Entry #35: Health Pt.3

One of the worst arguments flying around is that obesity is solely the result of personal irresponsibility. Glenn Beck even jumped on this train recently, and many conservative paundits get outraged at comments like Michelle Obama's suggesting that the food industry should do more to make its products healthier - the common misconception that by regulating the food industry the government is ultimately limiting our choices and deciding what we eat. "I want to be able to order a big, juicy steak when I go out!" It seems as though most Americans, conservatives in particular, believe that the average American is totally capable of making informed dietary decisions. They think it's as simple as, "don't eat too many Twinkies or Big Macs," or "spend more time at the gym to work off the calories."

This is total fucking shit. People are fucking idiots when it comes to nutrition. People are even bigger fucking idiots when it comes to fruits and vegetables. To cite an example, I worked as a janitor for about half a year at one point. I was talking to my manager and it somehow got brought up that I'm a vegetarian. She told me I probably eat lots of healthier things, like veggie pizzas. Fucking veggie pizzas: healthy. Most people think they're doing themselves a service putting a slice of iceberg and tomato on a quarter pound burger. Another example is how many people think vegetarianism and veganism are healthy. I've been around vegans for around a decade, and it's insane how many people honestly think they're eating healthier - and it surprises me even more that so many fucking people who aren't vegetarian think it's healthier. Granted I am vegetarian, I do aknowledge that it's for political reasons and I don't kid myself into thinking it's for ethical or dietary reasons. The healthiest people are pescetarians.

The worst examples I can think of are how many people think they're eating healthy by having granola bars and vitamin water. People eat that shit up. The worst people are the ones who think they're going on some diet by cutting carbs, or the people who think salads are the only healthy things to eat. So many fucking people seem to use that as an excuse, saying they can't eat healthy because they don't like salads. I know they're somewhat saying it in jest - but who knows the reaches of most peoples' idiocy.

As far as a lack of knowledge about fruits and vegetables? I had a customer just a few days ago ask me what's wrong with the Fuji apples. What is this shithead talking about? I walk over to the organic apples and they all look fine. Walking to the back room I realize what she must've been thinking: the organic apples aren't coated with wax, so they're not as shiny and smooth. What fucking idiot has never seen an apple on a tree before and honestly and sincerely thinks that apples are supposed to be shiny?
You know what's also pretty bad? I was in a local Heinens recently and they had golden beets - which made me stoked as hell. The problem is that the workers cut the leaves off of all the beets. That makes them go bad quicker, you fucking morons! The problem was only heightened by the fact that they were organic beets and have a shorter shelf life regardless. All of the beets were soft, and half of them I could poke my finger through if I applied a little pressure.
A couple weeks back I had a customer who told me I wouldn't be proud of our radishes. I continued doing my work, because I knew the dude was probably full of shit. He proceeded to put his grapes back and leave out of anger. After he left I decided to see if his concerns were actually justified, and you know what the problem was? The leaves on the radishes were a little - ripe. Does this fat old fuck even realize that you don't eat the leaves, and more than half of the times the leaves are slightly dingy on arrival.
There are also plenty of customers that also think oranges are the best source of vitamin C (eat some parsley, dude!), or bananas are the only good source of potassium. I had one customer come in asking if we had riper bananas, because she has a potassium deficiency and needed a quick source of potassium. You know what's a good source of potassium? Look around you, you fucking broad. Nearly anything in the produce department is a good source of potassium - it's not as though you'll be screwed if you don't have bananas.

The average American consumer knows jack shit about nutrition, because most of them believe they can go to the gym or take some pharmaceutical and miraculously patch up their poor decisions. What a surface level opinion for professionals on news stations to have. Diet isn't that simple and the average American is not capable of making their own well informed decisions, nor is it necessarily their fault if they're overweight or obese.
This is one of the worst opinions commonly held by most Americans - both professional or not, but of course it's too difficult for most Americans to understand any issue from a perspective other than that of personal choice. Obesity is a multi-layered issue that has societal, cultural, and fiscal factors and people need to quit treating it like it's on the shoulders of the consumer.
There needs to be some outside force coming in to intervene - whether it be the government enforcing more regulation the food industry or the food industry itself coming together to make one massive effort. But, unfortunately, we're going to continue to have people bitch about any sort of intervention impeding on their freedom of choice. Fucking nonsense.

Entry #34: 9/11

So just a few days ago a customer gave me a newspaper ad and asked about a sale. I looked to see if I could still honor the sale, but saw that the dates of the sale were September 9th through September 11th. Unfortunately the sale was over and I had to explain to the customer, and luckily the customer wasn't a total dick and didn't try arguing against it.

A few moments later I realized the humor in a sale on September 11th. Now I know the sale wasn't because of September 11th, but rather the sale had to do with football season.
I imagined how hilarious a sale centered around September 11th would be:

Shop until the towers drop!
While you're remembering America - remember to come in and buy your bananas from Costa Rica, your avocados from Mexico, and your apples from New Zealand!

There could be television commercials where some happy stick figure piloting a plane is smiling and waving as it hits a building with a huge "$2.99" marquee, and then the words "$.99 EACH" flashes across the screen in some cartoon explosion.

Shit could get totally bananas, and I'd love to see America sink so low to make any sale.
Fuck, instead of a lemonade stand I should set up an American flag stand in some public place next September 11th. I could sell tons of other shit - like red, white and blue cupcakes, and advertise them as "freedom cupcakes." I could imagine making shit mounds of money off of fat, motorized cart driving fucks. On the topic of pieces of shit, I totally saw some teabagger earlier today driving a Volkswagon - and a new one at that!
So you're totally pro-America and a total devotee to the spirit of capitalism and the free market, yet you're buying a new German car while you're living in FUCKING CLEVELAND? Cleveland has a fucking Ford plant and a Chevy plant. You're contributing to lost jobs, lost wages, lost benefits, our city's economic collapse, etc. You know, Ford used to offer wonderful benefits. For example, I remember being a kid and my dad having a choice of dozens upon dozens of optometrists who would accept my father's health insurance. What happened when I got to be a 19 year old college student? My dad's insurance only covered one optometrist in the greater Cleveland area. Nowadays every new worker getting hired in at Ford gets completely stiffed on health coverage. I'm a fucking produce guy making a third of their wages and even I get more coverage than them.
In conclusion, I would've shit on that woman's windshield if it was late at night and I wasn't apprehensive of getting caught.

As I continue to rail along tangents: speaking of teabaggers, I was watching FOX news earlier. Even though I disagree with the bulk of the opinions presented on FOX, I can sometimes respect O'Reilly and he can present reasonable arguments on certain topics (although horrible arguments on others, like food and health).
There was this story about a video of an irate volunteer meter maid down in Florida. I guess the backstory is that some woman tried to park in a spot for a second, without paying, before she decided whether or not she wanted to go in somewhere (I'm guessing she was checking the store hours or something. I could easily google the exact details, but fuck it!). The guy was a dick to her, so she sent her husband - who recorded his interactions with the meter guy on his cellphone.
I was totally shocked when FOX news actually sided with the volunteer meter guy - saying that if the couple was unhappy they should've talked a higher authority. What the fuck? Then they used an analogy saying that it's like trying to deal with hoodlums yourself instead of calling the cops. Again, what the fuck?
I've already discussed this before: you're a total dick if you're going to a "higher authority" to try and get somebody into trouble. The guy would've lost his volunteering position (even though I think he did anyway, because of the video?) if you went straight to his boss. Again, you're a piece of shit if you're trying to make somebody lose a job or position. Refer to one of my previous posts.

Entry #33: Juicing

Above is a picture of one of the most badass dudes to ever exist: Jack LeLanne. It's unfortunate that he thinks organic food is a scam, but at least he's a strong advocate of juicing and vegetarianism and a strong opponent of processed foods. You know who else rules and was a strong supporter of juicing? Fucking Max Gerson. I'd add the Juiceman to this list, but I'd already be a target of criticism from the mention of Max Gerson by every boring asshole out there who watches Penn and Teller's Bullshit and medical drama shows that should have "bullshit" tacked onto the end of their names. The AMA is probably already contacting the FBI to send somebody out to beat me with a nightstick and flash a Neuralyzer across my face.

Back on topic, juicing rules - but it's a total ripoff if you don't do it yourself. Places that juice, including Robeks, charge somewhere in the area of five dollars for a simple fucking juice with two or three ingredients.
So what do I like to juice? Beets, carrots, celery, peaches, apricots, ginger, chard, and apple - not all necessarily in the same juice. Unfortunately my juicer sucks a lot of rod, so I don't juice too many greens or herbs - otherwise I'd be juicing more spinach, parsley, cilantro, etc.
The best juice I've made so far? Golden beets, carrot, ginger, and apricot. Fucking sunrise; throw some fucking buckwheat pancakes off to the side and it's a breakfast of nutritionally sound asskickers.

Whenever somebody tells me they juice I immediately think more highly of them. Unfortunately I don't have any stories about customers to relate to this topic.

Entry #32: Health Pt.2

So I recently started doing something in the last couple months that I would've never foreseen years ago: I started going to the fucking gym. I used to get all my excercise from basketball and later biking - but now basketball would only be an option on my days off, and my bike is still waiting to be fixed.
What am I pissed off about now, exactly? Well, it'd be a fair assumption to think I'm pissed about fucking meatheads trying to convince me to eat lean meats and drink whole milk, or push powerbars - but that's not the case this time. In fact, only once did some fuckface who's not employed at the gym try and inquire about my dietary habits. I told the dude that I was running fucking empty on the treadmill and he asked about what I ate: I told him that I ate some cabbage and noodles, some apples, and some water. He told me I needed to eat some chicken and gave me a lecture on protein, while I ignored him and walked out of the gym listening to Cro-Mags.
The whole issue about the gym pisses me off is the popular opinion held by most Americans that caters directly to the food industry - you can eat whatever the fuck you want as long as you work it off. Apparently science has uncovered the great mystery of health: try and avoid a caloric surplus and you'll be doing well. How the fuck does this make any sense? Can I drink some cyanide and work off the calories? If you're putting toxic shit into your body it's going to affect you somehow, I don't give a fuck even if you sweat most of it out of your pores - it's still going to have some negative affect on your health. Diet is far more important than excercise, and fitness and wellness are not synonyms. Luckily the personal trainers at the gym that I go to aren't really this type I'm complaining about. Luckily. Otherwise I probably wouldn't attend the gym I do, and I probably would've made a fool out of myself trying to argue with them at every possible opportunity.

I'm not trying to downplay the importance of regular excercise - otherwise I wouldn't have dropped a fucking hundredspot on a gym membership when I was far from financially stable.
You know what's fucking gnarly? Some fucking weak documentary called "Killer At Large," which offers by far the weakest "solutions" I've ever seen in any food related documentary, highlights the problem with this emphasis on excercise in American culture. Just like pharmaceutical drugs, excercise allows you to eat whatever the fuck you'd like without any obvious issues. Go ahead, be a fucking gluttonous hedonist - you can work off the calories and keep enjoying your Twinkies and Big Macs! Then you can take your fucking Prozac to balance out your miserable existence that ultimately benefits nobody other than yourself and the powers that be.

