People can be so convincing. Especially when it comes to food.

Humans love enthusiasm. We adore showmanship and passion. Attend a four-hour long Bruce Springsteen concert or the Super Bowl, and see if you don’t leave feeling inspired and renewed in the human spirit (if also a bit exhausted…and broke). It’s why pundits run the gamut of extremes; because for (almost) every opinion out there, some open mind will listen–and form more opinions.

It’s all ego stuff, if we want to get technical…ideas occupy the mind, the identity of who we are and our purpose. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, particularly if we do good things with what we learn and believe. It’s also a cunning wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing game for marketers and multinational (food) corporations.

Take into consideration the great lengths corporations go to in order to sell you their packaged, processed foodstuffs, and the pieces begin to fall into place. It’s definitely at the heart of fear-mongering tactics designed to keep you from eating the healthiest food options.

When the Environmental Working Group recently released their 9^th annual Dirty Dozen and Clean Fifteen produce guides to pesticides in produce, it’s no surprise that industry trade group United Fresh Produce Association said: “it is irresponsible to mislead consumers with a sensational publicity stunt disguised as science.” They made this claim despite the fact that the EWG takes its rankings directly from U.S. government data on produce. But, apparently, the UFPA wants you to not worry about pesticides. Now who’s sensational? The conventional produce industry certainly doesn’t want you to buy fruits and vegetables that are organic and locally grown on a small farm. In fact, they’d prefer it if you buy the safest of all: canned or frozen.

The same tactic is behind the lawsuit that got New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s soda ban overturned. Despite everything we know about sodas—particularly their effects on children—the industry turned the issue into a discussion about Big Government and Americans losing their rights. As if we were one sip away from being imprisoned, stripped of our identities, and sent to government labor camps.

Or, take the raw milk issue. Nearly half of all U.S. states ban the sale of raw dairy products because of the “health risks,” but there are still minimal regulations on the health or safety of the places (you cannot call them farms) where the overwhelming majority of our nation’s dairy comes from. These filthy, sad, terrifying and inhumane massive factories produce far more health risks than a glass of milk from a loved and well-tended to cow. You know the kind, they have a name, not a number stapled to their ear or branded into their hide.

Then of course, there’s the hot button food issue of our time: GMOs. Giant chemical companies now own patents on most of what’s on the average American’s dinner plate. They claim to be advancing food science, our safety, our farming culture. They tell us non-GMO crops are bug-infested and nutrient-deficient inferior-quality products. We must support GMOs because it’s our duty to our farmers, our children, our health. But we know the opposite is true. Even if their science was on point, why go to all the trouble to patent and protect seeds? It’s a motive as murky as the misty trail of pesticides lingering over a field of GMO corn.

So, why do they do it? Why do they want us to be scared of healthy food?

If Profit, Power and Control aren’t answer enough, we must also consider that this is how things have been done for a while. Like Gandhi said, ridicule and resistance come before acceptance. Even as moral as the issues clearly seem to be, there really are no rules—defining what food should be is a very fine line. For some of us, eating ethically, organically and mindfully makes a lot of sense. For others, eating cheap, fast and at the expense of others is just as reasonable.

In many instances in our food industry, there are genuine people who truly believe in what they’re doing—even when that’s beating animals into submission, or telling a farmer he’s going to face a lawsuit for unauthorized planting of a GMO seed. Similar to The Boss giving his best performance night after night, or an athlete playing the game of his career on the Super Bowl field, people are driven to do what they feel drawn to. And as much as we might disagree with the tactics employed by our food system, we must remember, they’re people too, driven by their own motivations. And while those motivations may be greed and fear, like any motivation, it can change. In fact, it’s often those who’ve been deeply entwined in the corruption of an industry that become the most valuable voices of opposition. The fact is, for now at least, Big-Ag will continue to try and scare you. They’ll try to seduce you. Sometimes, they’ll probably even win. But eventually, they’ll lose.

Keep in touch with Jill on Twitter @jillettinger

Image: freezelight

The post Why the Food Industry Loves to Scare Us Into Eating Scarier Food appeared first on EcoSalon.

VideoAmericans eat an average of three burgers a week. What is that habit costing us?

