explained that the nation's food supply is controlled by only a handful of large companies that more often than not put their own profit over consumer health, the jobs of American farmers, factory workers' safety, the environment and the lives of the animals themselves. The documentary revealed shocking and even disturbing truths about the food we eat and how it is produced.
Being confronted with the reality of modern industrial livestock production, also known as factory farming, does not sit well with consumers. This article talked about experiments conducted in which samples of meat products were given to subjects with different descriptions of how the animals were raised, while keeping the meat itself the same. The goal of the experiment was to test if whether the beliefs of how the animals were raised and then slaughtered would influence how a person would feel about the meat they were eating. The results concluded that when people believed they were eating meat from a factory farm, they regarded it as being considerably worse than the other meat-even though it was the same. The study suggested that humans have a reluctance and revulsion towards eating meat from animals they believe have suffered.
So basically, according to the American people, "humane" meat is more delicious and more ethically sound, and should be what you are eating if you do choose to eat animals. To these people, "humane" meat would come from animals that spent their life fully free, living out the traditions and habits they would carry out if they were free-range animals, until it was their time to go to the slaughterhouse. Advertisers love to take advantage of marketing language such as "all natural" and "farm fresh,"to trick consumers into thinking they are eating something other than the meat that they perceive as "bad" just because of these essentially useless phrases. However, as we saw in "Food, Inc," these kinds of farms and the farmer's markets that sell their products, are hard to come by.
As the article put it, in America, the majority of all the meat that we eat is produced on what would be regarded as factory farms. This was not always the case. Melanie Warner, author of "Pandora's Lunchbox," explained that our diets have changed more in the last 100 years than they have in the last 1,000. Much of what we eat now has been engineered into what appears on our plates. If we lived in a perfect world, we WOULD be eating truly organic meat. We would eat meat that is, to its core, truly humane.
"States Struggle to Provide Housing for Migrant Farmworkers"
Migrant farm workers are the unsung heroes of the agricultural industry. Although invisible to most, the impact of farmworkers on the nation's food supply is impressive and undeniable. They are the hidden champions providing the blemish-free fruits and vegetables people have come to expect.The documentary Food, Inc displayed a life of these workers laden down with long hours, low pay and even the possibility of unwarranted arrest. The conditions and stories of these workers often go undocumented but an overwhelming number of them face injustice, abuse and as this article talks about, substandard housing.
With the low pay these workers are receiving, it's not surprising to discover the less than satisfactory living conditions that go along with it. Many workers are living in unsanitary and overcrowded areas that pose serious risks to their health. When Tracie McMillan, author of The American Way of Eating, wrote about her time working temporarily as a farmworker in San Diego, she found herself in need of housing and found it living with 14 other people in one two-bedroom ranch. All but one of these workers were also farmworkers. She described the conditions as poorly sanitized but preferred it to the other options. Farther South of where McMillan was staying, other farmworkers lived in tent communities in the hills. In Florida, workers have been found living in box trucks and shipping containers riddled with disease and declining mental health.
The absence of safe and sanitary housing for migrant farmworkers has been a pressing issue for decades. According to the article, 41 percent of farmworkers are undocumented, which is a big factor for their reluctance to lobby for better conditions. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 17 percent of workers live in employer-owned housing with 76 percent living free of charge. Speaking up could lead to the loss of their jobs in addition to their place to live. A few states have made efforts to improve the living conditions for these farmworkers. As early as the 1960s, California began building migrant housing centers. However, these centers are only available to families. With the majority of farmworkers being single men, this hardly settles the problem.
The fact that growers are pushing for more efficient living conditions does not mean that they actually care about these employees. Those employing the workers recognize that lack of adequate housing is a problem for the effectiveness of their business. Decent housing equates to capable workers and that's all they really care about.
