2009年8月17日 星期一
Analysis of XV) The Forager
At the final stage of the epic food journey, The author gave himself a final mission - to go way back before the ancient times, to practice hunting and gathering of his own food. It’s somewhat of a strange journey, as the hunter-gatehr way of collecting food is no longer possible for the modern society. Yet he presses on, hoping that he will learn something new about the world and the food we eat behind it all.
Analysis of XIV) The Meal: Grass-Fed
Finally, after a week of hard work on the farm, the author finally earned his rights to enjoy the food with his friends.
In some ways, positive light can be shed on this: they say the food always tatstes better when you've earned it. Or, you can just choose to see it as just a placebo effect, and say that the food itself doesn't really taste good, it's all in one's own head.
Either way, the scientifically known fact is that, the amount of omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids are rich in Salatin's foods.
In otherwords, carrying Polyface foods too far from the farm is in essence, against the Salatin principals, and therefore he shared his food with his friends.
source: Cover Browser
Perhaps this is just an eye opening experience, to be in touch with mother Earth and father sun have created for us. Instead of relying so much of preto, this section just sets out to bring awareness, whilst uncover truths. This is how th author remains objective - to no overpraise the food as being super tasty. After all, this is an investigation, not an essay.
In some ways, positive light can be shed on this: they say the food always tatstes better when you've earned it. Or, you can just choose to see it as just a placebo effect, and say that the food itself doesn't really taste good, it's all in one's own head.
Either way, the scientifically known fact is that, the amount of omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids are rich in Salatin's foods.
In otherwords, carrying Polyface foods too far from the farm is in essence, against the Salatin principals, and therefore he shared his food with his friends.
source: Cover Browser
Perhaps this is just an eye opening experience, to be in touch with mother Earth and father sun have created for us. Instead of relying so much of preto, this section just sets out to bring awareness, whilst uncover truths. This is how th author remains objective - to no overpraise the food as being super tasty. After all, this is an investigation, not an essay.
Analysis of XIII) The Market: "Greetings from the Non-Barcode People"
...and finally, the good are ready for the "beyond organic" followers to purchase.
It was not a difficult tasks this time around, to trace the food chain of the Polyface produce and meats - since everything is raised/grown and processed all in one place - unlike corn.
Ironically, all this this wholesome, naturally-grown-without-pesticides-or-additive plants and animals have a tough time being approved by the USDA because it is "unconventional." Again, from the perspective that the author is presenting, which is that from the farmer's time, is irrational. The reason? because, again, it does not comply to "industry" standards.
From this point of view, it would seem like that the consumers would rather ritually follow the rules of the society, the industry, or the government, rather than taking in what is natural, what is actually good for us.
Both the author and Salatin agreed that the products from a grass farm is expensive. However, the customers buying these foods are surprisingly, not of the upper class - just low key, everyday citizens driving Chevrolets.
source: Fairfax Digital
Here, Salatin shares more of his philosophy with the author, he believes that the healthiest of foods are the ones that are traded between just two parties, plain and simple. And that most Americans have put less importance on food - spending less money on foods today as compared to 1950's.
An important point of view presented is that, whilst most people are concerned with who their car mechanic is, and who the house contractor is, they are not concern about who grows their food. In addition, people are willing to pay for the maximum value that their car is worth, but not their food. The only explanation I can think of is - ad campaigns and a national hidden agenda - growing up, most people's notion of a farm is that of Polyfaces - animals living happily in barns, cows eating grass, people were never told growing up that the beef they're eating is sitting in their own filth in a feedlot. So under this illusion, most people do not bother to examine their food source. Even if they do find out, they are already so used to the industrial food process, that they retain status quo on food out of a long habit.
source: platypuscomix
All Salatin hopes for, is that, his food supplies will become a healthier alternative for those interested. Not to become a primary food source for Americans - it would be impossible for people living in cities to do this.
So at the day, this chapter reminds me of something that a TED speaker mentioned, industrial bread is to feed the food. In other words, (beyond) organic foods is for the yuppie.
It was not a difficult tasks this time around, to trace the food chain of the Polyface produce and meats - since everything is raised/grown and processed all in one place - unlike corn.
Ironically, all this this wholesome, naturally-grown-without-pesticides-or-additive plants and animals have a tough time being approved by the USDA because it is "unconventional." Again, from the perspective that the author is presenting, which is that from the farmer's time, is irrational. The reason? because, again, it does not comply to "industry" standards.
