Agribusiness interests have tried to paint manure digesters as an easy technological approach to solving the problem of methane production on factory farms.
A couple weeks ago, I linked to an article that reported that these digesters are plagued by problems. This article by Wisconsin dairy farmer John Kinsman gives this matter an even deeper look. While I’m skeptical about Kinsman’s claim that small scale dairies largely solve the methane problem by avoiding manure lagoons, his article is nevertheless worth reading just for this sentence:
There were chronic problems with the digester and at the time the mixer in the tank was broken, requiring special scuba divers to repair it.
Dude?!?! (Thanks, Bea.) Link.
David Kessler, author of the new bestseller, The End of Overeating
, just wrote an article investigating why obesity rates have gone out of control over the past thirty years. It turns out that when food companies load up foods with enough sugar, salt, and fat, they end up stimulating dopamine production in ways that’s akin to what happens during drug addiction:
In theory there’s a limit to how much stimulation rewarding foods can generate. We are supposed to habituate – to neuroadapt. When Di Chiara gave animals a cheesy snack called Fonzies, the levels of dopamine in their brains increased. Over time, habituation set in, dopamine levels fell and the food lost its capacity to activate their behaviour.
But if the stimulus is powerful enough, novel enough or administered intermittently enough, the brain may not curb its dopamine response. Desire remains high. We see this with cocaine use, which does not result in habituation. Hyperpalatable foods alter the landscape of the brain in much the same way.
and:
Rewarding foods are rewiring our brains. As they do, we become more sensitive to the cues that lead us to anticipate the reward. In that circularity lies a trap: we can no longer control our responses to highly palatable foods because our brains have been changed by the foods we eat.
Given the biological mechanisms that are involved, efforts like New York City’s initiative to reduce salt consumption shouldn’t be sneered at as nanny-state meddling. As always, it’s wise to check out how the Center for Consumer Freedom responds, and just support the opposite. (Thanks, Venkat.) Link.
The New York Post has an article all about young children who’ve decided to go vegetarian. The whole piece is fantastic—until for some ungodly reason the reporter decides to get a comment from the endlessly incompetent Nina Planck. Planck, who (from what I can tell) doesn’t hold a degree in nutrition, and who advocates feeding raw milk to mother and baby alike, apparently told the New York Post reporter that soy can stunt a child’s growth.
After Planck discredited herself in the pages of the New York Times in 2007, I’m astonished that any journalist would listen to a word she has to say. (Thanks, Marty.) Link.
Says here that Whole Foods Market is discontinuing raw milk sales in at least four states. They were nuts to carry it in the first place; there are too many risks and liabilities associated with selling the stuff.
This is a significant step forward for public health, plus it’ll antagonize Nina Planck, which is also nice. (Via Marler.) Link.
If you enjoy this site, please follow our links to Amazon whenever you have something you want to purchase. Your purchases are currently this site’s sole source of support.
Check out Amazon.com’s vegan grocery
, which currently stocks 1752 items, most with free shipping.
Some sections especially worth looking at: vegan vitamins, snack food, prepared food, candy, chocolate, and even baby food.
Keep in mind that Amazon’s vegan grocery section is new and isn’t yet 100 percent accurate. So please check product ingredients before ordering, and again when the product arrives. If there are any items inaccurately included in this section, send Amazon’s customer service a polite email and let them know. I’ve no doubt that this is going to turn into an incredibly useful and comprehensive shopping resource for vegans—plus the prices tend to be great.
Vegan.com earns commissions from any and all purchases you make whenever you vist Amazon.com through one of our links, even for products we haven’t linked to directly. These commissions enable me to keep this blog updated daily.
I just used Random.org to select the winners of our latest book giveaway featuring copies of Tamasin Noyes’ exciting new cookbook, American Vegan Kitchen
. Our five winners are:
- Andrea D. of Long Beach, CA
- Kelly C. of Boise, ID
- Jessica C. of Marietta, OH
- Judi C. of San Luis Obispo, CA
- Nicholette Z. of Minneapolis, MN
In regard to the food survey that asked participants to choose their favorite fake meats, veggieburgers were way out in front with 146 votes, with sausages next at 96 votes. Sandwich slices scored 44 votes and hot dogs a mere 20 votes. I had some other stuff up too, like prawns, but only a few people voted for the laggards.
