Natural doesn’t mean safe
Bookworm on Apr 10 2009 at 11:54 am | Filed under: Uncategorized
Already back in the 70s, when the “natural” movement began, my Mom was cautious. As she liked to say, “hemlock is also a natural substance.” Her point was that nature can be cruel, and that people who assumed that things untouched by human hands were automatically better were foolish and potentially dangerous. The bee in my bonnet with the natural foodies is their belief that pasteurization destroys foods. Showing their profound ignorance of history, they have no idea that, before Louis Pasteur, thousands of children died every year from the dangerous bacterias in food. Any slight diminution in the nutritional value of milk (and it’s not clear that this diminution affects us in any way) is more than offset by the fact that we don’t die from drinking milk.
Well, it turns out that the natural foodies need to sit up and take notice again regarding the fact that nature, given free rein, can be hostile to humans. It turns out that free-range pig, which is supposed to be more succulent and healthy, is also more likely to come equipped with trichonosis, one of the ancient food scourges, not mention some nasty other food borne problems:
The study published in the journal Foodborne Pathogens and Disease that brought these findings to light last year sampled more than 600 pigs in North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin. It discovered not only higher rates of salmonella in free-range pigs (54 percent versus 39 percent) but also greater levels of the pathogen toxoplasma (6.8 percent versus 1.1 percent) and, most alarming, two free-range pigs that carried the parasite trichina (as opposed to zero for confined pigs). For many years, the pork industry has been assuring cooks that a little pink in the pork is fine. Trichinosis, which can be deadly, was assumed to be history.
Agricultural scientists have long known that even meticulously managed free-range environments subject farm animals to a spectrum of infection. This study, though, brings us closer to a more concrete idea of why the free-range option can pose a heightened health threat to consumers. Just a little time outdoors increases pigs’ interaction with rats and other wildlife and even with domesticated cats, which can carry transmittable diseases, as well as contact with moist soil, where pathogens find an environment conducive to growth. The natural dangers that motivated farmers to bring animals into tightly controlled settings in the first place haven’t gone away.
I suggest you read the whole op-ed. Frankly, I don’t know how it got into the New York Times, because it’s informed, rational, humane, human in its outlook, and sensible. Clearly, some editor slipped up and can soon expect to receive his (or her) pink slip.
Related posts:
- Putting natural disasters into perspective
- Barack Obama — natural born follower
- “A ship in harbor is safe, but that’s not why the ship is built”
Email This Post To A Friend
8 Responses to “Natural doesn’t mean safe”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Greetings:
When I was studying printing management in college, I had a professor who used to say that it took 10 years for a new technology to get firmly established in the industry. He liked to attribute that to the difference between the leading edge of technology and the bleeding edge of technology. When salespeople would approach me about new equipment, I would tell them that I would rather be second than first. This, the differing implications of short term knowledge versus long term, is a concept that needs to be stressed as a part of sound logic.
My husband’s family had a friend who died of trichinosis in his brain. He has vivid memories of going to visit him in the hospital, and is absolutely adamant about pork being cooked to 160*. I’ve told him that it wasn’t a problem any longer, that domestic pigs are raised on concrete for the most part, in physically very controlled circumstances, and are regularly dosed with ivermectin to eliminate parasites of any sort. Can’t convince him. So I looked on line to see what I could find, and was surprised to learn first that there had only been about half a dozen cases in the US since 1993, and that the biggest factor in the elimination of the problem had been the requirement that all waste food that is normally collected and fed to the pigs be heated to temperatures that would destroy any parasites or their eggs. Pigs are biologically very close to humans – that’s why they’re often used for medical experiments for procedures for humans. They’re also very prone to spreading diseases within a herd. Most modern pig farms are set up so that there’s very little exposure to outside infection, because they’re usually pretty big, and if a disease is introduced, the chances of spreading to throughout the herd and having massive losses is pretty high.
In my house, all meat is cooked to leather-like consistency. I’ve had severe food poisoning twice, and aim to avoid a third time.
I am a raw meat eater, hamburger, steak, or I eat meat cooked rare.
In the late 70′s I picked up a case of ringworm from something I ate. Never figured out what the cause was, but it didn’t cure my taste for red meat.
I really do not care for well done meat, to me the meat loses flavor when overcooked.
rock…me too.
Ringworm??? maybe a wrong name? ringworm is a skin infection.
http://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/tc/ringworm-of-the-skin-topic-overview
Tapeworm, maybe?
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/tapeworm/DS00659/DSECTION=causes
An observation on cooking meat. Someone raised on a farm pointed out to me once that those who live among farm animals like their meat well cooked.
An advantage of well-cooked vegetables is that they are more digestible. “Natural” raw is more likely to just go in and out.
I am more casual than many about eating food that hasn’t been refrigerated ASAP. Reason: in visiting friends in Central America, I have eaten their cooked beans, unrefrigerated for 1-2 days but screened away from flies, without dire consequences. (At the same time, consider the source. One vacation in Mexico I ate hot food without any health problems. My last restaurant meal in Mexico, I ate some lukewarm food. I was somewhat doubtful about its sanitary qualities, and rightfully so. I problems w Montezuma’s Revenge for some days after I returned to the States. Also note this food was not screened from flies.)
>>Someone raised on a farm pointed out to me once that those who live among farm animals like their meat well cooked. >>
I’d modify that statement to “_some_ of those…”
And I agree with you on the refrigeration as well. All in all, I think we’ve become overly cautious. Certainly prudence is in order, but the fact is that if you’re never exposed to bacteria, you can’t develop immunity to it/them. Look at all the Mexicans who _don’t_ suffer Montezuma’s revenge…! Somehow they manage to remain healthy. They become immune – or they die in their early years. And no doubt, some do. We’ve immunized ourselves, and protect ourselves from nearly everything. Heaven help us if the system fails – the death rate is going to be tremendous because there are so many who simply have no immunity to natural biological agents. My mother used to say you have to eat a peck of dirt before you die, but you don’t have to eat it all in one meal. Kind of a weird saying – I always took it to mean cleanliness is good but don’t get extreme.
suek,
Heh….
I was kinda sleepwalking through that time.
I had rings, about the size of a dime to a quarter, appear on my back and upper arms. The doc I saw said they were worms and prescribed pills. The pills worked and a short time later all signs disappeared.
It is entirely possible I may not be correctly remembering what the doc said.