Bryan Walsh has written a cover story for the current issue of Time magazine entitled “The Real Cost of Cheap Food.” The article is an in-depth look at American commercial food production and consumption. Walsh takes the reader on a journey from farm to table. Naturally, many in the food production industry have taken issue with the assertions made by Walsh in the story. Here we will try and provide you with a synopsis of the Walsh story as well as reaction from some in the food production industry.The Time Story:
Walsh begins his story with his description of the modern food production industry from the microcosm of bacon:
Somewhere in Iowa, a pig is being raised in a confined pen, packed in so tightly with other swine that their curly tails have been chopped off so they won't bite one another. To prevent him from getting sick in such close quarters, he is dosed with antibiotics. The waste produced by the pig and his thousands of pen mates on the factory farm where they live goes into manure lagoons that blanket neighboring communities with air pollution and a stomach-churning stench. He's fed on American corn that was grown with the help of government subsidies and millions of tons of chemical fertilizer. When the pig is slaughtered, at about 5 months of age, he'll become sausage or bacon that will sell cheap, feeding an American addiction to meat that has contributed to an obesity epidemic currently afflicting more than two-thirds of the population. And when the rains come, the excess fertilizer that coaxed so much corn from the ground will be washed into the Mississippi River and down into the Gulf of Mexico, where it will help kill fish for miles and miles around. That's the state of your bacon — circa 2009.Walsh certainly grabs the reader’s attention.
Walsh argues that our current food production methods are inhumane, inefficient, environmentally destruction, affecting global warming, and causing negative health effects in humans. As Walsh puts it, “A food system—from seed to 7-Eleven—that generates cheap, filling food at the literal expense of healthier produce is also a principal cause of America’s obesity epidemic.” Walsh goes on to point out that obesity adds “$147 billion a year to our doctor bills.” Walsh then quotes Doug Gurian-Sherman, a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, saying, “The way we farm now is destructive of the soil, the environment and us[.]”
The Time story discusses that food some consider healthier—food produced either sustainably or organically—is often more expensive, harder to find, and not produced on a large enough scale to be competitive with commercially produced food. According to data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), less than 1% of US crop land is in organic production. Additionally, according to the article, on average it would cost $900 more per year to buy basic food staples from the organic aisle given the current state of the industry. Still, at the same time our grocery bills are lower than what they’ve been before in terms of cost per calorie. Walsh cites the USDA as reporting that “Americans spend less than 10% of their incomes on food, down from 18% in 1966.”
Walsh credits these savings to the dominance of a single crop—corn. Then he goes on to point out the negative aspects of having corn as such a significant staple in the food we consume. Among the criticisms are the costs of production in terms of fertilizer and oil use, the cost in terms of taxpayer-supported subsidies, the effect of mono-culture crop production on the environment, etc. Walsh’s story then moves on to discuss the meat industry and the cost of this industry in terms of the environmental impacts and human health problems.
“Pound for pound, a pig produces approximately four times the amount of waste a human does, and what factory farms do with that mess gets comparatively little oversight.” In addition to the waste disposal issues, Walsh criticizes Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) as environmentally damaging beyond waste disposal. He, of course, is talking about antibiotic use in livestock production.
Walsh raises the argument that the overuse of antibiotics in animals is leading to more antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and these bacteria can affect human health as well as animal health. For their part, the “Institute of Medicine estimated in 1998 that antibiotic resistance cost the public-health system $4 billion to $5 billion a year—a figure that’s almost certainly higher now.” It is worth mentioning that there are several advocacy groups engaged in a campaign to “keep antibiotics working.” The livestock industry, according to the Walsh story, attributes antibiotic resistance to human use of antibiotics and not veterinary use. Regardless, Representative Louise Slaughter has introduced legislation that would significantly limit antibiotic use on farms.
The Time story points out the benefits of sustainable farming from environmental health, animal health, and human health perspectives. The story also points out that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) successfully lobbied to get proposition 2, a proposition requiring animals be able to move around in cages without touch anything, put on the California ballot and passed in this past election. As this blog has reported before, the HSUS is pushing similar measures in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Many agree sustainable agriculture might be a preferable method of food production overall, but given the increasing population worldwide and the demand and need for cheap food, plus the land required for sustainable agriculture, and it may be years before this type of farming is economically efficient and is producing enough food to feed the masses. Sustainable agriculture is likely more labor intensive on a whole, and while there is currently high unemployment, those who depend on farm labor know how difficult that labor is to find while remaining within the confines of the law.
At the end of the story Walsh makes a basic, yet profound point. If American agriculture is going to change the way food is produced, the desire to switch will have to be driven by the wants and needs of the consumer. Consumers that are currently cutting back on expenses during this current economic climated. However, for their to be a major paradigm shift in agricultural production, it will take conscious consumer decisions to buy organic or sustainable agriculture products. It will take conscious consumer decisions to go to farmers markets and roadside stands, and to eat and shop at restaurants and stores that use organic and sustainably raised food. As Walsh writes, “if there’s one difference between industrial agriculture and the emerging alternative, it’s that very thing: consciousness.” To read Walsh’s story for Time click here.
Industry Reaction to the Story in Time:
Naturally, those in the food production industry are not wild about Walsh’s story. The following are some public comments industry groups have made in response to the Time story.
Ken Anderson is reporting for Brownfield’s Ag News that the National Beef Board reacted to the story by stating it, ““repeats a wide range of ‘factory farming’ claims, including the common myths about modern beef production’s over-reliance on corn and antibiotics…”’ The Beef Board also says they offered to provide Walsh with information from their industry and the chance to interview some representatives, but that of the six experts offered to speak to him, “Walsh included only one short quote related to antibiotic use.” To read the Anderson article click here.
The Cattle Network website is reporting that the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) also has concerns about the image of American agriculture the issue painted. NCGA President Bob Dickey believes “mainstream media needs to get out on the farm and see what’s really happening, and to do so with an open mind . . . ‘As the world population expands and demands for protein grow, U.S. farmers are delivering. When can we expect to see a Time cover story that treats hard-working American family famers with respect for their innovation, dedication and sacrifice.”' To read the Cattle Network story click here.
Whatever side one takes on the issue, Walsh certainly has stakeholders talking about the future of the food production industry. The discussion will likely continue in state capitols across the country and in Washington, D.C. for some time to come.
Posted: 08/25/09