On average, Americans eat three times more meat than people in other countries. Not only that, but we also eat an average of three hamburgers per week. Yes, you read that correctly. Three hamburgers a week.

What is that eating habit costing society? The Center for Investigative Reporting put together a video to answer that question. Watch it and you’ll never look at a hamburger the same.

A few key numbers:

• It takes 1800 gallons of water to make a single pound of grain-fed beef.
• Because cows release methane gas when they digest food, they produce more greenhouse gas than 22 million cars per year.
• Slaughterhouses create about 30 million pounds of contaminants a year.
• One burger can contain the DNA of more than a thousand cows.
• If all Americans ate no meat or cheese one day a week, it would have the same climate change prevention effect as taking 7.6 million cars off the road for one year.

The post Video: The Hidden Costs of Hamburgers appeared first on EcoSalon.

A weekly roundup of EcoSalon’s top stories.

We like being single but we also like companionship. In Abigail Wick’s weekly column Sex By Numbers, she tackles the topic: Can I Stay Single But Commit To One Man? Wick decides to address the issue penning it as an open letter to her dear friend and in truth, as much a letter to herself.

Dude, are you astrocartographically correct? In her article The 20 Best and Worst Cities for Your Astrological Sign, Shelter editor K. Emily Bond says: “Whether you actually buy into planetary politics (we’re reserving judgment), the cosmos are a fun and convenient foil for a range of bad behavior and bum luck.” Check out the story to see if your sign matches where you live.

Every city has a bevy of sustainable designers and L.A. has hurned out a fair share of them. In Sustainable Los Angeles: The Pioneers and Emergents, writer Kelly Drennan tallies up the best and brightest from shoe designers to ready-to-wear.

We have a lot we could be learning from the great north, especially when it comes to being truly environmentally friendly. In her story 7 Lessons From Canada’s Environmental Pragmatism, writer Senior Editor Luanne Bradley says: “According to the Vancouver Sun, the city is now moving ahead in 10 key areas that range from greening the economy by securing the city’s international reputation as a mecca of green enterprise, improving food production, cutting greenhouse gases and making walking, cycling and public transit the preferred transportation option for its citizens.”

Once a month, The Green Plate harvests the most interesting, biggest, weirdest, and puzzling recent news stories on food politics, the food industry, eating trends, and edible discoveries from around the web, and shares them with you. This month’s focus was on the latest food safety stories which are both shocking but fixable. Columnist Vanessa Barrington writes in (Shocking) News From the Food World: “This month, intentionally mismarked Chinese honey contaminated with heavy metals and illegal antibiotics is being shipped to the U.S. through India, preventing the U.S. from collecting tariffs and endangering your health, yet the FDA doesn’t want to inspect the honey entering the country. What gives?”

The post The Friday Five, Vol. 25 appeared first on EcoSalon.

I have a friend who refers to the Standard American Diet by the acronym SAD.

This is an apt description indeed. Think about it. We have more colorfully packaged choices on the shelves of our supermarkets, more new flavors of cereal, crackers, and chips than we know what to do with, more fortified, functional foods than ever. Yet, as a nation, we get sicker every year. Diet related diseases are epidemic, especially among young people. In fact, children today are the first generation expected to have a shorter life expectancy than their parents. And it’s all related to our SAD. With all of our medical knowledge and wealth, how did this come to pass?

According to Marion Nestle, Professor and Chair of the Department of Nutrition and Food Studies at NYU and author of the classic book, Food Politics, the problem is that our heavily subsidized, highly efficient food industry produces too many calories – twice as many as we need. Because of this surplus, food companies must work hard to get us to EAT MORE. Hence the millions of dollars in advertising spent every year to get us to Supersize It.

Though Food Politics was published back in 2002, it’s just as relevant today. Besides advertising, the Food Industry influences our diets in many ways that most of us are not even aware of.

1. Food industry lobbyists influence USDA’s food guidelines.

Chapter 2 of Food Politics provides readers with an instructive history of the development of the USDA Food Pyramid and how food industry lobbyists influenced the final product. For example, meat and dairy producers did not like the implication inherent in the pyramid design that some foods were better than others. They preferred a design that presented each food group as visually equal. The food industry spent over a year fighting the design and wording. In the end, the pyramid won out, but the meat and dairy industries succeeded in getting many minor changes made. The biggest change was that, instead of recommending a straight number of servings (2-3), the wording was changed to “at least 2-3 servings” to encourage people to eat more.

