The film (movie) Food,Inc was produced in the U.S.A. and released in 2009, and is about to be released in Australia (next week – 20th May). Food,Inc. is especially relevant in the U.S.A. – the home of rubbish takeaway foodchains and an obesity epidemic (though not to suggest that we’re all Olive Oils here in Australia, either. At least we didn’t invent rubbish tucker). In the U.S. genetically modified plants and intensive animal raising practices are common, huge corporations (including chemical companies) are heavily involved right through the food production chain, and environmental health and sustainability often seems to be ignored (you only have to compare the different average size of the family car, between the US and Australia).
But instead of urging consumers to eat grassfed and free range animals rather than lotfed, predictably, Food,Inc encourages people to reduce the amount of meat they eat and instead eat ‘plant based foods’. This is a pity, when so many of the other ideas on the film website look like they’re based on solid facts.
Last night I had a slice of rubbish TV viewing after knock-off time, and watched CSI Miami. By chance it was an episode featuring food production issues – in fact one graphic and unusually lengthy digital animation ran right through the food chain, from start almost to finish (only up to people eating the end result – not up to the composting/recycling stage, so not quite the whole circle of life). Clearly this CSI Miami episode was pushing a barrow – the extra-long animation spelt that out clearly that the director was ensuring an unmistakable message was broadcast. The episode featured a horticultural farm owned by a huge corporation, in trouble for a) allowing runoff from a nearby feedlot to contaminate irrigation water with E. Coli, thus causing the rapid and unpleasant death of a salad-eating fast food restaurant customer (I knew the poor old cattle would have to get the blame somehow); then b) the husband died from Botulism poisoning, contracted from eating the genetically modified corn which just happened to have been grown on the same farm. This particular variety of corn was developed by the corporate farm owners and contained genes from a bacteria that ‘1 in 500 times’ produced Botulism bacteria in the corn instead of the bacteria designed to keep corn-eating bugs at bay. (One customer gets deadly E.Coli poisoning and her fiancee-to-be gets deadly Botulism poisoning, all from the one restaurant visit – how unlucky is that!)
This CSI Miami episode goes absolutely hand-in-hand with the Food,Inc movie which is set to be released in Australia next week (20th May).
If anyone involved in Australian agriculture (or agriculture anywhere, for that matter) wants to understand what is shaping the current views and future likely trends of the average food consumer (i.e. everyone) in western countries then you need to look no further than popular culture – in particular, films and television programmes such as CSI Miami and the Food,Inc. movie.
Interestingly, on the Food,Inc. movie website there’s also a mention of a boy who died from E.Coli poisoning after eating a hamburger. Perhaps E.Coli poisoning is a common problem in the US; or at least it sounds like it’s a popular and current scare-mongering media topic. Australia does have some large feedlots however there are relatively few here, and apparently they’re just babies compared to the U.S., where feedlot grain is much cheaper and more reliably available.
Interestingly, potentially lethal bacterial poisoning can occur after eating plant-based material, but for some reason it doesn’t seem to attract the bad press that bacterial poisoning from meat does.
Re. genetically modified plants – it is a absolute tragedy that short-sighted governments and agricultural departments (and certain farmers, who pushed the G.M. approval barrow) missed the fabulous opportunity presented by our island nation – to have a whole country that is GM-free. And I laugh hysterically at anyone who even considers the possibility that multi-national corporations are genuinely interested in developing genetically modified crops because they’ll feed the world’s starving. (I’d have thought even the most naive consumer would be well aware that large companies only have one thing on their minds. Money in their bank.) When at ag. college years ago we discussed impending Plant Variety Rights legislation (now known as ‘Plant Breeders Rights’ (PBR) – sounds a lot more innocuous & less grasping), and I could only really see the downside – particularly with regard to the contamination of non-GM crops grown by neighbours.
Re. feedlots – there is a solid ethical and sustainability argument against feedlots, especially in the U.S. where cattle can be fattened naturally on grass far more reliably than in Australia (although when Australia doesn’t have the grass to fatten cattle, grain is scarcer and more highly priced too – meaning that feedlots aren’t a simple drought saviour). Surely grain, which takes a lot of resource inputs to produce, should be put to better use, rather than fattening cattle?
Re. ethanol – crops should be grown to feed people – anyone who suggests that growing crops (such as sugar cane) specifically to produce fuel is a long-term sustainable activity, needs to sit down with a pen and paper and list all the inputs and outputs in an objective fashion. It’s simply a stop gap with no long-term sustainable (balanced) future.
As to the Food,Inc film – I haven’t seen it yet (it’s released here on May 20); but the ’10 simple things you can do to change our food system’ are worth a read. All great ideas – except for number 5: ‘Meatless Mondays – go without meat one day a week.’ Why? Surely it would be infinitely more intelligent to encourage everyone to cough up the extra cash to pay for meat produced in free-range systems (as distinct from intensively farmed animals – particularly common in the poultry and pig industries, as well as cattle feedlots).
Quality food production is safer in the hands of a myriad of family farmers rather than a handful of big corporations. In Australia, apart from the poultry and pig industries – most animals are raised in extensive grazing systems rather than intensive caged and grainfed situations, unlike in the U.S. However the Australian general public should be encouraged to insist governments (local, state and federal) safeguard our food producing future. This doesn’t just mean ‘supporting farmers by visiting the local farmers market’ as the Food,Inc website suggests – it means ensuring no more of Australia’s best farming land is sacrificed to acres of brick, cement & bitumen suburbs; that the taxation system is set up to enable farmers to put resources away to help tide themselves over the bad times, as much as possible; taxation systems actively assist family succession and younger generations who want careers in agriculture; hobby farms are not confused with efficient food producing operations; etc.
I look forward to seeing the film Food, Inc; I just hope that Australians are familiar enough with Australian agriculture to be able to distinguish between what Australia has in common with the U.S., and what the differences are; and are smart enough to consider everything and weight it up – adopting only the ideas they are satisfied apply.
Ditch the ‘No meat on Mondays’ suggestion – instead just buy smarter – know how your food was produced and where it came from.
Tags: Conservation and the environment, Image of the bush, Australian outback TV and film, Vegans & Vegos