If I may leave this entry on a less serious note - I wish I knew how to skateboard so I could do that for excercise:

Entry #31: Okra

As of late I've been all about okra. Holy fuck it's delicious.
Two weeks ago I got a couple pieces of freshly picked okra from City Fresh. I ended up being short on oil and way too tired to try and bread it, so I just boiled it in water. I don't even care that it got as slimy as twat: it was fucking fantastic.
So how does this segway into my job as a produce stock clerk? I keep getting customer complaints about product quality, which is definitely an issue at many grocery stores. See, most workers just don't care that much, and it's not a priority of theirs to monitor the quality of the entire department. Back when I worked at a smaller store, I actually had to look through all the expiration dates, parole the entire department looking for bad product, and front all the perishables in the last hour of my shift. At a busier store? No fucking way we have the time to routinely look for bad product, because we're way too rushed trying to finish stocking product and filling any gaps. So who does this duty get passed onto? The morning workers who, apparently even after decades of working in produce, don't do a very neat job; the end result is tons of shit on the floor, total shit. I can't really blame the morning crew, because they're probably feeling just as rushed to fill in gaps and suck the dicks of management pigs. Of course that's when most of the work is done: in the morning before management arrives and late at night after management leaves and the shipment arrives.
So anyways, I've never seen high quality okra, because it's always blackened, spotty, and about the size of a flash drive. The okra at City Fresh was pretty nice, but just a few days ago I went to a farmers market and got some fucking ace command, fucking Top Gun okra. The okra I got is seriously longer than my flacid dick - it's fucking huge.
Four bucks for all of their okra that they picked for that day. Anybody who says farmers markets are expensive are just whiny fuckshits that buy trash quality from Wal-Mart or eat everything out of a can or microwave safe container. Farmers markets aren't expensive, and I'm fucking stoked on okra.

Entry #30: Closing the Food Gap

For my second book review I will be talking about Closing the Food Gap by Mark Winne. This is the third book I've read in the last two years that's made a huge impact on my life, after Food Politics and The Crazy Makers. The author doesn't bullshit around and even accuses other authors, such as Michael Pollan, as only appealing to an upper-class that has an expendible income to spend on better quality food. Mark Winne definitely knows what he's talking about, even though he glorifies a few regions in the Northeast and he keeps a relatively pessimistic tone throughout the entirety of the book.
This book is the first place where I ever really read extensively about "supermarket abandonment" and a more detailed explanation of how bus routes are planned. This book also was my first exposure to certain solutions to getting fresh produce to lower income citizens, such as CSAs, or community supported agricultures. Because of this book I immediately looked up online whether or not there are any CSAs nearby, and I found an organization called City Fresh. After reading about City Fresh I made sure to show up at one of their locations that's relatively nearby and now I volunteer weekly. My only peeve is that most of my fellow volunteers refer to the organization as a co-op, whereas my idea of a co-op is where its shareholders do some work either in the growing or distribution of the product - not just pay a weekly or seasonal share.
City Fresh offers such great quality produce, and all of it is from local Amish farmers - so it's also all organic. I fucking love the Amish. City Fresh is also going to start offering whole grain flower, jellies and jams, black walnuts, honey, and maple syrup - also all locally produced.
Back to the book: I hear the author is also featured in a movie called "Polycultures" that's specifically about sustainable forms of agriculture in Northeast Ohio. I definitely need to get my hands on a copy of the movie.
Even though it wasn't the book's intent, I can speak so much more clearly on why obesity is such an epidemic in low-income areas: from weakly planned bus routes, limited selection in bodegas and corner stores, supermarket abandonment and higher prices in urban areas (also worse quality produce), etc. Most of which is probably common sense, but it's all explained so eloquently in this book.
This book fucking rules, hands down. It's definitely something I'd recommend, especially to fucking science fuck yuppies who think everybody has a fair shot at health or easy access to fresh fruits and vegetables.

9.6/10

Entry #29: LeBron James

Although this entry has absolutely no relevance to vegetables directly it still relates to the produce clerk profession, because it seems the majority of grocery workers actively follow local sports - which I guess is a general blue collar hobby, since all of the white collar workers are wasting exorbitant amounts of money to get seats at the Staples Center behind Jack because they're too insecure and afraid of disappointment to root for any professional sports teams other than the Lakers or the Yankees. Local sports are at the heart of any business that supports its local workers, and local sports are also at the heart of local businesses themselves - especially when you're from a city that harbors a superstar.

Anyways, I figured I should chime in on the discussion of LeBron James. First of all, it was classless to make the decision on national television and make heated comments directed towards our city such as, "I want to celebrate something other than winning the regular season" - but what do you expect, dude is from Akron. Akron, Youngstown, Toledo: you may as well be born on a mound of dog shit while your mother's afterbirth mixes with her diarrhea she got from her fried chicken and jojos that she bought from the Wal-Mart prepared foods section. I don't expect anybody from Akron to have class - I expect them to have a child before they're out of high school. See, Cleveland isn't thought of as having any class, but its lack of class is shown more through drunken rage and any trashy acts are excused through a feeling of defeat and a nihilistic attitude.

Well, I think Chicago would've been a better choice for Lebron anyways. Bosh is overrated and LeBron and Wade are going to compete for head banana; whereas the Bulls have the youngest player with the most potential in Rose, the top rebounding team in the league last season, a great rebounder in Boozer, the ultimate roleplayer in Noah, and a fucking city that isn't horseshit. If this:



isn't playing 24 hours a day, Shaq isn't motorboating Carmen Electra's ass, and crocodiles aren't attacking nursing homes regularly - then I don't fucking care about your city, Miami.
Why the fuck did Bosh say he refused to come to Cleveland? Oh yeah, because nobody in the NBA has any fucking taste and they'd rather be down in southbeach because they're thinking about parties and beach bitches. As far as I'm concerned, if your main criteria for a city are its wealth, its relative distance to a beach, and its frequency of trashy bitches - then fuck you, you're a piece of shit.

Entry #28: Corn

Corn is one of the shittiest things in nature. If corn played in an organized sporting event against mosquitos, flesh eating disease, AIDs, dick cheese, jealousy, and the LA Lakers I'd be pretty hard-pressed to decide who I'd favor. I almost feel as though there's some conspiracy theory behind Native Americans gifting us their precious grain: maybe they knew the level of misuse and abuse would be so obtuse with the white man and they'd ultimately destroy themselves with maize-mania.
Why do I dislike corn so much? Well, first of all it doesn't even taste that fucking good and it's typical "meat and potato" macho male fare. So many fat fucking dudes with Budweiser-stained NFL shirts come in and dig the fuck out of the corn, throwing ears all over the fucking place searching for "good ones." Guess what? Corn is 10 for $2, that's $.20 a piece. Who gives a fuck whether or not the ear is a millimeter longer or looks slightly thicker? Chances are you're just going to drench it in butter or put it in your mashed potatoes and turkey - it's not like you're going to taste much of its exquisite flavor or differentiate between one ear or another.
Corn fucking sucks because of the farm bill, and the fact that it's heavily subsidized so farmers grow corn instead of other, better products. The end result is type 2 corn being grown and sold to make things like additives, preservatives, HFCS, etc. at a cheap price, and companies trying to extend their usage of corn byproducts. This is not fucking good - at all.
You know why else corn sucks? Third world countries indebted to the World Bank grow genetically engineered corn (along with specialty products) specifically for the world market and to sell to first world countries - instead of being able to concern themselves with sustenence farming. Instead big fucking America and its big fucking technological "advancements" march in and shit GMO corn fields across the landscape - when other grains would fare much better in drier areas, regardless of how fucking much they modify the corn seeds in a laboratory.
Corn has its large, yellow-and-white bulbous dick down Mother Nature's throat. Fuck corn, fuck the people who buy it, and fuck how much it sells.

Entry #27: "Conflicting Interests"

I'm well aware that I have absolutely no readers, so apologizing for a long gap between entries (and the low quality of more recent entries) is totally unnecessary - but I still feel obligated to apologize for how infrequently I post nowadays.
I have lots of shit tied up at the moment. I started working on my own tabletop RPG, I've been hanging out with friends more often, I'm considering starting a comic strip, and most importantly - I'm going to plan on driving again and having my own car for the first time in over 2 years. One problem is that driving would mean a couple hundred more dollars I'd have to spend monthly, and it really makes me consider taking a second job. The larger problem is that it seems in no way whatsoever could my second job be something I actually fucking enjoy, because of the simple corporate idea of "conflicting interest." I can't work at any other grocery retailer, I'm limited in working for any food distributers, samplers, gas stations, or health food stores. If my second job, in any way, appears to benefit another grocery retailer then it will ultimately lead to me choosing one job or the other.
This pisses me the fuck off. I found a craigslist listing about a job sampling organic foods: this shit would be totally boss. If I sampled organic foods, chances are I'd be learning about products and I could apply that information to my personal life and my job in produce. I would be paid to engage in conversation with people about foods that I'd probably eat myself - just like in produce. The whole issue of "conflicting interests" in this case was questionable, because I wouldn't be working for any one specific store - rather I'd be traveling between grocers in the Cleveland and Akron areas. The pay would rule, the title would rule, and the level and nature of my customer interaction would rule.
But guess fucking what? Apparently corporate considers the job "conflicting interests" and bars me off from applying for this second job. See, I understand the concept of "conflicting interests:" if you're engaged in your company's sales then it would cancel out if you're supporting a competitor simultaneously. The major flaw in this logic is, though: I don't give a fuck about my company's interests. It's not as though I purposely try and undermine my store's sales, but I get absolutely nothing concrete out of caring. On an abstract level, you could argue that if the store had higher sales then there would be more hours available for every department - which is false, my particular store being a shining example on the contrary. The store manager at my particular store gives out as many hours to the produce department as similar stores that make 40 grand less every week. Hours are entirely at the whim of the store manager and his/her degree of greediness. If he/she feels that he/she can get a larger bonus based upon how few hours he/she hands out without compromising the store's sales and that bonus - then it's based entirely on whether or not the store manager wants to help out his/her employees or would rather opt being a greedy dickhole.
You know, if I was a store manager I would care about the "best interests of the company" (although profits shouldn't be the only interests) - but I'm not a store manager, or any manager for that matter. I go to my job and do it well, without any vocal complaints or problems: this is all that should be asked. I'm not a fucking salesperson, I don't sense any sort of communal connection to my store, and I'm not doing cheers or chants like if I was working at Wal-Mart. Fuck this shit so hard. I was so stoked on possibly getting this second job.

