We are Eating Animals
Patrick EdmondsA succulent cheeseburger and fries after a night of drinking with some friends. A juicy porterhouse steak at a fancy restaurant on a third date. Crispy bacon and sausage patties with eggs on Sunday morning with the kids. A chicken cutlet sandwich with broccoli rabe and roasted peppers with some colleagues for lunch. Buffalo wings and cheesesteaks on Sunday for the game. Turkey and ham with the family for Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter.
Whether it’s breakfast, lunch, or dinner, we Americans love meat. And we usually love it even more when we enjoy it with someone else present. We consume immense quantities of it, and it, in turn, consumes so much of who we are, where we go, and what we say to one another once we get there. And while we talk about what’s on it or where we got it or how we prepared it, we rarely discuss what’s in it or where it came from or how it was produced. For something that makes up so much of our day, our daily conversations, and our cultural identities, it is ironic that the latter deliberations are not mused over more frequently.
All of these contemplations, and far more, are what makes up Johnathan Safran Foer’s most recent literary effort, and first nonfiction piece, in Eating Animals. The book is a meaningful, considerate look at the thriving industry of factory farming, and all its detrimental effects, the slow revitalization of traditional farming, and the still polarizing options of vegetarianism and veganism.
Foer takes the reader through a personal exploration to seek the answers to questions that will ultimately shape our environment, health, and heritage. Like Foer’s two previous pieces, Eating Animals functions as a well-crafted balance between history, philosophy, psychology, sociology, and morality. Blending together well-documented, carefully research data and statistics on the issue and all its variables and personal narratives- from his grandmother’s Holocaust survival to PETA activists, traditional farmers, factory farmers, and even his own battles with vegetarianism- Foer brilliantly crafts a truly thought-provoking piece of literature worthy of our time and reflection.
The book seeks to challenge our conventional view of the customary practices of producing, preparing, and eating animals. Whether it be animal cruelty (cows are routinely skinned and slaughtered while still alive, pigs are perpetually tortured at slaughterhouses by having electric prods shoved up their anuses and eyeballs burned out, and chickens (both egg and meat producing) are relegated to cages slightly smaller than the computer screen your probably reading this on and frequently have their heads ripped off and are stomped on while alive); or the health of the animals we eat (with more steroids, non-theraputic antibiotics, and other chemicals injected into animals than humans, as well as almost all animals being artificially inseminated, in addition to the reality that large spread influenzas have developed and spread from factory farms, including the avian flu and most recent pandemic swine flu), it is impossible to deny that there is something wrong with how our food is produced and the effects it can have on us.
On top of these chilling personal realities are the even larger environmental dangers of continuing to sustain such a large-scale effort of meat production and consumption. Research has proven now that factory farming contributes far more to global warming through carbon dioxide releases than the entire transportation industry combined. And while many still debate the validity of global warming, Foer also offers the reality that factory farming is directly related to horrific, biblical forms of pollution on towns, rivers, wild life, and its human inhabitants. As he points out, it is impossible to call yourself an environmentalist and still eat the 99% of meat found in supermarkets, restaurants, and fast food places manufactured on factory farms.
The book also addresses the economic effects of this industry and our obsession with meat. While we have refused to pay for our passion, or addiction, directly, demanding cheap meat always be available, we are certainly paying for it in a number of other outlets. Furthermore, Eating Animals exposes how the American people have outright abandoned its first true industry, farming. Now referred to as traditional farming, in reference to the few remaining farmers who were brave enough (Foer refers to them as heroes) to oppose the factory system, and continue to raise, humanely care for, and provide healthy, uncorrupted animals to the people who are willing to pay. Half a million of these “traditional” farmers have lost their livelihood in the last thirty years alone. True American workers put out to pasture by our ever-growing demand for quicker, cheaper, poorer quality food.