From this point of view, it would seem like that the consumers would rather ritually follow the rules of the society, the industry, or the government, rather than taking in what is natural, what is actually good for us.
Both the author and Salatin agreed that the products from a grass farm is expensive. However, the customers buying these foods are surprisingly, not of the upper class - just low key, everyday citizens driving Chevrolets.
source: Fairfax Digital
Here, Salatin shares more of his philosophy with the author, he believes that the healthiest of foods are the ones that are traded between just two parties, plain and simple. And that most Americans have put less importance on food - spending less money on foods today as compared to 1950's.
An important point of view presented is that, whilst most people are concerned with who their car mechanic is, and who the house contractor is, they are not concern about who grows their food. In addition, people are willing to pay for the maximum value that their car is worth, but not their food. The only explanation I can think of is - ad campaigns and a national hidden agenda - growing up, most people's notion of a farm is that of Polyfaces - animals living happily in barns, cows eating grass, people were never told growing up that the beef they're eating is sitting in their own filth in a feedlot. So under this illusion, most people do not bother to examine their food source. Even if they do find out, they are already so used to the industrial food process, that they retain status quo on food out of a long habit.
source: platypuscomix
All Salatin hopes for, is that, his food supplies will become a healthier alternative for those interested. Not to become a primary food source for Americans - it would be impossible for people living in cities to do this.
So at the day, this chapter reminds me of something that a TED speaker mentioned, industrial bread is to feed the food. In other words, (beyond) organic foods is for the yuppie.
Analysis of XII) Slaughter: In a Glass Abattoir
I'll begin this entry with a video:
vegans supporter's video of animal slaughter
Being a meatatarian, I often say this to vegans that try to convince me that eating me is a sin: "For every animal you don't eat, I eat three." I will do my best to analyze this chapter without too much bias.
This chapter explores some aspects of morality behind slaughtering animals.
The Author quickly found himself getting used to slitting chicken throats, and he find that rather disturbing. At the end of the day, this "reassembling" process has produced 300 chickens ready to be sold.
The slaughterhouse of Polyface seems like the most industry and machine like "processing" out of the the entire clever system of grass farming.
Are we meat eaters really murders that slaughter theses animals out of twisted pleasures? or are like what we once were, eating what we can to survive, and thus eating meat has become our biological identity?
At least Polyface does the slaughtering cleanly, at the entire process is bare naked in front of the customers to see, so there is no hidden "in-humane" stuff that goes on behind other slaughter houses, as Salatin suggests.
Perhaps the most of us who are used to eating pre-processed meats have been following the three wise monkeys: "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" when it comes to animals deaths and filling our own stomach. If the general population can kill their own meat, I'm sure there would be significantly less meat eater in the world. (The meat industry would NEVER allow that to happen of course).
source: Chanrouen
In the mean time, I am going to enjoy my steak tonight.
vegans supporter's video of animal slaughter
Being a meatatarian, I often say this to vegans that try to convince me that eating me is a sin: "For every animal you don't eat, I eat three." I will do my best to analyze this chapter without too much bias.
This chapter explores some aspects of morality behind slaughtering animals.
The Author quickly found himself getting used to slitting chicken throats, and he find that rather disturbing. At the end of the day, this "reassembling" process has produced 300 chickens ready to be sold.
The slaughterhouse of Polyface seems like the most industry and machine like "processing" out of the the entire clever system of grass farming.
Are we meat eaters really murders that slaughter theses animals out of twisted pleasures? or are like what we once were, eating what we can to survive, and thus eating meat has become our biological identity?
At least Polyface does the slaughtering cleanly, at the entire process is bare naked in front of the customers to see, so there is no hidden "in-humane" stuff that goes on behind other slaughter houses, as Salatin suggests.
Perhaps the most of us who are used to eating pre-processed meats have been following the three wise monkeys: "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" when it comes to animals deaths and filling our own stomach. If the general population can kill their own meat, I'm sure there would be significantly less meat eater in the world. (The meat industry would NEVER allow that to happen of course).
source: Chanrouen
In the mean time, I am going to enjoy my steak tonight.
Analysis of XI) The Animals: Practicing Complexity
The chapter follows Salatin as he takes care of the "by products" of his grass farm - the animals that depends on it.
