What do the movies Alien, Jurassic Park, and Robocop have in common? Other than being examples of science fiction masterpieces in my childhood eyes, they all portray evil organizations acting without regulations or concern for public safety.
Unfortunately this is not just a fictional theme but a current issue in the United States and around the world. In the events leading up to the present day, main companies supplying most of the nation’s food demand have growingly become more powerful, and more careless toward the wellbeing of consumers. What is at stake here in the United States is the increasing loss of national health as these large companies unsafely increase yields, and cut costs which we then pay for, in too many cases with our lives. All’s not lost however, there is still hope for the consumer, surprisingly, it is the consumer.
One of the ways that these companies have recklessly increased their bottom line (profits) has been the introduction of cut cost through altering the dietary habits of the animals we eat. Before the American food industry was tainted with the focus of costs and increasing yields. Even before we relinquished farming too large corporations, cows only consumed grass. Shocking to believe I know. However, in this current age, corn, a much cheaper alternative to free grazing is now the number one source of the feed for the beef, chicken, pork industry and it is now being introduced to fish. Now cutting cost is not a bad thing, and the US government has made through its legislation, corn so cheaply available that is stands to reason that it could be a equitably great alternative. The problem is this cutting has caused consequences, and it has only gotten worse.
Allen Trenkle, a Ruminant Nutrition Expert explains in a documentary by Robert Kenner, Food Inc., “Cows evolved on consuming grass, and there is some research the indicates a high corn diet results in E. Coli that is Acid-Resistant.” Allen continues “These would be the more hurtful E. Coli.” Allen makes a good point in the last quote when he discusses the, “more hurtful E.Coli.” The fact is, by changing diets to more a cost focused means and not based on nutrition, has unleashed and continue to unleash dangerous strains of E. Coli.
Corn is not the only cause of dietary issues forced on consumers by the food industry, and not nearly as disturbing as the findings of Consumer Reports. In an article by Consumer Reports entitled, “You are what they eat,” the author illustrates the feeding and medication of the meat industry. The primary focus of this article is to provide readers with the details of the diets of animals raised for eating. It is evident that the dieter habits of beef, pork, chicken and fish have been altered greatly and far beyond what is natural. One such point is the feeding of processed chicken feathers and feces categorized as “rendered animal by-products” to cows, and even fish. Furthermore, Robert Lawrence, M.D., Chairman of a National Academy of Sciences Committee was quoted in the article saying “I was shocked to learn that every years in the U.S. 11 Billion pounds of animal fat is recycled into animal feed”. Combining the meat industries in this way has promoted the spread of illness in poultry, to beef and other animals within the industry.
How have these companies been able to make these changes? Where is the government oversight to prevent these kinds of careless business decisions? One of the big sources leading to the relinquishing of control to these companies starts in our nation’s government. “For years during the Bush administration the Chief of staff at the USDA was the former Chief Lobbyist to the beef industry in Washington…” said Eric Schlosser in the documentary Food Inc. This documentary was directed by Robert Kenner, with the intent to unveil the actions of our current food industry and how they have, and continue to alter what we consume. Eric Schlosser also points out that, “The head of the FDA was the former executive VP of the National Food Processors Association.”
What was the outcome of the instances like these two? Marion Nestle, a Professor and author on nutrition and food safety points out just how incapable the regulatory agencies like the USDA and FDA have become. In her book, Resisting Food Safety Nestle states how “35 separate laws administered by 12 agencies housed in six cabinet-level departments.” Nestle continues, “At best a structure as fragmented as this one would require extraordinary efforts to achieve communication.” This issue of communication is outlined in great detail by Nestle as she explains the dizzying lines of jurisdiction between the USDA and FDA.
An example of just how poorly agencies are able to communicate let alone agree on standards comes from Consumer Reports. The FDA allows the use of a drug called Roxarsne (3-Nitro), which is placed in non-organic feed for the purpose of killing microbes. This drug contains arsenic in a form less toxic to humans and deemed below the threshold of cancer causing. Although concerning, what is interesting about this case is that the FDA/USDA have a higher toleration for arsenic levels in chicken meat and livers, than EPA allows in water. In fact, by EPA standards some of the levels found in chicken liver could cause neurological damage to young children when consumption exceeds 2 ounces of liver a week.
Historically the organic movement has been seen as the one fighting for improved government regulations. However, this issue is felt by more than just those opposed to the use of synthetic elements in food production. Blake Hurst, a third generation farmer, volunteer member of the Missouri Farming Bureau discusses and advocates for improvements in farming. He states, in his article Organic Illusions, “It is the position of the critics that you just can’t trust the government on these issues, which may indeed be the case.” The “critics” in his quote are referring to those against conventional, non-organic insecticide, and the issue of regulation of chemical mixtures used to promote the protection of produce in the fields. Although Hurst is arguing against organic methods of farming, he acknowledges the concern that the government is not properly vetting what is allowed to be sprayed on our food.
If the regulatory bodies are so badly fragmented, have the wrong people in charge, and overall cannot be trusted, who do consumers turn to for change? Who has the power to stop these companies from perverting the food industry more?
John Mackey co-CEO of Whole Foods presents a very intriguing answer to that question. In his article “Conscious Capitalism,” John addresses the anti-corporate movements and the Hollywood “evil” appearance that large companies seem to carry. John points out that there exists a voluntary exchange between the consumer and the company. He states, “If consumers are unhappy with the price, the service or the selection at Whole Foods Market, they are free to shop at competitors.” This is the source of the power consumers have to change companies. When consumers make a choice not to buy from a particular company, it can cause a ripple that turns into a tidal wave of change. It begins with consumer choice, which will start affecting the company’s profits.
In Food Inc., Tony Airoso, the Chief Dairy Purchaser for Walmart states, “It is a pretty easy decision to try to support things like organic. It’s all based on what the customer wants.” This idea doesn’t just apply to organic foods, but to consumer conscious conventional foods as well. Although this is the best answer to the current problems within the food industry, the companies question know this. Eric Schlosser states in Food inc., “There is a deliberate veil. This curtain that’s dropped between us and where our food is coming from.”
In order to change the food industry for the better, we must have more informers and supporters, more farmers willing to speak up, and more people like Robert Kenner and Eric Schlosser bringing these issues to light. The more people know about what they are eating, or what the true cost is to what we are buying, the more we will see change. Furthermore, we need alternative producers, local farmers and garden growers, supported by local purchasers. The cost to enter the food market is very low. Sure you can’t produce on the levels that established companies can, but you can do your part in undercutting the profits of these reckless companies. There is hope for the American consumer, and it is the American consumer.