16 Jul

Is Produce Safety a Thing of the Past?

Posted by Meghan in Food Policy. Tagged: .

I’ve written a lot about the budget cuts that are happening to the farm bill both in the Senate and in the House, but those cuts are affecting other programs as well. Most notably in the news right now is the Microbiological Data Program.

This relatively small program—which only costs $4.5 million per year—is the only one that comprehensively tests produce for pathogens like salmonella and E. coli. (Remember that cantaloupe outbreak last fall?) They also put all their results into the CDC’s comprehensive database used to help link illnesses to food products.

Surprisingly, the produce industry is actually the group that’s asking for this program to be eliminated. According to the Chicago Tribune, “the USDA’s Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee complained about ‘unnecessary recalls’ and asked if the funds would be ‘better utilized elsewhere.’” (I don’t really think that 19 recalls in two years is “unnecessary.”) And the senior vice president of public policy for United Fresh told The Grower, “As we said before, we continue to believe that USDA’s MDP program is not the right way to go in terms of a testing program for microbiological testing on fresh produce. Certainly FDA has the tools, resources and capabilities to do this on their own.”

The problem is that the FDA has no such resources. It already does check some produce, but it’s a tiny amount compared to what the MDP checks annually. (You can see more specific numbers on Food Safety News.) The “tiny program that matters” (according to The New York Times) is important considering that in 2011, one-third of foodborne illnesses in the U.S. were linked to produce.

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro from Connecticut is encouraging the administration to continue funding this program. You can read Michele Simon’s letter to Michelle Obama or Bill Marler’s editorial and even sign the petition.

13 Jul

FARRM in the House

Posted by Meghan in Uncategorized.

The Federal Agriculture Reform and Management Act (the House of Representatives’ version of the farm bill) is in the House, and it was passed by the Agriculture Committee yesterday with a 35-11 vote. I’ve already posted about the Senate’s version here and here, but now the House has its own version. Let’s check out some of the “highlights” (more like lowlights).

  • The committee rejected an amendment 31-15 that would restore $16.5 billion in funding for SNAP. (Instead of just cutting funding, how about working to fix some of the problems with food stamps?)
  • Good news: they passed an amendment from Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) to make it easier for people to use food stamps for community-supported agriculture programs.
  • FARRM creates $35 billion in savings, nearly half of which comes from cuts to food stamps. It also cuts $6 billion from conservation programs.
  • The farm bill that the Senate passed attempted to address the issue of giant farms still collecting farm payments. This bill does not.
  • The bill also took away funding from UDSA’s programs to help new farmers—programs that are desperately needed since the current crop of farmers are older. And according to the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, it “cuts funding for rural economic development by 88 percent when compared to the average funding levels of the past three farm bills.”
  • Crop insurance subsidies are slightly out of control, 26 businesses collected more than $1 million each in 2011 and over 10,000 others got more than $100,000 each, according to the Environmental Working Group. This bill actually increases crop subsidies.
  • The Senate version included more measures to address fruit and vegetable consumption—this bill does not. It also disposes of a program that helps farmers with organic certification.
  • There’s a proposal to forbid any state from setting its own standards over the production of crops and livestock. (It’s also raising some constitutional questions.)

So what comes next? It should go to the whole House for a vote before negotiating with the Senate, but Speaker John Boehner may not bring it to the floor for a vote in an election year. And with the five-week recess, there’s not much time before the current farm bill expires September 30. They may vote to extend the current bill and wait until next year to settle this.

12 Jul

Thursday Topics

Posted by Meghan in Thursday Topics.

(Each Thursday I like to link to some of my favorite online pieces from the previous week.)

11 Jul

Food Stamps: Did You Know?

Posted by Meghan in Food Policy, Nutrition. Tagged: , .

One of my personal favorite food policy advocates, Michele Simon, recently released an in-depth report on food stamps. (There’s also an infographic.)  As someone who admittedly isn’t as well-versed as I should be in this part of the farm bill, I was eager to learn more. I was surprised by much of what I read.

Did you know that…food stamps represent the largest chunk of the farm bill?

SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), which cost $78 billion in 2011, represented 68% of the 2008 farm bill and currently makes up 80% of the $1 trillion farm bill that has been passed by the Senate. One in seven Americans are on food stamps, and nearly half of those are children. 

…food stamps are currently in danger?