This is where the "processing" is done on the Polyface farm: naturally, by the animals. This is actually a very simple method of food flowchart
Sun -> Grass -> Cattle -> Chicken
|
V
pigs
The chicken, being the "Cleaning crew" of the grass, takes care of the grub in the cow pies, and help spread the manure, and eats up more grass. Here, Salatin is allowing the chicken to do what it does the best - scratching. Salatin also uses the pigs natural tendency to play in manure to spread cow compost to his pasture.
source: about.com
The author essentially reports the efficiency of this closed loop, complex system in which all the animals are dependent on each other. Taking this line of logic: the humans try to re-invent the wheel by simplifying the process of nature, to create his own version of the complex system. The only problem with that, it seems, that made made systems are always fundamentally flawed somehow.
Looks like the general population is too caught with instant gratification and results, that most forgot to see the background advantages of Salatin's way of farming : In order to count
this system’s efficiency, “you need to count not only all the products it produces...but also all the costs it eliminates: antibiotics, wormers, pesticides, and fertilizers.”
So if such a great way exists to produce food, why don't all the farmers follow the Polyface method? The answer, the author says, is simple: most farmers are lazy. If the machine can do all the job for us, then there is no incentive to get up 6 am everyday to take care of the chickens.
This begs the question: why did humans create technology in the first place? to make our lives easier, save us time. Yet, this dependency on machinery is killing us ever so slowly. In the industrial revolution, people want to automate everything. Now in this post-industrial era, the trend is almost the opposite - people are finding ways to go back to nature.
source: Zone5
This is where the "processing" is done on the Polyface farm: naturally, by the animals. This is actually a very simple method of food flowchart
Sun -> Grass -> Cattle -> Chicken
|
V
pigs
The chicken, being the "Cleaning crew" of the grass, takes care of the grub in the cow pies, and help spread the manure, and eats up more grass. Here, Salatin is allowing the chicken to do what it does the best - scratching. Salatin also uses the pigs natural tendency to play in manure to spread cow compost to his pasture.
source: about.com
The author essentially reports the efficiency of this closed loop, complex system in which all the animals are dependent on each other. Taking this line of logic: the humans try to re-invent the wheel by simplifying the process of nature, to create his own version of the complex system. The only problem with that, it seems, that made made systems are always fundamentally flawed somehow.
Looks like the general population is too caught with instant gratification and results, that most forgot to see the background advantages of Salatin's way of farming : In order to count
this system’s efficiency, “you need to count not only all the products it produces...but also all the costs it eliminates: antibiotics, wormers, pesticides, and fertilizers.”
So if such a great way exists to produce food, why don't all the farmers follow the Polyface method? The answer, the author says, is simple: most farmers are lazy. If the machine can do all the job for us, then there is no incentive to get up 6 am everyday to take care of the chickens.
This begs the question: why did humans create technology in the first place? to make our lives easier, save us time. Yet, this dependency on machinery is killing us ever so slowly. In the industrial revolution, people want to automate everything. Now in this post-industrial era, the trend is almost the opposite - people are finding ways to go back to nature.
source: Zone5
Analysis of X) Grass: Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Pasture
Joel Salatin is a grass farmer.
How could this possibility be? The exports that makes Salatin money to feed his family are the beef, chickens and eggs?
As it turns out, the entire philosophy of the Salatin farm, as the author found out, is that: if you take care of the ecosystem in which the animals thrive on, most important from the base level of food production, the animals that's half of the game won already.
Before reading this section, most people, like the author himself, did not think growing grass can be such a complex methodology. Most North Americans take grass for granted: it is readily seen everywhere before all the suburban houses.
Putting a patch of pasture under a microscope, the author starts to appreciate the true elegant greenness behind all the hard work and thought put behind the scene to take care of the grass.
source: Panoramio
As in example to illustrate this: allowing the cows to eat too early and you risk killing the grass by not giving it enough of a chance to recover; wait too long and the grass will become too fibrous and the cows won’t eat it! This single concept here explains the title "grass farmer", so much work and dedication is pouring into organizing and managing the food source. Instead of bring the food to the animals, like what the feedlots are doing the Iowa, the grass farmer brings the animal to the food.
It turns out that, the Salatin grass farm can produced the same, if not more food energy per acre of land than that of a corn field.