So when I asked the woman working in human relations I informed her that the job would most likely be sampling through places like Whole Foods, Zagaras, and Mustard Seed. I noted that it would more than likely not have any sort of affiliation with Trader Joes. So guess what? When she comes back to tell me that the job would be "conflicting interests" according to corporate, she pointed out that it's possible I could be affiliated with Trader Joes. Did you not fucking listen? Is it because I'm some uneducated produce guy? Derp derp? Have you ever even been in a Trader Joes, or even more surprisingly - has anybody that talked to you from corporate ever been in a Trader Joes? The employees there do everything from cashiering and stocking, and more than likely the sampling; yes, the samplers are in-store workers and not paid through any separate employer. Not only that, but the majority of products in Trader Joes are store brand - and therefor aren't products that would be sampled at multiple different grocers.

What irks me about the concept of "conflicting interests" is its shortsightedness and its simplicity. You know, the customer base at my workplace is definitely not the same customer base as Whole Foods. You're ignorant as fuck if you think that shoppers at Whole Foods are thinking, "Oh man, I wonder if _______ has this product - I'll definitely pay less to go somewhere with a far worse organic, animal-friendly, and gluten-free selection and much lower quality products!" If the customers have the money to shop at places like Whole Foods or Mustard Seed, they're obviously going to either for quality or their organic selections - things of which my company could never compare. Hell, my workplace doesn't even carry tempeh or seitan - let alone tons of other common specialty products. You know, I was talking to managers at my old location and I asked them about the Super Wal-Mart that opened and whether or not it hurt the store's sales - apparently the loss in sales was less than 5%. Less than 5%, from fucking Super Wal-Mart.

There are definitely three main customer bases: people who want shit dirt cheap who don't care whatsoever about its quality, customers who want to shop at a pro-union workplace that supports local businesses, and customers who have the money to buy whatever the fuck they want and just care about quality or their health. My workplace definitely fits into the second category. Whole Foods isn't any more of a threat than Wal-Mart is.

But no, shit has to be boiled down to the simple idea of "conflicting interests" and just as long as something can be categorized as another grocery retailer or in any way affiliated with one - regardless of vast differences in customer bases, quality, or selection - then it's barred off. Thank you corporate for not knowing fuck about anything.

Entry #26: Attractive Women

My workplace happens to be in a wealthier area, so it's very often that attractive middle-aged women and trendy girls in their twenties shop at my grocery store - at least those who aren't picking up hummus and clif bars from Trader Joes. I will say that I'm not actively on the prowl or expecting to talk to any of these women - because I have a wonderful girlfriend who I'd never want to betray. I'm sure she could accept me appreciating somebody's physical attractiveness if I'm not hooting and making grabbing motions in the air like I'm squeezing tits.
Anyways, there are things that a 9 or 10 can do that will instantly make them a 5 in my book - almost in some Seinfeldian, observational nitpicking on my part. Most of the things that they do are things I've mentioned in older posts, especially those having to do with fucking bananas (not literally fucking bananas, I'm using fucking as an adjective).

1) Banana rippers. If you're an attractive woman and you pick up a big fucking bunch of bananas and rip off a single banana and place it back - you're instantly plummeting on the physical attractiveness meter. If I was ever single again and I was in bed with a banana ripper, I would feel like I'm shoving my dick in a huge mound of manure. More than likely I would be spitting on her in my head, and I'd probably go out of my way to make the sex messy and demeaning. I can't take banana rippers seriously. On the other hand, if you kindly walk over and pick up a bunch immediately where I placed my last bunch, make a comment or appology, and not rip off a single banana *swoon*.
2) iceberg lettuce/salad purchasers. A girl can't be attractive if she's boring and she eats iceberg. Plain and simple.
3) Women who don't know how to cook. This almost sounds sexist, but I'm definitely not going for that angle. both men and women should aspire to learn how to cook well, fuck anybody who says otherwise. If you're coming in and asking me for cooking advice, you exhibit any sort of ignorance of fruits/vegetables, or you're buying incredibly boring products (iceberg, baby cut carrots, tomatoes, etc.) then you're immediately dropping to average or below.

Entry #25: Job Security

Some of the biggest assholes alive are customers who sincerely believe that by purposely being careless and leaving extra work for you to do that they're ensuring you're not bored and you're looking busy for management. I've heard people refer to this loosely as giving us job security.
Why is this total shit? Because you're treating your workers like they enjoy wiping your ass. Do people purposely shit on the restroom floor when they're out so the janitors/porters have job security? Do seniors in retirement homes cock a fucking smile and shit their pants whenever their caretakers walk in the room in the name of job security? Do I go into your office job and start throwing around papers and jumping on your desk like a fucking orangutan, then tell you "don't worry, I'm giving you job security"?

I'm sure that even without people acting like children and not returning things to their proper places that I'd still have enough to keep me busy at work. People act like it's some sort of joke, "oh, sorry about ruining your display;" I have a fucking box that I'm actively grabbing shit from, why don't you just grab from my box, save me work, and get something fresher than what's already on the shelves! You're not cute, and neither are your friendly jokes.

Entry #24: Garden Pt.1

Life right now rules pretty fucking hard, aside from feeling like such an outsider and questioning my financial future. I'm just now trying to overcome the initial efforts of my first life goal: my feet are figurately getting wet. My major "goal" in life is to learn to feed and sustain myself, without the use of any fossil fuels and without any outside help. My first obstacle will be gardening, followed by finding a guide to teach me how to forage, and then possibly learning how to hunt (preferably without a gun) and then kill and dress an animal.

My parents have allowed me to use a plot of their land at our house in Medina that has around 3 acres. I've decided I want to grow perennials, and then possibly try and cultivate a small permaculture once I've gotten the hang of everything; I figure perennials would allow me to work a little less and experiment with more non-conventional fruits and vegetables.

Just in the last week I spent a few hours turning over soil:

I'm sure it could look better, and I'm unsure if I made any dire mistakes. For one, I had to use my shovel to loosen up the soil (instead of something more effective like a pitchfork), and for two I accidently dug near tree roots in a few areas (near the far left on all three rows, and near the far right on the closest row).
I'm going to wait two weeks before I plant anything, so I hopefully have sufficient time to find a seed supplier (probably online) and get something shipped. Ideally I would form nearby connections and get my seeds locally, but I'm taking a slight shortcut for the lack of time I have left before I have to plant. Possibly I may plant annuals in the closest row if I have problems attaining enough seeds or I don't have enough ideas come crunch time, if anything - arugula or eggplant. Right now I'm looking at planting a nice breeds of dandelion and boxthorn/goji.

Such a boring entry to anybody other than me, more than likely - but I'm so fucking happy that I'm moving on my first major goal. I worked my ass off for how inexperienced I am, and I have blisters on right hand.

I'm just slightly perturbed because gardening may again be something where I'm a fucking pariah and it's near impossible for me to get advice that's relevant to my intentions and ideals. It's already that way with medicine, organic food, sex, science, and various other topics - and it's horseshit. While at the Mustard Seed I asked a dude for advice on what to plant for fixing nitrogen into the soil, and whether or not runner-beans are perennials (or if there were any perennial seeds available in the store's selection). The produce dudes there were helpful as fuck, but they couldn't give me a proper answer and decided to call a guy who has a reputation for being a good gardener and works at another location. When I tried to explain myself I sounded incredibly amateurish (as I admittedly am on this topic), and said something along the lines of how I want a self sustaining garden. The guy laughed and said something to the extent of, "that's what all gardeners would want - but it'll never happen. Everybody has to treat their gardens with something." However, the guy's countenance on the phone was more patronizing or condescending than it was friendly and jocular. He was telling me how I'll need to get organic fertilizers and I'll need to add things to my soil like seakelp.

This shit pissed me off and confuses me. Agriculture has been around for a long time, and I'm guessing that centuries ago farmers weren't awaiting their overseas shipment of seakelp. I don't see why it's so radical or taboo for me to want nothing from an offsite source. Granted I don't have a farm, and I don't have animals producing manure - the garden itself is in a rural area, and I could get manure from local sources if I struck charismatic gold and befriended a helpful farmer. Honestly though, I'm going to try and mulch using recycled newspaper or cardboard boxes from my work - and I plan on starting a compost.

I don't see how reliance upon store bought products or offsite materials is the only option; the reason why I want to learn to feed myself is incase we reach peak oil or there's a massive food system collapse, in which case I don't think it's feasible for me to get in a car and use oil (that isn't there) to go buy a product that isn't made onsite (and is thereby shipped using oil) and probably wouldn't even be available.

Apparently Mother Nature uses a fuckload of oil, driving here and there and getting shit shipped to her to enrich her soil. Bull fucking shit. I eventually want to imitate nature, not rely upon shit that's not even geographically logical.

I feel too afraid to ask for any sort of advice, because I'm afraid everybody is either going to advocate synthetic fertilizers or they're all going to laugh at me, like fucking Carrie.

Aside from the garden, I just got a juicer and started juicing, and I started creating the framework for a fruit and veggie themed tabletop RPG.

Entry #23: Medicine

Eventually I would have to make a post about this topic, seeing my habitual skepticism regarding most modern research and pharmaceutical drugs. I usually have a huge veiny boner for the underdog, and I guess quite predictably - I support Naturopathy and dietary healing, similar (although not as fervently) to my support of organic and otherwise sustainable farming methods. I will try and step down from any bias I may have, and address a problem that annoys the shit out of me; I feel as though discourse on medicine has become the most roundabout, waste-of-time venture since fucking Nascar.

On one side of the ring we have conventional medicine, whose constant "quackwatch"-type bullshit likens a fucking witch hunt. They refuse to acknowledge that medicine existed longer than 400 years ago, and if anything isn't well documented in modern, recent research - its legitimacy is ultimately discredited. Admittedly, it makes sense that if you're raised to trust any piece of research released by a larger university or any government institution, so long as it doesn't radically question our status quo - then you'd more than likely be skeptical of anything that isn't widely published or categorized under popular opinion.
On the other side of the ring, we have practitioners of alternative medicine - mostly non confrontational, Californian pussies. Instead of openly being dicks (like those that support conventional medicine, who seem to dedicate their efforts into squelching their opposition), they're mostly quiet or only privately object. I guess this also can make sense, since they'd face public stigmitization. It's also pretty shitty that their stereotype is similar, if not worse, than that associated with the organic food movement. In short, plenty of them make jokes of themselves by being into spirituality, auras, and shit of the same ilk.

