Category: Eating for Ecosystems

Let’s speak respectfully of all people, no matter what their food choices.

April 18th, 2013 · · Eat Less Meat, Eating for Ecosystems, Eating for Health 3 comments

A recent food article in my local newspaper repeated an annoying phrase.  Recovering vegetarian.  Not even in quotes, but stated as if it were fact.  The expression was used to describe a young woman who for years did not eat meat but who for various reasons has taken up the steak knife again.

It’s not the first time I’ve heard the expression ‘recovering vegetarian.’  I’m sorry to report I first heard it from food activists.  There are also websites written by people who use it to label themselves. Nevertheless, I’ve never liked the phrase and don’t like it now.

To say it is to suggest that vegetarians have a disorder, and that those who resume eating meat are on the road to becoming normal and healthy again. Or it suggests that vegetarianism is a fad followed by misguided individuals, some of whom thankfully see the light and go back to consuming animal products.

The phrase sounds clever.  But it’s a disrespectful dig at people who make the decision not to eat meat. That decision is courageous and difficult today when most menus and meals are centred on animal products, and when most of the people around us eat flesh food twice a day.  Check out the offerings at almost any restaurant, and you’ll see that avoiding chicken, pork and beef takes commitment. But vegetarians do it because they’ve decided to be kinder to animals, or to the planet, or to their health.  That’s because scientific evidence shows that eating conventional meat in the amounts we do today produces huge amounts of greenhouse gases, water pollution, and deforestation, as well as fueling avian flus, antibiotic resistance, and chronic disease. Whether or not you agree with vegetarians’ specific approach to the problems, their ideals are worthy of regard.

In my work, I encourage people to eat sustainably and compassionately.  And one way they can do that is by consuming a lot less (and better) animal products.  I don’t recommend that people become completely vegetarian, because most people won’t and because avoiding meat altogether is not necessary for the environment or for health.  But those who decide to stop eating meat deserve our respect.  And we can show our respect by not using phrases like ‘recovering vegetarian,’ but rather by speaking kindly of others no matter what their food decisions.  That kind of compassion will probably help us make faster progress toward better food systems.  It’s also the right thing to do.

NDP candidates say sustainable agriculture will be a priority.

April 12th, 2013 · · Eating for Ecosystems, Eating for Health, Food Policy No comments

It’s refreshing to hear politicians talk about policy for sustainable agriculture and healthy food.  That’s what Lana Popham did this past week when she spoke to a community group in North Vancouver.  The provincial NDP Agriculture Critic (and former farmer) outlined a few of the steps the NDP will take if – or when – it forms government in BC after the election in mid-May. Here are some of the points she made:

Lana Popham and Craig Keating speaking about sustainable agriculture and healthy food

(1) An NDP govt would put high priority on agriculture. While Ms. Popham has been ag critic over the last four years, she said there have been four different agriculture ministers, a sort of revolving door in a dept that has been considered relatively unimportant by the governing Liberals.

(2) The NDP would re-name the department — as The Ministry of Agriculture and Sustainable Food Systems.  It’s only a name, but words can be powerful. In this case, it suggests an emphasis on ecological production and consumption.  Issues would be addressed under the pillars “Grow B.C., Feed B.C., Buy B.C.”

(3) Local, small-scale producers would be supported, e.g. through ‘extension services’ in which farmers can get help from govt agronomists and other experts.   When she used to farm, said Ms. Popham, and had problems with plant diseases or other challenges, she had the option of phoning a provincial office and having a knowledgeable person come out to her farm to assist.  Much of that service has been disbanded, she said, though it cost little to the taxpayer.

(4) The NDP govt would have a strong policy for institutional purchasing of local and sustainable food. That means that food in B.C. hospitals, for example, would be sourced increasingly from farmers in their regions, creating a more stable market for B.C. agricultural products as well as healthier options to patients.

North Vancouver city councilor Craig Keating introduced Ms. Popham, and also spoke to the issues.  He’s running himself as an NDP candidate in his local riding, and said his personal priorities, and those of his party, emphasize supporting local farmers and healthy food.

 

 

I revived a wilted purple kale, thanks to Tristram Stuart.

April 8th, 2013 · · Eating for Ecosystems, Food Visionaries No comments

If you’re concerned about food, sustainability, and justice, you’ve got to see Tristram Stuart’s TEDTalk, revealing the extent of global food waste and what we can all do about it.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWC_zDdF74s.

Mr. Stuart is an English author whose book Waste showed what a shocking amount of nutritious edibles end up in landfills while many of our fellow planetary citizens go hungry.  As it says in his YouTube blurb: “Western countries throw out nearly half of their food, not because it’s inedible — but because it doesn’t look appealing.”  How embarrassing is that? See his site at http://www.tristramstuart.co.uk.

Meanwhile, there is much we can do.  For this moment, I’d like to tell you about an experience I had today with purple kale.  Mr. Stuart points out that most of us don’t store food properly, allowing it to go bad more quickly than is necessary.  In a small but memorable example, he says that when leafy greens have wilted, you can bring them back by setting them in a jar of water, as if they were a flower bunch.  In a sense, they are.