2. Food industry sponsorships

The food industry regularly sponsors research studies, nutritional journals and conferences, and sometimes, entire university departments. How much does this corporate money influence the findings and recommendations of research? Surveys cited in Food Politics show that researchers often have financial or professional ties to the companies they are researching, which certainly creates the impression of bias. And when food companies use the findings of a study in its advertising, as a way to sell more product, the appearance of bias is even harder to ignore. Also, when a corporation has an exclusive partnership with a university research department, as is becoming more common, there is a very real concern that these partnerships will interfere with academic freedom.

3. Endorsements and labeling rackets

When professional societies develop partnerships with food companies in order to provide nutritional information to consumers or develop labeling schemes for certain foods, the net outcome is not always good for consumers. Food Politics offers many examples of this phenomenon, including one in which the American Heart Association charged food companies enormous fees to be a part of its Heart Check labeling program. The program resulted in the labeling of foods like pop-tarts as heart healthy. Such labeling schemes that isolate one aspect of a food product, such as cholesterol, while ignoring sugar content and other less healthy aspects of the food in question, only confuse consumers. The program was eventually discontinued and fees returned.

4. Revolving doors

When industry executives get jobs in government things tend to go the way industry wants them to. This happens in every sector (think banking!) and the food industry is not an exception. Two recent examples of revolving door appointees in the Obama administration include Dr. Islam Siddiqui, chief agricultural negotiator and former lobbyist and vice president for science and regulatory affairs at CropLife America, a US trade association representing the major manufacturers, formulators and distributors of crop protection and pest control products. In September Catherine Woteki was named Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics at the USDA. Previously she served as global director of scientific affairs for Mars, Inc., where she managed the company’s scientific policy and research on matters of health, nutrition, and food safety.

5. PR

Remember the Smart Choices labeling scheme, an industry-driven label designed to make consumers think that Froot Loops are healthy? An earlier example given in Food Politics is that of Nestle’s efforts to convince women in developing countries that formula is better for babies than breast milk. When its reputation in the US suffered as a result of these efforts, the company hired a well-known PR firm to help it out of the mess. The book includes a chart that outlines the company’s actions including issuing opinion papers on the subject, sponsoring conferences, and urging journalists to write favorable articles on the subject of formula feeding.

6. Lawsuits against critics

Remember Oprah vs. The National Cattleman’s Association? Have you heard of the veggie libel laws that exist in 13 states? The prospect of an expensive lawsuit can really have a chilling effect on anyone considering speaking out against a specific food or production practice.

7. Marketing to children and in schools

Not only do packaged and fast food companies spend millions to target children through advertising on television, in magazines, on the Internet, through movie product placements, and toy campaigns, they also have an incredible grip on the visual space inside schools. Food Politics outlines how companies use advertisements in hallways, on buses, and in teaching materials to reach children. And also how club and sports teams sponsorships, contests, school meal programs, and “pouring rights” contracts get company logos and products in front of children. If you don’t know what a pouring rights contract is, it’s a program in which a packaged good or soft drink company gives cash-strapped schools money for sports and other programs in exchange for an exclusive right to sell their products in the school.

I caught up with Marion Nestle, author of Food Politics, over email and asked her a couple of questions about the current landscape of food politics.

Q: How have things changed for better or worse since you wrote Food Politics?

A: “The Food Movement!  When I wrote the first edition of Food Politics, all people talked about was personal responsibility. Now just about everyone understands that the food environment discourages healthful eating.”

Q: What do you think of the USDA and FDA under the Obama administration?

A: “The USDA has a complicated job. Historically it has favored industrial agriculture. That has not changed, but Vilsack has introduced new initiatives that favor organic and local producers. That’s a start. USDA’s work is governed by the Farm Bill and advocates for sustainable agriculture need to start working now to get that bill to do a better job.”

Q: What is the biggest hot button issue emerging today in food politics?

A: “It depends on what concerns you, I suppose. Mine is election campaign laws, the root of corruption in our political system.”

To keep up on developments in food politics, check in on Marion’s blog.

