Food Ignorance, Confusion and Why the Kitchen is Empty
Tue, Jul 13, 2010
Author: Andrew Gruel (4 Articles)
Andrew Gruel manages Seafood for the Future, a non-profit seafood advisory and promotional program based at the Aquarium of the Pacific in Southern California. Andrew holds a degree in Food Marketing and Culinary Arts from Johnson & Wales University.
A recently published article in the New York Times about genetically modified salmon made me wonder if I was a dogged ideologue. Or rather, are my strong opinions regarding food hindering my ability to see the whole picture? It was my initial reaction to this article about genetically modified protein that made me wonder. I am sure it was similar to the one I imagine everyone would give: “Genetically Modified Salmon!!!—insert gasp here—That’s Horrible”. But after I thought about it, I realized, I am making a judgment based on a science with which I am not too familiar.
It is commonplace to immediately reject certain foods in our country because of the perception attached to it. Many time reactions are perpetuated by a blog, a sensational story about food on the news or because your produce has dirt on it. Using the phrase “farmed” isn’t usually a bad thing for instance, but when referring to fish it is a four letter word. Is there a chance that these rejected products could feed millions of people at a low cost with minimal risk? I suspect that many people—even the ones who campaign against it—are not 100% certain.
Do we really know all the information and science behind these topics, or are we cherry picking reports that support an idealistic and uncompromising solution? And more importantly, why is it universally accepted that this conversation about genetically modified foods is happening behind closed doors as if it were an X-file? What is our vision for innovative research if we can’t encourage scientists to study GMO’s in public?
Knowledge Gap
Every hot-blooded food junkie has an opinion about how our food system should change. On the other hand, the average American couldn’t tell you the difference between corn syrup and Aunt Jemima. Jammed between these two voices is uncertainty, silence, and a legitimate illiteracy about consumption habits.
Rants about food are polarized to include two camps: Those who don’t care about what they eat, and therefore would rather pay less for artificial nutrients, and those who are very aware of the food they eat, and would much rather see a system in which food was, well, food.
The crossfire includes biotechnology, carbon analysis, economics, federal regulation, health and public policy to name a few. Just thinking about it makes me less hungry (and this is a rarity). People are stumped about the food they eat and how to feel about this convoluted talk. Perplexity makes it easy to accept parroted arguments promoting one food’s categorical sovereignty without actually examining the issues. Such ignorance is exemplified by the seemingly universal acceptance of the junk that is being served to children at schools.
Jumping on the Bandwagon
Somehow the disengaged consumer is forced to side with one extreme camp on these divided issues; there is no middle of the road. Either accept the manipulation from the food marketing titans, or protest all genetically modified foods, corn products, grain-fed beef, and farmed fish because someone said they are bad. Consider if the thousands of people who object to eating corn products actually understand why they are doing this.
As for genetically modified foods, does a legitimate two-sided forum and education outreach exist? Is everyone aware of the pros and cons? Drought-resistant gm crops could help to alleviate famine in developing countries, where low rainfall often leads to food shortages. Why are people against farmed salmon when most of the scientific evidence against it is lacking and outdated? How about Carbon Footprint. Is this a savvy term that sounds good at dinner parties or a legitimate argument when supporting your favorite locavore?
What’s the Issue?
Is it really about food, or is it an issue of lifestyle and the ubiquitous rejection of the kitchen?Knowing the US has no distinguishable food culture, maybe these debates are becoming too advanced, polarized and are missing the underlying problem: We (and I mean the majority of the country) don’t spend enough time in the kitchen, learning about food, examining our food system, touching real food, trying fresh vegetables and fruits, examining the basic issues of supply and demand, questioning elementary principals of food distribution. We are detached.
It is a fact that Americans spend less and less time around food, at the market, and ultimately at the dinner table. This minutes-per-day-with-food metric has been on the decline for years. A family dinner routinely consists of a few speed bumps through a fast food joint, and for those harried work and eat types, the “prepared” aisle of the supermarket will suffice. And why are restaurants so busy on Friday and Saturday nights? Shouldn’t this time be spent cooking with friends and family?
Maybe there’s a solution that doesn’t dive right into the deep-end of confusing discourse
Maybe it is time to take a step back and just get people to appreciate real food as more than a commodity. Focus on getting people into the kitchen and show them how simple it is to eat well without guilt. Perhaps Monsanto should try cloning Rachel Ray!
