Brian writes
> obesity has gone up, rural economies have declined , environmental issues have increased, and the income generated by food production has moved upstream to the processors.
> so if food was to cost more if we had less emphasis on industrial Ag would that be such a bad tradeoff if we could reverse some of the negatives I listed?
I assume you intend to say that if food cost more, -- people would
lose weight because they would eat less, rural economies would thrive,
the environment would be saved, and farmers would have more money. I
rather doubt these consequences. If good food costs more, people tend
to buy cheaper, poorer food. They switch to cheap starches and fats
instead of high quality fruits, vegetables and protein rich items. If
domestic food prices go up, what actually happens is the distributors
just buy more and more food from other countries. To be a sustainable
producer, you have to have customers who want what you are selling and
are willing to pay for it. If they are willing to pay more to get your
particular product, you will survive. If they aren't -- either you
have to lower your price or try to get subsidized, thereby forcing
them to pay for it.
> Craig Infanger, University of Kentucky College of Agriculture economist, said "With the changing tastes of the American consumer and an improving economy, you can understand why imported foods are the fastest growing section of the typical supermarket," he said. "Our food stores are now stocked with fruits and vegetables year-round with the origin and source changing with the seasons. That's why horticultural products are the largest component of agricultural imports."
* * *
USA Today reports:
The FDA inspects about 1% of the imported foods it regulates, down
from 8% in 1992 when imports were far less common.
The FDA also doesn't require that exporting countries have safety
systems equivalent to those in the USA. The USDA does that for
countries that export meat and poultry, and the Government
Accountability Office -- the investigative arm of Congress -- has said
for at least a decade that the FDA should, too.
The decline in FDA inspection resources has been pronounced in the
past five years. While food imports have soared about 50%, the number
of FDA food-import inspectors has dropped about 20%, the agency says.
Meanwhile, more food imports come from developing countries, where
pesticide use is often higher than in the USA, water quality is often
worse and workers may be less likely to be trained in food safety,
says Michael Doyle, head of the Center for Food Safety at the
University of Georgia.
A 2003 FDA study found pesticide violations in 6.1% of imported foods
sampled vs. 2.4% of domestic foods.
* * *
The International Herald Tribune reports:
"The public thinks the food supply is much more protected than it is,"
said William Hubbard, a former associate commissioner who left in 2005
after 27 years at the agency. "If people really knew how weak the FDA
program is, they would be shocked."
"With globalization, American food processors are turning to
less-developed countries to get food ingredients because they can get
them so much more cheaply," Hubbard said.
"The word is out," he said. "If you send a problem shipment to the
United States it is going to get in and you won't get caught, and you
won't have your food returned to you, let alone get arrested or
imprisoned."
******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm *
******************************************************
|
