Eating Too Much

In the first chapter of Mindless Eating, Brian Wansink discusses several reasons why people eat more than they should. Surprisingly, what Wansink has found is that the reason we eat so much is not because the food tastes overly good, but because of a multitude of subtle cues that we are subjected to every time we eat. A study conducted in many different states gave out free popcorn to movie-goers in two sizes, medium and large. Even though the popcorn was 5 days old and very stale, people went ahead and ate to their heart's content. The study concluded that the people who were given the large size were likely to eat more than the people who were given medium. Countless studies such as this one are conducted to find factors that make people eat more or less. Some factors, or cues, include container size, labeling, marketing and advertising, etc.

Another topic in this chapter is dieting and why most diets don't work. Wansink points out that most diets are some form of deprivation. The problem with deprivation is that our bodies fight it both physically and mentally. It works for a short time, then the weight comes right back as soon as the diet is over. Wansink suggests that to lose weight, we need to trim off just enough calories so that our bodies don't notice that we're eating less. This makes the point that mindless eating works both ways.

After reading this chapter I realize that all of these small cues do influence how much I eat. Hopefully, I will recognize at least some of the cues while eating in the future. But if so many of these small factors act on us on a subconscious level everyday, is it even possible to recognize and then act differently every time we eat something?

American Cuisine

When you think of American food, what first comes to mind? For most people it is probably hamburgers, hot dogs, apple pies, etc. In his article "Eating American," Sidney Mintz analyzes American eating habits and in the process claims that there is no such thing as the "American cuisine." Looking at our history and the amount of diversity we have in the US, it is obvious that the country is composed of many, many cultures and traditions. Each of these cultures contributes its own cuisines and traditional foods to the countless different foods we Americans consume. Also, since the US is so large in area, there are different foods in different regions spread out all over the country.

Mintz also recognizes some trends in our eating habits in his article. He states that we are eating more and more meat, processed foods, and sugar. We are also cooking in less and eating out a lot more. Perhaps fast food is our national cuisine since so many people eat it. Or maybe it's just the way we eat. It is debatable whether or not we have our cuisine, but is it possible that over a period of time that we could develop a national cuisine? What kinds of cultural or social changes would have to occur for that to happen?

Genetic Engineering

Genetic Engineering in Agriculture: The Myths, Environmental Risks, and Alternatives by Miguel A. Altieri provides a critical view of the false benefits and potential problems of using genetic engineering to produce what is promised to be more and better food. Altieri claims that what shapes agricultural production is not environmental concerns or people's needs, as it should be, but rather maximizing profits. He believes that genetic modification of produce is just another way to maximize the efficiency and output of industrial food production. As Michael Pollan and previous posts in my blog mention, theses methods of maximizing this efficiency are usually not environmentally or socially friendly.

Although genetic engineering promises larger yields for crops and less usage of insecticides and herbicides, studies show that this is not always the case. In fact, Altieri makes it seem as though there are hardly any benefits to genetic engineering and that it is far more detrimental than the conventional production methods. He may have a skewed point of view; however, he does have some legitimate arguments. He brings up important topics such as: the cost to farmers, genetic pollution, whether these foods are safe to eat for humans, and the effects on the surrounding ecosystem. As an engineer myself, I understand the drive to discover new solutions to current problems and the thrill of solving these problems using new technologies; however, in agriculture, I believe we need to look at the bigger picture, not just maximizing yield and efficiency but also considering environmental and social issues.

Some questions to consider: Who actually benefits from genetically engineered products? Are we using this technology to feed starving people around the world, or are the rich benefiting more? Is it safe to eat these modified foods?

Swine Flu

Mike Davis discusses in his article "The Swine Flu Crisis Lays Bare the Meat Industry's Monstrous Power" yet another major problem with the meat production industry. The recent outbreak of the virus strain H1N1, commonly known as the swine flu, has infected countless people around the world. It is very probable that swine flu originated and grew in industrial pig farms where the animals live crammed in tiny pens that aren't even large enough for them to turn around in. Having such a large number of animals living in such a small area (covered in their own feces) provides a perfect environment for a virus like swine flu to generate.