Increasing the Learning Curve
Here are my suggestions:
- Step 1. Start With Kids: Children are the educators for adults. Introduce a food curriculum into our compulsory education that would mirror that of English, social studies, algebra and gym. People will not just know more about where our food comes from, but they will eat better food. In addition, the principal mechanisms of the kitchen can teach kids about following instructions, teamwork, examining what they put into their body (anti-drug message?), and mindfulness of the senses. Food is economics, world trade, ethics, and law. I surely would have done better in my Macro-Econ classes if we were talking about trading food and not micro-processors. Why not stretch to advocate for this to be part of standardized testing as well.
- Step 2. Simplify, Simplify and Simplify a Little More: It is all too confusing. Behind the titles of these unflinching articles is a litany of words and stories that would sedate 99% of Americans. Confusion about good food forces people to McDonald’s. The conversation should function to get people into the kitchen. Show them how simple it is to prepare good food.
- Step 3. Objectivity: Food is steeped in politics. As a result of this, campaigns are established and money flows to sway public opinion—insert vivian krause. Like any educated voter, when examining our food it is essential that we learn about the issues rooted deep within the terroir of conversation.
- Step 4. Food Labeling: If the differences between food products are not on the label, people can not make an educated decision. If one drive is to harness the power of a free market, and let people vote with their fork, the information must be transparent, and the votes counted properly.
- Step 5. Start a Sustainable Tastes Better Campaign: At the end of the day, most people want a high quality product that won’t kill them. If food treated with antibiotics isn’t killing them, and Americans have been living longer lives year after year, why not keep eating these products. Sustainability is becoming a political movement, and politics certainly don’t taste good. So how is it possible convince someone that they should buy sustainably even if they don’t care about the environmental aspects? Show them that it tastes better. Quality equals sustainability.
Tags: Andrew Gruel, Carbon Footprint, Fish Farm, food, Food Systems, GMO's, School Lunches, Sustainability
Great article, and I absolutely mean it.
You certainly left me with food for thought.
One other suggestion you might offer in terms of simplifying choices of healthy food is to point your readers to Seafood for the Future’s magazine, “Inspired CHOICES,” the simple art of choosing and cooking sustainable seafood.
The magazine has a wealth of very helpful information that provides consumers like me with ample insight and information in the daily effort to help navigate through the sea of confusion and clutter when it comes to making simple and healthy food choices.
Here’s a link to the online version of the magazine so that other readers can benefit from a very cool publication: http://seafoodforthefuture.org/inspired_choices/issue_1/
Keep up the good work with your posts and with the work you’re doing with Seafood for the Future.
@Andrew
I do take umbrage at your claim that America has “no distinguishable food culture.”
You really think so? I know of several million chefs, restaurant goers, internationally recognized food guides, barbecue fanatics, various regional food specialists, home cooks, and others who would heartily disagree with you on that point.
America has one of the most diverse and celebrated food cultures in the world, and to deny its existence is both insulting and ignorant.
This is not to say that there are not other fine points made in your article – there are many – but to insult the very people you are trying to help and educate I don’t think is an effective move and comes across as patronizing.
You said that “it is a fact that Americans spend less and less time around food,” but the past four years have actually seen an increase of people cooking meals at home and spending time at the dinner table, though it’s hard to say whether it’s because of economic reasons (not enough money to eat out all the time), or if there is really a change in mentality going on.
Having just spent 6 weeks in Europe – Ireland, France, Italy & Croatia – it seems to me not wrong to say that America – the United States – has at least a very limited food culture. BBQ notwithstanding, the food of my childhood, growing up in the 50s and 60s in the Washington, DC suburbs to a solidly middle class family, is the food I all but refuse to eat these days. The food culture of other countries is what we seek when we go to restaurants – Italian, Mediterranean, Asian, French. If the U.S. has a traditional food culture – please describe it.
Laura–
Your comment got me thinking about whether the US does indeed have a limited food culture. You asked for a description of traditional US food culture, so here goes. I am making a list of things I was exposed to growing up between Chicago and Wisconsin, as well as traveling a bit about the States. Some of them may be regional dishes not found elsewhere, while many may have a more national reach.
There are certainly many US foods we think of as junk food, processed food, or fast food, but many people also make them at home. I’m thinking of burgers, hot dogs (Vienna beef in Chicago), Chicago-style Italian beef, popcorn, Chicago-style deep dish or stuffed pizza, milk shakes. A fair number of the “Chinese” or “Mexican” dishes sold in US restaurants are US inventions.
