To set this book review up properly, I should probably mention that although I was raised strictly lacto-ovo vegetarian, I am technically now an omnivore. (The occasions at which I eat meat are rare, and mostly fall in the category of politeness if I’m served meat at someone’s house where I’m a guest. I am certainly vegetarian by preference, but sometimes it’s just good manners to eat what one is offered.)
I just finished reading, Michael Pollan’s book The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals, and although it wasn’t specifically the book’s intent, it did reinforce my vegetarian inclinations.
In our modern and civilized world, we, as individuals, no longer have to rely on what we (or our friends and family) can grow, catch, or hunt, to feed ourselves. We have a world of options before us, and therein lies the omnivore’s dilemma: what do you choose to eat when there are nearly-unlimited choices. The book offers an in-depth look at three different food chains, and four different meals, based on different choices in how/where our food is prepared, and where that food actually comes from.
The first meal comes from the ‘industrial’ food chain and is your classic fast-food meal. This is a meal designed to be eaten quickly and built on an industry that values cost-cutting above all else. I probably found this section of the book, with its primary focus on industrialized corn, to be the most eye-opening and educational. Not that I eat a tremendous amount of fast food, but I had no idea how pervasive corn (and one specific variety of corn in particular) was in all processed foods (take for example the now-classic Chicken McNugget, which has an astonishing 38 ingredients, only one of which is chicken, 13 of which are derived from corn, and several of which are completely synthetic). The chapter on corn reproductive habits was also fascinating.
The most common corn-derived ingredient is, of course, high fructose corn syrup, which is in nearly every processed food, from candies to ketchup to canned green beans. Michael Pollan asserts that corn’s success as a species can be directly tied to government actions, originally intended to protect farmers by guaranteeing farmers would receive a set minimum price for their corn (supplemented when necessary), but which in the long run, has created a vicious cycle of supply far exceeding demand, forever driving the price of corn downwards. The market price for corn is now far below the cost to produce it, but because the government keeps supplementing it, it is still one of the ’safest’ crops for farmers to grow, and so more farmers keep growing it in larger quantities.
There are a number of problems with this system. First, corn is specifically bred for how many kernels can be harvested from a single acre. The resulting corn is far simpler in nutrient content than other corn varieties. Second, because farmers are guaranteed to be able to sell their corn, fewer farmers rotate crops, so the same corn is grown year after year in the same field, destroying the soil quality, which in turn prompts the farmer to pour more and more chemical fertilizers onto the field, much of which finds its way into the greater environment. To top it all off, more and more animals are being fed more and more corn because it is so cheap. This is bad because, for example, meat from cows whose stomachs are clearly designed for eating grass, but are fed almost exclusively corn, has a much higher fat content than grass-fed cow. Even farm-raised fish are being fed corn, contrary to their natural carnivorous nature. In short, the author proposes that many of America’s obesity problems can be traced to industrialized corn and industrialized meat.
The second and third meals are from the ‘pastoral’ food chain and look at two dramatically different ‘organic’ meals prepared and eaten at home.
The first of these two meals, is one prepared from entirely ‘organic’ products purchased at a local specialty food store (i.e. Whole Foods), but whose ingredients come from all over the world. One problem proposed in this section is that although, the food itself might be more nutrient-rich and the growing techniques more environmentally friendly, there are associated environmental impacts of transporting such goods hundreds and even thousands of miles from where they are grown to where they are purchased. A second problem, is that more and more ‘organic’ products are being raised on large industrialized farms, and that several of these large companies have had a large say into creating the standards by which a food can be considered ‘organic’. So, although an organic food may not be fertilized with certain chemicals, they may still be raised in unhealthy conditions (masses of ‘organic’ meat animals crammed into small spaces, for example). Terms like ‘free-range’ and ‘grass-fed’ are increasingly being abused to the point of being an exaggerated form of marketing lingo. This section is troubling, because I like to buy organic when I can, and organic foods are more expensive, so I’d like to think there were pretty high standards of growing practices in place, to justify my spending the extra money.
The second of these two meals is a meal prepared as much as possible with locally-grown ingredients. The author spent some time on a farm in Virginia, where amazing quantities of healthy meats are being raised through an elaborate and management-intensive system which relies on rotating crops and animals and supporting their natural roles. The results have turned a patch of farmland that had been abused for years into a highly-productive farm. Eggs produced by the chickens on this farm are legendary in the area for their rich taste, color, and texture. This is the ideal farming setup and highly efficient. In one season, this particular 550-acre farm produces 30,000 dozen eggs, 10,000 broilers, 800 stewing hens, 25,000 pounds of beef, 25,000 pounds of pork, 1,000 turkeys, and 500 rabbits.
The fourth meal, and at a polar opposite from the first meal, is a meal where all the ingredients to make the meal were hunted/gathered from the wild by the people preparing the meal. For this, the author partnered with experts at hunting and gathering and was forced to confront what it means to eat meat. Today’s consumers are so distanced to the process of raising animals for meat, that few people stop to think about what it means to require an animal to die so that you can eat and many might reevaluate their meat-eating choices if they were to visit the farm where the animal was raised and then visit the slaughterhouse where it was killed. This is not a model that’s really very viable for masses of people, but this section did include some interesting observations, including a fascinating discussion of the life cycle of mushrooms.
Reading this book has prompted me to re-evaluate my own food choices. I think I’ve been pretty good about preparing healthy, vegetarian meals at home as often as practical, but now I am thinking more about where the ingredients came from and am working towards supporting local growers as much as possible.
For starters, I try to shop at the local farmer’s market once a week. This supplies much, but not all, of my vegetable ingredients for the week, depending on the season. I am also very excited about my plans to join a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) program next year, in which I’ll pay a monthly ’subscription’ fee to a local farm in return for a certain amount of fresh produce each week, based on what’s in season.
The Omnivore’s Dilemma was an entirely engrossing read. The author combines his personal experiences and observations with documented research, in apart-narrative, part-essay, easy to digest format. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to be conscious about the food they eat.
# # #
Recommended Link:
LocalHarvest.org: find farmers’ markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area
