#food systems

[chamerionwrites]

Nearly a dozen children were working shifts cleaning meat processing equipment used at an Iowa pork plant’s so-called kill floor over a four-year period, the US Department of Labor announced.

Eleven children were using corrosive chemicals to clean as well as perilous “head splitters, jaw pullers, bandsaws, neck clippers and other equipment” at a Seaboard Triumph Foods pork processing plant in Sioux City, according to officials. This is the second time federal investigators have found children working at that particular Sioux City meat processing plant.

The most recent settlement comes with Qvest LLC, an Oklahoma-based cleaning company hired by Seaboard from 2019 to 2023. The company was fined $171,919 for violating federal law.

In September 2023, Seaboard hired a new cleaning contractor: Fayette Janitorial Services, headquartered in Tennessee. Investigators found Fayette hired 24 children to work overnight shifts – some as young as 13 and carrying glittery school backpacks – including some of the same minors who were employed by Qvest, the previous cleaning company. In May, Fayette was fined $649,304.

“These findings illustrate Seaboard Triumph Foods’ history of children working illegally in their Sioux City facility since at least September 2019,” said wage and hour midwest regional administrator Michael Lazzeri. “Despite changing sanitation contractors, children continued to work in dangerous occupations at this facility.”

The federal investigation comes after a 2023 New York Times report on migrant child exploitation, in which the paper documented children working dangerous jobs and overnight hours.

Children who arrive at the US’s southern border alone often stay in the country for years before their cases are adjudicated. While they wait, they live with sponsors. As of 2023, only one-third of migrant children went to live with their parents, a sea change from a decade ago. That can leave children vulnerable to exploitation or trafficking.

[reasonsforhope]

"A global shift to a mostly plant-based “flexitarian” diet could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help restrict global heating to 1.5C, a new study shows.

Previous research has warned how emissions from food alone at current rates will propel the world past this key international target.

But the new research, published in the Science Advances journal, shows how that could be prevented by widespread adoption of a flexitarian diet based around reducing meat consumption and adding more plant-based food.

“A shift toward healthy diets would not only benefit the people, the land and food systems,” said Florian Humpenöder, a study author and senior scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, “but also would have an impact on the total economy in terms of how fast emissions need to be reduced.” ...

The researchers found that adopting a flexitarian diet could lower methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture and lower the impacts of food production on water, nitrogen and biodiversity. This in turn could reduce the economic costs related to human health and ecosystem degradation and cut GHG emissions pricing, or what it costs to mitigate carbon, by 43% in 2050.

The dietary shift models also show limiting peak warming to about 1.5C can be achieved by 2045 with less carbon dioxide removal, compared with if we maintain our current diets.

“It’s important to stress that flexitarian is not vegetarian and not vegan,” Humpenöder says. “It’s less livestock products, especially in high-income regions, and the diet is based on what would be the best diet for human health.”

In the US, agriculture accounts for more than 10% of total GHG emissions. Most of it comes from livestock. Reducing meat consumption can free up agricultural land used for livestock production, which in turn can lower methane emissions. A potent greenhouse gas, methane is mainly expelled from cows and other animals raised for livestock. Animal production is the primary contributor to air quality-related health impacts from US food systems.

“This paper further confirms what other studies have shown, which is that if we change our diets to a more flexitarian type, we can greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” said Jason Hill, a professor in the University of Minnesota’s department of bioproducts and biosystems engineering.

According to the study authors, one way to achieve a shift toward healthier diets is through price-based incentives, such as putting taxes on the highest-emitting animal products, including beef and lamb. Another option is informing consumers about environmental consequences of high meat consumption."

-via The Guardian, March 27, 2024

[simplefoodsmallfarmz]

In the tradition.

When you operate a small farm, stuff happens and ya gotta stop and repair, replace or recycle what’s broken. It’s not always easy and it definitely is a time commitment, however, it still remains a blessing because during the downtime, lessons are learned.

What have you fixed recently?

[soilthesimpletruth]

Two of my favorite plants for this time of year for the northern hemisphere. Goldenrod, the yellow one and the other plant that is orange and yellow is called Lantana. Both of them are tremendous pollinator plants that support butterflies, bees and birds. Goldenrod supports birds with its seeds in the winter and Lantana supports hummingbirds with its nectar June through November.

[moldypeachfaygo]

[wachinyeya]

Our soil is degrading, droughts increasing and once fertile land turning into desert (www.decadeonrestoration.org ). But there are glimmers of hope:

Sometimes the biggest global changes are driven by local communities and their leaders, Africa’s smallholder farmers, for example. Hundreds of thousands of people are now coming together to revive their lands – by turning dried up monoculture plots into forest gardens. Learn how it works!

African Farmers Restoring Food Systems, led by Trees for the Future, has been recognized as a World Restoration Flagship under the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration.

