ethics

Shopper's Guide to Pesticides iPhone App

maki — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:42:42 +0200

3 years ago, I mentioned a handy list of produce ranked by how much pesticide is used to grow them. The higher (=more pesticides) the ranking, the better it would be to stick to organically grown.

I recently got a new iPhone (yes…I’m the very opposite of an Early Adopter of tech gadgets) and discovered that the same list is available as a free iPhone app called DirtyProduce. Here’s a screenshot of the opening page:

It doesn’t do much beyond list the Dirty Dozen (the most heavily pesticide-treated fruits and vegetables), the Clean 15 (the last pesticide-used) and the full list of 47 produce items, but it’s handy to have around with you. Who knew for instance that peaches were the most pesticide-laden fruit or vegetable? I tend not to peel my peaches, and I ate, oh I don’t know, a few tons of them over the summer. I may start peeling them next season, or look for non-treated ones.

Anyway, if you do have an iPhone, take a look. And if you don’t, there is still the PDF list to print out and carry in your wallet.

EWG Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides

Real beef

maki — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 08:56:36 +0200

As opposed to the previous post, this is about real meat.

First, I got an email from one Tony McNicol, a Tokyo based photographer and journalist (he’s originally from the UK). On his site, he has several fascinating photo essays depicting some off-the-beaten-track slices of Japanese life. One of them is about Kobe beef, which is a very special (and expensive) kind of beef.

[Kobe Beef, June 2009 - Images by Tony McNicol. Used with permission.]

Kobe beef is (as Tony says) not just wagyuu, and it doesn’t mean beef from the city of Kobe. It is beef from a particular kind of cow, in a particular place, in a special way. Only about 2000 of these specially raised cows are slaughtered every year, and it it sold at retail (if you can get a hold of it) for $500 a kilo.

Now, it is quite obvious that Kobe beef is not some kind of happy accident of nature. It is a manmade product in all senses of the word. The cows were bred to be a certain way, and they are raised with plenty of human intervention. It is really agriculture - which is, after all, the process of growing food for human consumption - taken to its extreme.

This reminded me of another manmade meat product, which for various reasons has been the center of controversy, especially in the U.S., for a few years: fois gras. A few people object to the method of producing a duck or goose with a fatty liver, called gavage, which involved force feeding food into the bird’s gullet with a tube. These few people have been very vocal, and in some places successful. The anti-gavage movement has even spread in a small way to Europe, though most people here (from my very unscientific observations and conversations - though some EU countries have started the procedure to ban gavage) shake their heads at the very notion of the government trying to ban its consumption.

The best observations on the fois gras conflict in the U.S. that I have read is in from Incanto, an Italian restaurant in San Francisco (via Elise’s Twitter). Note that I think it’s the best partly because I wholly agree with the opinions expressed there. (It’s also quite well written, as are their past newsletters, which you can also read on their site. It’s the first time the quality of writing on their web site or newsletter has made me want to visit a restaurant!)

The point made there that I agree with the most is this: I think there is far too much preaching and pushing of ones opinion on other people going on in the food world. It is one thing to decide for yourself, and possibly for your family, how and what you eat. It’s quite another to try to force others to do so, particularly through government legislation. I tend to be sort of left of center when it comes to politics, but some of the tactics used by people and organizations who have a particular food agenda makes me want to shy away from them - even if I actually share their particular stance on a food issue.

As humans, we have to eat to survive, and except for a very few people, we rely on other people to grow or make the food for us. It is good to keep a vigilant eye on the process by which food reaches our tables, but “your way” is not always the “right way” for everyone. We all have to make our own decisions, and hopefully we can continue to do so.

Meat and the environment

maki — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:38:59 +0200

Today is Green Day, and we’re being bombarded with Green Day Sales, reminders as to how Green this company or the other is, and so on. It’s a big topic nowadays.

I feel that the things that we can do as individuals is getting increasingly muddy. For a while it seemed like biofuels were a solution, but now the huge demand for plant-based fuels may be causing serious food shortages. Food miles and locavorism may not be as clear cut a solution either. Michael Pollan says we should start growing our own vegetables, but that’s not possible for a lot of people, for space or time reasons.

Is there something relatively easy we can do? Sort of. Meat has a huge carbon footprint, so eating less of it may do more than pretty much anything else in terms of slowing the process of global warming.