Then there are a lot of desserts that you don’t find in other countries. Pies (pecan, sweet potato, pumpkin, apple, blueberry, rhubarb, elderberry), strawberry shortcake, chocolate chip cookies, candied yams, crackerjack, maple syrup, Frango mints, mint chocolate chip ice cream.
The US has lots of fruits and veggies that hardly exist elsewhere. Squash, pumpkins, blueberries, cranberries, raspberries, sweet potatoes. Also, hunting is forbidden in many parts of the world, so I would say that the venison, pheasant, bison, wild duck, wild turkey, freshwater fish, etc. that we eat in the US is also quite unique to the country. Rainbow trout, which is now raised and served worldwide, is originally from the western US.
For main courses, typical US things I grew up eating are honey-baked ham, meatloaf, breakfast bacon, breakfast sausage, pancakes, honey-mustard chicken or pork, bratwurst, sauerbraten, Thanksgiving turkey, stuffing, baked potato, potato salad, peanut butter and jelly, lamb chops with mint jelly, casseroles, macaroni and cheese.
I’ve never seen chicken-fried steak, hominy grits, fried green tomatoes, cornbread, pulled pork, or many other southern dishes cooked outside the US. Even our cooked greens are not cooked the same way elsewhere.
US beverages include root beer, sarsparilla, lots of cocktails, California wines (Illinois was the nation’s leading wine producer for a while in the 19th century!), and the hundreds of micro- and not-so-micro-brewed beers in the US (in Wisconsin we have big guys like Miller, medium guys like Point Special, micro brews like the Capital brewery in Madison, former micro-brews that sold out to bigger companies like Leinenkugel’s).
Anyway, this is but a small sampling of what one person grew up eating in the US. It would be interesting if someone wrote a post about the native food culture (or lack thereof) in the US. Kenji, Andrew, I’m looking your way.
Another note–the existence of sophisticated food cultures in other countries doesn’t mean that that is what people eat every meal, every day. In Spain, for instance, not everyone is making El Bulli-style cuisine in their kitchens. People sometimes eat junk food, and sometimes really special traditional dishes like paella, but mainly people fix a dozen or so go-to meals in their homes, just like in the States.
Greg,
You reply made me hungry. Honestly, thanks for that. I don’t want to get into a whole new discussion here, but I am sensing that we all have differing opinions of what constitutes a food culture. This is not a bad thing, and in many cases culture is undefined.
For me, when I refer to a culture surrounding food, I am referring to traditions, stories, memories and routine that lives in the “kitchen”. The amount of time that we spend in the kitchen for example. In theory our time spent out of the kitchen could be our food culture.
A bit about my food culture: I grew up in a household with at least 6 microwaves. We would burn through them at a rate of 1 a year, and at times they would pile up in the garage like used tires. On Christmas morning I was always awakened to that sexy scent of frozen Sara Lee pastries rolling around on a crusted lazy susan, inside our newest microwave (we called it the sonic steamer). That little nugget of breakfast ecstacy went from frozen to foxy in 35 seconds. And eggs? Forget it, I didn’t realize that eggs actually came from a shell until my first mischeif night.
We used to fight over that last drop of margarine or frozen pot pie. Jesus, we were the family in the old “Leggo my Eggo” commercials. But what was I missing? I didn’t eat fish until I was 20 years old. The idea of cooking or eating food outside the fast food norm was a joke. I thought that ketchup was a daring novelty. I was 18 years old ordering pasta with butter off the kid’s menu during Easter Brunch.
This was my food culture, and selfishly I think is similar to many Americans. So when I travel to other countries and see how much of their day is devoted to spending time in the kitchen or dining with family I realize that maybe food is not a part of the American culture. For example, in the US when someone has a special occasion everyone gathers at a local restaurant and celebrates. In most other countries these experiences are full of food, literally.
So to me a food culture is not represented by a subscription to a magazine, enrollment at a 30 K a year culinary school or a NY Time’s foodie blog.
So I use this opportunity to conduct some market research and inquire about anyone else’s interpretation of a food culture.
Andrew–
I think you’re right to say that your and Laura’s experience of lots of frozen or processed food is very common in the US, and you might be onto something when you speak of many US people’s holding special events at restaurants instead of at home. But I guess I wanted to point out with my comment that that’s not the only thing going on in the States. And I’m not referring to foodies or culinary students or whatever other cultural subgroups we might deem inauthentic. I think there have been and are still a fair number of normal people that do still center their family life around the kitchen, not as some radical, alternative lifestyle choice, but simply because that’s what they’ve always done in their family. It might not be the majority of people, but it’s a group that exists, and it would perhaps behoove us to look to this group of people if we desire to expand a healthy food culture.
