To Market, To Market

With each week, I have been trying to get closer to the origins of my food and be connected to the practices that drive its production. This has required a greater and greater degree of transparency. In Week 1, it was easy to know whether or not my food required the slaughter of animals. In Week 2, it was a bit harder to know how much human intervention had been required in my food production, but "certified organic" labels helped guide my choices of selection. Unfortunately, there is no standardized and trusted label guaranteeing that a product is locally grown. The solution? Get away from labels altogether.

In order to eat locally, I decided to buy my groceries at a local farmers market. Luckily, there are 25 to choose from in DC. I picked Eastern Market because of its size and its proximity to my neighborhood. The majority of the produce sold in Eastern Market's open-air food stalls is grown in rural counties in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. The indoor merchants at the South Hall also carry local seafood, meat, and baked goods.

I decided to buy fruits and vegetables from Maryland and Virginia outside (specifically green beans, new potatoes, corn, fuji apples, mixed greens, and pears). I spent about the same amount of money as I would had I bought these products at the grocery store although I was not able to purchase some items that I normally would (such as bananas and avocados). Inside I bought chicken breast and locally-harvested bread from the bakery.

Besides impacting where I purchase my food, eating locally has caused me to cook at home more than I normally would. I have had to use some non-local ingredients (like spices and olive oil), but I have been able to stick to a mostly local diet. However, I think this would be really hard (and expensive) to keep up for an extended period of time.

Week 3: The Local Food Movement

The Local Food (or Slow Food) Movement is one of the fastest growing ethical diets today. It's no wonder that "locavore" was named the word of the year in 2007. The term, coined in 2005 by a group of women in San Francisco, describes a person who eats only food that is produced within a 100-mile radius of where he or she lives. However, according to the Eat Local Challenge website, people can choose what local means to them - be it a 100-mile radius or simply their state's borders. For my diet this week, I am going to try to limit myself to eating food that was grown and produced within a 200-mile radius of where I live.

Like organic foods, local food is believed to be more environmentally-friendly. With fewer "food miles" to travel and less handling needed, locally-grown food presents a more simplified food network where consumers are more connected (or less disconnected?) from the food they are eating. Eating locally also generates money for the local economy. According to a study by the New Economics Foundation in London, a dollar spent locally generates twice as much income for the local economy. When businesses are not owned locally, money leaves the community at every transaction.

Local food is fresher and seasonally-organized. It also allows farmers to grow smaller, more diverse crops instead of focusing all their resources to producing one crop that is shipped across the nation to be stocked in large supermarkets. I plan to rely heavily on food from farmers markets during this week in order to stay local.

The Privilege of Eating Organic

So I am nearing the end of the second week of my ethical eating experimentation, and things have gone fairly smoothly. I managed to avoid eating any meat products during my first week, and I went almost a whole week eating organically....almost.

Saturday was my 22nd birthday, and while going out was a lot of fun, it posed significant problems to my organic agenda. First, one of my dear friends (and aspiring pastry chef) made me a delicious tangerine mojito-flavored birthday cake. It was covered in brightly-colored, handmade fondant. It was - not surprisingly - not made entirely of organic ingredients. This, however, did not prevent me from eating it. Then, we went out to celebrate on H Street. When we were at my favorite bar, the owner brought us over a complimentary bucket of tater tots (yes, a bucket). Once again I participated in the consumption of non-organic food (and drink).

While these slip-ups might seem to indicate that I simply had less ethical conviction on my birthday, they really demonstrate the fact that eating organically limits your food options. As much as we demonize megafarms that grow hundreds of acres of a single crop for profit, we should also acknowledge the sterilizing effects of eating strictly organic. Sure, you can find organic alternatives to most conventional food products, but your access to these alternatives is limited by your financial capacity and your geographic location. This week's challenge would probably not even be possible if I were living in a rural town in my home state of Texas. Eating organic is a privilege, and it's not an option for everyone.

In addition to economic and geographic constraints, an organic diet also poses threats to food traditions. I chose to eat the non-organic birthday cake my friend made for me because acknowledging her work and participating in the community event that her food production created was important to me in the celebration of my birthday. Since coming to college, I stopped mammals in order to reduce my meat consumption. Yet every year when I go home for the holidays, I eat tamales on Christmas Eve because it is a family tradition. People should absolutely make an effort to be conscious about what they are eating and how they are connected to it. While we don't want to become disengaged from the food that is put on our plate everyday, we also don't want to become disconnected from the food traditions that shape our identities. We should work to create new traditions around healthful, ethical ingredients and recognize that thinking about what you eat demands more than checking for the USDA Organic label on products from the grocery store.

Is Whole Foods Ethical?

