FOOD -- TED talk that will stir up guilt, fear ... and hopefully CHANGE

[Darren Dirt]

http://www.ted.com/talks/mark_bittman_on_what_s_wrong_with_what_we_eat.html

I'm filling my fridge with PLANTS this weekend... and cutting back on the "convenience" foods that are mostly industry/business and very little nutrition. I just hope more and more people realize what Mark is trying to remind us (hopefully not teach, i.e. we should already know this but just have forgotten, culturally) -- that we has a species, and as individual members, eat too much meat and junk food. Even if you're not willing or interested in becoming anything close to vegetarian, at least looking at the ratio of meat:plants in your diet surely can't hurt, and possibly can help the long-term survival of our species on this planet. To think that 30% of the land on Earth is used for livestock production, yikes. That can't be sustainable (let alone the "double within 40 years" predicted growth!)



And if you are truly ready to re-examine the concept of human self-importance* (over other "objects" surrounding us throughout the natural world) then have fun...
http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_pollan_gives_a_plant_s_eye_view.html



*humanity: 25000 genes. rice: 30000. #humblingaintit

[Thorin]

Apocalyptic predictions (aka "double in 40 years") is easy.  What's harder is actually being right.

Humans are more important than plants or animals.  If one disagrees with this and one wants to give the planet back to the plants and animals, one should off oneself and become plant-meal.  Of course, no one would actually kill themselves, thus showing that while they might say plants and animals are more important, they won't walk the talk.

But hey, telling others what to think and do, now that's something every human likes doing.  After all, if you can get them to parrot you and spread links of you talking, you clearly have influence and power.

That said, I didn't bother watching the video as I'm in no way interested in the hypocrisy of someone telling me what's best for the planet when they won't even do what's best for the planet themselves.

[Mr. Analog]

There's actually a really handy guide on eating well here:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/index-eng.php

As for TED, "Did you know that disco record sales were up 400 per cent for the year ending 1976? If these trends continue, A-y-y-y!". I guess what I'm saying is that when a TED presenter is relying on statistics to bring their argument across they usually have a weak argument. (see "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" )

But thanks for bringing this up, I know one thing I've changed in the last year or so is eating habits. I'm down to having red meat once a week, I try to make sure I'm having something from each food group at every meal and reduce portions. I also try to avoid pre-packaged stuff and do more of my own cooking. Often I find pre-packaged stuff is just overpriced ingredients collected together for convenience sake.

There's actually a good spinoff show from SMBC-Theater that covers eating frugally, but well, check out their show about soup: http://youtu.be/EAwXDSaMuiY

[Darren Dirt]

Apocalyptic predictions (aka "double in 40 years") is easy.  What's harder is actually being right.

Humans are more important than plants or animals.  If one disagrees with this and one wants to give the planet back to the plants and animals, one should off oneself and become plant-meal.

I'm not interested primarily in the "what the world will be like 40 years from now" speculations, it's just one thing that caught my attention towards the end.

And re. "plants vs. humans", actually the Talks seem to be focused on humanity working in harmony with the plants, instead of thinking it's a zero sum game where "us" winning means "they" have to lose. And the modifications to our lifestyle would result naturally from modifications to our point of view -- just look at how things have changed in the past 100 years, in terms of what garbage fuel we throw into our bodies, it's literally killing us (science/medicine has just made it harder for the average joe to see, since so many miracles are resulting in "longer life"... but what about quality of life? and what about the environment around us that we   enjoy/endure that life in?)

As Mr. Analog pointed out, it's possible to alter your diet/lifestyle choices without going to an impossible-to-maintain extreme. If the average North American is eating a half-pound of red meat EVERY DAY while even the government (which is IN BED with agribusiness!) tells you to limit yourself to around a half-pound per WEEK, obviously it's not gonna cost you health-wise to reduce your meat intake (and replace it with plants) and just look at the waistlines and heart attack stats, it's gonna HELP you health-wise.

But it comes down to individuals making choices, these TED talks are meant to inspire and encourage open-minded discussion and possibly lifestyle changes etc... not to force anybody to make life changes against their will (leave that to the legislators )

[Tom]

I'd say nature is just as important as we are. Without it, we're doomed. Though without us, it'd be just fine But I don't really want to die, so eh.

It's funny you guys are cutting back on meat.. I've had to significantly increase my meat intake. Its about the only thing I can eat these days aside from veggies. Of course I try not to eat red meat too regularly. I split my intake into fish, pork and beef. And some chicken. So I suppose it isn't all bad.

5+ years ago I'd eat meat a few times a month, now its nearly (if not) every day

[Mr. Analog]

The assumption there (if I'm reading you right) is that the quality of life has declined which is completely subjective, the western diet from a century ago would appear grotesque these days (particularly the levels of sodium to prevent spoilage and calorie intake to keep you working 12 hours without automation).

I say if you want to change your diet do it for yourself.