I think the generalized projection of a certain consumerist suburban lifestyle as the norm in our country may lead us to believe that this represents the totality of the US experience. And there’s some justification for that. I grew up in a city of 3 million people surrounded by suburbs of 6 million people, so understandably a lot of the media representation of a “normal” life had nothing to do with my own experience. But it’s important to remember that a commonly-shared experience, even the experience of a majority of people, shouldn’t make us forget about the existence of other ways of living.
So my take is that we’re in agreement about what constitutes a food culture. It’s just that we grew up in different food cultures!
Andrew & Greg – I think we are all on the same page, really. I guess I’m sensitive these days to the food culture I grew up with which I kind of see as a scam now. Convincing Americans to eat processed foods and turn farms into monocultures really raises my hackles. I grew up eating reasonably healthy foods – I did not eat potato chips for breakfast on the way to school, for instance. But an ice cream sandwich as my sole sustenance at lunch? For sure. Fries at the Boardwalk every summer? Of course. The number of boxes of Cheez Its I’ve put away is uncountable. But until I became a Michael Pollan junkie, I did not appreciate the cycle of life that is sun, grass, cow poop, bugs and chickens. And I find that I want to eat food with real ingredients now. Not chemicals. Anyway, all your points are very well taken. And, in full disclosure, I don’t cook a meal beyond steel cut oats. My husband is the cook in our family!!!
Greg, Kenji and Anonymous,
This is great because it brings me full circle to the original thesis of this article. Keniji, I now want to retract my statement about America not having a food culture, because clearly we do. Just these few replies have proven this. Our food culture, however, is to some extent about ignorance, and forces us to make food one of the lesser priorities on our “agenda”, hence the accpetance of fast food, frozen food, tv dinners, and dining out in almost every occasion. (side note: we also look at chefs as deities in our culture, and to be fair, most of them aren’t really that up to date on these food issues either. Look at who funds these culinary institutions? Why doesn’t CIA, Johnson & Wales and any other culinary school only buy local products, sustainable seafood, and grass raised beef?)
See, it is easy for me, a culinary school graduate and self acclaimed Food Fighter, to recognize the parallels between our obsession with fast food, agri-business, subsidies etc….all the potential causes of what Michael Pollan would refer to as symptoms of a western diet. But for those of us that don’t spend time around food, making it a centerpiece of all external cultural associations, food is nothing more than a commodity, almost a condiment for life (was that a stretch?).
My call to action here is about not just accepting arguments regarding food because they “seem” right or some sensationalist claim was made, but instead to make food a topic of conversation. Allow our culture as innovative Americans to emulsify with food and the food experience. To use the cliche, “learning where our food comes from”.
That was my reply post above. I didn’t mean to go anonymous! Laura
Kenji,
You are correct, to deny the existence of one was probably too bold of a statement, certainly mark me down to a B + for that one. If I could rephrase that comment I would suggest that one of our only unified food cultures is a fast food culture.
I would love to see some solid numbers that support the statements that American’s have been spending more time in the kitchen over the past 4 years.
Andrew,
Here’s some sources. I could find more if I had more time:
NYT in 2008 reports that 60% of people surveyed cook more at home, eat out less:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/dining/10home.html
Here’s the quote:
“Americans have been spending more time in their kitchens since the economy soured and food prices began to rise this year. About 60 percent surveyed in July by Mintel International, a market research firm, said they were cooking more often and dining out less frequently. Marcia Mogelonsky, a senior researcher at Mintel, said that as the economy has worsened, that figure has probably increased.”
Similarly, in 2008, there was a 32% rise in applicants to the Culinary Institute of America over the year before, and similar rises in the last couple of years (and I don’t have numbers, but from talking to teachers and administrators at other culinary schools, they’ve all been seeing a similar phenomenon).
The magazine I worked for – Cook’s illustrated, which focuses on recipes for home cooks – saw an increase in readership of over 30% in the last four years, and that’s at a time when other magazines that focus more on reviews and restaurant-style food are foundering or closing completely.
I’m sure there are other examples out there.
I’ve no doubt that fast food is also seeing a similar increase in sales and that most likely only fine dining is feeling the crunch with the economy, but my point was that people are still cooking, and by some measures, more so than ever before.