When you see the photo above, what does it make you think of? Until a few years ago, I would have thought “Mmm, meat heaven!”. Nowadays I’m not as enthusiastic. As I have gradually reduced the amount of meat in my diet, I’ve found that I enjoy meat less and less. As a matter of fact, the meat products that I do enjoy are ones that have been cooked or prepared in such a way that the essential meatiness of the meat is changed or masked. I still love things like sausages, ham and dried meats - and bacon, of course. When I cook meat, I prefer to use Asian or Japanese methods that mask the gaminess or meatiness. For example, I have a hard time dealing with roast pork with crisp crackling, the way people love to eat pork in Britain and some parts of Germany (it’s a Franconian speciality). The pigginess of the meat is very assertive, and I can’t enjoy it.

On the other hand if pork is prepared as nibuta, with aromatic vegetables, sake and mirin, I love it. And I eat far less of it at a meal than with a typical Western-oriented meal because it’s so richly flavored.

If you’re a dedicated meat lover, the idea of weaning yourself off it may be very difficult to contemplate. One way to do this fairly painlessly may be to switch to eating more Asian food, including Japanese, where meat is used more as a flavoring than the main star, and vegan protein sources have been incorporated as a matter of course for generations. And there’s nothing wrong with an occasional steak or hamburger - just as long as it is occasional.

Something to think about perhaps.

Hold the tuna and the food guilt, please

maki — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:38:29 +0100

This past week the New York Times published another in a series of dire warnings about how dangerous a certain food is, in this case tuna which is supposedly laden with mercury. One of the sources of this recent round is a conservation group called Oceana. There were, of course, rebuttals and counter-claims to this. The Japanese government isn’t all worried because of yet another food scare rash in the U.S.

It isn’t as though we haven’t heard this kind of thing before, whether it’s how dangerous soy is, or whatever.

A couple of thoughts came to mind as I read about this latest scare.

First of all, it’s odd that people are focusing on tuna in sushi. Despite the explosion of sushi popularity worldwide, I would bet anything that the consumption of canned tuna is far higher than as sushi or sashimi. And as that NY Times article itself notes, cooking does not affect the levels of mercury at all. (Most canned tuna is ‘light’ so has less mercury, but it does have a not-insignificant amount.)

But then, sushi is trendier, and a nice piece of raw tuna is much prettier than a boring beige can of the thing.

It also reminded me of a certain regular customer at Sushisay. He would come in at least once a week, sometimes more, sit down at the counter, and order a big plateful of toro sashimi, about 20 pieces, at (depending on market prices) $10 a piece or so. He’d follow that up with several tuna and yellowtail sushi pieces, around $7-$10 pp. (I don’t see yellowtail garnering as much attention; it’s not the star tuna is, and it’s also, you know, beige, but since it is also an oily fish that is higher up on the ocean food chain, I’ve no doubt it also comes with a generous serving of mercury.) Attempts to coax him to try other kinds of sashimi and sushi never amounted to much. He was a good customer of course, but his backside was taking up a precious chair at the counter unnecessarily - if you’re going to sit there you should be prepared to tackle some variety. (I am sure a lot of sushi dilettantes sit at the counter because they’ve heard somewhere that’s the ‘best spot’. It is, but if you’re just ordering a Cooked Sushi Set, go away to that corner table.)

I never talked to him directly, but I was really curious about this. Did he eat all that tuna because he loved it so? Did he do it because of its alleged health benefits? Was he just showing off? (His bill was always astronomical, as you can guess.)

It always annoys me when I see these food scares going around. It seems to reinforce this preoccupation that a lot of people have with the idea of food as medication, good or bad. There was an old science fiction short story by Japanese author Shinichi Hoshi, called “Flavor Radio” (Aji rajio 味ラジオ) about a society where people only ate bland, carefully nutritionally balanced and manufactured bread. Their urge for different flavors in the mouth, since humans are such oral animals, was met by a ‘flavor radio’ that was embedded in a tooth, with constantly changing programming. I think a lot of people would love to jump to a future where such a thing was possible. Many would probably just skip the flavor radio part right now and just eat nutritionally balanced manufactured food, period, right now. You know, those people who down a huge handful of vitamin pills and things every day, or subsist on protein powder drinks.

Of course I am not saying we should not be concerned about food safety. On the other hand people shouldn’t be rushing to wards the latest miracle nutrient either. And above all, moderation is a great idea, especially in eating. Why not try all the different kinds of sushi neta instead of safe old tuna?

But this may actually be good news for those of us who truly love sushi. The biggest danger connected to tuna, especially bluefin (the type that’s most popular for sushi and sashimi) may be that it’s being overfished. If enough half-believers start to stay away from tuna, there’ll be more left for us for a longer time.

So, if you’re eating sushi just because you think it’s ‘healthy’, stop! Go away. Go back to uhm, well what do you go back to these days? Spinach with e.coli? Sprayed apples? Organically produced green beans that aren’t politically correct because they’ve been shipped from a third world nation where people could use the work desperately but think of that long journey to get them to you and the C02 emissions OMG?