The version of the farm bill that was passed in the Senate included a $4.5 billion reduction over ten years. The House of Representatives, meanwhile, wants a $16 billion cut. Many groups, including the Environmental Working Group, are outraged that the subsidies given to large farmers are remaining while these low-income benefits are decreasing.

…there are few restrictions on what can be bought with food stamps? (Though some states have tried.)

People on food stamps cannot use them to buy alcohol, cigarettes, or non-food items. But beyond that, there are no restrictions. The program was founded in 1964 to help those in need while also taking care of agricultural surpluses, which were at the time fruits and vegetables. I suppose that now the purpose of the program unintentionally remains the same, though our agricultural surpluses are now mainly corn, soy, and wheat—which are the backbones of unhealthy processed foods and sugary beverages.

Compare this program to WIC, which services low-income women who are pregnant and/or have children under five. According to their website, “WIC foods include infant cereal, iron-fortified adult cereal, vitamin C-rich fruit or vegetable juice, eggs, milk, cheese, peanut butter, dried and canned beans/peas, and canned fish. Soy-based beverages, tofu, fruits and vegetables, baby foods, whole-wheat bread, and other whole-grain options were recently added to better meet the nutritional needs of WIC participants.” Why do we care about the health of these populations but not the general population?

At least nine states, most publicly New York, have attempted to place restrictions on these purchases. In 2010, they asked for a waiver from the UDSA to try restrictions for two years. Simon argues (and I agree) that states should be given the freedom to experiment with what foods are included.

…there is very little transparency?

There is no public data available on how SNAP dollars are spent. The data is out there since retailers can easily track what people buy with food stamps, but it’s not available. Farm subsidy information is public, so why isn’t this information? There’s even a specific SNAP education program, but how can they effective education people if we don’t know what they’re purchasing? And as Simon says (completely unintentional pun),  “Why should only private entities with financial interest in SNAP have access to information that significantly impacts public health?”

…powerful industries benefit from SNAP?

The biggest industries that benefit from SNAP are major grocery stores (10% of all grocery store purchases are made with SNAP dollars), big food manufacturers (who undoubtedly profit from what is being bought), and most surprisingly, banks. Yes, banks. States set up contracts with banks in order to administer food stamps through EBT (electronic benefit transfer), in which people have their benefits transferred to a card that can be easily used at places that accept food stamps. According to the USDA, administrative costs of EBT for SNAP totaled $314 million in 2010. Those costs are split between USDA and the states.

J.P. Morgan, which is the bank of choice for these contracts in half of the states, has a five-year, $83 million contract in Florida and a seven-year, $126 million contract in New York. Both contracts are expected to far exceed the initial predicted amounts.

…there’s a bill in Congress to address these issues?

Ron Wyden, a Democratic senator from Oregon, introduced the Fresh Regional Eating for Schools and Health Act in 2011. The FRESH Act would “authorize pilot programs that will assist SNAP beneficiaries in meeting federal nutrition guidelines and promote innovative local projects” and “require retail stores with gross annual SNAP sales in excess of $1 million to report food purchased by program recipients to the Department of Agriculture.” The bill has been introduced but has not yet made it to the committee stage.

I highly recommend reading the original report (you can read Simon’s recommendations on p. 23) or the articles from some of the various news agencies that have picked up this story (including Reuters, Time, and the San Francisco Chronicle).

10 Jul

To-Do Tuesday: How to Structure a Meal

Posted by Meghan in To-Do Tuesday. Tagged: , .

(Each Tuesday, I write about an actionable item that we can all use in order to live and eat green.)

Whenever I talk to someone about eating less meat, they often worry about what to make for dinner. Breakfast and lunch are usually pretty self-explanatory, but I think people tend to struggle with dinner because in this country our meals really are centered around meat. Instead of just subtracting the meat from your normal meals, it’s far easier to learn a new way to structure your meals so that vegetables and grains become the focus. You can definitely buy a few vegetarian cookbooks and really get into some fancier meals, but honestly, many people don’t have time on weekdays to create an elaborate meal. It’s more sustainable to learn a formula, figure out what your options are, and then continue to make new combinations as you learn what you like.

So what’s my formula? Grain + vegetable + legume/protein + fat. It’s not revolutionary in any way, but it works for me.