The problem: neither side trusts its opponent's sources; this isn't a case of not being on the same page, this is being in an entirely different book. I'm going to sound like a fucking simpleton trying to discuss philosophy, but I truly believe that both sides of nearly any argument contain worthwhile substance - I'm not into relativist bullshit, but I do believe that the nature of understanding is much more complex than how we attempt to oversimplify it with science. I think it's incredibly arrogant on humanity's part to sincerely believe it's capable of retrodiction, unbridled understanding, and authority over the natural world. Lately I've been reading a lot about permaculture and perrenials, and it's so fascinating to me - the prospects of emulating nature and its potentially higher productivity, even when compared against our modern chemicals and techniques. Like it says in a favorite song of mine, "Improv Culture Kill" by Policy of 3 (a New Jersey based emotive hardcore band from the early '90s):

"we celebrate the cultures that we kill, they are roadside tourist traps when they should be an insititution. And our science - that has poisoned us on the inside and the out, has created more fear than any vengeful, primitive god. And our science, which we accept so wholehearted, forces us to define what truly is a great mystery. We reach out, but we lack the embrace. We reach out, but there is no embrace to find."

There's no heart in our modern scientific world, and I believe both nature and our minds are the two most complex entities in existence - two things arguably forever more powerful and heartfelt than anything resulting from science and technology. I also believe that contrary to all those angsty, teenage, atheist Family Guy and Daily Show fans swearing religion is the bane of humanity - science itself has created more fear and death. Science and technology created our weapons of warfare, they created all the problems with our modern food system, they were the agents behind all the annual deaths caused by pharmaceuticals, they were the co-conspirators behind all our synthetic recreational drugs (or pharmaceuticals misused for recreation) and all the deaths and strife as a result of their sale, they've hurt our evolution (since our only "progress" still within sight, according to most people, is technological), caused more sedentary lifestyles, and built cultures around convenience and escapism. I'm not a primitivist thought, I believe some technology is beneficial - I don't believe in fucking nut and berry, hunter-gatherer shit. Sorry for sidetracking, I just wanted to get my opinion out there on such a sensitive matter; everybody acts as though I'm fucking their mother whenever I criticize our species' attempts at progress through scientific inquiry and technological fixes. The point I want to make, simply, is that science itself is a faith - one that's only more divided when lobbyists and corporations are involved in the funding of research, and when two opposing sides can make equally as convincing claims on nearly any matter.

Discourse on medicine has reserved its seat in the same arena as internet messageboard, "no u" bickering. Those on the side of alternative medicine will continually question the legitimacy of their opposition's sources - seeing as the majority of popular research is funded by corporations that directly profit from positive results and clever euphemism. On the other side, those associated with conventional medicine will continually question the legitimacy of their opposition's sources, since they don't receive massive funding or, in many cases, they're not released by popular publications or by the government.

Shit is so bananas. Nothing is accomplished. How about you all quit being dickheads, and why not settle on healthy diet and excercise? Well, the pharmaceutical industry seems to have the public convinced (through its heavy advertising) that they'd rather work a pill into their routine than completely change their lifestyle and diet. Convenience digs its claws into our culture's health once again. Conventional medicine fails to emphasize prevention, and many forms of alternative medicine thrive on unnecessary preventive methods. The dietary supplement industry also thrives on its consumers believing it's difficult to get all their nutrients through whole food sources, which isn't true; and the herbal supplement industry is full of plenty of companies that sell low quality products, and make it difficult to sift through all the shit for the diamonds!

Just have a healthy diet and live a happy, active lifestyle - learn to forage for herbs (as I intend to do) if you have access to them and they're applicable to your health situation. Food is your medicine, and medicine is your food. If you die shortlived, it's fine (which you probably will not if you maintain a healthy lifestyle). Quit trying to fight the inevitable and contributing to our overpopulation problem.

Entry #22: Supplementation

Sen. McCain and the Dietary Supplement Safety Act, S. 3002

My girlfriend recently showed me this link, and apparently tons of people are getting super defensive against this proposed legislation regarding supplements. Basically what the bill entails is that key components of DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act) be revised, namely supplements being considered food, rather than drugs, and evading the costs of pre-market research.

Honestly, I will give McCain the benefit of the doubt, and I believe he's sincere and well-intentioned with the proposed legislation - although I do contend that the bill has potential to become anything but beneficial to the consumer. McCain may have pharmaceutical lobbyists pulling his strings as plenty of people suggest, but honestly, he may just be thinking that the lack of regulation has led to a few lower quality products and mislabeling; however, it seems a bit contradictory for a Republican to push any bill that places potentially high fines or added restrictions on industry.

My predictions: the producers of herbal supplements would be hit the hardest, and the alternative medicine sector would be hard pressed to stay financially viable. The reason why, I assume, the producers of herbal and dietary supplements opted to be considered food products under DSHEA was so that they could cut their expenditures and therefor maximize their profits. This isn't a new concept, and the supplement industry isn't any worse than any other major industry; if they weren't required to foot the bill for pre-market research they could save tons of money, not to mention the research (at least for herbal supplements) would be slightly more difficult to pass off as legitimate in plain sight of AMA opposition. I don't think them opting out of pre-market research was a result of them "knowing" their products were faulty (as plenty of practitioners of conventional medicine would suggest), but it was them engaging in very common greed-driven practices: this is the #1 reason I believe capitalism works against public health, not only through lobbyists buying heavily biased research, but via industry curtailing its responsibilites to maximize its profits.

The article states:
"The McCain bill would change existing mandatory serious adverse reporting regulations, requiring minor adverse effects to be reported as well so that the FDA could arbitrarily pull supplements off the shelves or reclassify them as drugs. This immediate recall authority would be granted to the “Secretary upon determination,” that there is a “reasonable probability” that the product is “adulterated” or “misbranded.” Adulterated in this bill takes on a whole new expanded definition: “A dietary supplement which contains a new dietary ingredient shall be deemed adulterated under section 402(f) unless there is a history of use or other evidence of safety.” The development of new products that contain newly discovered nutritional components may be entirely quashed."

If the FDA could arbitrarily pull any supplement off the shelves, then nearly everything could eventually be pulled and be required extensive testing. Herbal supplements could be hit especially hard from this, and they'd slowly have to test each product before it could get its place back on a shelf. Funding would probably be difficult to come by, because the only herb that people give a fuck about testing is marijuana (I swear - the one herbal exception for practitioners of conventional medicine. I fucking wonder why, douchebags?). I'm probably sounding a bit like a fearmongerer at this moment, and it may not be that rough for the herbal supplement industry (which is growing at a steady rate annually) - but what about the dietary supplement industry? If the supplement industry overall is showing to be profitable, then the pharmaceutical industry may see their share of profits to be made in supplements and front the research bills where the less wealthy supplement industry falters and may be more hesitant to cover. If the pharmaceutical industry used its money to profit off of marketing dietary supplements and somehow overtook most small or medium sized producers of dietary supplements, then shit could get dire and lower quality products could get churned out at a quicker pace. I guess I see the pharmaceutical industry as a vulture, and it would more than likely swipe other industry's profits while they're vulnerable - since right now the supplement industry has steady grounding, and even then doesn't pose an enormous threat.

ps. I'm not a strong supporter of supplementation. I already said in a previous post that I'm more a supporter of getting all your nutrients through whole food sources, and healing through diet rather than Naturopathy. If supplements were as effective as whole food sources we wouldn't have to eat any shit at all, and I'd rather learn how to forage for herbs than take something in a pill form (especially when larger retailers try and sell mislabeld products or those in cellulose capsules). I still, however, see the supplement industry as more worthy of my support than the pharmaceutical industry - and any sort of legislation that in any way favors big business, notably the pharmaceutical industry, I will more than likely oppose.

Entry #21: Breast Milk

So I just read an article earlier today about a chef who made his wife's breast milk into cheese:
here's the article

I personally think this shit rules; fuck all the noise from the armchair scientists who think this shit is unhealthy and has potential for disasterous results. Breast milk is healthy, has a perfect balance of aminos for human development, and doesn't have the same health risks as dairy milk. All the naysayers can back the fuck off; the comment about, "As for quality there is no comparison. You can control everything cows ingest and you can keep them producing milk all year," is nonsense. Most dairy cows probably have horrible diets, and it's not as though you can't control what humans eat - and chances are if the dude is a chef his wife probably has plenty of good, homecooked meals. I'm pretty surprised on the comments to this article - since so many of them are mildly opposed to dairy (or at least the idea behind it), most notably the dairy industry and its lobbyists. Honestly, I think it's gnarly as fuck; even though one isolated case in an unimportant, stupid fucking article hardly represents the general populace - I still see more and more people, including a few of the customers at my work, showing interest in local farming and the opinions of food activists. More progress can be made, but shit still makes me smile so huge on the inside whenever a customer mentions heading to a farmer's market or whenever somebody trash talks the dairy industry.

I'll eat cheese made from a woman's tit any fucking day of the week, as long as she has relatively healthy dietary habits and doesn't take any medication.

Entry #20: Green Peppers

Green peppers are definitely the Bibbies or Kidds of the vegetable world: they consistently produce good results, yet they're not talked about too often and are almost taken for granted.
Green peppers are one vegetable I can easily pick up and eat without augmenting them in any way or adding any salt; even though they're still tasty without preparing them in any way, they undauntedly add to nearly anything that's normally cooked with them. Add green peppers to pizza? Fuck yeah. Add green peppers to beans and rice? Fuck yeah twice.

Recently I encountered possibly the meanest, most forward customer since I started working in produce. I had some indian lady ask me about peppers and their respective hotness - an area where I'm not too knowledgable; for the most part, I just stick to poblanos, habeneros, red chiles, and green peppers. I feel like I did an alright job, given my lack of knowledge. Of course she's looking for fucking anaheim peppers (the one pepper my store sells that I'm least familiar with) and poblanos (the ones on the floor were very questionable, overripe pieces of shit). Don't ask me what the fuck came over me, and why I was bitching to a customer, but I told her I wish I could give her the poblanos for a discounted price - but corporate policy prohibits me from placing anything out at a discounted price, especially when it's being sold directly to a customer or somebody I personally know. The fucking woman, she told me that I'm a bad worker! She said that a good worker would do whatever's necessary to sell the product at a reduced price and getting some sort of sale out of it, instead of throwing it away. It's pretty obvious I hate throwing shit away, especially when it's clearly still edible (just fuckheads won't buy it because it's beginning to gnarlify and less vibrant) - but I'd hate it even more if I got fired and was ultimately cockblocked from getting another produce job; I refuse to work at Wal-Mart, I'm not rehirable at Marcs, Trader Joe's and Nature's Bin are dickshits that never give me interviews, and I'm pretty sure most of the other grocers in my area require 2 or more years experience for their produce positions. Losing my job would be one of the most demoralizing things that could happen to me at the moment.

Just as a reminder: I can't put shit out at a reduced price. My workplace cares too much about upholding its reputation for quality. It's fucking stupid, but whatever. Customers need to quit begging me to give them shit for a reduced price, because as much as I wish I could - you're jeopardizing my job. I'm allowed to stuff banana bags, use dollar off stickers, and occassionally trim up two icebergs and put them out 2-for-1 on a styrofoam tray. There's not shit else that I can do.