Trying to eat a strictly organic diet while working in Tenleytown has caused me to rely heavily on Whole Foods for almost all of my meals. I find myself leaving work each afternoon to get lunch at the grocery store instead of having to research organic-friendly restaurants or wake up early to pack my own lunch. Yet I am starting to question if relying on this corporation to make all my tough food decisions is simply falling back into old habits.

An article published in Slate in March 2006, "Is Whole Foods Wholesome?" poses similar questions. In this piece, Field Maloney attempts to find out if Whole Foods really is as virtuous as it presents itself to be. First, the good news:

1. Whole Foods pays its workers a solid living wage. Its lowest earners average $13.15 an hour with excellent benefits and health care. Furthermore, no executive makes more than 14 times the employee average.
2. Whole Foods was one of the first grocery stores to "bag the bag" doing away with plastic bags at their checkout counters - an initiative that has particular meaning to D.C. residents, who are now taxed for each plastic bag they use.
3. Whole Foods supports local non-profits, and many of the stores offer their own composting or utilize wind or solar energy.

Now for the not-so-good news:
1. Whole Foods may promote saving energy and being eco-friendly, but sometimes organic isn't the greenest option. Organic apples from Washington state have a much greater carbon footprint than apples conventionally-farmed in nearby West Virginia.
2. Supporting organic farming does not necessarily mean supporting small farmers. Almost all of the organic food produced in America comes out of California, and only a handful of corporations dominate the industry.
3. Whole Foods, oft referred to as Whole Paycheck because of its prices, is not a viable option for every consumer. In the closing paragraph of Maloney's article, he offers an nuanced (and somewhat depressing) argument:"It's likely that neither Wal-Mart nor Whole Foods will do much to encourage local agriculture or small farming, but in an odd twist, Wal-Mart, with its simple 'More for Less' credo, might do far more to democratize the nation's food supply than Whole Foods. The organic-food movement is in danger of exacerbating the growing gap between rich and poor in this country by contributing to a two-tiered national food supply, with healthy food for the rich. Could Wal-Mart's populist strategy prove to be more 'sustainable' than Whole Foods?" Just some food for thought.

What I ate yesterday: bowl of organic cereal with organic soy milk, Nantucket Nectar juice and organic salad from Whole Foods, Amy's organic Burrito Bowl

What I ate today: another bowl of cereal and soy milk, organic granola and fruit salad, oven-roasted vegetables (red potatoes, carrots, onions, shallots) and cheese

GMOs and the Eugenics Movement of Food

Advancements in technology and science have enabled us to accomplish seemingly impossible things. Video chats, 3D sonograms, and digital cameras never cease to amaze me. So when the genetic manipulation of crops paved the way for an inexhaustible food source, it was hard not to think that we had created a real solution to the world's hunger problem. But have we just created a new problem in the form of Frankenfood?

Scientists now have the ability to genetically manipulate common crops such as corn, cotton and soybeans, inserting traits that, in one case, let farmers spray weed killer without hurting the crop and, in other instances, fight off insects. While this enables farmers to produce more food for less money, it also causes consumers to ingest pesticides, hormones, and other chemicals. These genetically modified foods are found on every aisle of any major (non-organic) grocery store in America, yet this is not the case all over the world. For instance, Europeans have largely rejected GMOs on the basis that they pose potential ecological and health nightmares.



According to a study conducted by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications and the USDA, 85% of the corn produced in America is genetically modified compared to 26% worldwide. Furthermore, the United States is the biggest adopter of biotech crops, growing 158 million acres. The second largest producer of GM crops, Brazil, grows a third of this amount. Globally, biologically engineered crops continue to be embraced in both developed and developing nations. However, Europe still remains largely resistant. According to a USA Today article published last week, "of 26 European Union countries, only six plant the one genetically modified, or GM, crop accepted there: insect-resistant corn. Germany discontinued GM planting in 2008." In February, India decided to reject a newly approved eggplant variety genetically engineered to produce its own insecticide. The debate over the use of GM crops still wages in Asia and Africa. In November of last year, China approved biotech rice and corn varieties. This decision has the power to greatly influence the future of agriculture. As Eric Hoffman, a genetic engineering policy campaigner argues, "[China] grow[s] an incredible amount of food and fiber, and the more they embrace this technology, the more it's going to be used. There's potential for China shifting the balance away from the movement that Europe is creating to stop these technologies."

What I ate today: organic banana, cabbage crunch salad, pesto pasta, vegetable spring roll, homemade chicken salad (all of these things were bought at Whole Foods)

Week 2: Eating Organically

Today concludes my one week experiment of being a (lacto-ovo) vegetarian. I was able to go the entire week without eating meat, and hopefully, saved a few animals in the process. Now begins the second iteration of my ethical eating experiment: going organic.

The Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), which was enacted under Title 21 of the 1990 Farm Bill, served to establish uniform national standards for the production and handling of foods labeled as “organic.” This legislation authorized a new USDA National Organic Program to set national standards for the production, handling, and processing of organically grown agricultural products. According to the 1995 National Organic Standards Board definition, “organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony." The principal guidelines for organic production are "to use materials and practices that enhance the ecological balance of natural systems and that integrate the parts of the farming system into an ecological whole." In this way, organic farming purports to be more environmentally sustainable than conventional agricultural methods.

Organic farming entails: the use of cover crops, green manures, animal manures and crop rotations to fertilize the soil and control insect populations, the use of rotational grazing and mixed forage pastures for livestock operations and alternative health care for animal wellbeing, the reduction of external and off-farm inputs and elimination of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers and other materials, such as hormones and antibiotics, and a focus on renewable resources, soil and water conservation, and management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological balance.

Organic products are often criticized as being unaffordable, and thus not a valid alternative for many individuals. However, advocates of the organic movement argue that paying a little more for non-genetically modified food products saves money in the long run by reducing environmental degradation and health costs. You'll have to stay tuned to find out how this new diet affects my food budget.

Soy: Friend or Foe?

In the past couple of years, I have stopped eating red meat (except for the occasional Five Guys' cheeseburger), so I was familiar with meat substitutes before I began this experiment. (In fact, I think Gimme Lean breakfast sausage tastes better than the real deal and have sneaked it into my meat-loving brother's breakfast tacos without detection). I eat soy-based "chikin," drink soy milk, and I love TDR's barbeque seitan. I feel like I am making a more ethical and healthy decision when I consume these products over their animal-based alternatives. However, when I was reading New York Magazine's "Eat Good," a guide to ethical eating, I was a little caught offguard by their inclusion of soy on their list of suspect foods.

The guide's authors, Beth Shapouri & Christine Whitney, label soy as having a big carbon footprint, being overfarmed, creating corporate monopolies, and being genetically modified. While not all soy products are guilty of these infractions, I realized I wasn't sure how ethical my purchases had been. "You thought it was healthy. Soy is overgrown, generally highly sprayed, and the USDA reports that it has more acreage dedicated to genetically modified plants than any other crop." The fix Shapouri and Whitney suggest? Buy certified organic; this guarantees your soy is not genetically modified.

What I ate today: cereal, (leftover) half of veggie burger and onion rings, a calzone with pineapple, mozarella, onions, and olives

Reduce meat consumption, reduce global warming

In the past, when I have asked the vegetarian and vegans I know why they choose not to eat meat, many of them advocate for animal rights. Others say they feel it is simply healthier and reduces their risk of heart disease and other illnesses. However, few of them say they stopped eating meat to reduce global warming. Yet, according to a study published by the University of Chicago, the average American does more to reduce global warming emissions by going vegetarian than by switching to a Prius.

As compelling as I found Michael Pollan's The Ominvore Dilemma, it's hard to overlook the fact that many of the recommendations he provides are not applicable to lower class individuals. Yet if we recognize the impact producing animals for meat has on the environment, it might become easier to get legislation to regulate factory farms and meat processing plants or provide support for increased accessibility to fresh fruits and vegetables. Hundreds of companies have responded to the increased awareness of climate change by providing eco-friendly products. Consumers are instructed to buy energy-saving light bulbs, water filters in lieu of bottled water, and products made of post-consumer waste and recycled materials. Perhaps one of the most significant changes a person can make to combat environmental degradation is reduce their meat consumption. According to a UN report, animal agriculture accounts for most of the water consumed in U.S., emits two-thirds of the world's acid-rain-causing ammonia, and is the world's largest source of water pollution. Hybrid cars may still seem like a luxury, but $100 for a CSA share is starting to look like a great deal.

What I ate Friday: watermelon, a Caprese sandwich, breakfast tacos with scrambled egg whites and Gimme Lean fake sausage

What I ate today: kiwi, a salad sampler from La Madeline (Caesar salad, fruit salad, vegetable soup), half a veggie burger with onion rings

The Politics of Lunch

Growing up in Texas, I didn't know many people who lived a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. I had never heard of Morningstar even though their products were available at my local grocery store. I considered meat to be an essential part of a well-balance meal, and although my school cafeteria had a salad and potato bar, it never offered veggie burgers, tofu, or meat substitutes. I rarely (if ever) thought of how politics affected what I was eating. I was more concerned with how many calories I was consuming than where my meals were coming from. I had no idea that so many ingredients of the food I ate was derived from corn - let alone why.

