Don't Judge a Fruit by Its Color: Produce Standards and Food Waste in America

www.huffingtonpost.com - April 19th, 2013

Picture an idyllic family-run peach farm in rural Connecticut. There are rows upon rows stretching for acres with luscious and zingy Red Garnets, Washingtons, or Raritan Roses. I spent the summer after graduating from high school in the late '90s there, pruning, picking, and selling the fruit. People came from all over to pick their own or drive up to the small wooden hut where we sold any of our forty-two varieties of juicy peaches and sweet local blueberries next to homemade jams and our sticky honey. It was hard work, made harder by people's perception of the perfect peach. As much as we explained to customers that we only picked when the fruit was ripe, they would still frown on the occasional blemish or split pit.

Now, take a stroll through your local supermarket. What do you see but towers of oranges, bananas, broccoli -- a cornucopia of fresh produce. The supermarkets are never supposed to look depleted. Having shelves consistently fully stocked with flawless, standardized produce means there is an unnecessary amount of waste piling up outside our markets and in our fields, as farmers overproduce to keep up with the demand for the perfect produce. Even if I wanted to buy all these fruits and vegetables, workers in the markets would be restocking the shelves as I walked out the door.

It's no secret that we're a wasteful nation. According to Dana Gunders, in her paper for the National Resources Defense Council, 40 percent of food produced in America is thrown away.

Every step along the way in food production some food slips through the cracks and ends up in a landfill, through harvesting, transport, at the market and in the home. But a significant amount of the food that is grown never even makes it to the supermarket. Some of this waste is due to environmental factors and the risks involved with farming, other waste comes from a lack of labor to harvest or transport the produce. However, much of the waste can be attributed to culling the goods in order to meet high government-issued industry standards of size, color, weight, blemish level, and Brix (the measure for sugar content).

We can't only blame the government standards. As we get used to identical green beans and bruise-free apples, we become less involved with the realness of our food. It's hard for me to believe that a marginally undersized parsnip wouldn't be as delicious as the ones that are allowed into the supermarket. When I buy produce I mostly look for those in season and ripeness. Knowing that marks and spots can happen naturally reminds me that food was grown and not created in a lab. If I get it home and it looks slightly more offensive, I cut that bit out and move on.

Read More

Monsanto Keeps on Moving Toward a Lock on the World’s Food System

www.globalresearch.ca - February 18th, 2013

Arguments are scheduled to begin next week before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether an Indiana farmer is right when he claims that the seeds he planted should not be considered under the control of Monsanto, the giant transnational chemical and seed monopoly, through its patenting of the seeds.

Some are calling it a “David versus Goliath” contest but the farmer, Vernon H. Bowman, of southeastern Indiana, told The Guardian that he sees it as a question of right and wrong. In that, he is up against the power of Corporate America and the various parts of that power are arrayed against Bowman.

A lower court heard the case against Bowman v. Monsanto, one of the most powerful corporations (St. Louis, Mo.-based) in the most powerful nation in the world, and found in favor of Monsanto. The U.S. protects its corporations like it protects nothing else. It does not protect the individual in the same way and, in this case it is protecting the right of corporate hegemony over a single farmer.

Bowman, 75, who works the same land as his father, bought soybean seed from a local dealer, and the seed contained some of Monsanto’s patented “Roundup Ready” soybean seed, mixed in with other seeds. Monsanto maintains that such seeds can be used for feed, but cannot be used to plant a second crop, which is what Bowman was doing. Farmers who buy Monsanto’s patented seeds must sign an agreement that they will not save seed for planting in a subsequent year, but will buy new seeds every year from the company. They also pay a per-acre “royalty” for using the company’s seeds.

Monsanto typically enters a farmer’s land (some would call it trespassing) and takes samples (some would call it stealing), and then has the samples DNA-tested for their patented genes. If any appear, they sue the farmer and, since farmers are notoriously outgunned, legally and financially, they end up settling for an undisclosed amount with the company. The amount is undisclosed because, along with the settlement, there is a gag order and the farmer is coerced into agreeing not to discuss the case with anyone. Few farmers have enough money to take on the corporation.