So anyways, back to the green peppers. Now I'm going to bitch about my workplace again, somewhat. Of course the dickheads at corporate have no idea what they're doing and they're committing mass pepper genocide. Yes, they're ruining dozens of good peppers en masse: sending them to the fucking gas houses, gunning them down in trenches, and all that other shit Hitler did. The new layout has the peppers in a cooler much colder than their previous location, and a very dry cooler at that. The dry cold eventually causes the peppers to wrinkle at a faster rate, and although they're not technically spoiled - they're still more fragile and very much less likely to be bought. I would love to call the customers dumbasses or picky right now but I personally wouldn't buy a pepper wrinklier than my balls that caves in when I press it. Just a few nights ago I threw out about 10lbs of green peppers, green peppers that definitely would've been edible in the same timeframe if they weren't sped up to wrinkling.

This shit is heinous. Green peppers are dying, fuckholes.

Entry #19: Organic Food Pt.2

I'm just making this post because my efforts always seem futile. I feel like an armchair conspiracist, even though I'm not shouting anything too far astray from the mainstream from ontop of my online-soapboxes. It feels like I'm one of those Ron Paul Revolution, illuminati conspiracists shouting tons of regurgitated shit that nobody gives a fuck about, only backfiring and making them look like uptight, paranoid - or even pretentious - pricks. This is not the fucking case; in Entry #14, I cite Paul Roberts and Michael Pollan, both being top selling authors and very popular investigative journalists - not unverified online sources or youtube user speculations. They're not obscure sources, and they're not sources that require much digging. This is surface-level shit, fuckheads. They're certainly not my only sources of information, though, and they're certainly my most accessible - so don't get the sort of vibe that I'm limited to only their works, I just didn't feel like writing a fucking college essay for my entry and felt that those two sources alone could efficiently be utilized for my argument.

I'm glad to know that most people will just do a simple search on the FDA website, find something saying otherwise, and close the argument because further speculation would be "unscientific." Somehow a fucking branding iron gets heated up, and I get a big fucking "hippie" on my hairy white ass. The cheese-meter only begins to peak once the ad hominems start to get used; of course, since I support organic food that means I'm in the same category as soccer moms who drive Priuses and shops at Whole Foods. Genius. There's a fine art to stereotyping, one that I probably haven't been too keen on in any of my entries myself. The Prius driving, soccer moms who shop at Whole Foods isn't a very original, inventive, or otherwise clever stereotype, honestly; it could've very easily been expounded upon, and without such obvious choices. That's just like making fun of obese people with McDonalds jokes. The stereotype doesn't challenge me, it just pisses me off.

First off, I don't shop at Whole Foods. Whole Foods abandoned its buying local buying practices long ago and started building warehouses. Plenty of the produce from Whole Foods is from the same national industrial organic companies that you find at conventional grocers, just slightly fresher and with higher price tags. In my previous entry about organic food, I stated that I'd still rather support Whole Foods than Wal-Mart: I do not retract this statement. I wouldn't want to support Whole Foods for its produce, but rather for its specialty products and its treatment of workers. How workers are treated greatly affects where I shop. Even though Marcs is the cheapest grocer in northeast Ohio, I still avoid Marcs since I know the quality is poor (oftentimes they salvage leftovers from the Westside Market), their workplaces are anti-union, and the kids working in most of the departments (including produce) could give a shit less about what they're doing.
Whole Foods is definitely a step up from a conventional grocer, but please don't use it as a fucking representative for the organic movement (especially when I clearly state that I support organic and local, if possible). Whole Foods sells high quality products, and has a great selection for those with special dietary restrictions (vegetarian, vegan, gluten-free, etc.), but it's not what I think the organic movement should be about. I strongly disagree with Whole Foods, Earthbound Farms, Stonyfield Farms, etc. - any company that thinks expanding organic food to an industrial level is the solution; it's a band-aid and definitely creates more discussion, but it's not what we should aspire to.

Secondly, don't use hybrid cars (especially those that are foreign made) to represent people who shop organic. When living in Tucson I occassionally went to this local food co-op, and it wasn't full of people who were wealthy and "sophisticated" enough to own hybrids. The stereotype of people who shop organic driving hybrids is entirely based off a small population of wealthy Hollywood types or middle agers who suddenly have an interest in their health. To that: fuck California for fucking up how people perceive organic food. I don't know a single person who owns a hybrid (not that I have anything against hybrids); I personally walk, ride my bike, and take the RTA to wherever I need to go. If I was going to get a car again for the rare instances when I need it, it would probably be the rustiest, cheapest piece of shit I could find - and I'd use it as little as often. However, I'd still make sure it's American made, fuckheads.

In conclusion, people don't know what the fuck they're talking about, and people do a really shitty and uncreative job at stereotyping. California has shaped the white, upper-middle class, health-conscious yuppie stereotype associated with organic food, and for that: fuck California. Best babes, weed, and burritos? Fuck you, I'll take a homely piece who can hold a conversation and appreciate the underprivileged, piss drunk alcoholics stumbling around and making funny shit happen (rather than eating doritos and sitting around in black lights listening to Bob Marley), and my European food. mmmm.

Entry #18: Pet Food Politics

This entry will be my first book review entry; every time I read a book from now on I plan on writing an entry as a review, and I plan on bringing up a few topical issues from said book. Pet Food Politics by Marion Nestle exceeded my expectations. Upon buying the book, I was expecting the themes to be things like corruption in the pet food sector, euthanized cats/dogs in pet food, poor labeling, etc. To my surprise, the book wasn't dedicated to any of these topic per se, and its theme was the pet food recalls of 2007.
Even though the material wasn't along the same lines as what I expected, much of the snippets of information presented were actually quite relevant to our human food system. I place Marion Nestle in high esteem, and much of my initial interest in food politics and nutrition was the result of two books: The Crazy Makers by Carol Simmonachi, and Food Politics by Marion Nestle. These were the first two books to ignite my interest, and since then I've finished 3 other books (and started reading numerous others) and watched multiple documentaries on the broad subject of "food politics." Nestle's Food Politics made me challenge many of my eating habits and loyalties, and was the basis for novel interests and hobbies of mine - ones I regret not caring about while I was still younger and in school.

The humor is, when I was working as a produce guy for the same grocer in another town about 2 years back, all the controversy discussed in this book was still fresh. I remember when we first had to place a country of origin tag on every single fruit and vegetable, and I remember getting pissed the fuck off wondering why people cared so much (assuming American products probably weren't any better quality-wise). Honestly, even as a supporter of the locavore movement, I still get fucking pissed when people bitch about shit coming from China or Mexico. The ways they express their distrust usually comes off as xenophobic, or very red scare-esque. I don't look at China as some "commie pinkie" threat, intentionally contaminating its exports; even after reading this book, I just see China as a country with many regulation issues and with many of its industries trying to cut costs and corners wherever possible. If America lacked any firm regulation, I could see the same sort of food safety scares and contamination issues occurring domestically (with how often industries cheat their customers).

One way Food Politics really challenged my beliefs was by making me question my support of herbal and dietary supplementation. In Food Politics, Nestle told of how the supplement industry opted to be considered food, rather than medicine, so it wouldn't be subjected to the same harsh regulation and pre-market testing. I don't think Nestle's aim was to make a total rejection of the supplement industry, but she was moreso trying to explain the events that lead to food products that make health claims. It was tough for me to accept the idea that many herbal and dietary supplements are "frauds," and because of a lack of regulation, products are usually poor quality and the parts in the ingredients could be recalibrated to their cheapest possible arrangements. Now I would have to try and do research or ask a reliable source what companies sell legitimate and trustworthy products. My faith in Naturopathy dwindled, and I started to place much of my support into healing through diet and nutrition from whole food sources. If possible, though, I would still love to take a course on foraging herbs in the wild (one is offerred at the Midwest Native Skills Institute).

Even after reading Food Politics, I still didn't trust pharmaceutical companies any more than I did the herbal supplement industry. Much of the pre-market research is funded by companies that manufacture the product being tested. Although I'm sure many people would still debate that comment, I'm not about to make any of my other arguments at full length in this entry nor address this particular argument. I'm just stating that I have a general distrust of pharmaceuticals, and they're the convenient quick-fixes that Americans demand in all sectors of their lives. It's obviously much easier to factor in a few daily pills into your routine than change your entire lifestyle and diet; it's just lazy, and prevention should reign over the treatment of symptoms. In Food Politics, I saw Nestle as being an opponent of herbal supplements, and therefor through dichotomous thinking - she could be assumed a member of the other camp, the pharmaceutical industry.

However, upon reading Pet Food Politics, I realized Marion Nestle isn't nearly so predictable. In Chapter 19, she discusses the problems with the FDA being too short staffed, underfunded, and being assigned too many tasks. She reintroduces the events with the supplement and tobacco industries mentioned in Food Politics, and states that:

"[...]under pressure from industries outraged at the FDA's attempts to regulate these substances as drugs, systematically reduced the FDA's resources at the same time as it greatly increased the agency's responsibilities. These actions crippled the FDA's ability to protect the food supply as well as carry out its other mandated functions. The resulting disarray is best seen in the FDA's present inability to act quickly and decisively on questions about the safety of prescription drugs." (Pet Food Politics, Marion Nestle, p.147)

Ah-ha. So now the FDA was disliked by the tobacco and supplement industries (for trying to enact harsher regulation and pre-market testing), had less support, and had way too many tasks to effectively handle (between regulating produce, fish, supplements, tobacco, and pharmaceutical drugs). Not only does the FDA have to give just cause to research herbals and dietary supplements being marketed after they're often already for sale, but it doesn't have the time and resources to decisively oversee the research being presented for proposed prescription drugs (at least that's what I got out of the information). The one final sentence in the passage I quoted alone makes me assume that Nestle is at least skeptical of some of the prescription and pharmaceutical drugs being marketed.

Again, Marion Nestle challenges another belief or habit of mine in Pet Food Politics: wheat-gluten, or seitan. As a vegetarian who's actively trying to eat/drink less non-organic soy, now I have to question and research the source of any wheat-gluten or seitan that I eat. The 2007 pet food recall highlighted in Pet Food Politics was the result of wheat-gluten imported from China that had been adulterated by melamine and cyanuric acid (which together form crystals that can clog up the kidneys of animals). Incase you're unfamiliar:

"Melamine and cyanuric acid are 'non-protein' sources of nitrogen; they are not amino acids, the building blocks of protein. But when added to animal feed, the chemicals make the feed appear to contain large amounts of protein whether it does or not. [...] The point of all this is that adding a non-protein source of nitrogen like melamine or cyanuric acid to a farm feed boosts its apparent - but not real - protein content." (Pet Food Politics, Marion Nestle, pp.70-71)

Not to disregard the health of my pets, or anyone else's pets, but I am now legitimately a bit frightened for my own health whenever I eat any wheat-gluten or seitan. Although there's probably a bit more inspection when it's planned to be in a human's food source, I still buy imported wheat-gluten mock meat products from Asian markets. Hopefully because of this book I'll be a bit more cautious with my own diet, and any pets I may have in the future with my girlfriend.