This is the latest installment in Vanessa Barrington’s weekly column, The Green Plate, on the environmental, social, and political issues related to what and how we eat.

Image: Ben McLeod

The post How the Food Industry Influences What We Eat appeared first on EcoSalon.

If you’re still chuckling from the weirdest of 2008’s green building designs, pop some popcorn and pull up a chair before you check out the Dragonfly – it’s a 600-meter-tall wing-shaped skyscraper filled with self-sufficient offices and vertical gardens. Would you be happy to see this against the Manhattan skyline?

New Zealand comedian Mike King has been talking green for a while now, yet that didn’t keep him promoting the pork industry – until he broke into a pig farm with animal activists and saw things for himself. “If I had known this was going on I would never have supported this.” Read the full story at Stuff.

Another summer, another tide of sunscreen attacking man and beast alike – unless you go for the new wave of eco-friendly versions. Check out Alternative Consumer’s recommendations, and have a look at our own.

If you work in the heirloom tomato industry, you’ll be fuming after Scientific American’s Brendan Borrell described heirlooms as “feeble and inbred” in an article that implied these strains of fruit were fatally flawed and needed a genetic band-aid. A blistering response wasn’t long in coming, prompting Mr. Borrell to take back a few of his ill-chosen words. You can read our Vanessa‘s thoughts on the subject at Civil Eats.

How about this for inflammatory? Writer and activist Michael Pollan is so concerned about food from mass-commercialized agriculture that he advises us to avoid all food we’ve seen advertised. Pioneering or paranoid? Read his argument at AlterNet and decide for yourself.

When people look at wind turbines, they make a lazy association: spinning blades = bird-killing machines = worse than traditional power. The problem, argues Benjamin Sovacool at Scitizen, is that few of us see first-hand the damage mining and acid rain does to our feathered friends, and out of sight means out of mind. Wind turbines have a ways to go, it’s true, but the conventional energy industry kills far more birds.

For the fellas out there who like to explore themselves – I mean figuratively, for pity’s sake – there’s a new magazine on that very topic, called Masc. Top tip? Funny is hot.

Some things shouldn’t be so small – stamp-sized cellphone manufacturers, I’m talking to you. In the same category is bonkers Brit Perry Watkins, who has turned a children’s ride into the world’s smallest road-legal automobile. Parking should be a cinch, although beware of being crushed under the wheels of passing bicycles. A unique concept, we dearly hope.

If you clicked on our popular TOMS vegan shoe giveaway and are now finding that standard footwear no longer measures up, hot-foot it to Greenopia where Katherine has listed the top eco-sneakers on the market today and gives advice on where to donate your shoes when they’re falling off your feet.

He’s walked 1,200 miles to raise awareness for the plight of homeless children. He’s about to walk the 600 miles from Atlanta to Washington. And he’s 11 years old. A kind of philanthropic Karl Bushby, Zach Bonner is a fund-raising walking machine, and you can read his story at MSNBC.

As someone who once got a chili seed in one of his eyes, I can attest that making hot sauce is dangerous. You need to know exactly what you’re doing, so we reckon you can’t go far wrong with Aleta’s comprehensive guide at Omnomicon. Although – is there a greener alternative to vinyl gloves?

We know that organic is the way to go in principle. But what about practice? Enough of “should”: is organic better? Chelsea Green‘s Makenna Goodman isn’t so sure. Have we been robbed by companies willfully misusing the loosely-defined organic label? Gary Hirshberg of Stonyfield Farm thinks Goodman’s aim is a little off: the real problem is the food system that small-scale farming challenges. Where do you weigh in?

If you’re wondering what the force of nature known as Bette Midler is up to these days, you don’t live in New York. She’s been tackling the city’s legendary garbage problems, and her New York Restoration Project has stumped up $38 million for good causes – not the first time she’s set such an inspiring example. Respect to the lady with the voice that parts your hair.

So, modular house-building is convenient, adaptive to the environment and oh-so-very-cool. But did you realise that you could knock a prefab together in just 8 days? It takes me that long to put up a shelf, let alone a house.

Finally, a dumb but impressively brave act of environmental terrorism. Just imagine if their timing had been off.

Image: Sleeping Bear

The post Eco Links to Green Your Weekend appeared first on EcoSalon.