Grains

Most of these grains can be found in the bulk bins at your grocery store (bonus: bring your own containers for less packaging!), are quite inexpensive, and will keep for a long time in your refrigerator. To figure out how to cook them properly, a quick Google search is your friend. (Here is one of my favorite guides from Eating Well.) I will often decide which couple grains I’d like to eat during the week and make big batches when I have some time on the weekend.

  • Barley
  • Brown rice
  • Bulgur
  • Farro
  • Millet
  • Pasta
  • Quinoa
  • Spelt
  • Teff
  • Wheat berries

Vegetables

Use any vegetable you can think of! Branch out and try some new ones. (I was a little afraid of kale until I tried it, now it’s my favorite vegetable.) I try to stick with in-season veggies because they often taste better and are cheaper. This is a fantastic tool to show you what’s in season each month in your state.

There are lots of ways to cook vegetables: you can boil them, microwave them, steam them, grill them, sauté them, roast them, or eat them raw. My personal favorites are sautéing and roasting—I think those methods make vegetables taste the best. (Here’s another good guide from Eating Well on how to cook vegetables.)

Legumes/Proteins

You can buy canned beans and lentils that are pretty cheap, or you can buy dried ones that are even cheaper and cook them yourself.

  • Black beans
  • Canned salmon/tuna/sardines (if you eat fish)
  • Chickpeas
  • Eggs
  • Lentils
  • Pinto beans
  • Tempeh
  • Tofu
  • Shellfish

Fats

I often like to add a fat source to my meals to increase satiety. Plus, fats are delicious and can be good for you! I often add some chopped nuts/avocado or cook/roast my veggies in a little oil, but you can also use dressings and/or sauces that you like.

  • Almonds
  • Avocado
  • Dressings/sauces
  • Oils
  • Peanuts
  • Walnuts

A lot of people like to plan out their meals in advance before they go to the grocery store, but that doesn’t really work for me. I’m never sure what I’ll be in the mood for five days from now! Instead, I just make sure I have several options from each group on hand, and I know that I’ll be able to create many different meals. Here are a few of my favorites, all of which are easy, fairly quick, healthy, and delicious:

  • Barley with scrambled eggs, avocado, and greens
  • Bulgur with kale, tempeh, and walnuts
  • Fried brown rice with carrots/mushrooms and shrimp
  • Quinoa with sautéed zucchini/summer squash/red pepper/carrots and crumbled tofu
  • Whole wheat pasta with tomato sauce and beans

9 Jul

Should the Food Industry be Regulated?

Posted by Meghan in Food Policy, Nutrition. Tagged: , .

As part of the PLOS Medicine series on Big Food, Kelly Brownell from the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity recently wrote a piece on the regulation that’s necessary within the food industry.

Brownell says that “when the history of the world’s attempt to address obesity is written, the greatest failure may be collaboration with and appeasement of the food industry.” Up until now, the public health sector and the big food industries have been “working together,” and the food manufacturers consistently throw out measures that are intended to appease, including big donations to health care facilities and the production of healthier processed foods.

The food industry “has been in high gear, making promises to behave better, but their minor progress creates an impression of change while larger attempts to subvert the agenda carry on.” These food manufacturers are failing marketing initiatives, continuing to increase serving sizes, and creating an endless stream of sugary beverages (vitamin waters, really?).

Brownell says it best: “The obesity problem has industry’s attention, and they are doing things. The question is whether these things are meaningful or are the predictable behavior of an industry under threat and are designed to stop rather than support public health efforts.” He argues that big food has no incentive to do what it needs to do (sell less processed food) and instead of making small concessions and hoping that the food industry will come around, we should be regulating them just like we regulate other industries. I tend to agree with him and would love to hear his ideas for how specifically we should start regulating.

However, there are other groups approaching this issue from the other side. The American Medical Association voted recently to promote taxation of sugary beverages. According to the AMA, sugary beverages account for half of our intake of added sugars, and “a penny-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened drinks would lower obesity rates by 5 percent and would save $17 billion in medical costs over 10 years.” (I’ve also previously posted about soda taxes.) Some countries even have fat taxes.

Which approach do you agree with? Perhaps some of both? I would love to hear what you think!

5 Jul

Thursday Topics

Posted by Meghan in Uncategorized.

(Each Thursday I like to link to some of my favorite online pieces from the previous week.)

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.