• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Food for thought

Soapweed

Well-known member
John Stossel

Natural Isn't Always Better

Email John Stossel | Columnist's Archive

It's not what we don't know that causes us trouble. It's what we know that isn't so. Whichever famous writer said that (it's been attributed to many), what he said carries truth.

What are some of the things we know that aren't so? Here's one: Grass-fed "free-range" beef cattle are better for the environment -- and for you -- than factory-farmed corn-fed cattle. It does seem to make sense that the steer raised in the more "natural" environment would be better for the world.

Michael Pollan, the prolific food author and activist, wrote in The New York Times that "what was once a solar-powered ruminant (grass-fed steer) (has been turned) into the very last thing we need: another fossil-fuel machine" (http://tinyurl.com/2fnr6xx). How so? Farmers burn fossil fuels to ship corn to feed cows instead of letting them eat what's naturally under their feet.

Restaurants serving burgers supposedly made from grass-fed beef self-servingly claim their foods are healthier for the planet. The American Grassfed Association -- surprise, surprise -- says its cattle are better for the environment because harmony is created between the land and the animals.

People believe. Nobody likes the idea of cattle jammed into feedlots. When we asked people, in preparing this week's Fox Business show, which kind of cattle were better, we got the expected answers:
"Free roaming."
"Cows should be outside."
"Free-roaming grass-fed cows, because you've got happy cows. They've lived a happy life out in sunshine."

It's logical to think that grass-fed steers might be better for the environment, but so often what sounds logical is just wrong.
Don't believe me? Dr. Jude Capper, an assistant professor of dairy sciences at Washington State University, has studied the data (http://tinyurl.com/36492d8).

Capper said: "There's a perception out there that grass-fed animals are frolicking in the sunshine, kicking their heels up full of joy and pleasure. What we actually found was from the land-use basis, from the energy, from water and, particularly, based on the carbon footprints, grass-fed is far worse than corn-fed."

How can that be?

"Simply because they have a far lower efficiency, far lower productivity. The animals take 23 months to grow. (Corn-fed cattle need only 15.) That's eight extra months of feed, of water, land use, obviously, and also an awful lot of waste. If we have a grass-fed animal, compared to a corn-fed animal, that's like adding almost one car to the road for every single animal. That's a huge increase in carbon footprints."

Once again, modern technology saves money and is better for the earth. By stuffing the feedlot animals with corn, farmers get them to grow faster. Therefore they can slaughter them sooner, which is better for the earth than letting them live longer and do all the environmentally damaging things natural cows do while they are alive.

"Absolutely right," Capper said. "Every single day, they need feed, they need water, and they give off methane nitrous oxide -- very potent greenhouse gases that do damage."

But what about damage to people? Some advocates of grass-fed beef claim that the more naturally raised animals are healthier to eat.
"There is absolutely no scientific evidence based on that. Absolutely none," she replied. "There is some very slight difference in fatty acids, for example, but they are so minor that they don't make any significant human health impact."

But what about those hormones the cows are given? Surely that cannot be good for us.

"What we have to remember is every food we eat -- whether it's tofu, whether it's beef, whether it's apples -- they all contain hormones. There's nothing, apart from salts, that doesn't have some kind of hormone in them."

So the next time you reach for that package of beef in the grocery store tagged with all the latest grass-fed, free-range lingo, remember: Not only does it often cost twice as much, but there's no evidence it's better for the environment or better for you.
It's just another food myth.
 

Silver

Well-known member
Sounds like what he's saying is that the sooner the earth is rid of all cattle the better off it will be :roll:
I don't think I'll ever buy into the theory that my cows wandering around hills and valleys are bad for the environment. And if those mother cows aren't killing the earth then those calves that are allowed to stay out there until they're finished aren't killing it either.
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
We can stand together or fall apart. All this devisiveness only hurts agriculture. We all can market our product without tearing down other producers. The "Science" behind grassfed or grainfed seems to be directly related to who sponsers the study. Sadly, the folks in inner cities just hear the same thing.........beef=bad. And we are too busy beating on each other to get back to back and fight the folks who want us gone. Whats really funny and ticks me off is the same folks who want all farm animals (Animals period) to frolick and play and live happy free lives and never be hunted or turned into burger, buy into the methane gas is killing the planet speech. :???: :mad:
 

Justin

Well-known member
i bet within minutes we could all come up with an article that says the complete opposite. it just depends on which side of the fence you are on. this particular article, i'm sure is/will be popular with feedlots and those who implant their calves. :wink:
 

mrj

Well-known member
Silver, are you saying Stossel is wanting cattle gone from this earth?

It reads to me as if he is pointing out that those using environmental extremism and 'health' scares to promote their more expensive grass fed beef are making the ill-informed consumer believe that is the case.

We raise our cattle pretty 'lean' and like a young dry cow which certainly is 'grass fed' for our freezer. We also really enjoy going out and eating a great grain fed steak.

It seems logical that there is a market for most any beef product and any that is raised following legal 'rules' is healthful, tho there may be minute differences in fatty acid profiles and possibly other micro-nutrients.

I do wish he would have pointed out that the tofu and many veggies have vastly higher 'hormone' levels than does beef.

And, yes, it would be great if those who badmouth conventionally produced beef to sell their specialty beef would realize they are harming us all for a little more profit for themselves.

mrj
 

Silver

Well-known member
mrj said:
Silver, are you saying Stossel is wanting cattle gone from this earth?

mrj

I'm saying that to buy into any of these ridiculous theories that one type of beef is less harmful to the planet than another kind beef, one would first have to accept the fact that raising beef is bad for the planet.
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
Silver said:
mrj said:
Silver, are you saying Stossel is wanting cattle gone from this earth?

mrj

I'm saying that to buy into any of these ridiculous theories that one type of beef is less harmful to the planet than another kind beef, one would first have to accept the fact that raising beef is bad for the planet.

:clap: :clap: :agree:
 

mrj

Well-known member
I get that point. Seems that these things all begin with the premise that any critters other than wild life, and especially people, are naturally harmful to old "mother earth".

Well, I've observed that wild horses are very damaging to the earth! No doubt other are, too, if not managed properly.

And, we are probably guilty of not calling those on their premise that mankind and his food animals are automatically guilty of everything harmful to the earth.

Too many battle, too little time!

mrj
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
leanin' H said:
We can stand together or fall apart. All this devisiveness only hurts agriculture. We all can market our product without tearing down other producers. The "Science" behind grassfed or grainfed seems to be directly related to who sponsers the study. Sadly, the folks in inner cities just hear the same thing.........beef=bad. And we are too busy beating on each other to get back to back and fight the folks who want us gone. Whats really funny and ticks me off is the same folks who want all farm animals (Animals period) to frolick and play and live happy free lives and never be hunted or turned into burger, buy into the methane gas is killing the planet speech. :???: :mad:

Well put,there is enough division in the cattle buisness already .
good luck
 

Latest posts

Top