Bring on the flavor radio. In the meantime, I think I will stick to moderation and variety, and enjoying how my food actually tastes first and foremost.

Related, tuna porn! All about tuna, an article I wrote for the Sushisay web site back in the day.

Cloned meat and animal products poll results

maki — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 07:09:38 +0100

Thank you to everyone to participated in the cloned meat poll! Here are the somewhat surprising results (which are, of course, very unscientific but interesting anyway).

Total votes cast: 259
The votes for “Will eat cloned meat and other animal products, no problem” and “Will never eat cloned foods, ever” ran neck and neck, with the “Will eat” votes coming out just ahead, 36% to 34%. Another 26% would try cloned meat, with reservations. (The rest of the votes were “other”).

You can see the results represented in a bar graph on the cloned meat poll.

In retrospect maybe it’s not surprising that most people are at least willing to give cloned animal products a try, with most scientific studies telling us that it’s all safe. And keep in mind we are eating quite a lot of cloned or hybrid plant products already - cloning plants by taking cuttings has been a practice for ages, as any gardener would know. I guess there is more squeamishness about cloning sentient mammals, understandably.

As for myself, I think I’m in the “I may try it but I’m skeptical” camp. But I would want there to be clear labelling of meat and other animal products that they came from GM or cloned sources. At the moment that may be the biggest point of contention between producers and consumers, with regulatory agencies caught in the middle.

A new poll: Would you eat food from cloned animals?

maki — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:10:04 +0100

The first poll about chickens (the original question, the actual poll, and the results summarized) was so interesting to me, that I’d like to make polls a semi-regular feature on Just Hungry. I think that polls and the answers to them on difficult issues can help qualify one’s thinking on the subject. So, here is another one for you about on the subject of the ethics of eating. The subject is cloned animals.

Yesterday the The U.S. government approved the sale of food from cloned animals. Here is the Food and Drug Administration’s report. The European Union issued a public call for consultation on the scientific issues regarding food derived from cloned animals. The draft opinion of the agency (link, PDF) is that such food is safe for human consumption.

How do you feel about this? Remember that food from cloned animals would include eggs, milk and milk products as well as meat. Please include your opinions in the comments to the poll too.

Link to poll page

The U.S. government has approved the sale of food from cloned animals and the EU seems to be headed that way - what will you do?

maki — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:44:53 +0100

Saturday morning thoughts no. 1: Chicken poll results

maki — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:52:12 +0100

Here are the results of the Chicken Poll posted earlier this week (go to that post for a nice graphic):

Total votes cast: 326
Almost half (48%) voted for “Free range, organically raised, happy chickens only”. That’s really heartening, though I think that Just Hungry readers may be more conscious of their food choices than the average consumer.
Approximately an equal number of people voted for “buying a reputable brand” and opting out of eating chicken altogether. (19% and 18% respectively).
11% buy whatever is cheapest or on sale. I thought that this number might be higher, since chicken does have a reputation for being an inexpensive meat.

This is a very small sampling and is by no means scientific, but it was very interesting. Thank you to everyone who participated! The voting is now closed, but I’ve left the comments open if you would like to add your voice to the fray.

The question of food ethics: What's your chicken policy?

maki — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:25:41 +0100

It may well be that 2008 is the year when questions of ethics and choice really come to the fore. In the UK, coincidentally or not three major TV programmes on the subject have been airing this week. As I mentioned earlier the BBC is airing a second season (series) of Kill It, Cook It, Eat It, a program about the slaughtering of animals for human consumption. On Channel 4, two heavyweights of the TV cooking world, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Jamie Oliver, are tackling the issue of battery raised chickens. In the U.S. Michael Pollan, author of the seminal The Omnivore’s Dilemma, has a new book out, In Defense Of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto (I haven’t read this yet). Here in Switzerland, the leading supermarket chain stopped selling traditionally raised fois gras, at least in the German speaking parts of the country.

I don’t really have hard-and-fast rules on food. I’m not a diehard locavore, I’m not a ethically-motivated vegan, I buy conventionally farmed produce as well as organic. One food I do have a firm line on is chicken. Ever since I found out in what conditions factory farmed chickens are raised, I have only bought organically raised ‘happy’ chickens and eggs, as I wrote about two years ago. I think that chicken is a sort of bottom line type of food. A lot of people nowadays may be avoiding red meat and pork (is pork a red or white meat? I’m never sure), but they do eat chicken. And even if you don’t eat chicken, you may eat eggs.

So, I’m curious. What are your personal policies when it comes to chicken? I’ ve put up a poll about it - please vote, and tell me your opinion in the comments there.

Link to chicken poll

Chicken: what's your choice?

maki — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:01:07 +0100