> From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> But it isn't necessarily any worse for you than many other forms of meat...
I'll agree if you'll put "industrial" or "factory" in front of "meat."
Organic, free-range meat is a far cry from Chicken McNuggets.
I once went to an agricultural conference session on meat production. The
speaker, an avowed meat-lover, said, "If you don't know the person who grows
your meat, you should be a vegetarian."
The problem is not "mechanical separation" nor even "chemical separation." The
problem is that we have become so separated from our nourishment that we no
longer understand why and what we eat.
Most people might claim that they eat for the satisfaction that flavour brings.
Well, flavour is one of the most easily (and most cynically) manipulated
aspects of food. Most people have no idea that 95% of their diet comes from
just a half-dozen different sources, and that should anything happen to those
sources, there could be starvation, even in industrialized countries.
Poor people each cheap food. It's not their fault; they feel they have to. But
that food is cheap through a combination of subsidies and corner-cutting. This
means the "centre aisles" of most grocery stores are filled with food-like
substances that have been engineered to taste good and to quell the vagus
nerve's hunger signals, with little or no attention to nourishment.
So, if you don't like "mechanically separated meat," DON'T EAT IT! Go to a
farmer's market and buy a freshly-killed chicken, while you still can -- recent
legislation (SB-510), if enforced, will make it impossible to do so.
----------------
When a fellow says, "It ain't the money, but the principle of the thing," it's
the money. -- Kin Hubbard
:::: Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op ::::
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|