The author questions the obvious: why did American turn her head away from the productive and environmentally friendly way of producing food? Because it does not conform the mechanisation religion of industrious processing.
source: African American Environmentalist Association
Grass farming method of raising animals is against one of the principles of industry: time is money. The animals don't fattened fast enough to be a good source for the process food machine. On top of that, animals raised form various pastures means less homogeneity, violating yet another industry standard.
The author makes raises yet again, his main thesis thus far in the book: the irrationality complying with the industry when it is clearly inefficient.
We can see that the author is suggestion America is following the industry for the sake of following it: “our civilization and, increasingly, our food system are strictly organized on industrial lines” that prize consistency, mechanization, predictability, interchangeability and economies of scale. Corn works within this system; grass does not.
How could this possibility be? The exports that makes Salatin money to feed his family are the beef, chickens and eggs?
As it turns out, the entire philosophy of the Salatin farm, as the author found out, is that: if you take care of the ecosystem in which the animals thrive on, most important from the base level of food production, the animals that's half of the game won already.
Before reading this section, most people, like the author himself, did not think growing grass can be such a complex methodology. Most North Americans take grass for granted: it is readily seen everywhere before all the suburban houses.
Putting a patch of pasture under a microscope, the author starts to appreciate the true elegant greenness behind all the hard work and thought put behind the scene to take care of the grass.
source: Panoramio
As in example to illustrate this: allowing the cows to eat too early and you risk killing the grass by not giving it enough of a chance to recover; wait too long and the grass will become too fibrous and the cows won’t eat it! This single concept here explains the title "grass farmer", so much work and dedication is pouring into organizing and managing the food source. Instead of bring the food to the animals, like what the feedlots are doing the Iowa, the grass farmer brings the animal to the food.
It turns out that, the Salatin grass farm can produced the same, if not more food energy per acre of land than that of a corn field.
The author questions the obvious: why did American turn her head away from the productive and environmentally friendly way of producing food? Because it does not conform the mechanisation religion of industrious processing.
source: African American Environmentalist Association
Grass farming method of raising animals is against one of the principles of industry: time is money. The animals don't fattened fast enough to be a good source for the process food machine. On top of that, animals raised form various pastures means less homogeneity, violating yet another industry standard.
The author makes raises yet again, his main thesis thus far in the book: the irrationality complying with the industry when it is clearly inefficient.
We can see that the author is suggestion America is following the industry for the sake of following it: “our civilization and, increasingly, our food system are strictly organized on industrial lines” that prize consistency, mechanization, predictability, interchangeability and economies of scale. Corn works within this system; grass does not.
2009年8月12日 星期三
Analysis of IX) Big Organic
So the items labeled "Organic" on the store selves are not what they seemed...
In this chapter, the author sets out to investigate the organic "scene". Starting from his local organic super market Whole Foods, while he picks up this next family dinner, and explains organic food.
Even the very definition of the term involved with the industry itself. What is really behind the misunderstood word of "Organic"? The impression to the general population is that, any product stamped with organic word on is automatically more "superior". How true is that? The Author also questions all the literature presented alongside the the food; how accurate does it it depict the actually condition of the plant/animals on their respective farms?
As it turns out, the mainstream organic should be called "Big Organic". A bunch of the organic farms started as hippie farms of the 70s, using no chemicals in growing their produce. Eventually they felt the growing pains and needed the industrial machinery to help them expand their "business". It is ironic that the very hippies that once raged against the machines eventually deflected to the "dark side".
source: boingboing
One such example is Gene Kahn, founder of Cascadian Farm. It was just a simper quasi-communal hippie farm back in the day. Eventually, Kahn realized that: no body's overly concerned about organic food after all: "It's just lunch". Eventually, these one time "small organic" farms evolved into the super sized "big organic" farms that fills the selves of the organic produce section in the supermarket.
Deeper in the investigation, the author found that the big organic farms , aka industrial organic, are not completely different from the conventional farms after all. Other plants are introduced on the fields as the alternative to pesticides; horse dun is used as fertiliser, instead of NPK chemicals. Mass manual labour are employed to take care of the plants. Yet massive harvesting and packaging machinery are still used to "process" the the crop.
It is no wonder that Joel Salavin insisted being called "beyond organic". All this processing he considers his anti-thesis.
