One of the major problems with industrial livestock production is the absence of a closed-loop system. Instead of raising cattle on pasture, where they can graze and leave their droppings, returning nutrients to the soil and out of the water supply — ultimately improving the health of the whole system — the industrial model will ship feed corn from Iowa to a feedlot operation in Texas, leaving a massive manure lagoon to pose health risks through leaching into groundwater instead of those excess nutrients going back to the soil from which they came (And yes, there are strict standards for manure lagoon safety, but the fact is that as many of these lagoons age and their liners begin to deteriorate, farmers already in debt for all their equipment, patented seeds and chemical inputs can’t afford to fix them.).
Finally, we can talk about how industrial animal products affect human health. While it’s true that meat and other animal products provide proteins and fats that we need for a wholesome diet, not all meat is created equal.
Grass-finished beef has 50 percent lower saturated fat, three times as much vitamin E, and up to five times more conjugated linoleic acid (CLA, an omega-3 fatty acid) than industrial beef.
Many studies have shown that CLA can significantly reduce incidence of cancer, and many other studies have shown that over-consumption of beef (assumed to be industrial, since it’s been the only easily available option for so long) increases risks of cancer and heart disease.
Pastured eggs also contain significantly higher levels of omega-threes then their industrial counterparts. The logical conclusion, one that has been reached by many in the scientific community, is that eating grass-finished beef and dairy and free-range pastured eggs can help improve human health.
This overview of an alternative system is, regrettably, extremely brief and missing many important facets that would require much more space than I have here, but the issues I’ve covered should serve to highlight some of the flaws in relying solely on a framework of industrial agriculture when making arguments.
Granted, this closed-loop, sustainable system isn’t something that can be implemented across the board anytime soon. However, it is not only a viable option, but as more and more people become aware of the possibilities and benefits of such a system, it is becoming a reality in places around the world, including here in the U.S.
It seems to me that both Newkirk’s and Rockwell’s positions suffer from a lack of exposure to ideas about agriculture that fall outside the currently dominant industrial paradigm. Maybe it’s time to look past our preconceptions and have an informed debate about the future of our food system.
Continue Reading: « Previous12
A version of this article appeared in the Apr 28 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 3 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
http://www.greatgrassbeef.com/CGRWhyGRFin.htm
If this is the website that you used to write your column, I want you to see how biased the article can be before you actually write and blame on different things. This is a biased source for you to write an article. I'm sorry but as a philosophy major, you should know better.
Reply to this Top
As a writer for the CT I am prevented from engaging in discussion so that is not my aim here, but I'd like to clarify my credentials.
First of all, my primary major is Crop & Soil Environmental Sciences, agroecology option. Philosophy is my second major, and this is the first piece I've written for the CT where the CSES major wasn't listed under my name. I've spent the past several years learning about both the industrial model of agriculture and the many alternatives to it (diversified cropping systems, agroforestry, permaculture, etc.) and the evidence is overwhelming in support of the benefits of these alternative systems.
Second, I did not use that particular website for information. I took the majority of my information from readings I've done in previous agriculture classes, including writers such as Wendell Berry, Wes Jackson, and Fred Kirschenmann. I believe if you look them up you'll find they are well respected and long-time advocates of agrarian reform with enough experience under their collective belts (both firsthand and through their ties to the scientific community) to know what they're talking about. Biased does not automatically mean incorrect.
And third, you're right...as a philosophy major, I DO know better. :)
Reply to this Top
I feel like the major point these articles have missed was the awesomeness of bacon. Something taste bad? Cover it with bacon and it becomes great.
Reply to this Top