This is the fourth in a series of guest posts from author and farmer Ben Hewitt of Cabot, Vermont. Ben’s newest book, Making Supper Safe, is due out in June 2011. Thank you, Ben, for these thoughtful posts on a challenging, complex issue.
Having spent three posts doing my level best to convince you that the issue of foodborne pathogens is but a short chapter in the story of food safety, it only seems fair that I offer my definition of “safe food.”
It does seem reasonable that we demand food that is free of the pathogens that can cause acute illness and even death. Still, as I’ve noted, I think we need to accept that all of our actions, including eating, harbor a degree of risk. We all know that traffic accidents claim between 30,000 and 40,000 Americans annually, yet most of us continue to drive. I think the reason it’s so hard to accept that our food might cause acute illness or death is that we see ourselves as innocent victims, rather than participants in our nourishment. I believe this is a view that we should all work to change.
I also believe that an honest definition of “safe food” would include the chronic disease and related death associated with the quality and types of foods that now prevail in our nation. The reasons for this rapid evolution are too numerous and complex for a blog post, but there’s no doubt that the sad and largely unspoken truth about our food is that it doesn’t need pathogenic bacteria to kill us: It does just fine on its own.
I think a well-considered definition of “safe food” would account for how that food is grown and produced, with consideration of how these practices affect our health and environment. The issue of drug resistant bacteria associated with meat production is one example; so too are accepted practices for large-scale commodity agriculture, which is rapidly eroding our nation’s endowment of topsoil and clean water. If a production methodology threatens future generations’ ability to feed themselves, then it can hardly be called “safe.”
One thing that’s rarely mentioned in the context of food safety is food rights. As some of you may know, the FDA has stated that “There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food,” and “Plaintiffs’ assertion of a ‘fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families’ is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.”
What does this have to do with food safety? A number of things. For one, concerns over pathogenic bacteria are the primary stated reason that we do not have a fundamental right to any food we wish. In other words, if the FDA is to be believed, by denying us this right, we are being protected from foods that could make us very sick. I should note that the issue of food rights most often pops up around raw dairy, which has come under fire on both the FDA and CDC websites.
What’s interesting is that, according the FDA’s own data, raw dairy isn’t even in the top 10 most dangerous foods. For instance, on a per serving basis, deli meats are 10-times more likely to cause foodborne illness than is raw milk. I’m not saying this to promote raw milk; I’m simply noting a striking inconsistency in the position of the agency that decides what foods we can and cannot have access to.
The main issue, as I see it, is that we simply are not getting good information from our government regarding what is healthy and safe, and what is not. To be told that we do not have a fundamental right to have access to the food of our choosing, when the justification for that denial is our safety, and then to learn that numerous other foods, which are statistically far more likely to spread pathogens, are perfectly legal throws into question the judgment of the agencies assigned to keep us safe.
I believe that every American should have the right to decide what “safe food” means to him or her, whether that means Big Macs for breakfast, or drinking milk straight from the udder. I believe that truly safe food is food that does not propagate chronic illness, and is produced in a manner that does not endanger our health, our environment, or our ability to feed future generations. I believe that this food should be accessible to everyone, and I am certain that our current regulatory and subsidy arrangements are an impediment to such accessibility.
Okay. That’s a lot of “I believe.” The question is, what do you believe?
Thanks for reading,
Ben
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Read Ben Hewitt’s other posts on Nourishing Words:
- Foodborne Illness: Peril or Distraction?
- The Microbes That Keep Us Well
- S510: Risk and Responsibility
Visit Ben Hewitt’s website for more information on him, his writing and where to hear him speak. If you haven’t yet read The Town That Food Saved, released in early 2010, read about it on Nourishing Words and get your hands on a copy soon! Ben will be featured as a keynote speaker at the upcoming NOFA-NH Winter Conference on March 19 in Exeter, New Hampshire.
I’ve enjoyed reading this series and looking forward to reading the book.
The recent announcement by Michelle Obama of the “Nutrition Charter” in partnership with, of all things, Walmart, leaves me really tired.
This would be the third time recently that Big Business/Big Agriculture has completely driven government policy creating the possible rocking of your food world. The recent Food Safety Bill, USDA approval for unfettered use of GMO alfalfa and now this. All smoke and mirrors. Sigh.
I have enjoyed Ben’s posts and viewpoint very much during this series. Very educational for a rookie. Thanks!
I’m right there with you as a rookie on most of this stuff, which was why I was happy to have Ben as a guest poster!
Eleanor
“What’s interesting is that, according the FDA’s own data, raw dairy isn’t even in the top 10 most dangerous foods. For instance, on a per serving basis, deli meats are 10-times more likely to cause foodborne illness than is raw milk.”
Raw dairy is not one of the top 10 because it is only consumed by a very small percentage of people. Per serving, it is actually much more dangerous. However, overall, more people get sick from deli meat because many, many more people eat deli meat.
Ben, don’t make a joke out of yourself. The book was great, but you have to think harder before you make claims about statistics. Good luck in the future.
Observer,
I’m hoping that you didn’t intend the last part of your comment to be disrespectful—it’s tricky to understand the intention behind a written comment, particularly when it’s sent anonymously. In any case, Ben might have other thoughts on those particular statistics that he’d like to share. Thanks for reading the series.