I do not think using foreign labour (in this case, from Mexico) is the longer term solution for the food industry, as it creates what's called a "dependency" for developing country to outsource cheap labour to industrialized nations.
The Rosie chickens, the so called "free-range", is treated not that different from the the steers of the Iowas feeding lot: although the chickens here are not bathing in their own feces and fed anti-biotic, the are still in cramped quarter. The free-range part, is nothing more than a door way to a tiny space that the chickens do not even go to.
source: Mom's on the roof again
Sitting down with his family to indulge on an all organic meal (featuring Rosie the chicken,
South American asparagus in January, and a variety of California industrial-organic produce) with his family, the author admits that the food is essentially the same as an ordinary meal - after you factor in the freshness.
So what does that leave the value of big organic then? The author admits that it maybe very well be "healthier" for people to eat, although science is not at the level to pin-point what exactly it is that makes it healthy. It is using scientific induction to make this "educated guess".
What is known for sure? The drastic reduction of pollution to the environment while raising the crops and animals. No manure ponds, no pesticides are may remain in our atmosphere. No chemical runoff to poison our rivers.
The author concludes this chapter with some sarcasm: all this seemly is "greener" method of producing food has still, one fatal flaw: it is still “floating on a sinking sea of petroleum.” Every step is making the food onto the dinner plate still requires too much petro to ship it around the world.
source: Pacific riptide
In this chapter, the author sets out to investigate the organic "scene". Starting from his local organic super market Whole Foods, while he picks up this next family dinner, and explains organic food.
Even the very definition of the term involved with the industry itself. What is really behind the misunderstood word of "Organic"? The impression to the general population is that, any product stamped with organic word on is automatically more "superior". How true is that? The Author also questions all the literature presented alongside the the food; how accurate does it it depict the actually condition of the plant/animals on their respective farms?
As it turns out, the mainstream organic should be called "Big Organic". A bunch of the organic farms started as hippie farms of the 70s, using no chemicals in growing their produce. Eventually they felt the growing pains and needed the industrial machinery to help them expand their "business". It is ironic that the very hippies that once raged against the machines eventually deflected to the "dark side".
source: boingboing
One such example is Gene Kahn, founder of Cascadian Farm. It was just a simper quasi-communal hippie farm back in the day. Eventually, Kahn realized that: no body's overly concerned about organic food after all: "It's just lunch". Eventually, these one time "small organic" farms evolved into the super sized "big organic" farms that fills the selves of the organic produce section in the supermarket.
Deeper in the investigation, the author found that the big organic farms , aka industrial organic, are not completely different from the conventional farms after all. Other plants are introduced on the fields as the alternative to pesticides; horse dun is used as fertiliser, instead of NPK chemicals. Mass manual labour are employed to take care of the plants. Yet massive harvesting and packaging machinery are still used to "process" the the crop.
It is no wonder that Joel Salavin insisted being called "beyond organic". All this processing he considers his anti-thesis.
I do not think using foreign labour (in this case, from Mexico) is the longer term solution for the food industry, as it creates what's called a "dependency" for developing country to outsource cheap labour to industrialized nations.
The Rosie chickens, the so called "free-range", is treated not that different from the the steers of the Iowas feeding lot: although the chickens here are not bathing in their own feces and fed anti-biotic, the are still in cramped quarter. The free-range part, is nothing more than a door way to a tiny space that the chickens do not even go to.
source: Mom's on the roof again
Sitting down with his family to indulge on an all organic meal (featuring Rosie the chicken,
South American asparagus in January, and a variety of California industrial-organic produce) with his family, the author admits that the food is essentially the same as an ordinary meal - after you factor in the freshness.
So what does that leave the value of big organic then? The author admits that it maybe very well be "healthier" for people to eat, although science is not at the level to pin-point what exactly it is that makes it healthy. It is using scientific induction to make this "educated guess".
What is known for sure? The drastic reduction of pollution to the environment while raising the crops and animals. No manure ponds, no pesticides are may remain in our atmosphere. No chemical runoff to poison our rivers.
The author concludes this chapter with some sarcasm: all this seemly is "greener" method of producing food has still, one fatal flaw: it is still “floating on a sinking sea of petroleum.” Every step is making the food onto the dinner plate still requires too much petro to ship it around the world.
source: Pacific riptide
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)