Read More

Top 10 GMO Foods To Avoid

www.nationofchange.org - February 6th, 2013

Genetically modified foods have been shown to cause harm to humans, animals, and the environmental, and despite growing opposition, more and more foods continue to be genetically altered. It’s important to note that steering clear from these foods completely may be difficult, and you should merely try finding other sources than your big chain grocer. If produce is certified USDA-organic, its non-GMO (or supposed to be!) Also, seek out local farmers and booths at farmer’s markets where you can be assured the crops aren’t GMO. Even better, if you are so inclined: Start organic gardening and grow them yourself. Until then, here are the top 10 worst GMO foods for your “do not eat” GMO foods list.

Top 10 Worst GMO Foods for Your GMO Foods List

1. Corn: This is a no-brainer. If you’ve watched any food documentary, you know corn is highly modified. “As many as half of all U.S. farms growing corn for Monsanto are using genetically modified corn,” and much of it is intended for human consumption. Monsanto’s GMO corn has been tied to numerous health issues, including weight gain and organ disruption.

2. Soy: Found in tofu, vegetarian products, soybean oil, soy flour, and numerous other products, soy is also modified to resist herbicides. As of now, biotech giant Monsanto still has a tight grasp on the soybean market, with approximately 90 percent of soy being genetically engineered to resist Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup. In one single year, 2006, 96.7 million pounds of glyphosate was sprayed on soybeans alone.

Read More

Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops

www.independentsciencenews.org - January 24th, 2012

How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years?

In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012). This finding has serious ramifications for crop biotechnology and its regulation, but possibly even greater ones for consumers and farmers. This is because there are clear indications that this viral gene (called Gene VI) might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance.

What Podevin and du Jardin discovered is that of the 86 different transgenic events (unique insertions of foreign DNA) commercialized to-date in the United States 54 contain portions of Gene VI within them. They include any with a widely used gene regulatory sequence called the CaMV 35S promoter (from the cauliflower mosaic virus; CaMV). Among the affected transgenic events are some of the most widely grown GMOs, including Roundup Ready soybeans (40-3-2) and MON810 maize. They include the controversial NK603 maize recently reported as causing tumors in rats (Seralini et al. 2012).

The researchers themselves concluded that the presence of segments of Gene VI “might result in unintended phenotypic changes”. They reached this conclusion because similar fragments of Gene VI have already been shown to be active on their own (e.g. De Tapia et al. 1993). In other words, the EFSA researchers were unable to rule out a hazard to public health or the environment.

Read More

Why Is Grass-Fed So Important?

www.psychologytoday.com - January 23rd, 2013

It’s universally accepted that wild fish like salmon, which eat the algae and plankton at the bottom of the sea, are a healthier source of protein over their coastline fish farm-raised counterparts. Over their life span of eating sea greens, these fish accumulate a wonderful concentration of essential fatty acids in their muscles. When we take in these essential fatty acids (also known as ‘good fats’), these health benefits are conferred to our bodies: These healthy fats create lower inflammation in our blood vessels.

Inflammation is a major factor in many diseases including heart disease, cancer, emotional illness and auto-immune conditions. In fact, inflammation is more of a factor in heart disease than even cholesterol. Healthy fat intake from fish has been shown to be an important factor for better brain function, and strongly suspected as the main reason populations who eat more fish-based diet have lower levels of anxiety and depression too.

What About the Beef?

What many people do not know, however, is that when cows eat green plants like grass, they will also accumulate healthy fatty acids in their muscle tissue in a way that is similar to the way the fish do it. The same for chicken. The problem is, most of the meat and chicken we eat come from animals that are fed grains, corn and genetically modified soy. When range animals are fed these grains, corn and soy, they do not collect these same unsaturated healthy fats in their muscle tissue, and instead collect more saturated, unhealthy fats.  In natural food stores, these meats are touted as “antibiotic and hormone free,” “natural,” “organically-fed” and “grain-fed.” Meat that is labeled this way simply means that the animals were not treated with nasty hormones or antibiotics to help them grow faster (by the way, 70 percent of the total antibiotics used in the world are used specifically to make livestock grow faster).