Today I tried it with some gorgeous but droopy purple kale, and it worked. 

Let me know if it works for you. Meanwhile, read Tristram Stuart to learn some of his additional ideas — not only how we can minimize food waste at home, but how policy makers can help decrease the tragic waste of so much of the world’s precious agricultural harvests.

 

 

Sustainable Diets: Here’s one recipe.

March 6th, 2013 · · Eating for Ecosystems 2 comments

What constitutes a sustainable diet?  That’s a central question being asked in the food movement today, as organizations and experts ask what we should be eating for an agricultural system that supports — rather than undermines — the planet and public health.

There’s no easy answer to the question.  And there’s no single plan for eating patterns that will be appropriate for everyone around the world. For example, people who have easy access to livestock-source foods that are produced naturally, kindly, and without chemicals, can eat more meat — ecologically — than can people who do not have such access. But part of the ‘sustainable diets’ equation for many humans will be less and better meat that is produced in ways that minimize greenhouse gases, water pollution and excess manure, compared with the ways that much of (intensively-raised) livestock is today.

But less and better meat is only part of the story.  Even vegetarian diets are not necessarily sustainable, depending on what else you consume. Highly-processed foods are another part of the problem in our current food systems.

International discussions on sustainable diets are coming from many quarters.  The UN Food and Agriculture Organization had a conference on the topic in 2010 and has since published the excellent Sustainable Diets and Biodiversity. (http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3004e/i3004e.pdf).  The influential Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition suggests a ‘double pyramid’ illustrating that we should eat more of those foods that have less environmental impact.

UK food expert Dr. Tim Lang has written on the topic (http://www.gulbenkian.pt/media/files/agenda/eventos12/ConfAlimentacaoAbr2012_TimLang.pdf) as has Dr. Jennie MacDiarmid and others (http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2012/07/31/ajcn.112.038729).

The experts say we need more research into what constitutes sustainable diets.  And they’re right.

But meanwhile, based on the work of food luminaries like Dr. Lang, Dr. Marion Nestle, Michael Pollan, Mark Bittman, and many others, here is my recipe for what I believe makes for ecological eating, and what I believe will be major ingredients in ‘sustainable diets:’

1. Eat less and better meat.

2. Eat locally produced food as much as is reasonable.

3. Eat organic, or edibles that are produced with minimal chemical inputs.

4. Eat more natural, and less highly-processed, foods.

5. Avoid GMOs or genetically modified foods.

 

 

GMOs are in the news.

March 6th, 2013 · · Eating for Ecosystems One comment

 

GMOs are in the news, and for good reason.  Whether to continue allowing genetically modified, or engineered, food and agriculture could be one of the most important political and cultural decisions of our time.

Genetically modified apples have been proposed for the B.C. Okanagan, which is of concern to critics.  As outlined on the site of the excellent Canadian Biotechnology Action Network:  “The small BC company called Okanagan Specialty Fruits is asking Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) to approve a GM “non-browning” apple. The U.S. government could approve the GM apple soon. Contamination from GM apples threatens the future of our apples, and the farmers who grow them.” http://www.cban.ca/Resources/Topics/GE-Crops-and-Foods-Not-on-the-Market/Apple/GM-Apple-Info-Flyer.

You may also have heard that a former anti-genetic-engineering activist has done an about-face and declared that GM foods are a good idea after all.  His name is Mark Lynas, and he’s gotten lots of press from his dramatic declaration. (www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-tercek/mark-lynas-gmo_b_2424493.html)

For what I feel is a rational view of the events and the debate, read the analysis by knowledgeable food journalist Tom Philpott. (www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/01/mark-lynas-failed-attempt-end-gm-debate)  Philpott comments that Mark Lynas seems as dogmatic now in his pro-GM stance as he was on the other side.  Philpott also cites rigorous studies showing that organic and other non-GM crop systems can produce as much food – with less environmental damage – than can GM ones.

Reasonable people can differ on the basic idea of GMOs.  But at the very least, we as societies need deeper and more objective research before committing ourselves to this sweeping new technology.  Much of the ‘science’ on GMOs to date has been conducted by biotech companies.  And no-one is stopping those companies from publicizing only the data that support their claims.  We need more independent studies of the consequences of radically altering the genetic makeup of our foods.

For me, the nail in the coffin on GMOs is the indisputable fact that these foods are controlled by giant transnational biotechnology companies.  That’s because those companies get patents on their ‘new’ seeds, and thereby own and control them.  That means that more and more of our food is owned and controlled by someone other than local communities.  Doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.

One independent scientific study, published in November, 2012, made biotech companies squirm. Published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, the report was authored by the European research team of Seralini et al (2012), who showed high levels of toxicity to rats from genetically modified (GM) corn, and from a major related pesticide that is used on GM crops. Their experiments demonstrated that when the animals were fed GM corn, or exposed to the Roundup pesticide that is employed on many GM crops, they were much more likely to get sick and die than were control animals.  The debate continues.

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637)