With this book, Marion Nestle gives me plenty of new information without a boring voice. She makes me question myself, and she ultimately teaches me lessons in caution and food safety.

9.3/10

Entry #17: Cabbage

Cabbage fucking rules, and it's not just my inner European speaking (well, maybe it is). Cabbage is so fucking cheap, and haluski is easily one of the tastiest dishes ever for its simplicity. Today my work was raising money for Harvest For Hunger (charity shit) and was selling 2 pierogies, a serving of haluski, and a coca cola for $2. Honestly, it was well worth the $2, but I felt like I ate a fucking stick of butter like an popsicle. I felt like a fat fuckhead all day. Honestly, I have no complaints about customers in this post; I've been pretty dry in my customer well of hostility. That Italian woman who recommended the dandelion greens a few weeks ago asked my ethnicity, and when I told her I was Hungarian and Polish she said something like, "well, so you're only used to eating cabbage then?" Pretty dick move; forgive her, she gave me good advice. I'm proud of being a fucking honkie (descendent of Hungarian laborers). Cleveland is probably one of the most "honkie" cities in the United States, since it's always had such a huge Hungarian population and was once a blossoming industrial city. I'm not proud of being "white," but I am proud of being Hungarian. Fuck it. Don't mistake my "honkie" pride as some racist, white pride, KKK, redneck, country rebel type shit.

For those who don't know, now you know. Haluski is a fancier term for cabbage and noodles. I'm unsure of whether there's a definitive difference between the two, but it still irks me when people refer to haluski as "cabbage and noodles" or when people refer to kolaches as "pastries." It sounds like uncultured, bullshit oversimplification to me.

So obviously green cabbage rules, but so does red cabbage, napa cabbage, broccoli and brussel sprouts (also members of the cabbage family). Today was so busy with fucking customers that I was hardly able to keep the produce floor in decent shape for the short while I was alone. Every second I had a customer ask me a question. Here's something that pisses me off: when customers ask where shit is that's not even in my fucking department. Yes, this entire store is my fucking responsibility; when I'm not stocking bananas, I'm stocking every single goddamn grocery aisle and punching the aluminum shit out of Dr.Doom. Real talk: I don't know shit about the floral department, I can't unlock wine coolers for you, and I don't know where the marmalade and angel food cakes are (try the fucking bakery, where else could it be?). Do people think that I've worked every other department, or do people expect me to come into my workplace unpaid to study what shit resides down each aisle? I can't tell anybody precise numbers; just look. If your life is so inconvenienced because you can't search a grocery store for some (more than likely obvious) item that's probably listed on a sign above its aisle, then you truly are a lazy dickhead.

Back onto the topic of cabbage: today at my work it was so busy that not only my department was wiped, but so was the salad bar. There was barely any spinach left, and no salad blends (only romaine). Instead, I just had tons of red cabbage. Totally irrelevant, but read my fucking blog anyway. Care about my pointless fucking life, please. Let me get indulgence from feeling self important. I forgot how good red cabbage was, even uncooked.

I also want to know what the hell I'm doing wrong with brussel sprouts, and why I can never make them taste as good as my work does. If I had regular readers, I would ask for recommendations on how to prepare brussel sprouts - because when I get them from my workplace's hot food bar, they're one of my favorite foods I've ever had. Fuck kids for not understanding the delicacy that is brussel sprouts; so many kids are just raised on fucking Kraft, Manwich, and baby formula. Fuck baby formulas; don't feed your children that shit. Kids are so accustomed to sodium and fat, and that's why they typically have such a strong distate for more flavorful vegetables. Sodium, fat, and sugar were nature's rewards, not the base of a meal. Not to mention their dads are usually shithead "meat and potato" men that push their dietary habits onto their children. No wonder kids are always such insensitive and hyper fuckheads. Watch this lecture about how nutrition influences behavior. The main culprits are preservatives (like yellow #5 and sodium benzoate), potatoes, corn, dairy, and high sugar (or sugar substitute) diets: shit that nearly every American kid is guilty of indulging in regularly.

nutrition and behavior aspartame (lecture)

Entry #16: Penn and Teller

Penn and Teller are definitely top tier douchebags. They essentially do what I'm doing in my blog (try and present contrary information using tons of profanity and an angry demeanor), but they fall into the categories of corporate interest and pro-technology stances. They're perfect entry-level jerking material for all of those nerdy kids nationwide who major in engineering, thinking their net life worth is defined by their income and our only progress humanity can still achieve is through technology and science. These are the asshats I would send to gas chambers - after I have them engineer more potent gas chambers with which to suffocate themselves. Oftentimes these are the same people who fall under the "predictable atheist" category mentioned in my entry about Family Guy. One of my coworkers tries to tell me that Penn and Teller try their best to have professionals represent both sides of the argument, which is totally untrue. In their episode about organic food they interview some fucking inarticulate hippies outside of a grocery store, and in their episode about Wal-Mart they interview some dickheads who make t-shirts. Of course they also interviewed a higher-up member of Green Peace and the mind behind the High Cost of Low Price movie - but Penn and Teller still try their hardest to make their opposition look as moronic as possible by also presenting the least reputable, least professional sources possible for the side they're against.

I could discuss their episode about organic food, but I already made my entry about organic food, so instead I'm going to talk about their episode about Wal-Mart - which made me want to punch my monitor on numerous occasions. The entire episode panned out like one huge advertisement for Wal-Mart, and reeked of sponsorship and corporate funding. The information was blatantly biased, especially in regards to Wal-Mart employees' payroll.

Let me remind you that they said in their episode the average hourly wage for a full-time Wal-Mart employee is $10.51/hour. First of all, I don't have any statistics or numbers available in front of me - but how many employees are full-time at Wal-Mart compared to their part-time employees? How often do they hire in new employees at full-time? Isn't it common fucking knowledge that Wal-Mart avoids giving full time employment, because in some cases that means they're also entitled to give certain benefits? I know my workplace is hardly Wal-Mart, and I'd safely assume it's a much better work environment - but my employer doesn't hire in any new employees at full-time, unless they're filling a specialized position or they're in a supervisement position. How many of those full-time employees at Wal-Mart, then, have been at the store for years, have trained positions or have supervisement positions that naturally pay more? This is hardly an accurate portrayal of the sort of income they offer.

For a comparison, let's talk about Ford Motor Company. Ford Motor Company is a huge employer for northeastern Ohio, and if you're living in any suburb of Medina or Cuyahoga counties you more than likely know at least one person who works at Ford, or has a relative who does. My dad, for example, has been working at Ford as an electrician for around 15 years. Previous to working at Ford my dad worked at TRW, and when he was first hired at Ford he doubled his hourly wage. Nowadays my dad currently makes over $30/hour, and he always refers to himself as a "dinosaur," because similar positions are becoming fewer and fewer.
Ford is going through a financial crisis at the moment, and every couple months it offers its employees a "buyout" opportunity - where they take a small annual income and paid tuition for a few years in place of their position with the company. When employees take these buyouts they hire new people to fill those positions, but they nearly cut the expected hourly wage in half. Positions that previously paid $17/hour are now being filled for $8.50/hour. Eight fucking fifty for a factory job, and a highly labor intensive one at that!
If we were to use Penn and Teller's bullshit acquisition of statistics and we calculated the average income for those employed with Ford Motor Company, those employees with more seniority would hugely inflate the statistic - not to mention they don't accurately represent what you'd expect if you were a new hire at Ford, even once you reach your maximum hourly rates. The statistic is only full of more shit if the majority of those being polled are nearly all employees with more seniority or trained positions - which is more than likely the case if you're compiling information on people who are employed full-time at Wal-Mart. Their statistics should be based off of part-time employees, their average starting wages, and their maximum salary caps.

Later in the episode, Penn and Teller actually say that we should fucking tear down the downtown areas in cities to build Wal-Marts?! What kind of bullshit is this? They blame politicians and special interest groups for rejecting proposals to build Wal-Marts in their towns, and say something to the extent of "who are the fuck are you to say what's right," or some other relativist shit along the same line. Well, I won't be dodgy in what I'm about to say: most people are fucking morons. Consumers drive the economy, sure, I can accept that as fact. I would go even further and say that workers drive the economy, because it's their paychecks that ultimately pump money into bullshit companies to come out with newer, improved bullshit products that we usually don't need. If the consumers are going to be dickheads and drive 20 miles away to buy all their products at a big box retailer I don't want my quality of life to be hurt in the process. I'll gladly support family businesses and get artisan and high quality products at higher prices, but I'll just be a bit more responsible with my money and not buy too many items outside of necessity. However, if your support of Wal-Mart is going to drive my downtown area out of business and hurt my quality of life, I hope you choke on a chicken McNugget so I can visit your gravestone to personally dig up your grave and fornicate your dead corpse with a broomstick, and then smash in your fucking rotten head with a baseball bat. "Who the fuck are you," Penn and Teller? You're obviously some dickheads who assume that the general population knows what the fuck it's doing, that's why you're making a tv show to uncover all the "bullshit" it supposedly believes.

I want to support quality products, not mass produced shit that's outsourced and sold at non-union workplaces. It would be nice if I could go into a store and its workers actually made the products they're selling, so if I have any personal questions, complaints, or recommendations they could give me relevant fucking information and not redirect me to some other motherfucker or tell me they're unsure.

You know what else really pisses me off? Anti-union fuckheads. My union ensures me a minimum number of hours, and even though it's only 14 hours it's still better than nothing. At one point I worked at Target (and later got fired), and they would schedule me for one day a week sometimes, or they would give me 6 or 7 hours split amongst 3 days. A few friends of mine have worked at Blockbuster, and they had similar issues. One friend of mine actually wasn't scheduled a whole week straight while at Blockbuster. How the fuck are you supposed to do anything, or even make the radical claim that you even have a job if you're only working one or two fucking days a week? How about when I was working at Little Caesars and I would go entire shifts without a single, quantifiable break? My union also offers optical and dental insurance, and minor health insurance for its full-time employees. One of the coolest things about having a union is you're not a total bitch, and unless you're caught stealing your workplace doesn't want to bother with going through all the paperwork and proving just cause behind firing an employee. When I was working at Chipotle I got fired for not reaching the ringing standard at the cash register; I was fucking shaking half the time I working there - I felt so much stress and tension trying to reach that ringing standard. Hey, I just got fired instead of them actually trying to help me improve my speed, calm myself down or give any pointers. You're a motherfucking manager, not a taskmaster. Manage me, tell me how to perform my job and help my performance, not sit idly by and to criticize me and laugh at my attempts. A few of my friends have worked at UPS and FedEX factories, on the otherhand, and been able to get away with nearly anything without getting fired. In my opinion, this is the way things should be. Nobody should be fired unless they're totally unmanagable, they constantly don't show up without calling, they openly quit their job, or they're caught stealing. It's true it can create lazier workers, but it creates less stressful environments for its employees who are the driving bodies of our economy - without their wages paying for bullshit they don't need, capitalism would stop existing. I will gladly pay more money to give workers higher wages, and I will gladly give $8 out of my paycheck to ensure a few benefits, job security, and a floor for my hours.