While attitudes towards healthy eating in America are certainly changing, there is still a great need for more progress and policy reform. Today I read a blog post on grist regarding recent setbacks to the "Healthy Schools" legislation pending before the D.C. Council. In the post, Ed Bruske describes how the creators of the "Healthy Schools" bill have dropped the requirement to include larger servings of fruits and vegetables in school lunches due to the fact that D.C. school administrators "did not want to spend precious resources on food that would only end up being thrown away." Since most of the meals served in school cafeterias, has been frozen, shipped hundreds of miles, and then reheated for lunch, the vegetables offered lose their flavor and their nutritional value. Additionally fresh fruits and vegetables are often more expensive than their frozen, pre-packaged counterparts. While policymakers are attempting small steps to make fruits and vegetables more accessible, there still needs to be a push for more education regarding food issues. Sure, reheated frozen green beans are not going to be popular amongst students, but "kids will eat fresh tasty veggies if they have a chance to access them and learn about them," says Debra Eschmeyer, director of the National Farm to School Network. If I had knowledge of more healthful and ethical food options when I was growing up, I would have advocated for access to them. Certainly making compromises is key to getting policy approved and funded, but should policy influence education or vice versa?

What I ate Wednesday: cinnamon raisin bagel and cream cheese; seitan, Farm to Fork salad at TDR, sauteed carrots; roasted eggplant and red pepper sandwich with mozarella and french fries

What I ate today: oatmeal; pesto pasta salad; lettuce wraps and tater tots

Going Veg

For the first week of my project, I decided to adopt one of the most popular ethical diets: vegetarianism. A 2008 study released by Vegetarian Times claims that 3.2 percent of U.S. adults eat a vegetarian diet while 10 percent of Americans say they largely follow a vegetarian-inclined diet (normally, I would fall into this category). While these figures may seem fairly insignificant, they represent a huge change in the number of vegetarian Americans today. According to a 1994 study, less than one percent of Americans were vegetarians. Similarly USDA has published reports stating that red meat consumption declined about ten percent between 1980 and 1999 while fruit consumption rose four percent. Not only have many people changed their food consumption habits in the past few decades, but they have also changed their attitudes toward vegetarianism. More and more consumers are limiting their consumption of meat in favor of more fruits and vegetables as a way to reduce their risk of heart disease, their exposure to harmful pesticides, and their fat and caloric intake. These changes have driven food producers, supermarkets, and restaurant owners to offer more healthy vegetarian options. There is about a 30 percent market share for vegetarian products, and now even large fast food corporations like Burger King offer veggie burgers on their menus.

There are environmental, ecological, and ethical arguments for becoming a vegetarian. U.S.-produced meat contains dangerously high quantities of deadly pesticides. While many people believe the USDA protects consumers' health through regular and thorough meat inspection, fewer than one out of every 250,000 slaughtered animals is tested for toxic chemical residues. Moreover, more than half of the antibiotics used in the U.S. are fed to livestock. Raising livestock also greatly contributes to the depletion of natural resources. Pound for pound, far more resources must be expended to produce meat than to produce grains, fruits and vegetables. While 25 gallons of water are needed to produce a pound of wheat, 5,000 gallons are needed to produce a pound of California beef (Third International Congress on Vegetarian Nutrition 1997). Thirty-three percent of all raw materials (base products of farming, forestry and mining, including fossil fuels) consumed by the U.S. are devoted to the production of livestock, as compared with 2% to produce a complete vegetarian diet. According to GoVeg.com, switching to a vegetarian diet allows you to save 100 animals each year. Does this mean I will save two this week?

What I ate today: a banana; a samosa, macaroni and cheese, and a corn and edamame salad from Whole Foods; and vegetable lo mein and a spring roll

What does it mean to eat ethically?

In contemporary society, progress is measured by choice and variety. We celebrate our ability to walk into a supermarket and find mangoes from Australia, avocados from Mexico, apples from Washington, and potatoes from Idaho all within the produce section. Yet what is the cost of this convenience and choice? The effects of globalization have allowed us to feel more connected; we can communicate instantly with someone on the other side of the world. Yet at the same time, we have become more alienated from the things that comprise our daily lives. American farmers in the Midwest labor from dawn until dusk in order to grow food to ship throughout the country and around the world while their own communities struggle to find food to put on their tables. As consumers, we strengthen this ever expanding food network and further exacerbate the inequalities it produces by supporting the companies that control it. Now instead of simply worrying about the nutrition and taste of our food, we must also be concerned with how our diet affects the environment, how the animals and workers are treated who produce it, and how our food choices contribute to development, resource depletion, pollution, and the availability of genetic modified ingredients. So with all of these considerations, how exactly does one eat ethically?
Over the course of the next few weeks, I will adopt different diets in an attempt to limit my environmental impact and support fair labor practices.