While natural meats are certainly a step up from the regular antibiotic and hormone treated animals, being "natural" doesn't necessarily help the fatty acid profile of the animal meat — which may be the most important piece for our health. The problem here is that most meat labeled “organic” typically comes from animals that were still fed grains — not grass or plants. So this meat will not have the healthy unsaturated fats we humans need for lower inflammation and healthy arteries.

Read More

Are Un-Labeled Genetically Modified Foods Already in Circulation?

www.huffingtonpost.com - January 22nd, 2013

Sixty two countries have either banned or required mandatory labels for GMO foods (as of late 2012). This includes not only all of Europe, but also China, India, Brazil, Russia, and Syria. In Europe, GMO food represents a very small proportion of the food supply, but it's not banned. 

In the USA, GMO food quietly entered the food supply in the 1990s and has been sold to unsuspecting consumers ever since, without any labeling. In that time, America has seen sharp rises in allergies, bowel-related diseases, and autism compared to countries that don't eat GMOs.There are many different GMO foods, and we have almost no scientific knowledge as to which ones are safe.

There have been very few controlled studies on the health impact of GMOs; no controlled human trials; and only one long-term animal study. Scientists are impeded from conducting tests. Researchers are legally barred from access to the GMOs, and the derivative foods are unlabeled, making controlled experiments nearly impossible. 

The only long-term study found that GMO corn caused massive tumors and premature death in rats starting after one hundred days. Critics complained about the sample size and types of rats used in this study; but those were the exact same as the FDA-approval study, which cleared the GMO corn as "safe" after monitoring impact on rats for only ninety days. I believe the science so far is inconclusive, and I'd love to see more studies.

Read More

Top 10 Genetically Modified Foods to Avoid Eating

www.naturalnews.com - January 17th, 2012

There is a conspiracy of selling out happening in America. Politics and personal interest it would seem determine government policies over and above health and safety issues. When President Obama appointed Michael Taylor in 2009 as senior adviser for the FDA, a fierce protest ensued from consumer groups and environmentalists. Why? Taylor used to be vice president for Monsanto, a multinational interested in marketing genetically modified (GM) food. It was during his term that GMO's were approved in the US without undergoing tests to determine if they were safe for human consumption.

The danger of GMO's

The question of whether or not genetically modified foods (GMO's) are safe for human consumption is an ongoing debate that does not seem to see any resolution except in the arena of public opinion. Due to lack of labeling, Americans are still left at a loss as to whether or not what is on the table is genetically modified. This lack of information makes the avoiding and tracking of GM foods an exercise in futility. 

Below are just some of the food products popularly identified to be genetically modified:

1. Corn - Corn has been modified to create its own insecticide. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has declared that tons of genetically modified corn has been introduced for human consumption. Monsanto has revealed that half of the US's sweet corn farms are planted with genetically modified seed. Mice fed with GM corn were discovered to have smaller offspring and fertility problems.

2. Soy - Soy has also been genetically modified to resist herbicides. Soy products include soy flour, tofu, soy beverages, soybean oil and other products that may include pastries, baked products and edible oil. Hamsters fed with GM soy were unable to have offspring and suffered a high mortality rate.

3. Cotton - Like corn and soy, cotton has been designed to resist pesticides. It is considered food because its oil can be consumed. Its introduction in Chinese agriculture has produced a chemical that kills cotton bollworm, reducing the incidences of pests not only in cotton crops but also in neighboring fields of soybeans and corn. Incidentally, thousands of Indian farmers suffered severe rashes upon exposure to BT cotton.

Read More

Big Ag Profits From Food Waste

www.huffingtonpost.com - January 14th, 2013

Almost half of all the food we produce in the world never makes it to a plate. Today, we allow a staggering two billion tons of food to go to waste each and every year. If we eliminated this unnecessary food waste, we could potentially provide 60-100 percent more food to feed the world's growing population.

These are just some of the shocking statistics from a new report by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IME), highlighting once again how staggeringly wasteful our food and farming system is. But it's not just simply the food that's going to waste: think about all the wasted energy, water, chemicals and labor that went into producing, transporting, and storing what is ultimately just left to rot.

The IME's new report mirrors a 2011 study by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), entitled Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extent, Causes and Prevention. The FAO found that industrialized countries waste 222 million tons of food every year -- almost equivalent to the annual net food production in sub-Saharan Africa. In the United States alone, we waste more than 29 million tons of food each year. That's enough to fill the 90,000-seat Rose Bowl every day, according to food-waste guru, Jonathan Bloom, author of American Wasteland.