[justalittlesolarpunk]

hello! I've just found your blog and that's AMAZING, but I have a question: what do you think about industrial food? it's super low quality, and furthermore, they produce a lot of trash as plastic (unnecessary) packaging! It would be easier just to say "starting eating organic food", but for poor people, buying grapes or apples, even not organic, costs more than buying cookies full of fat, sodium and carbohydrates (not talking about all the chemicals). I personally, think about non conventional food plants as an alternative since most of them are super resistant to weather changes and easy to rise. I wanna know what you think about

Hi! Thanks for getting in touch. The long and short of it is, I hate industrialised farming. It pollutes the air, soil and water, poisons and impoverishes farmers, increases the likelihood of zoonotic pandemics, reduces the genetic diversity of plants and encroaches upon wildlife territories. We need a massive return to local, small-scale regenerative agriculture if we are to feed everyone and equitably share the earth with other species. But you’re right, it has to be done in a way that’s just and fair for people who can currently only afford plasticked, pesticided and processed food, as well as making a living for farmers. We’re all on the same side here, but people often don’t realise that. I also think we need to massively diversify our food plant range - a system that relies on just a few staple crops is insanely vulnerable, especially with more and more extreme weather coming our way. So many plants I was raised to think of as ‘weeds’ are not only edible but highly nutritious and often medicinal. Where are the dandelion farmers? The mycologists selling turkey tails? And foraging should be taught in all schools so kids can feed themselves in the wild and pass these skills on to future generations. As with most climate solutions, I don’t think it’s an either/or - I’d welcome pretty much any solution as part of a wider melting pot of alternatives. The only thing I won’t budge on is that we have to change, because the way we in the North and West farm right now just isn’t sustainable.

[cognitivejustice]

As the General Coordinator of La Via Campesina International, Morgan Ody works for the human rights of peasants and rural workers worldwide, promoting food sovereignty and agrarian reform.

La Via Campesina International, founded in 1993, is committed to defending peasant agriculture for food sovereignty and is called the ‘global voice of peasants.’ Morgan Ody, a vegetable farmer in Brittany, France, is the movement’s General Coordinator. Justice is a keyword within the work of the movement, as Ody explains:

“Most peasants and rural farm workers have come together because they face discrimination and lack of access to basic services and human rights. Struggling for justice is a significant reason peasant organizations like La Via Campesina were formed.”

Agroecology and Collaboration

At Terra Madre, Morgan Ody will represent La Via Campesina International at the conference Agroecology. To Ody, agroecology is more than agricultural practices.

“Agroecology is not only a set of agriculture practices; it is a complete change in the mindset compared to the mindset of the new capitalist world system, established in the 16th century, which was very much based on a vision to dominate and extract nature, seeing nature as a machine for humans to dominate.”

La Via Campesina International and Ody demand greater equality between human society and other living beings. Ody highlights the difference between industrial agriculture and peasant practices, pointing out, for example, the relation to animals.

“How peasants work with animals involves a sort of friendship in daily life, taking into consideration the animals’ emotions. This differs greatly from industrial agriculture, where animals are seen as machines, and there is no relationship between farmer and animal.”

[u-mspcoll]

Food Literacy for All Showcase

"Do you know why the US Food Administration was created? Nope, it's not for public health reasons! Rather, it was created on August 17, 1917 by executive order primarily to provide food for the Allies in Europe during World War I. The US launched a rigorous campaign, greatly humanitarian in nature, onboarding roughly half the families in the nation to take on food pledges with weekly meatless, sweetless, porkless, and wheatless days to ship those foods to soldiers and starving civilians in Europe. This campaign demonstrates how the lack of overindulgence in food sympolizes patrioatism in the US during WWI."

Spotlight on food history posters prepared by students enrolled in the Food Literacy for All (Winter 2024), a community-academic partnership course hosted by the University of Michigan Sustainable Food Systems Initiative. Read more!

[mauricesmall]

This photo is of 1/10th of the compost dug up for our garlic beds this winter.

[chamerionwrites]

This is also why it really (perhaps unduly) rubs me the wrong way when people immediately assume that I am a mostly-vegetarian because I’m an animal lover. Yeah obviously cruelty to animals is also bad, and I do find it reassuring on a number of levels to know exactly where my meat and eggs come from, but…idk the prevalence and pervasiveness of that assumption is just really telling. Something something Upton “I aimed at the public’s heart and hit it in the stomach” Sinclair writing The Jungle about the plight of exploited migrant workers but getting everybody outraged about food safety. Something something legions of internet commenters on any post or article about someone who even vaguely harms a (cute, fluffy) animal gleefully opining about how that person should be dismembered/burned at the stake/other graphically cruel punishments, and not seeing any kind of contradiction in terms. Something something it’s easier for military officers to adopt dogs from overseas than for eg Afghan translators to get refugee visas