Eleanor
Hi Observer,
Thanks for your comment.
You’re correct, raw dairy is not consumed by nearly as many people as rest of the foods on that list (most estimates suggest that 1% – 4% of the US population consume raw milk).
However, please notice that my comparison to deli meat is in fact on a per serving basis, which I believe accounts for the disparity in the number of people consuming raw dairy and the number of people consuming deli meats.
Is there a 64-page PDF on the FDA website warning about the consumption of deli meats, as there is for raw milk? Why no, there isn’t.
I’m not saying there’s no risk to raw milk. Nor would I say the same about pasteurized, especially considering the most recent American deaths associated with milk were from the pasteurized variety.
Thanks for reading my book,
Ben
One other comment on the stats relating to the relative risk of food.
Just as the data on total numbers of foodborne illness and death are deeply flawed and based on extrapolation and assumption, I suspect these data are also somewhat questionable and shouldn’t be held up as proof of anything. However, I think the larger point – that our rights as food consumers are being affected by bad and/or misleading information – is still valid.
You did compare Big Macs to raw milk as if they were some kind of food safety equals. The justification is just flawed. It’s like you’re saying, “Well, they get to serve people damaging food, so why can’t I?”
It’s a recurring argument. It’s illogical.
The confirmed cases speak for themselves. Raw milk has such a small segment of the population that consumes it, yet it accounts for most of the milk illnesses. Pasteurization saves a lot of people their health. Plain and simple. There’s nothing Wendall Berry or anyone else is going to do to change that short of taking the pathogens out of the cows. That’d be great, but that is not where we are at.
It’s not comparable to traffic accidents when you are feeding kids raw milk. When you drive, you put them in a car seat or buckle them up. There are laws for that, too.
It’d be nice if the raw milk crowd started to seriously give thought as to why they feel like their subject to a “nanny-state”. Being an adult, and especially a parent, comes with responsibilities. Owning up to that is part of what growing-up is about.
It’s time to do a little growing up.
If you are drinking raw milk from this farm, they are experiencing a recall because a sample tested positive for dangerous E. Coli. Anyways, here’s the farm’s listing from “realmilk.com” and the Weston A. Price Foundation, along with the Farm-to-Consumer-Legal-Defense-Fund.
“Medical Lake:The Country Market, contact Tom Turnbough 14211W. Thorpe Rd. Medical Lake, Wa., 99022 Phone (509) 216-2857 days (509) 244-9617 evenings after 7pm. E Mail delturnbough@netzero.net . The market sells vegetables, fruit, home grown hormone free beef, pork. and lamb along with the raw milk from milking shorthorn cows that are fed organic grain at milk time and pastured on grass that is free from commercial fertilizer and insecticides. Eggs frome free range chickens.”
That will be all from me. Once again, good luck on the other matters.
In regards to Observer’s comments, I think – or hope, at least – it was clear from my post that I wasn’t making a direct safety comparison between raw milk and Big Macs.
Rather, I was making the point that we should be allowed to choose which one fits our individual ideals of a safe and healthy diet. And that we should be willing to assume the responsibility for doing the research that can help us make these choices, rather than simply relying on the spoon-fed and arguably-not-terribly-accurate data and rhetoric coming from these agencies.
That, to me, is part of what growing up is all about.
I don’t understand why folks like Observer feel what other people choose to consume is any of their concern. I don’t think it’s my responsibility to shut down McDonald’s or to force anyone to drink raw milk. Foods should be labeled so we can know exactly what they are, and the choice from there is yours.
Being an adult is learning to make choices for yourself and to accept the consequences.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading the guest posts by Ben – his writing style is engaging and fun, and makes the topic of safe food interesting even to those of us who spend very little, if any, time considering such topics. To read the words “Big Macs” and not have it followed by some dire warning was refreshing, given that I love Big Macs and get tired of hearing about junk food all the time. That being said, this blog and Ben’s work on “Making Supper Safe” does give me the incentive to start looking into this issue more closely – I know I could benefit from eating better, and the environment sure needs some help too! I’ll be ordering both of Ben’s books – keep up the good work Eleanor!
I agree: It’s not about who’s right and who’s wrong. It should just be about learning what’s best for us and being open to new ways of looking at things. I used to love my Big Macs too; the more I learned, however, the less appealing they became. I’m glad you liked the series.
Eleanor
First of all YOU’RE NOT ALONE with your fear of being overwhelmed by the garden. And dealing with a chronic illness, like the effects of Lyme Disease (hideous and insidious), are monumental tasks. I am hoping that somehow it has been reigned in and somewhat contained, but I know it continues to wreak havoc in unimaginable ways.
I’ve really tried to rein back on my gardens and have turned to lots of containers with dwarf trees, lettuces, etc. I just cannot do what I once was able to do. And gardening should be about the JOY, not about the work.
Sending fond and healing wishes across the miles. And STOP worrying about what you might or might not be able to do. Just work at filling your mind with great words and sights.
Joys,
Sharon Lovejoy Writes from Sunflower House and a Little Green Island
Sharon,
Thank you so much for your wise advice and for sharing your own experience with gardening challenges. This will definitely be my year to learn to go with the flow. You’re so right; it should be about joy!
Eleanor
Pingback: Ben Hewitt on Regionalized Food Systems | Nourishing Words