On January 3, 2014 there was an article printed in Hawaii’s Honolulu Star Advertiser newspaper written by an Associated Press writer – Mary Clare Jalonick – that absolutely blew my mind. I’ll add my two cents as we go along but you will definitely get her point.
For years the government has been issuing guidelines about healthful eating choices.
Now, a panel that advises the Agriculture Department is ready to recommend that you are to be told not only what foods are better for your own health, but for the environment as well.
That means that when the latest version of the government’s dietary guidelines comes out, it might push even harder than it has in recent years for people to choose more fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds, whole grains and other plant-based foods – at the expense of meat.
The beef and agriculture industries are crying foul, which is a sweet euphemistic way of saying, shitting in their pants, saying an environmental agenda has no place in what has always been a practical blueprint for the healthful lifestyle that they cling to so Monsanto can continue to pay them off to pollute the environment.
The advisory panel has been discussing the idea of sustainability in public meetings, indicating that its recommendations, expected early this year, might address the environment.
A draft recommendation circulated last month said that a sustainable diet helps ensure food access for both the current population and future generations.
A dietary pattern higher in plant-based foods and lower in animal-based foods is “more health promoting and is associated with lesser environmental impact than is the current U.S. diet,” the draft said. Duh! Really? What rock have these people been hiding under for the past 30 years?
That appears to take at least partial aim at the beef industry. A study by the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences last year said raising beef for the American dinner table is more harmful to the environment than other industries such as pork and poultry.
While that is absolutely true, there was no mention of how disastrous pork and poultry are to one’s overall health and wellbeing.
The study said that compared with other popular proteins, beef produces more heat-trapping gases per calorie, puts out more water-polluting nitrogen (you would think they might bring fluoride into the equation), takes more water for irrigation and uses more land.
As the advisory committee has discussed the idea, doctors and academics on the panel have framed sustainability in terms of conserving food resources and also what are the healthiest foods.
There is compatibility and overlap between what’s good for health and good for the environment, the panel says. If they were al all serious about the environment you would think they would seriously discuss banning Monsanto’s GMOs and especially glyphosate from polluting the environment.
Once the recommendations are made, the Agriculture and Health and Human Services departments will craft the final dietary guidelines, expected about a year from now. I guess this would give the “pimps” enough time to band together and raise enough money to buy the proposal off.
Published every five years, the guidelines are the basis for the USDA’s “My Plate” icon that replaced the well-known food pyramid in 2010 and is designed to help Americans with healthful eating. Guidelines will also be integrated into school lunch patters and other federal eating programs that have historically blocked the introduction on vegetarian/vegan meals in the school lunch programs.
The meat industry has fought for years to ensure that the dietary guidelines do not call for eating less meat. After all, their motto is “In God we trust. All others pay cash!”
The guidelines now recommend eating lean meats instead of reducing meat altogether. But another draft discussed at the panel’s December 15th meeting says a healthy dietary pattern includes fewer “red and processed meats.”
In response, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association sent out a statement by doctor and cattle producer Richard Thorpe calling the committee biased and the meat recommendation absurd. Of course he would say this. It would mean less prescription drug income and less dead cow sales for him. But he did say that lean beef has a role in healthful diets. How human of him.
Guess where else objections are coming from? Congress!
A massive year-end spending bill enacted last month noted the advisory committee’s interest in the environment and directed Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, one of Monsanto’s chief “hookers” in government, “to only include nutrition and dietary information, not extraneous factors” in final guidelines.
Congress often uses such nonbinding directions to put a department on notice that lawmakers will push back if the executive branch proceeds, because they ain’t gonna give up a buck for anybody or anything.
Environmentalists are pushing the committee and the government to go the route considered and Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the public Interest said the idea of broader guidelines isn’t unprecedented, and added that they have already been shaped to address physical activity and food safety.
What to do, what to do? Who do we trust and who do we believe? The Obama’s have an organic garden for their use at the White House but they don’t broadcast it. Why? Because hookers always do what they are told to do.
If you would like complete truth and honesty, I urge you to go to the website www.asanediet .com to view the book, A Sane Diet For An Insane World.
Remember, you and only you can follow a healthy or unhealthy path. Once you start putting unleaded fuel into your gas tank, your vehicle will start running really good.