Interestingly, 66 people answered the question by choosing, “Hate ‘em all.”
Congratulations to our latest winners. I’ll do another book giveaway for another exciting new title within the week.
Forget Foreman vs. Frazier, there’s nothing I enjoy more than watching competing factions of the meat industry duke it out against one another.
On February 25th, Canada found BSE in a six-year-old dairy cow. Such a finding pits the consumers’ right to know against the industry’s desire to keep things on the DL. Guess who won out?
But somehow, R-CALF, an American beef industry trade group, caught wind of Canada’s secret mad cow. Would R-CALF oblige its beef-producing comrades across the border by keeping everything hush-hush? Of course not: if word of this mad cow got out, it could provoke the US to close its market to Canadian beef, thereby guaranteeing higher beef prices and more profits to American ranchers. So R-CALF let loose with a torrent of outrage against Canada’s handling of this BSE case:
The [Canadian Food Inspection Agency] said the BSE-positive case was confirmed Feb. 25, 2010, which means the CFIA and all other governments who knew about this latest BSE case kept it a secret from the public for almost two weeks. If we had not discovered this information, the public may never have known.
This is beyond awesome: America’s beef industry rats out Canada’s cattlemen while feigning disgust.
Now that this precedent has been set, it’ll be interesting to see how R-CALF will react if, in the future, another mad cow is discovered in the United States. My guess is they’ll be saying it’s no big deal—and will issue the usual blanket denial that the public health has been at all endangered. (Thanks, Larry.) Link.
Persuasive piece by Kim Stallwood arguing that the only way to make lasting gains against the fur industry is to attack it with the sort of cruelty bans that have been used to great effect against battery cages:
The animal rights movement is failing on the anti-fur campaign. And it should know better after decades of activity. The problem? The movement indulges the fur industry by framing the wearing of fur as a cruelty-free lifestyle choice issue. So, the mindset is that if fashion designers want to use fur, well, that’s their prerogative. If people want to wear fur, well, that’s their choice too.
Instead of framing fur as a personal lifestyle choice issue and essentially working with the fur trade in some sort of bizarre tango of anti and pro, the animal rights movement should be implementing a long-term strategy targeting the production of fur as a public policy issue. For example, where are the legislative initiatives regulating how animals are raised for fur and how they are killed? Use public sympathy for the way in which animals are raised and killed to get laws passed making the production of fur that much more expensive.
When you’re losing the war it’s time to change course. Link.
I’d completely forgotten being interviewed for this article for my alma mater’s campus newspaper, but I’ve got to say the reporter did a bang-up job of writing this up. This is one of the best campus newspaper articles I’ve ever read on agribusiness cruelties and the advantages of veganism.
And I think it’s a perfect example of how it’s possible to simultaneously push to eliminate the worst factory farming cruelties on one hand, while strongly advocating for veganism on the other hand. These two efforts need never undercut one another; in fact, one bolsters the other. (Via Eric.) Link.
Update: On my first pass through this article, I scanned over, “Marcus explained that if the egg and dairy industries were more animal-friendly, he would consider switching back to vegetarianism.” That’s completely untrue, and I would never say anything to that effect. I’ve been misconstrued. If you looked hard, you can probably find beef and chicken raised with as little cruelty as the stuff could possibly be raised—I would never consider eating any of it.
Read agribusiness journals and you’re constantly hearing that farmers need to tell their story in order to counter the threat posed by animal advocates. But after reading this Adam Bedford article, maybe that’s not such a hot idea after all. This is a baffling piece. In the rare instances where the text rises toward coherence, the ideas being advanced seem guaranteed to alienate the public:
[Jonathan Safran Foer's] reasoning for giving up meat was partly due to what he called “factory farming” and how he didn’t think this was ethically right. “Factory farming” aside, I personally don’t think eating meat or not eating meat is an ethical decision, it’s a food choice. One’s views on capital punishment, supporting Manchester United and kicking a cat are an ethical decision. I have no issue with someone who doesn’t eat meat, as that is a personal decision for them to make. I personally choose to eat meat because I believe that that is what farmed animals are for.
Hard to believe that an agriculture website found Bedford’s piece worthy of publication. If this is the best story animal farmers can tell, they’d be well advised to STFU. (Via Hawthorne.) Link.