Maybe the goal of most of these anti-union employers is to make their workers unhappy, so they spend more money on the entertainment industry?

As a closing thought, anybody who is anti-union is fucking worthless and they should be fed their own shit from a trough, since they're already accustomed to low-quality products.

Entry #15: Polka Pt.1

Fuck yeah, a polka band covering Katy Perry. This entry has literally no relevance to this blog whatsoever, but it's fun and we should all take a moment to appreciate polka music.

Entry #14: Organic Food Pt.1

In this entry, I'm going to discuss a horseshit article I've come across that embodies every inane utterance in transgenic food's defense. Now, incase it hasn't already been stated in a previous post, I'm a somewhat supporter of Naturopathy. Naturopathy is a form of alternative medicine that states that the digestive system is the "central" body system, rather than the nervous system, and that we can heal ourselves through the ingestion of herbs/roots/barks/etc. In all honesty though, I probably align myself more with "healing through diet" rather than the ingestion of herbs or supplements. Regardless, I'm not going to deploy all my defenses in Naturopathy's favor in this article nor am I going to take any major shots at conventional medicine/pharmaceuticals; I'm simply using this discussion on medicine as an analogy for comparative reasons. Whenever Naturopathy is brought up, practitioners of conventional medicine get up in arms as if their entire lifestyles are threatened by these foreign beliefs. It's honestly very, very frustrating. We're in a country where people are encouraged to live by what I'd consider careless and egocentric lifestyles, and we're told that ideological militance is unacceptable and every person is free to do whatever the fuck they want if it doesn't hurt anybody else on the surface. Being "preachy" has a negative connotation, as if you're supposed to enact major social, environmental, or cultural change by changing yourself and ignoring the pitfalls of society around you. Yeah fucking right. So it makes no sense why it's acceptable for proponents of conventional medicine to criticize alternative methods and be "preachy" about it, but I'll receive criticism and get labeled "preachy" for questioning peoples' diets or comsumption of drugs and alcohol (even moreso pharmaceuticals). They'll try and tell you it's a matter regarding peoples' health - how the fuck is it not a matter of peoples' health when I criticize alcohol, or I criticize genetically modified food products? Damn shit-eating hypocrites.
So where's the parallel? Organic food is treated as the opposition, just like Naturopathy or any other form of alternative medicine. The link I'm about to post is on a site called "Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena." How the fuck is the alternative food sector "Pop Phenomena"? Citizens of some states have lengthy drives between them and any popular organic food grocer or health food store, even Whole Foods - the Wal-Mart of industrial organic. I doubt some people have even seen a Whole Foods when they're not watching Good Eats. What constitutes "Pop Phenomena," a trend amongst the Hollywood elite? Also: how the fuck can I take a "skeptic" serious or even consider somebody a skeptic when they're a proponent of the "winning" side of the argument? I know it can still make sense semantically, but it's just stupid. You're not a "skeptic" in my eyes, you're a jackass who's trying to reinforce what the majority already believes. Stay tuned, and keep stroking your dicks.

anyways, here is the article

Right on its onset the first paragraph already has an aggressive tone:
"Today we're going to put on our tie dyed shirt, grow our hair long and dirty, claim hatred for science and corporate America, then walk into the most expensive specialty supermarket in town and purchase one of the most overpriced products on the market today: Organic food."




Wow. This article teems edginess, it's practically its second language. I don't even know where to begin with my retort. I can't quit looking at the dude's smug, shit-eating smirk on his face. Actually, a response probably isn't even in order. He's just trying to be witty; I doubt he sincerely believes that every individual who walks into a healthfood store fits that archetype.




Moving onwards, price: the number one thing people are going to bitch about when they're arguing against organic food. If I was going to make a "Defensive GMO Bingo" like that popular "Defensive Omnivore's Bingo," (here) price would be the fucking block in the top left corner. It's a fair assumption that the writer of the article knows more than I do about economics, so shouldn't he know that prices are driven by supply and demand? Organic crops, even industrial organic, don't have the same market power as transgenic crops. My workplace, along with any other grocery store, is (putting it as indelicately as possible) greedy. It costs a lot to order organic foods, considering most major retailers outside of the West Coast have to order their large scale, industrial organic products all the way from California, Arizona, etc. Earthbound farms supplies most grocery stores unspecialized in healthfood in the Midwest. Not only is the shipment longer, more costly, and the organic food naturally has a shorter shelf life - but the product is also stored in a warehouse for extended periods of time waiting to be ordered, making its shelf life even shorter. It's expensive for larger grocery stores unspecialized in healthfood to supply organic options for these reasons (in addition to low demand), and most of them don't deem it worth their cut in profit. I've watched the organic options fluctuate constantly at my workplace, and I have to throw away tons of product firsthand. So it's a given that grocers don't want to spend the extra money and are "greedy" and insensitive to environmental or health concerns, but the large scale organic agri-businesses are also susceptible to greedy practices. This is what most proponents of transgenic food will argue, and it's true. They realize that they're offering a specialty product, so they can demand a higher markup. However, how is that any better or worse than RoundupReady corn or any other herbicide-tolerant seeds that demand monopolies for Monsanto or other similar corporations? Is that any less greedy? How is that any worse than things like runoff from chemical fertilizers? The smaller amount you're paying for transgenic food is ultimately churned back into higher taxes because of more environmental destruction and government subsidies.
Also you have to consider the working conditions at the grocery stores versus healthfood stores. Let's just compare Whole Foods against Wal-Mart; the average wage for a "team-member" at Whole Foods is $11. Holy shit?! I wish I could get paid that money to work in produce like I do right now. Not only that, but Whole Foods offers discounts for its workers, which (as far as I know) Wal-Mart does not. My workplace doesn't even offer any discounts, even though my workplace offers a few benefits and union membership. Where do low prices come from at major retailers? Cutting hours and eliminating operating costs. It makes sense that healthfood stores would have higher prices when their workers have higher wages, more benefits, and more hours. It's not fucking rocket science.




Now let's talk about farmer's markets and the famous Westside market in Cleveland. My favorite produce stand in the Westside market, the Basketeria offers food that's organic, local, and from Amish farms that's cheaper than most produce at even my Super Wal-Mart! Organic food doesn't always necessarily cost more money, you soggy dicks.


Yes, mass-production generally makes a product cheaper - but that should just be common sense. There are plenty of unlisted costs for genetically modified food (potential crop mutation, run-off, soil degredation, health costs, subsidies, etc). Organic food doesn't necessarily cost much more to produce, so long as cover crops are planted and on-site manure is used.




Further down the article the author states that,
"The food itself is identical [which it's not], but it's prepared in such a way to conform to different philosophical standards [....] for animals it requires that they have not been kept healthy through the use of antibiotics." (Skeptoid.com)

The reasons why the animals are given antibiotics are because they're living in such close confines in such high volumes, and because of the poor diets they're fed in place of grass diets to maximize and marbelize their fat. Why the hell would I want to eat an animal that has antibiotics in its daily feed when I won't even take antibiotics myself? The diet of the animals you eat is as important as your overall diet itself, just as a grandmother's diet is ultimately a factor in a grandchild's health, wellness, and proper development. If you're in some totally hypothetical forced cannibalism, would you rather eat a guy in a "tie dyed shirt" with "long and dirty hair" who buys all his produce from local co-ops or a lardass Hell's Angel with a handlebar moustache and clogged arteries, who spends all his freetime eating bar food and drinking cheap domestic beer?

The author of the linked article then follows to say:
"All right, let's take for granted the position that major food producers deserve to be struck with a blow. I'm sure the starving millions in Africa appreciate the sentiment." (Skeptoid.com)

The hunger problem in Africa isn't entirely a result of a lack of arable land, or Americans not helping out "enough" - it's largely the result of the global marketplace. Listen and let me make my argument before anybody dismisses it:

It's a granted that different crops grow well under different conditions, correct? Certain crops demand less precipitation, use fewer or more nutrients from the soil, store carbon differently, grow well in different climates and temperature ranges. Things like corn are not meant to grow well in arid regions! If the Africans were more concerned with growing things like sorghum and bulgur they could get higher crop yields. Not to mention:

"[...] as American and European farmers were also discovering, while fertilizers were a necessary ingredient for modern high-yield agriculture, they were not sufficient to ensure its success. Although African farmers saw massive yield increases within the first few years of adopting the new techniques, in a relatively short time, something odd happened - yields fell unless farmers added steadily greater applications of nitrogen and other fertilizers. This effect was so dramatic that over the course of twenty years, a farmer would need to double his nitrogen applications simply to maintain his yields at their initial level." (The End of Food, Paul Roberts, pp.154)

What does this mean? Well, synthetic fertilizers are ammonia based. Most of that synthetic ammonia is produced using natural gas. The middle east happens to be the largest supplier of natural gas. In attempting to imitate Western growing methods they're consuming large amounts of subsidized chemical fertilizers, and creating economic dependencies upon other nations.

P.S. Now I'm not personally a buyer of all that nationalist bullshit, but if you're going to be one of those assholes who says buying weed supports the middle east (I in no way support marijuana usage, but I don't employ this particular argument) or that you're not a supporter of the current war, then how can you even think for a moment that you're blameless when you're buying transgenic crops en masse that are almost wholly dependent upon middle eastern natural gas?

The following paragraph in End of Food states:

"Why this change occurs isn't entirely clear, but research suggests that under intensive agricultural methods, soils will lose not just macronutrients - nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, which can be replenished synthetically - but the carbon-rich organic matter left over by decaying plants and animals. The organic matter is key to good crop yields. The more organic matter in the soil, the more rainwater the soil can absorb and retain [...] The problem is that soil organic matter, or SOM, can be depleted when farmers raise too many crops without replenishing nutrients with cover crops or manure or other fertilizers. And once SOM begins to fall, the soil's capacity to hold and transport synthetic nutrients also falls, which means that farmers have to add steadily more nitrogen simply to maintain their yields." (The End of Food, Paul Roberts, pp. 154-155)

The real problem is one of the same problems the United States has - monocultures and too much farm land without enough cover crops being planted. A large portion of the corn (very variable in its yields) being grown in Africa that isn't being directly consumed by its citizens is being sold on the global market. Admittedly, most nations want to bring prosperity and potential jobs to their home countries - not excluding those in Africa. Growing corn year round like the Americans is an attempt to stay healthy in the global market, along with the many cash crops native to countries like Kenya - such as coffee, tea, and pineapples. Much of their already meager crop is being sold on the global market instead of being as widely distributed to its citizens, not to mention they're the wrong crops being grown.
One problem with distribution is poor road systems. If we really wanted to help starving nations in Africa, we shouldn't just pump our leftovers onto their plates (ie. giving them a fish, instead of teaching them how to fish in that popular adage) - we should be improving their road systems and helping them build better irrigation systems. We're also not helping their economies by giving them our produce, as opposed to helping their domestic farmers and using our wealth to buy up their products; if anything we're just dragging down their prices and hurting their already struggling farmers even more. As for helping themselves, they should focus more on growing crops native to their regions and quit growing as many crops solely for competition in the global marketplace.