Thanks Kenji,
I am still skeptical as I don’t think enrollment at CIA is an indicator of how many people cook for themselves, especially when all of these graduates are going to work in a professional kitchen, thus indicating a higher demand for staff in “outside” dining scenarios.
I also wonder about the varying definitions of “cooking at home”. Does this entail a tv dinner or a real meal. The NY Times does a great job of reporting on the new energy behind food concerns, but I think that demographic is a bit confined to the coasts. We can certainly split hairs about the why’s and why nots of a few percentage points from one survey to the next, but I don’t think it is in question that as a country we food is certainly not our focus.
Possibly my vision is a bit too idealistic in that I imagine a scenario in which farmer’s markets are all the rage, csa’s, cfa’s, etc, but this isn’t the case.
…And bigger is better, that goes along with the fast food culture.
Andrew–
Good thoughts, as always. Two insights from my mother:
First off, she worked all her life in the textbook publishing industry. It sounds like an honorable trade, but starting around the 90s it became more politicized. Since all publishing companies are trying to sell their product, and since Texas is the only state (or at least the biggest) that buys one textbook series in a given subject for the entire state, instead of letting each municipality decide for itself, all the textbook companies cater to Texas. They want that big sale. The problem is that, knowing this, there exist a lot of lobbying groups in Texas that want things like the elimination of any short stories with references to the Devil or Halloween. An extreme example is that an oil industry group demanded that any “pro-environment” passages be stricken from reading books. All this is to say that even your common-sense suggestions like a food-centered school curriculum, food labeling, and campaigns to promote sustainable food, run into your point number 5–political resistance from powerful groups.
The second lesson from my mom is that she runs cooking classes for formerly homeless youth that are getting back on their feet. She gives lessons like “10 things to have on-hand in the kitchen”. They’re things like onions, ground beef, tomatoes, rice, flour tortillas, that you can combine in different ways to make a cheap, nourishing meal. My mom’s classes are by no means focused on organic or sustainable or local, but at this point in the US’s (de-)evolution regarding food, it’s a big step just to teach people that there are these things called ingredients that you can use to make food. Maybe it’s the first step in promoting sustainable food–getting people to eat food as opposed to packaged products, even if the food is grown in California or Guatemala. Once people are back in the kitchen, then they can start worrying about things like local, pesticide-free, fresh, etc.
Greg,
Pretty interesting story about the text books. Knowing how politicized this is, and how difficult it is to make a huge change such as a proposed “food curriculum”, I would encourage private groups to try and manage this project.
I think your point about getting people away from packaged products as a first step is essential. We can’t let the perfect become the enemy of the good. Just getting people to associate food with raw ingredients is a needed step. Do you have a website for your mom’s cooking classes? I love that idea of 10 things to have on hand in the kitchen.
Andrew–
Give me your email and I’ll send you my mom’s class syllabus as an attachment. It was not a big thing, so there’s no website or anything.
Greg
Awesome, thanks
andrewgruel@gmail.com
Hit them in their pocket books or their children’s health. That’s the way to an American consumer’s heart.
I’m an individual who’s background is Middle Eastern grew up with the best fresh natural cooked food from Turkish/Syrian/Palestinian/ Lebanese heritage besides worked for a long time in the Gulf area who have complete different food such blend of Indian and Oriental. I just want to elaborate on the comment of Kenji Lopez-Alt that first of all WHO is the real American, secondly what you find in 90 % if not almost all restaurants with different culture whether it is Italian/ Middle Eastern or others are mostly commercial what is also called for tourists. I myself found the best Lebanese restaurant after back home, which people never cared to eat out, considered for luxury was in South Africa.
I lived about 30 years between California and Florida, worldwide traveler, and till this day I hardly see a real understanding to cooking because one very important aspect as I was an educator WE don’t pay attention to teach or enhance our children senses of smelling, tasting and touching which is very essential in cooking.
Regarding Cooks Illustrated, I myself canceled my subscription after they kept sending me advertisement which I request not to finding that I’m getting the same recipes of 10 years earlier when it was first published then most of their recommendation (tests) turned to be their sister or affiliated companies. To be fair to such magazine – most of the magazines are all repetition or copy from each other’s adding or twisting the info, which doesn’t help consumers.