Migrant farm workers are the unsung heroes of the agricultural industry. Although invisible to most, the impact of farmworkers on the nation's food supply is impressive and undeniable. They are the hidden champions providing the blemish-free fruits and vegetables people have come to expect.The documentary Food, Inc displayed a life of these workers laden down with long hours, low pay and even the possibility of unwarranted arrest. The conditions and stories of these workers often go undocumented but an overwhelming number of them face injustice, abuse and as this article talks about, substandard housing.
With the low pay these workers are receiving, it's not surprising to discover the less than satisfactory living conditions that go along with it. Many workers are living in unsanitary and overcrowded areas that pose serious risks to their health. When Tracie McMillan, author of The American Way of Eating, wrote about her time working temporarily as a farmworker in San Diego, she found herself in need of housing and found it living with 14 other people in one two-bedroom ranch. All but one of these workers were also farmworkers. She described the conditions as poorly sanitized but preferred it to the other options. Farther South of where McMillan was staying, other farmworkers lived in tent communities in the hills. In Florida, workers have been found living in box trucks and shipping containers riddled with disease and declining mental health.
The absence of safe and sanitary housing for migrant farmworkers has been a pressing issue for decades. According to the article, 41 percent of farmworkers are undocumented, which is a big factor for their reluctance to lobby for better conditions. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 17 percent of workers live in employer-owned housing with 76 percent living free of charge. Speaking up could lead to the loss of their jobs in addition to their place to live. A few states have made efforts to improve the living conditions for these farmworkers. As early as the 1960s, California began building migrant housing centers. However, these centers are only available to families. With the majority of farmworkers being single men, this hardly settles the problem.
The fact that growers are pushing for more efficient living conditions does not mean that they actually care about these employees. Those employing the workers recognize that lack of adequate housing is a problem for the effectiveness of their business. Decent housing equates to capable workers and that's all they really care about.
Newly discovered research suggests that that there is a psychological link between poverty, inequality and food consumption. The evidence provides that people who regard themselves as being poor are actually more likely to eat more. The explanation given is that they are eating more calories as a way to "self-soothe" their feelings of not being equal to others. The economic combination of poverty and social inequality can be linked to obesity due to elevated consumption of higher calories filled foods.
It is often said that the reason many poor Americans are overweight is because junk food is the cheapest food available. However, the article "Is Junk Food Really Cheaper?" looks to debunk that theory. The author states that it is not cheaper to eat highly processed food and most people can actually afford "real" food, they just don't realize it.
Viewing oneself as poor may also increase calorie intake as it is linked to perceptions of scarcity. If there is anticipated food scarcity, a person might feel the need to compensate for future calorie deficits. Because access to food is often a function of other resources, someone who views themselves as poor and lacking resources may also find themselves participating in increased food consumption.
In an article called "The Double Binds of Getting Food among the Poor in Rural Oregon," the authors talk about the idea of social capital. Many people believe that external signs of wealth are more important to their status in the community than the foods that they are eating. This heavily affects the foods they choose to eat or not to eat.
Addressing the problems of poverty and inequality can be essential in creating a solution to deal with the obesity crisis. A counter argument to the major dietary problems facing poor Americans can be that there is actually too much food, not too little. Policies should be enacted encouraging the poor to avoid overconsumption, exercise more and reduce their intakes of fatty and sugar loaded foods.
It is often said that the reason many poor Americans are overweight is because junk food is the cheapest food available. However, the article "Is Junk Food Really Cheaper?" looks to debunk that theory. The author states that it is not cheaper to eat highly processed food and most people can actually afford "real" food, they just don't realize it.
Viewing oneself as poor may also increase calorie intake as it is linked to perceptions of scarcity. If there is anticipated food scarcity, a person might feel the need to compensate for future calorie deficits. Because access to food is often a function of other resources, someone who views themselves as poor and lacking resources may also find themselves participating in increased food consumption.
In an article called "The Double Binds of Getting Food among the Poor in Rural Oregon," the authors talk about the idea of social capital. Many people believe that external signs of wealth are more important to their status in the community than the foods that they are eating. This heavily affects the foods they choose to eat or not to eat.
