Fast Food: Just Another Name for Corn
blog.wired.com
blog.wired.com
Here are some discoveries we made:
1. Most of the major chain restaurants use one or two suppliers that specialize in things like laser-cut chicken mash with painted on grill marks and similarly horrendous things. Once your tastebuds recognize food from those providers, it's almost impossible to eat at any of those places again.
2. Much of what is labeled "organic" fits some legal definition but not the real definition of what organic is supposed to provide. We ended up contracting with a local CSA (community supported agriculture) group for about $60 / month to get a more than ample supply of fresh fruits and vegetables, grown in season and no more than 30 miles from our neighborhood. You could go to the farm at any time and verify that your food was being grown as advertised.
3. We also found meat suppliers that will ship grass-fed beef, goat meat, etc. to our house for about $9 pound. It's a little more expensive than what you would get at the store, but it's a lot less scary.
After making these changes, we found ourselves with better tasting food, more energy and more interest in cooking for ourselves.
They aren't a well-oiled production machine (which is the point, right? :-) ) so orders will usually take a little longer than you expect but it's worth it.
This site also has links to suppliers around the country: http://www.eatwild.com/
"We're seeing that corn is the number-one reason that fast food is so cheap and available," said Meredith Niles, a food policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety who was not involved in the study. "U.S. programs are subsidizing obesity in this country."
U.S. programs are making sure that people have food to eat. Boo!
It's not just obesity.
This fundamental understanding drives our production models. Herbivores in nature do not eat dead cows, chicken manure, dead chickens, grain or silage: They eat fresh or dried forage. Of course, what’s neat is that empirical data is discovering the nutritional and ecological benefits of this paradigm. We’re reading about Omega 3 and Omega 6 balance, conjugated linoleic acid, polyunsaturated fats and riboflavin. Whenever a new laboratory confirmation of our philosophy hits the news, we make sure our patrons know about it. In a word, this is all about healing: healing our bodies, healing our economies, healing our communities, healing our families, healing the landscape, healing the earthworms. If it’s not healing, it’s not appropriate.
Around here they are known as "East Side Marios" or "Jack Astor's", around your place they might be "Chotcki's" or whatever, but we know they're all the same crap.
It would be painful for a lot of people, but corn, like oil, is so cheap and easy that we won't let it go until we're absolute forced to. Our dependence on it is killing us slowly and surely. Our corn monoculture forms the base of an unsteady food economy and an unhealthy, overprocessed diet. We've traded costs at the dinner table for costs in the hospital, and we've come out way behind.
There almost was sometime around 1990. A killer strain of some corn disease was going around and there was serious concern that corn would go extinct. Then someone found a resistant strain somewhere in Mexico and hybridization did the rest.
A friend of mine who happens to be allergic to corn was one of the people tracking the spread of the disease. Then their equipment was destroyed by lightning and they sat blind for several months.
Probably Ron Paul would be one of the few politicians that are actually against it. Because it doesn't say in the constitution that it's the governments job to meddle with the production or prices of food ;)
I'm noticing a pattern: "We have a new President taking his place in the White House. It's a great opportunity to rearrange agricultural policy and to think about obesity," she said. "This study shows that it comes down in a lot of ways to one product."
Several of these articles are asking Obama to overreach his constitutional powers and assume the role of dictator.
That's why so many people resent this type of thing. Instead of presenting the facts and letting people judge for themselves, these people advocate government intervention.
Inside every liberal is a little dictator waiting to get out.
Could you please elaborate on what you are trying to say?
Are you trying to write that chemicals are put into meat before it leaves the factory to cancel out all the other hormones, drugs, and other chemicals that have been part of the cow's entire life? I've heard of many studies where that is not the case at all. In fact, the use of hormones in poultry is banned--is it because hormones don't transfer to humans, or because they do? Though meat from cows doesn't need to be hormone-free... does it mean it's organic, and that the cow was fed the way it would be normally? I don't think so.
In your case, what about the possibility that since corn is almost exclusively used to feed cows even though it's not their normal food, shows that it must provide some benefit to the owners, one of which may be that the cows grow fatter from the same amount of corn versus the same amount of another plant? That would be one example of a situation where a bad trait can be developed for those who eat corn and for carnivores who eat that meat, without chemicals. Thanks!
I don't know that corn makes cows fatter, it's just a cheaper source of food. I'm pretty sure it allows you to grow significantly more cattle on a given amount of land. I could be wrong though. Given that I can hear them mooing every morning when I step outside you'd think I would know more, but I don't.
This is incorrect. Antibiotics, growth hormones, all of that doesn't just disappear from the cow's bloodstream the instant it dies. Just one simple delivery mechanism: Meat is muscle tissue. It is full of blood. Blood carries the various drugs that the cow has been pumped full of to deal with eating corn. You EAT that blood when you eat the meat. Now, certainly some chemicals change when the meat is cooked, but they don't all disappear, nor do they necessarily change into something harmless. Some chemicals may become (more) toxic after being cooked.
Who says it doesn't?