When I pick up a book especially if it is about Middle Eastern food, I check either hummus or tabbouleh to know if it is authentic and I hardly found 1-2 in 100 written recipes. Like making yogurt is the easiest task to do BUT people tend to be lazy not knowing that cooking is kind of therapeutic/ social/ artistic and healthier too. Well, I said my silly comment lately: Even I’m hurt with this economy, I’m glad to see a force on some people to start learning to cook or care for their health.
At the end it is all about marketing, making money and it is so scary when I go in the store don’t know which one to trust and consumers don’t read or if they see more than 4-6 basic ingredients to STOP taking that box or any other food to their cart.
The past 25 years (retired now) called every and each manufacturer whom their customer service don’t know a thing about their own stuff NOT for myself as much as advocate for others safety.
Andrew said: “I would love to see some solid numbers that support the statements that American’s have been spending more time in the kitchen over the past 4 years.”
We can’t tell how many since the food bloggers are world wide people and you will find that many blogs refer to some magazines or copy others blogs. It is nice to see such interest then I discover most of them for the photography rather than the healthy aspect of the food.
Lastly, I’m glad that FDA is kind of doing better job lately, which amaze me how many recalls we have daily. IF consumers wake up or read these links I bet you a change will happen faster.
Note: What scared me today buying cherry over sized than the usual. I asked is it possible genetically modified……Do we have to shop with a test kit ☺
Another great contribution, Andrew.
Regarding your opening about genetically modified (GM) salmon and the usual reaction of a consumer, this is the result of ignorance, and fear of the unknown, as well as fear mongering by certain special interest groups. The story behind the discovery that led to the GM salmon is really interesting and illustrates the unexpected path of scientific research discovery.
Dr Garth Fletcher and colleagues at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada, were trying to solve the problem of ’super-chill’ where salmon in farms were being turned into ‘fishcicles’ when the water temperature in the ocean around the farms dropped too low. Looking at other fish species that did not experience this phenomenon, they discovered that these fish possessed an anti-freeze protein (that is the ‘AF Protein’ in the early name of the company that is trying to commercialize this discovery). This anti-freeze protein protected the fish from freezing solid in very cold water.
Dr Fletcher tried to insert the anti-freeze gene that created this protein into Atlantic salmon to see if this would transfer the protection to the salmon. What he discovered is that this gene insertion resulted in the fish growth hormone complex being switched on full-time, meaning that the fish grew year round, not just in the spring and summer when it was triggered by longer photoperiod (daylight). Normally, salmon growth is controlled by the length of daylight; growth is triggered in the spring as the days begin to get longer and stops in the fall when days get shorter. What the new protein did was keep the fish growing through the fall and winter so that it reached its mature size and weight in a much shorter period of time. This protein insertion in no way alters the flesh of the salmon, which is what we eat; it is the same as other salmon. The only difference is that the GM salmon continues to grow throughout the year and reaches its market size sooner.
So, forget all the horror stories you have read about ‘Frankenfish’, which have all been written to scare consumers off. Instead, do your own homework as a consumer; find out more info from reputable sources, not the legions of ‘consumer advocacy’ groups whose real objectives are to promote special interests.
Thanks Andrew for writing about the need for people to educate themselves. But remember, education takes work and requires effort to get to the credible information. Don’t just believe what advocacy groups tell you, or what you see/read in the popular media – that is laziness. You need to talk to a wide variety of people and read from a wide variety of sources. That is what scientists do, and is the only way to learn how to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Cheers,
Dave
Dave,
This is great, thank you so much for this information. I think this is so important for people to know when evaluating this product. I have been incredibly disappointed lately with the media and special interest group’s attempt to use the contentious nature of this particular conversation to further their campaign against farmed salmon.
I was at an event the other night, actually a panel on sustainable seafood, and someone asked about farm raised salmon. First the panel members started to compare it against wild pacific salmon. I am not sure that people realize these are two totally separate fish, different species and should not be compared as apples to apples. Right after this they said that the next step for farmed salmon is genetic modification and told the story of the NY Times article. This made people leverage all of their negative associations between GMO’s into farmed salmon, once again not recognizing these are two totally separate conversations.
Andrew
Dave and Andrew, the consumer advocacy groups are there to protect the interests of the consumers, and yes, most are biased toward their own agendas. But, businesses who invest millions of dollars in fish farming are going to do anything to protect their own interests. One look at the history of pollution, abuse, and genetic monopoly in the large-scale food industries and one cannot be surprised that there is a trust gap. Look at the CEO’s language in that NYT article. He’s not helping to foster trust.
