Beef recall and downer cow update

As you've probably seen by now in the New York Times or other media outlets, the USDA has just mandated the largest beef recall in history. The 143 million pounds of beef that have been recalled were supplied by the Westland/Hallmark Meat Company, the same company that incited an outcry (by myself and others) over their inhumane treatment of cattle, as documented by a Humane Society employee.

Much of the media coverage of this recall has been focused on the dangers of this meat in the food supply. The Westland/Hallmark company is one of the largest suppliers to the National School Lunch Program, so people are concerned (justifiably) about how their childrens' health might be at risk.

I agree that health concerns are definitely one of the important issues that must be addressed in a situation like this. But I am both upset and perplexed that fewer news outlets have focused on the animal welfare aspect of the story. The employees and manager in the video have been fired, and criminal charges are being brought against them. But what about the companies themselves? Will no legal action be taken against them? Will other cattle companies make pledges to ensure the welfare of their cows from birth to death? Where are the voices demanding greater transparency and heightened accountability?

Better yet, when will we all just acknowledge that factory farming is an inherently inhumane and dangerous system and that it has to go?

Why factory farms must go

I have a video to share with you, but I want to warn you that it is very graphic and disturbing. While extremely difficult to watch, the video nonetheless tells a truth about our society that we should all confront. In their insistence on profit as the sole motive and driver behind their business, factory farms (CAFOs) have turned a blind eye to basic animal dignity and welfare, and behavior like the following becomes all too common.



The video makes me outraged. What kind of a society have we become, that we can allow such practices to take place? This incident is not isolated; a search on YouTube reveals other videos of downer cows being abused. In some ways I'm not surprised; these videos are consistent with the findings in Fast Food Nation and The Omnivore's Dilemma. A factory farm is, by nature, driven to produce the most meat possible at the lowest cost possible. Cows can't be treated humanely, because that would make for less productivity and higher expenses. Sadly, we are as guilty as the CAFOs. Every time we eat a fast-food hamburger, or every time we buy regular beef from our local grocery store, we tacitly endorse the practices of factory farms.

I don't think you need to go vegetarian (necessarily) to ensure ethical treatment of animals- although many a vegetarian would disagree with me on that point. Rather, I think it is important that we care enough to read labels, ask for information, and learn as much as possible about how the animals lived and died prior to becoming our food. Then we can make responsible decisions about the foods we eat, and we can opt to vote with our forks to end inhumane or cruel treatment of animals.

Learn more at the Humane Society website.

Buffalo: a supermeat!

I first discovered the buffalo burger when I was living in New York several years ago. It was in a diner of all places- not normally the kind of establishment where you expect to find new foods, but then, this was New York. On this particular visit to the Malibu Diner, there were table tents promoting the nutritional qualities of their buffalo burgers. Healthy burgers? I figured I'd have to try them. After one bite, I was hooked. High in protein, low in fat, and delicious (not at all like oft-bland turkey or chicken burgers); they quickly became a staple of my New York diet.



These days, when my food choices have as much to do with ethics as with health and taste, I am delighted to have discovered yet another reason to opt for buffalo meat. It turns out that bison, or American buffalo, are one of the most sustainably-raised meat sources in our country. Because they are native to North America, bison have co-evolved with the natural grasses that grow on prairie land. Consequently, they do not need (and are not administered) antibiotics or growth hormones in order to thrive. Furthermore, bison are gentler on the land than cattle, and they may even enhance the land; this article cites researchers who claim that bison-grazed prairie yields greater plant diversity than ungrazed land. Unlike cattle, bison are not domesticated: they graze on their native grasses and require lots of room to roam. Their grass preference contributes to their healthier, lower-fat nutritional profile.

When I was in Bozeman recently, the front page of the paper had an article about bison. (You've got to love that about Bozeman.) It turns out that Ted Turner is the largest bison rancher in the country, and that one of his ranches is just outside of Bozeman. Turner has a chain of restaurants called Ted's Montana Grill that specializes in all things buffalo. (The chain has not yet reached California, but those of you in New York should try the Rockefeller Center location at some point and let me know how it is). Ironically, there is not yet a Ted's Montana Grill in Montana, but that will change this summer, when Bozeman gets its own Ted's. Meanwhile, keep your eyes peeled when you're out at a restaurant, and taste some of that delicious, healthy, ethical goodness for yourself. In the Bay Area, you can try buffalo burgers at Pearl's, Buffalo Burger (you don't say!), or Bullshead Restaurant.