[solar-sunnyside-up]

this really cool article - https://www.bu.edu/bhr/2015/02/01/780/ talks about the history, particular England, and its grocery delivery system over the decades. How originally, you would send a list to a shop keeper for goods like Flour, sugar, milk, etc.. And have it delivered. Than the Cash and carry system, during the depression kicked off in order to save on delivery costs.  Basically putting all the work of Picking, sorting, loading, and transporting onto the individual rather than the business. But god, in a current system where you have something akin to a post officer do this?? It would really help decentralize cars as primary mode of transport if you didn't have to do all the work yourself. It's draining, its manual labor in its own right. Its not accessable. Its not efficient. It creates a competition on food that isnt necessary mostly for Perfect Produce. Lately we are starting to return to this threw delivery systems like Instacart (Gag) who exploit workers and customers for profit. But again, imagine for just a moment what this COULD look like. A neighborhood wide grocery drop off day like garbage pick up or the mail. Imagine having a day you knew was every week that you'd fill out a list and someone shows up with that sugar you where low on bc you wanted to make cookies. Imagine having the SAME rotation of ppl so you could know them. Imagine how different meal planning becomes, how communical it could be. How your neighbors might have over estimated how much tomatoes they go threw and ordered more so they brought you salsa.

[solitaryhome]

anyways re: the insane anon ask from last night. wanted to provide some illumination on the actual systemic problems we need to fix in our food system. which believe it or not have nothing to do with individual consumer body weight. sit down and read this for me real quick

The Omnivore's Dilemma - Michael Pollan

see ive even provided a helpful free pdf you dont even need to purchase the book. read it

heres some fun additional reading with varying degrees of relevance to my initial claim but which i think should be required to understand before u form an opinion on food systems lol

How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture - Horrigan et. al.

Evidence, causes, and consequences of declining nitrogen availability in terrestrial ecosystems - Mason et. al.

and if you still think our overproduction problem has ANYTHING to do with overeating, please watch this documentary lol:

ok thx byyeee

[soilthesimpletruth]

Growing food is a relationship. Part of that relationship is compost.

[hussyknee]

Def a good idea to delete theculturedmarxist’s stuff, he’s also a big-time propagandist/genocide denier type. It sucks that some tankies have gotten bigger platforms recently by strike blogging.

But yeah the banana thing is insane, I *think* the original poster was using it as an example of the fact that a more just society in the US is necessarily going to be a less convenient one because convenience often comes at the expense of (domestic and international) labor exploitation, and “non-domestic crops being available year-round” is an example of a luxury that came out of said exploitation, which is A Point (though I might’ve picked something like Amazon same-day delivery to argue it…)

But then people ran with it and made it about either How Do We Stop Big Banana Through Socialism or Here’s How Bananas Can Still Win. Both at the dehumanizing expense of now-theoretical Latin American laborers of course 🙃

Oh shit that's what's happening? Tankies coasting in on strike blogging?? Gdi.

Yeah I think that was the original point too. The thing is, that US leftists keep centering US consumer demand in everything, like the entire system of global labour and resource exploitation by multinational conglomerates, aided and abetted by the IMF and World Bank and the entire colonial power matrix, can be solved by yelling at enough people about their consumption. For people who are so obsessed with class, it seems to consistently escape them that Global North consumers are also exploited and disempowered by the same oligopolies and monopolies that pay producers pennies on the dollar and sell for prices that smaller and entry-level companies can't compete with. Even as an example, bananas in the US are priced way lower than what's profitable, just to keep a monopoly of consumers. And because so many companies in the West don't pay working class people a fair wage, they have to consume the cheapest, most convenient food stuffs. So when you talk about people reducing consumption of bananas, you're asking people dependent on the cheapest nutrient sources to bear the biggest loss.

This is exactly what we mean by "no ethical consumption under capitalism". It doesn't mean we give up on the entire issue, it means that the systems of production cannot be manipulated by consumer boycotts and individual ethics. Even if one product was taken off the shelves, whatever supplanted it would be just as unethical for some group of people. It means that the solutions need to be implemented top-down, not bottom up. Global North governments need to better regulate corporate behaviour, prioritise the well-being of workers and ecological chains involving production and transport, prevent monopolies by regulating prices, and encourage and incentivize local food supply networks. And also, as some from Colombia said in a reblog about the cocaine industry, economic stress must be taken off developing nations by forgiving their IMF and World Bank loans so that they can invest the profits from their export industries in reforming agriculture and social welfare systems.

I literally do not understand why, when people directly impacted by these conditions have clear and cohesive demands and action plans, Western liberals and leftists need to come up with these completely abstract, impractical, ego-centric bullshit to create endless discourse over. They don't actually care about engaging with activists, grassroots organizations and unions in the Global South, because that involves interrogating their own paternalism, privilege and bias, and narrows the scope for the clout-chasing dunk economy.