Look around and it's clear that we're not just wasting food by letting it rot or throwing it away. It's a well-known fact that we already produce more than enough food today for everyone to have the nourishment they need to thrive. But while the number of people suffering from chronic hunger increased from under 800 million in 1996 to over one billion in 2009, obesity and diet-related ill health in the West is running out of control. Although the U.S. makes up only five percent of the world's population, we account for almost a third of the world's weight due to obesity. As our diets have changed to incorporate the ever-increasing availability of cheaper meat and dairy products and highly processed food, devastating diet-related diseases -- like heart disease, Type 2 diabetes and some diet-related cancers -- have reached epidemic levels in the US.

In 2008, 33.8 percent of U.S. adults were diagnosed as clinically obese. One in three people born in 2000 in the U.S. will develop Type 2 diabetes by 2050. Between 1976 and 1980 and 2007 to 2008, obesity among U.S. pre-school age children -- we're talking about kids of just two to five years of age -- increased from five percent to 10.4 percent. During the same period, obesity among six to 11-year-olds increased from 6.5 percent to 19.6 percent, and among 12 to 19-year-olds we saw an increase from five percent to 18.1 percent. According to a study of the national costs attributed to overweight and obese people, medical expenses associated with these conditions alone accounted for 9.1 percent of total U.S. medical expenditures in 2006 -- and may have reached as high as $78.5 billion ($92.6 billion in 2002 dollars).

Read More

Processed Foods are Killing Us

chicagophoenix.com - December 10th, 2012

As American society became more industrialized and modernized, we focused the same innovation to our foods in an effort to make them more affordable and accessible, resulting in processed foods. While this made food cheaper and allowed Americans of all walks access to more calories, it did not lead to better nutrition nor a healthier society. This change to a heavily-processed food supply also can be correlated to the rise in Type 2 diabetes.

So why are processed foods so bad and how is it linked to the rise in Type 2 diabetes? Until the turn of the century, most Americans either produced their own foods or bought them from local producers in an unprocessed state. With advancement in food storage and preservation, foods were altered to have longer shelf lives and foods once produced at home, like bread, could now be mass produced in baking factories. Mass production led to processed foods appearing cheaper by their convenience.

The act of processing a food product breaks down the item to its basic components, often leaving healthy and nutritional things behind, like fiber. While this allows manufacturers to store products, like flour or corn syrup, easier and longer, it’s not necessarily better for your body. I like to use the example of a log and stack of papers. If you were to set a log on fire, it would burn slowly and release energy and smoke over a prolonged period of time. However, take that same log and “process” it into paper then set that pile of paper on fire. It would burn quickly, releasing it’s energy and smoke over a very short period of time. The same happens with food. For example, corn in its whole form takes time to break down and release its energy. Corn syrup, on the other hand, beaks down very quickly once ingested, releasing its energy all at once.

Read More

Are Pesticides and Food Allergies Linked?

www.cbsnews.com - December  5th, 2012

More Americans have food allergies than ever before, and a new study suggests chemicals in tap water may be partially to blame.

"Previous studies have shown that both food allergies and environmental pollution are increasing in the United States," study author Dr. Elina Jerschow, an assistant professor of allergy and immunology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City, said in a press release. "The results of our study suggest these two trends might be linked, and that increased use of pesticides and other chemicals is associated with a higher prevalence of food allergies."

Researchers analyzed more than 10,000 Americans who were part of an ongoing U.S. survey of health and nutrition. They analyzed their urine levels and found more than 2,200 patients had measurable levels of dichlorophenols in their urine. That's a chemical used in pesticides and weedkillers, which is also used to chlorinate drinking water.

The researchers reported of those with measurable levels of dichlorophenols, 411 people had a food allergy and more than 1,000 had an environmental allergy, such as to pollen. People with the highest levels of the chemicals in their urine were more likely to have an allergy than those with the lower levels.

"Our research shows that high levels of dichlorophenol-containing pesticides can possibly weaken food tolerance in some people, causing food allergy," said Jerschow.

Read More