A note to home chefs: since buffalo is lower in fat than other meats, you have to take special care not to overcook it; otherwise, it will be dry and tasteless. The National Bison Association recommends cooking bison "slow and low"- that is, at low temperatures for lengthy periods. If you're making buffalo burgers, cook at medium heat for 4-6 minutes per side. You can find buffalo meat at any natural/organic grocery store, some farmer's markets, and the occasional forward-thinking "regular" grocery store (Ukrop's). Here's a link to some buffalo recipes to get you started!

dairy products demystified

If you're a label-reader, as I am, then you may have come across the following message on one of your dairy products: "Does not contain the growth hormone rBST." This message is generally followed by an asterisk, with a fine-print footnote that says, "Federal tests have proven that there is no significant difference between rBST treated milk and non-rBST treated milk."

This message strikes me as fairly cryptic. If there is no difference between treated and untreated milk, then why brag about it? But can it be possible that there is no difference? What is rBST, anyway? Should I be avoiding dairy products from rBST-fed cows?

rBST stands for recombinant bovine somatotropin. It's also known as rBGH, or recombinant bovine growth hormone. Basically, it's a synthetic version of a naturally-occurring growth hormone that aids cows in lactation. Cows that are administered a synthetic version are able to lactate longer and thereby produce more milk over their lactation cycle than cows that rely only on the naturally-occurring BST. If you are beginning to think this sounds like a clever way for industrial agriculture to increase their yields, you're onto something. In fact, rBST was developed by Monsanto and sells under the brand name Posilac.

With rBST, as is so often the case with industrial agriculture, steps taken by large corporations to increase yield and productivity on the farm run counter to basic concerns about animal welfare, human health and environmental protection. Let's take these concerns one by one.

Animal Welfare

Cows treated with rBST are up to 50% more likely to develop "lameness" (hoof problems), mastitis (inflamation of the udder), and failure to conceive.

Human Health

Monsanto goes to great lengths to convince consumers that there is no difference between rBST-treated dairy products and untreated products. However, concerned citizens' groups such as The Center for Food Safety point to research that shows that rBST-treated milk demonstrates higher levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). Higher levels of IGF are correlated to higher incidence of breast, prostate and colon cancers.

Environmental Concerns

Every time we administer antibiotics, artificial hormones or other chemicals to livestock, residual amounts end up in our water supply. (This concern was one of the leading drivers of the original "organic" movement.)

Other food for thought

No other industrialized country in the world allows the sale of rBST-treated dairy products.

So where does that leave us? Industrial agriculture's (read: Monsanto's) argument is that rBST increases milk yield, which is good for farmers (they make more profits) and good for consumers (the cost of milk is kept lower). I think these claims should be taken with a grain of salt. Monsanto is the entity that stands to profit the most from sales of rBST. When an equation exists that says farmers must increase production so that consumer prices stay low, then the only farmers who stand to gain are the largest farmers, not the small or medium-sized farmers. Finally, if we take costs to human health in consideration, then the true price of rBST-treated dairy products is much higher than the sticker price we face at the grocery stores.

For those of us living in Northern California, it seems that most of our milk is already rBST-free. Indeed, Trader Joe's, Safeway and Whole Foods (my main grocery stores, when I'm not shopping at the farmer's markets) have all banned rBST milk (at least in my region). (Read the Chronicle article here.) But when I'm in other parts of the country and have to decide between milk from treated or untreated cows, I'll gladly spend the extra few cents to keep the artificial hormone out of the cows' diet and thereby out of mine.

saying no to CAFOs

The cognitive dissonance was too much. In the past few months I've driven I-5 between Los Angeles and San Francisco at least 6 times, and each time I've had to pass two CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations- more commonly known as "factory farms") right along the highway. I look out at the cows, terribly unhappy cows, standing in their own manure, waiting out their days at the corn-filled feed trough, never to graze again on their beloved grass, the food they were meant to eat. And I realize that every day I eat beef that was not grass-finished, I am directly supporting these animals' misery. And yet I have continued to turn a blind eye, ignoring their suffering because it was convenient for me to do so.

Well, no more. As of a week ago I decided to give up factory-farmed beef. When I go to the grocery store, all this decision means is that I'll spend extra (and have to look a bit harder) when shopping for beef. But the other implications of my decision include: no more Trader Joe's carne asada, no more In-N-Out, and no more eating beef of any kind at almost all restaurants. (Soon I hope to publish a list of links to restaurants that offer only grass-finished beef on their menus.)

Needless to say, G thinks I'm crazy (especially for giving up In-N-Out). But what I think is crazy is how we Americans have allowed these farms to develop in the first place, let alone become the dominant system of agriculture in the U.S. And since not even Nancy Pelosi can get a better farm bill passed, I'll vote with my wallet instead.

(Photo by Kent Kessinger and used by permission.)