[Lazybones]

Reminds me how I watched some wonderful documentaries on how the government food guides have little to do with science and a lot to do with lobbies (wheat and dairy farmers).


There are also massively conflicting studies as well. One will show a vegetarian diet is the way to go, and another study on the Inuit far up north shows that their almost all meet / blubber diet is also sustainable and healthy.

My greatest concern is the big seed companies, they are breading food not to make it heather, but to make it sterile so farmers HAVE to purchase / license more seeds, and also making it resistant to their own herbicides so they can sell more herbicides.... There seems to be some evidence that the latest modern crops are bigger and tougher yielding more food but at the same time the proteins are harder for our bodies to digest.

In general our diet in North Americana is strange compared to many parts of the world.

[Thorin]

A hundred years ago, so 1912.  That's back when they were still selling "firewater", a mixture of dirty water, cheap whiskey, and arsenic (for that "kick").  Oh, and alcoholism was rampant, even for those that knew to avoid firewater.  And your @%&# was literally on the street, as that's where you'd empty your chamber pot in a crowded city.  And yes, in 1912 there were still chamber pots and outhouses.

Over the last hundred years our life expectancy has risen by twenty years (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-003-x/91-003-x2007001-eng.pdf, page 13).  Quality of life we can't debate until we're sure we both agree on what that means - for some it means living longer, for others it means traveling more, for yet others it means having time to do nothing, for yet others it means being able to keep busy.

[Darren Dirt]

geez this is not the "debate" I was hoping to stir up.

Meh, eat 10 pounds of red meat a day and never eat a carrot stick, your choice. Just saying a lot of people are considering alternative lifestyles, some of which are a return to some of the aspects of how culture was a few decades ago (but not the complete removal of all technology/science, duh) I'm okay with indoor plumbing and antibiotics and less meat, but that's me.

[Mr. Analog]

Not to be snarky, but I thought this was supposed to fuel discussion? As far as I can tell we're having one.

I think the issue at hand (for Thorin at least) is the tone of the original video, Thorin's response was (unless I'm reading it wrong) hyperbolic sarcasm.

Of course to me diet is a personal choice and it should be one based on ones desire for health (or bacon cupcakes whatevs), the main sticking point for me is that some of the language used suggests a philosophy. The trouble with philosophies though is that sometimes they end up sounding a bit preachy (and nobody likes that).

I know what he is trying to say but the way it was delivered sounds an awful lot like "Change your diet or you'll kill the planet. You Monster." this opens a high-sodium cornstarch based GALAXY of worms.

In my opinion, I feel that rather than appealing to a person's intelligence this is being sold by exploiting insecurity, fuelling a sense of superiority over something personal like a dietary change...?

[Darren Dirt]

Not to be snarky, but I thought this was supposed to fuel discussion? As far as I can tell we're having one.

Sorry boyz, I meant that my "intention" (maybe more like "hope/expectation"?) was not to discuss WHICH dietary choices are healthier or not ... but rather to encourage folks to at least question what has been pretty much accepted practice re. meat intake -- but has not been "common" until the last 50 years or so.

But hey if this dialog heads in the direction of "study X says that Y is not as Z as other folks believe" etc. then fine, it's not like a consensus will be had that way... but might still be interesting info passed around, so have at 'er...

[Lazybones]

O and for fun 6% of the population are intolerant to gluten, yet it is part of nearly every North American meal.

[Mr. Analog]

I'm more confused than ever about what you're trying to say then.

I mean, sort of an obvious "question", you learn what to eat through what your parents fed you, what you learnt in school or through your beliefs or what your physician recommends. Then you learn on your own what your "accepted eating practices" are.

Dietary choices you make would be considered "questioning accepted practise" right? Which is how this conversation evolved I thought. So I don't see how you can make the distinction between the two.

This guy is saying people eat too much meat, right?

So to put you on the spot a little: what are you saying?

[Darren Dirt]

So to put you on the spot a little: what are you saying?

Me or Lazy?


personally, I don't have a "goal" in mind for this discussion... I just kinda had a sense when it was very much not what I hoped for (who am I now is less interested in "figuring out the truth" and more interested in sharing the experience with others of seeking it out, even if we never get "there")

[Mr. Analog]

The trouble I have with the video is that there are a lot of messages being put forth by a journalist who used a lot of big scary things to sell his pitch (reduce meat, eat local), this is a philosophy. A philosophy being pushed by FUD

This is why it rubs people like myself the wrong way from the get go and we get somewhat antagonistic, we see how people like Mark Bittman try to manipulate thinking through the use of fear rather than actual rationalizing. Big scary numbers, pictures and apocalyptic allegory wooo... it's the exact same tactic that Fox News is known for (IRAN MIGHT BUILD NUKES! OMG!)

LOL

All that said I believe everyone could cut down on their meat intake, meat for most people is the easy choice but it's a choice that comes with health consequences.