I am a chef and I’ve been reading and talking to people for years. The information out there is very confusing. What it comes down to for me is who I can feel good about and who I can trust to do their best for the environment and the welfare of the fish and the consumer. With that in mind, I buy very little farmed fish.
If you have specific companies who think are leaders and websites you trust, I would really appreciate the links.
Thank you –Jason
Jason,
You are correct in pointing out that when these conversations happen behind closed doors, it feeds the mistrust, and I have been disappointed by the approach taken by the CEO in that article to not help educate people more on this issue.
You make a great point about trust and really knowing the product and the face behind it. This is what we need more of, instead of just jumping on the internet in order to learn about food.
In terms of farmed seafood I feel this same way. While I support farmed seafood in general, as in a wonderful controlled and innovative way to reduce pressure off wild fish stocks, I do promote particular brands that I know more about. Farms that I have been to, toured, met the owners, and assessed the operation.
I will compile a list of a few farms and get back to you. I am sure that Dave can help in that area as well.
Thanks
Jason, in reference to the NYT article, you said, “Look at the CEO’s language in that NYT article. He’s not helping to foster trust.” I must be missing something because I did not notice any language issue; what was in there that triggered your concern?
Regarding not buying farmed fish, what is your reason? If everything else on your plate tonight is farmed, why not fish?
At one time, in the very distant past (agriculture was develop[ed 10,00-15,000 years ago) everything we ate was wild but that has not been the case for a long time. Domestication of plants and animals is unique to human civilization and is why we are here today to have this discussion. Wthout farming, frankly, the human population would never have reached the number it is today (and some say that would be a good thing for numerous reasons) and it is highly probable that you and I and many others would never have been born. It is thanks to farming that we are here. And it is important to remember that agriculture, and aquaculture, are continuously developing, evolving, and hopefully progressing.
Hi Dave,
Two excerpts from the article that concern me:
“Mr. Stotish of AquaBounty said his company was not against voluntary labeling, but the matter was not in its hands because it would only be selling fish eggs to fish farms, not grown salmon to the supermarket.”
Here he is using language to wash his hands of the engineering his company is doing and of the fact that he cannot control the conditions under which the fish will be raised.
“Our fish is identical in every measurable way to the traditional food Atlantic salmon,” Mr. Stotish said. “If there’s no material difference, then it would be misleading to require labeling.”
Here Mr. Stotish is qualifing what he says, which leads one to believe that he is avoiding a discusion of the differences. He should be teaching us about the science and being open about it.
My issue with this is that Trust is the biggest issue with farmed seafood. We have to be able to trust these industries to not harm the environment and to take responsibility for their processes.
“Regarding not buying farmed fish, what is your reason? If everything else on your plate tonight is farmed, why not fish? ” you ask.
That is because I trust the farmers that I buy from. I know how they grow the vegetables and the animals. I know how they organise their farm’s systems. They are responsible and take leadership rolls in promoting responsibility in others. If I don’t like how they raise food or I don’t think they do enough to improve our food systems, I don’t buy from them. That is where most farmed fish still lies. (No pun intended.)I don’t know of a closed containment salmon farm, but I would love to meet one. Of the following farm methods, I have concern about the posibility of the first four to cause damage to the surounding environment.
-conventional net pen;
-floating, closed-confinement systems with rigid walls;
-floating, closed-confinement systems with flexible walls;
-land-based flow-through system; and
-a land-based reuse system.
Business should be open about the pluses and minuses and open about what they do. Nobody has to be perfect, but they do have to be constantly striving to improve themselves and the world around them. The evolution of national and international food business has been very Darwinian in its aproach to self preservation. “What a book a devil’s chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horridly cruel works of nature.” Darwin’s quote sounds like industrial food. We need industry with compasion and a sense of social responsibility.
I feel positive about the roll science and research can play in the food systems we have. But I am ambivalent about the large scale food industry. We need them if we are going to make real change. Because we need them, we have to be able to trust them.
Jason
Hi Andrew, I agree with your article, mostly. I take exception to the food culture issue, of course. The USA is a huge country and as with Italy, for example, each region has its own specific dishes that define their cuisine. And within each of those regions, economic and social strata each have their own dedication to cooking in the home. This is where I think your suggestions are well made and on the mark. The biggest issue we have is a political one. Labeling, school lunches, food and nutrition in the schools, and a Sustainability Tastes Good program could all be promoted by the federal gov’t if their was enough popular support. But regulation, transparency, and objective information is the more difficult challenge.