Brian Dunning, the writer of the skeptoid article I linked, continues by saying:

"Make no mistake, organic food is big, big business. The days when the organic produce section of the supermarket represented the product of a small local farmer are long gone. California alone produces over $600 million in organic produce, most of it coming from just five farms [...] the same producers of most non-organic food in the state." (Skeptoid.com)

At this point, the article says something that's undeniable truth - even if it's lacking in its considerations and it involves incredibly surface-level reasoning. Quoting Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan,

"All but one of the vegetables I served that night bore the label of Cal-Organic Farms, which, along with Earthbound, dominates the organic produce section in the supermarket. [...] As part of the consolidation of the organic industry, the company was acquired by Grimmway Farms, which already enjoyed a virtual monopoly in organic carrots. Unlike Earthbound, neither Grimmway nor Cal-Organic has ever been part of the organic movement. Both companies were started by conventional growers looking for a more profitable niche and worried that the state might ban certain key pesticides. [....] Philosophy, in other words, has nothing to do with it." (Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan, pp.174)

The "problem" with Dunning's article is that with its strongly anti-organic undertone, it neglects to recognize with any sort of followup that smaller organic farms still do exist. The options are still extant, with the "beyond organic" farms (like Joel Salatin's Polyface Farms) mentioned in Omnivore's Dilemma, options at local farmer's markets, most produce that comes from the Amish, and even the possibility that the reader him/herself could do small scale organic gardening. Nobody is locked into the prices that are offerred at the supermarket, and it's not our only source of food. Everybody should aspire to not be that detached from their food source by making such base assumptions.

Dunning continues to use Trader Joe's as an example of large scale organic businesses fooling their customers into thinking they're buying something from a family business atmosphere. I don't think that this is a fair assessment, because along with Whole Foods it's the largest national organic grocer. Are you really going to use that as the example? This should already be common knowledge to most people. The sad thing is, so many people think that shopping at Nature's Bin or Mustard Seed or Trader Joe's is the acme of ways they can contribute. I will partially agree with Dunning's overall theme of his article, large scale organic isn't much better than large scale transgenic - but it's still partially better, and it's still a "lesser evil." Dunning even mentions a previous argument of mine but fails to address it, by citing the starting salary for Trader Joe's supervisors. Does he not take into account that the prices we pay at the register directly affect workers' pay? Their salaries or hourly rates aren't necessarily based on profit per se, but the location's profit helps pay for labor and the allocation of more available hours. When more hours are available and workers have higher wages, prices will be higher for the customer. Honestly though, Trader Joe's is consistently one of the cheapest among its competitors - including conventional supermarkets, so they were already a poor example to use if you're trying to convey the idea that organic food is generally more expensive. Trader Joe's even placed second, only under New York's popular Wegmans, in Consumer Report's list of the best received supermarkets (based on customer satisfaction) covered in The Plain Dealer about a year ago with low price being one of its best selling points. What exactly is cheaper than Trader Joe's in Northeast Ohio, from personal experience? Marcs, Wal-Mart, Aldis, and maybe some farmers markets. That's it.

In Dunning's next paragraph, he argues that organic farming creates a breeding ground for disease like ecoli:

"Most local Chinese farming uses organic methods, in that the only fertilizers used are human and animal waste [...] In the case of China and other poor Asian nations, the reason for organic farming has less to do with ideology and more to do with lack of access to modern farming technology." (skeptoid.com)

I can't say I'm personally well read in regards to Chinese farming history, or their current farming conditions. I can say, however, that in the case of Joel Salatin's Polyface Farms, his products rated higher in food safety tests than the average farming operation. Michael Pollan states regarding imposed processing regulations that, "The specifications and costly technologies implictly assume that the animals being processed have been living in filth and eating corn rather than grass." (Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan, pp.250) How are we to not assume that Dunning is making a fallacy by assuming that it's solely their use of organic manure and not the result of poor care, poor diets of those contributing the manure (animal or human), or some other related issue? Shouldn't Joel's farms have ranked lower in food safety tests if it's solely the result of using manure, something used since the advent of agriculture? Also, are you fucking kidding me? Is that even implying that chemical fertilizer is somehow superior to organic matter, including manure?

In addition, if you're going to bitch about fermented urine being used as an organic pesticide - I'll take my pissed on produce, and you can have your carcinogens. Urine is an infinite source of ammonia, unlike natural gas. At the end of a long paragraph about naturalistic fallacy, Dunning closes by saying, "By no definition can 'all natural' mean that a product is healthful." (skeptoid.com) The coin can be reversed, and you could easily make the same statement about synethetic products - but nobody wants to question the integrity of almightly science and its crucified technology, right?

In the next paragraph, Dunning highlights conventional growers' desire to eliminate unforeseen problems by using the most efficient processes and thereby cutting operating costs, and how farming is a highly regulated industry:

"What's the best way to improve the profit margin? To buy less pesticides and fertilizer. This means they must use far more advanced and efficient products. The idea that pesticides leave dangerous residues is many decades out of date. Food production is among the most regulated and scrutinized of processes, and today's synthetic pesticides and fertilizers are completely biodegradable. They're supported by decades of studies that demonstrate their total safety." (skeptoid.com)

The problem is this, and I appologize if my response is a bit "childish" or cliched anti-corporate ramble - much of that research is funded by the producers of the pesticides in question, including Monsanto. There are loopholes that can be evaded at any corner if the money is present. Chemical runoff from farms in Iowa does travel downstream into the Gulf of Mexico and hurt biodiversity. Chemical fertilizer does degrade soil quality, and as I already stated in my discussion of Africa - can ultimately strike demand for placement of greater amounts of fertilizer. I can understand that proponents of organic farming that bring up health concerns regarding chemical residue can be a bit questionable in their sources (chances are a good source would be hard to find anyways, since most studies would be funded in the interests of larger chemical companies), and it's nothing that I'd actively use in my arsenal and expect to be taken seriously. I personally wouldn't put those thoughts too far out of the realm of possibility, but I wouldn't expect them to be key striking points in any argument. If you're comfortable supporting the use of chemical fertilizers that degrade soil quality, maybe not always directly but at least by not returning macronutrients into the soil through organic matter or cover crops, then be happy furthering our dependence upon other countries (including those that most Americans rally at any chance to hate in the middle east). I'm not an opponent of the middle east, but I am a strong supporter of a country producing as many of its commodities as possible, slashing the amount of imported goods, and creating domestic jobs wherever possible. Plus the transport of all those transgenic crops alone is less sustainable, because all of that chemical fertilizer has to be shipped from an offsite source.

One of Dunning's final contentions is that organic farming is ultimately worse for the environment, since it requires more acreage. Well, let's just step back for a second and consider all of the land that's used to grow inedible type 2 corn for byproducts, including ethanol, chemical preservatives, animal feed, and most importantly high fructose corn syrup. Let's also consider all of the rainforests that are being tore down to grow soybeans. Well, last time I checked - soybeans are a very effective cover crop, and pull nutrients (including nitrogen) back into the soil. How about we cut back on the production of inedible corn at least a few months of the year, and instead plant those soybeans we're tearing down rainforest to cultivate? How about we just cut back on the amount of subsidized, inedible corn produced period, and instead plant more edible plants? How about we cut the subsidy programs altogether and give incentive to grow other crops? Ethanol, preservatives, animal feed, and HFCS are all fucking horrible things to begin with - and I hate thinking that so much of my nation's soil is used to produce corn that's stripped down to any one of the four.

Farming should be a small scale operation that isn't stigmatized or associated with negative stereotypes. More educated people should be farmers, and thereby quit being cronies for corporate interest, and sell more of their product at local farmers markets (thusly eliminating storage time, transportation costs, and create a friendly and personal atmosphere). We should also have more of our workforce willing to be farmhands.

I'm well aware that we're on the verge of another food system collapse and another mass starvation. It's very idealistic of me to assume that with our current overpopulation issue that any drastic change could occur anytime soon without consumers demanding their surpluses. Cuba is able to have a self sustaining food system, and China has made a valiant attempt despite its astronomical overpopulation problem. We, as a nation, need to band together and eat less food (meat in particular), put more preparation into our diets and place less emphasis on convenience, form self sustaining farmers market networks in every state, and quit shopping at supermarkets (I'll excuse you if I'm put out of a job because my workplace isn't seeing enough profit). It's a slight possibility within my lifetime, and a definite fallback if a mass starvation does occur. Transgenic farming is simply not sustainable. Energy is lost when you're using chemical fertilizers, since they're highly dependent upon a finite resource. Manure, on the other hand, can be fueled via the sun energy that grows the grass that feeds the cows. You're only complicating issues by attempting to mask one mistake caused by technology with a newer technological fix that has its own set of problems. Technology did not die for our sins, it has its comfortable seat in Hades contemplating more ways to fuck over our species and, unfortunately, planet.

Also, for the record, organic produce is healthier by at least one reputable study:

"A study by University of California-Davis researchers published in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry in 2003 described an experiment in which identical varieties of corn, strawberries, and blackberries grown in neighboring plots using different methods (including organically and conventionally) were compared for levels of vitamins and polyphenols. [...] The Davis researchers found that organic and otherwise sustainably grown fruits and vegetables contained significantly higher levels of ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and a wide range of polyphenols. [...] Why in the world should organically grown blackberries or corn contain significantly more of these compounds? The authors of the Davis study haven't settled the question, but they offer two suggestive theories. The reason plants produce these compounds in the first place is to defend themselves against pests and disease; the more pressure from pathogens, the more polyphenols a plant will produce. These compounds, then, are the products of natural selection and, more specifically, the coevolutionary relationship between plants and the species that prey on them. Who would have guessed that humans evolved to profit from a diet of these plant pesticides? Or that we would invent an agriculture that then deprived us of them? The Davis authors hypothesize that plants being defended by man-made pesticides don't need to work as hard to make their own polyphenol pesticides. Coddled by us and our chemicals, the plants see no reason to invest their resources in mounting a strong defense." (Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan, pp.179-180)

Which makes perfect sense.