Addressing the problems of poverty and inequality can be essential in creating a solution to deal with the obesity crisis. A counter argument to the major dietary problems facing poor Americans can be that there is actually too much food, not too little. Policies should be enacted encouraging the poor to avoid overconsumption, exercise more and reduce their intakes of fatty and sugar loaded foods.
"The Globalization of Bad Food and Poor Health"
Julie Guthman states that conditions such as cardiovascular disease and obesity have been linked to people with a sedentary lifestyle as well as certain types of diet. A big factor isWestern-style convenience foods. The impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the introduction of cheap US processed food into India has adversely affected the health of many of the population. Western convenience (aka junk) foods have replaced more of the tradition-based diets in the country. Increasing rates of diabetes, obesity and other health related issues have followed as a result.
United States agribusiness and retailers have captured the market. Western agribusiness and food processing companies are infiltrating the market in India and are seeking a more significant presence in the country. In The McDonaldization of Society, the author speaks about restaurant chains desire to extend their reach beyond just American society. Western-style fast food restaurants have begun popping up everywhere. Pizza Hut now operates in 46 Indian cities with 181 restaurants and 132 home delivery locations, a 67 percent increase in the last five years. KFC is now in 73 cities with 296 restaurants, a 770 percent increase. McDonalds is in 61 Indian cities with 242 restaurants as compared to 126 restaurants five years back, a 92 percent increase.
It is said that even when people have access to better foods, due to the methods involved in processing a lot of the foods that are eaten, diet is a major contributing factor in causing certain metabolic conditions and illnesses. Heart disease, liver damage, stroke, obesity and diabetes are just some of the diseases linked to diets heavily consisting of fast food. Frequent consumption of fast food has been associated with higher intakes of fat, sodium, added sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages and lower intakes of fruits, and vegetables. Fast food also tends to have poorer nutritional quality than foods prepared at home.
Additionally, in many places across the world, industrialized factory farming has replaced traditional livestock agriculture. George Ritzer talks about "vertical McDonaldization" which is the demands of the fast food industry forcing industries that service it to McDonaldize in order to satisfy its demands. Potato growing and processing, cattle ranching, chicken raising and meat slaughtering and processing have all felt the effects of McDonaldizing their operations. As shown in "Food, Inc," animals are thrown together in cramped conditions to scale up production and maximize output at minimum cost for the small number of companies that control the food industry. World trade policies encourage nations against imposing tariffs on subsidized imported products so they are forced to allow cheap, factory-farmed US meat into the country. These products are then in turn sold at lower prices than other domestic meats, leading to pressure for local producers to scale up and industrialize to compete with the American products.
As seen in "Should Food Stamps Buy Soda?" and other articles discussing government regulation of food, there have been calls for taxes on unhealthy food and increased emphasis placed on encouraging healthy eating. To create change in India and other modernizing countries would involve stopping the dismantling of local rural economies and agriculture parading under the title of globalization for the benefit of American agribusiness and food retail companies, and running away from unhealthy food processing practices, unnatural preservatives and harmful additives. There needs to be less emphasis placed on the rush towards urbanization and greater emphasis on localization.
United States agribusiness and retailers have captured the market. Western agribusiness and food processing companies are infiltrating the market in India and are seeking a more significant presence in the country. In The McDonaldization of Society, the author speaks about restaurant chains desire to extend their reach beyond just American society. Western-style fast food restaurants have begun popping up everywhere. Pizza Hut now operates in 46 Indian cities with 181 restaurants and 132 home delivery locations, a 67 percent increase in the last five years. KFC is now in 73 cities with 296 restaurants, a 770 percent increase. McDonalds is in 61 Indian cities with 242 restaurants as compared to 126 restaurants five years back, a 92 percent increase.
It is said that even when people have access to better foods, due to the methods involved in processing a lot of the foods that are eaten, diet is a major contributing factor in causing certain metabolic conditions and illnesses. Heart disease, liver damage, stroke, obesity and diabetes are just some of the diseases linked to diets heavily consisting of fast food. Frequent consumption of fast food has been associated with higher intakes of fat, sodium, added sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages and lower intakes of fruits, and vegetables. Fast food also tends to have poorer nutritional quality than foods prepared at home.