Thanks for the article, it is certainly full of food for thought. – JB
Jason,
To touch on your point about the govrnment promoting healthy school lunches, sustainability, etc. I do think they need to assist in the promotion, however, when it comes to the management of these “culinary resources” time has proven that the government clearly has failed. They are good at throwing money towards more school lunches, yet they continue to allow crappy school lunches to be served.
The Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act, an $8 billion plan to improve the accessibility and quality of school lunches, passed last week in the House’s Education and Labor Committee. The bill essentially increases the amount of money that is being spent on school lunches, yet it does nothing to protect these children from the poison in these lunches. I really don’t trust the government to be involved in these food decisions.
Depends. At some point an administration will have to promote an overarching program. Consider AIDS. After a period of public argument we as a country eventually came together to solve this international epidemic. If we can educate and get popular support for the fact that obesity and diabetes are epidemic, the growing age of farmers and increasing acreage of farms, importance of biodiversity, anything that works, we could get a national and international initiative begun.
Or we could look at American health reform or financial reform and the efforts of any administration don’t look as promising. So, ya, who knows what we can expect. But, I think the People’s oversight will eventually bring about change. I hope so.
JB
Jason,
While I do echo a sentiment of disappointment regarding the CEO’s response in that article, it is for slightly different reasons. In general I feel as if he lost his opportunity to educate people on a: the safety of the product b: the fact that it should be seen as a break-through in our desire to feed the global appetite, and c: his willingness to educate the public on the discovery of this procedure in the first place, as Dave did for us above.
In terms of your rejection of farmed fish, I implore you to consider a few thoughts. First, I feel as if many people are letting the perfect ruin the good in this conversation. You say that you have concerns over the effects of the aforementioned farming practices on the eco system. Please consider this, wild capture fisheries have been destroying the environment for years. Even the most environmentally sensitive fishing practices, those that come from fisherman you trust, cause significant damage to the environment and are most likely drawing from a stock that is below its sustainable biomass.
I notice that you have served Alaskan Salmon at your restaurant. Did you know that over 40% of the “wild salmon” that comes out of alaska starts in hatcheries and are raised in floating net pens? Check out this link: http://seagrant.uaf.edu/map/aquaculture/index.html
I am not asking chefs like yourself to only serve farmed seafood. I personally feel as if in a restaurant like yours, it is amazing that you can feature the local delicacies from people with whom you have a relationship (btw can you send one of those Maine crab rolls out to LA?) however, I do look to educated chefs like yourself to help teach people about our food system. It is important that people realize how important it is for everyone to consume healthy fish. This includes people of all financial backgrounds. So while they may never be able to afford a meal at a nice restaurant, they can still enjoy the health benefits of a responsibly farmed piece of seafood. What are the other options for the world’s hungry? McDonald’s? KFC? Cutter Canner unfriendly beef?
It is unrealistic to assume that small farmers are going to be able to feed the world’s hungry. However, “smaller” farms can dominate. It is realistic to assume though that we can create a food system that focuses on balancing our need for high quality nutrients with our need to maintain environmental integrity. Compromise. Not letting the perfect ruin the good. If we unabashedly reject farmed seafood, we will never be capable of regulating it here in the US and instead we will continue to blindly import questionable products from overseas.
You are 100% about the trust part. If there is one message that I could get across to chefs and diners, it is to buy from people you trust, farmers you trust. I assure you though that it will be much easier for 9 out of 10 chefs to visit a fish farm than it will be to go out on a commercial fishing vessel. Not that I don’t trust fisherman, but I will say, after reading through and being a part of DNA testing of fish sold in the market and through purveyors (and seeing how much is mislabeled), it is easy to stretch trust when working within the seafood distribution chain.
To your last paragraph. I agree 100%, well said.
Andrew, good point. Don’t let the perfect ruin the good. I just hope the good are making the best choices that they can. Do you think initiatives like this
http://www.seafoodchoices.org/whatwedo/GRI_workshops.php
are helping? What do you think I (and other chef/consumers) should use as a resource?
I have the same concerns with my wild caught fishermen. I buy from the guys I know and trust. And affordable seafood is a challenge for us too. We need farmed fish to work for lots of reasons.
Thanks again for writing a great post.
Great post!
When people start cooking at home again- not just as pretentious exercise but as an integral part of the meaning in their lives– sustainability will be easier to manage. If you are actually taking responsibility for feeding your family the only result can be a demand for better food. Our foods cost and its value will be more easily seen and felt.