As of now, there is no way of predicting when this kind of pandemic will happen in the future or what kinds of viruses may arise. There is strong evidence that the food production industry is making this problem worse. Although measures are being taken to relieve the short term issues through antivirals and vaccines, the more difficult long term issues are not being looked into as much. If this type of large-scale, industrial food production continues and grows, what kinds of problems are we going to have in the future? Will there be more viruses like the swine flu that will cause periodic crises killing innumerous people around the globe?

The Omnivore's Dilemma Chapter 12: Slaughter

In this rather grotesque chapter, Michael Pollan explores and describes in detail the process of slaughtering chickens at Polyface Farm. On processing day at the farm, they gather up a few hundred chickens and bring them to the processing shed where they prepare the birds for slaughter. I found it surprising that the chickens are relatively calm during most of this procedure. Pollan remarks that the birds are completely oblivious to what is happening while they are in the killing cones waiting to be slaughtered. The work in the shed is much like an assembly line where workers build up a sort of mechanical rhythm which allows them to get through this rather unpleasant process.

The processing shed at Polyface Farm as no walls; which means that customers can watch their chickens being slaughtered. Unlike the industrial meat production operations, Salatin does not hide the slaughtering process. He believes that people have the right to see all that goes on in these facilities. He also thinks that the strict regulations that the government places on his farm severely impede his production of organic food. Small farms such as Polyface are forced to abide by the same regulations and rules as the big industrial farms do. Since these small farms operate so differently from these industrial farms, shouldn't they have different regulations? Also, should all slaughter houses be like Salatin's processing shed where anyone can see what goes on inside?

The Omnivore's Dilemma Chapter 17: The Ethics of Eating Animals

I love eating meat. Steak, hamburger, chicken, turkey, ham, sausage, lamb, etc. you name it, I'll eat it. Reading this chapter of Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma opened my eyes to some things. Don't get me wrong, I'm still going to eat meat but I'll probably look at it differently. Pollan presents a fairly unbiased (in my opinion) discussion of the moral dilemmas involved in eating animals. Taking the point of view of an animal rights activist, he talks about how animals are mistreated before we slaughter and eat them. He actually becomes a vegetarian for some time as he contemplates the morality of eating meat. A major reason people give up eating meat is that they learn about how animals are maltreated and brutally slaughtered, and believe that the animals are suffering from this. Pollan explains that while the animals do feel pain, it is uncertain if they suffer.

Looking at individual animals on the farm also can skew the view that some people have on this subject. The chapter discusses that it is likely that these domestic animals would not have survived if it wasn't for humans. Looking at the animals as entire species, we see that humans are allowing these animals to thrive by feeding them and protecting them from predators (other than ourselves). We also provide them with swift and painless deaths. In the wild, animal predators tear apart their prey resulting in a very painful and drawn-out death. Pollan describes these topics, and several others, in great detail but it is ultimately up to the individual consumer to decide whether or not they want to eat meat.

This chapter brings up a myriad of questions, to name a few: Do the animals we eat have souls? Can they suffer or feel happiness? Do they deserve the same rights that humans have? Is speciesism comparable to racism? If the mistreatment of animals in industrial farms is the moral problem, is hunting animals in the wild ethically sound?

The Omnivore's Dilemma Chapter 11: The Animals

In chapter eleven of The Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan focuses on the details of how Polyface Farm raises its animals. Industrial farming runs on the basis of producing extremely large quantities of one product through monocultures, which require the assistance of man-made chemicals (antibiotics, hormones, etc.) to keep them from collapsing. On Joel Salatin's farm; however, all of the animals and plants live in a single ecological system where these symbiotic relationships between organisms are essential to producing efficient, yet high-quality food.

The chapter explores these symbiotic relationships more closely. Of these relationships, Pollan puts the spotlight on the cows and chickens. As the cows graze, they leave behind waste. The waste then provides food to the chickens that in turn produce waste that fertilizes the soil. This fertilized soil allows for grass to grow and feeds the cows. Although this loop is much more complicated than what I described it to be, it ultimately generates excellent beef and eggs without the use of any chemicals, drugs, etc. In fact, every component of the farm (even the forest) plays an important role in this amazing cycle of raising and producing food.

Though natural farms like Polyface can be very efficient, they require a lot more man power than the labor required at an industrial farm, as Pollan describes from first-hand experience. This raises the questions: is this type of farm practical on a large scale? and if so, would it be able to compare to the colossal system of industrial food production?