Additionally, in many places across the world, industrialized factory farming has replaced traditional livestock agriculture. George Ritzer talks about "vertical McDonaldization" which is the demands of the fast food industry forcing industries that service it to McDonaldize in order to satisfy its demands. Potato growing and processing, cattle ranching, chicken raising and meat slaughtering and processing have all felt the effects of McDonaldizing their operations. As shown in "Food, Inc," animals are thrown together in cramped conditions to scale up production and maximize output at minimum cost for the small number of companies that control the food industry. World trade policies encourage nations against imposing tariffs on subsidized imported products so they are forced to allow cheap, factory-farmed US meat into the country. These products are then in turn sold at lower prices than other domestic meats, leading to pressure for local producers to scale up and industrialize to compete with the American products.
As seen in "Should Food Stamps Buy Soda?" and other articles discussing government regulation of food, there have been calls for taxes on unhealthy food and increased emphasis placed on encouraging healthy eating. To create change in India and other modernizing countries would involve stopping the dismantling of local rural economies and agriculture parading under the title of globalization for the benefit of American agribusiness and food retail companies, and running away from unhealthy food processing practices, unnatural preservatives and harmful additives. There needs to be less emphasis placed on the rush towards urbanization and greater emphasis on localization.
6 startling facts that show how climate change and hunger are interconnected
Climate change could have a disastrous effect on food security around the world. According to the article, extensive research shows that more frequent and devastating climate disasters, decreases in crop yield and production and a decreasing lack of natural resources will worsen food insecurity and, as a result, threaten the lives of millions of people. It is important to include global warming in conversations about food insecurity.
By the year 2050, climate change could increase the risk of food insecurity by 20 percent. According to the World Food Programme, without dedicated efforts to fight against the impacts of climate change on the environment, there is increased risk for hunger and the destruction of reliable food systems for communities around the world. Regions that are already heavily affected by hunger such as Africa, South and Central America, and the southernmost parts of Asia, are predicted to suffer the hardest. Two groups that are most affected by hunger, women and children, are also especially vulnerable. In fact, a statistic in "The Hidden Benefits of Food Stamps" said that 83% of food stamps go to households with children, seniors and people with disabilities.A large number of those people are single-parent households. Drastically decreasing greenhouse gas emissions and being proactive about helping communities adapt to climate change are just two of the steps that can help with the threat.
To sufficiently feed the world in 2050, current crop production would have to double. Two of the most grown crops, rice and wheat, are predicted to decrease eight and 32 percent. With current diet and production trends taken into account, food production will have to increase by 60 percent to accommodate population growth and decreased crop production. To accomplish the goal of double crop production, food producers would have to increase the amount of sustainable crops without increasing negative effects on the environment. This means farmers should improve their methods by producing stronger crops as well as more varieties of plant life, keep soil nutrient rich and optimize irrigation strategies. There can also be a shift in diets to more sustainable crop options. According to Barbara Kingsolver in Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, the mechanized food industry has narrowed down crop variety and overproduced corn and soybeans, which are now used in almost everything.
Livestock are a fundamental source of income and food for many communities worldwide. However, their increasing population sizes have the potential to be a danger to the environment if not raised sustainably. During the digestion process, cows produce methane that is expelled into the air. One cow wouldn't make a difference but a population of 1.5 billion does. Cutting cattle populations would help settle the problem but there's not a high chance of that happening. It is recommended that farmers cut down on other sources of methane such as fertilizer, as well as improve cows' diets.
A sufficient food supply isn't just critical for people's nutrition, it's also crucial to the economic well-being of food producers. People who produce food are often hit hardest by climate change, which heavily affects sources of income. Seventy eight percent of poor people rely on farming to sustain their families. It is essential to develop more sustainable ways to farm that are supporting both the environment and those who rely on crops for their income.