But beyond all the statistics and gruesome certainties of eating animals in our present manner is the idea of stories. The stories we tell each other over a meal. The stories we tell our families at Thanksgiving time. The stories we will one day tell our children in the hopes that they too will tell their offspring. Johnathan Safran Foer’s journey to understand these stories and their relation to food, community and self started after his son was born. Foer wrote a friend about the forthcoming expectations and uncertainties of fatherhood, and his friend simply wrote back, “Everything is possible again”.
Much of what The Lunch Break was founded on was the idea of sharing stories to one another during lunch, over a ham and cheese sandwich or left over pepperoni pizza or meatballs and spaghetti. We know that the telling of these stories is essential to understanding ourselves, our neighbors, and our environment. We also believe that these stories we pass to each other like the salt and pepper over the family kitchen and work place tables can change our perspectives. So while I personally ponder my own narrative with eating animals and whether or not a book or a story can actually have an impact or change a system, society, or even an individual, I can’t help but think of the words of Foer’s friend and believe that anything truly is possible.
Reader Comments (10)
I think this is a well written and thought provoking essay with real importance to the lunch table. I can not think of a more appropriate subject than the food we eat and how it makes us feel both psychologically and physically.
I am going to read it. I am a bit hesitant because I can not imagine my life without the cheap meat, as it has been part of my daily consumption my whole life. It was how I was taught and how I am teaching my children. Meat is part of my very family and society, so if the books really can help me change to insure the health of millions of animals and my children, then I will be alienating myself.
I am ready though to take the challenge and here the argument Foer makes. Americans spend only about 11% of our income on food. That I believe must change if we are to gain a healthy and active society that does not rely on doctors and medicine to heal us. This will be the most serious question facing the new generations and as well as our own. Are we willing to change our habits, especially eating, to insure our health? Are we willing to start spending 25-30% of our income on fresh and ecologically safe food for our consumption?
I will read the book but the topic has been on my mind for some time. I hope to read it before Lent so I can give up the most drastic measures, but it is really about finding sustainable food that makes all our society healthy and setting the example now.
That is a great quote: "Everything is possible again."
I am first in line for the book! For nearly a year now, I have been trying to change my family's eating habits. For anyone else interested in doing so after reading the book, you need to be prepared for the hostility that you will face from others. The topic of food really does provoke unusual emotional responses. People will criticize you for trying to improve your life. They will tell you that what you are doing is nonsense because the FDA or the USDA have shown that there is really no danger in cheaply produced meat. Organic is just a gimmick. Maybe, to some extent this is true, but I still believe that my children deserve more nutritious food than powdered cheese products and canned vegetables. I am willing to err on the side of caution on this one. I have come to realize that most people want to be in denial about the food that they eat. I am not the healthiest person in the world, but I am not in denial about my bad habits. I just feel like if people could look at Doritos and donuts the same way that they look at smoking, they might still indulge in the bad habit of eating the stuff themselves, but they would realize it is like offering their children a cigarette for lunch. They are setting them up for a lifetime of harmful eating habits that are causing nearly as much damage to the body as smoking. I have family members who are facing prediabetic weight problems who cannot understand why it is so hard for me to stop smoking. I know that they do not understand that their addiction to McDonald's rivals mine to nicotine.
I guess I need to re-read that last line again and again. Between reading this week about what's happening in Congo and now Foer's findings, I am overwhelmed by the human capacity for cruelty. The older I get, the more I realize that our sense of freedom is often negated by our complicity in the workings of a machinery fueled by blind, habitual consumer gluttony. But I do believe that consumers can change society, however gradually. I wish more people felt empowered to make healthier choices, although when I look at my own habits, I just get overwhelmed again. I'm just like everybody else.
I'm going to read this book, though. "Unsafe at Any Speed" was able to galvanize public opinion against the auto industry's negligence. Everything is possible.
Sounds like an interesting read. I've always heard good things about Foer, but never got around to reading any of his work. The one thing that prevents me from picking up this book is probably the certainty that I know what it will contain. It's the reason why we don't read the Surgeon General's Warning on cigarettes, or research the side effects of our fossil fuel based economy before we pump our gas. From books like Sinclair's The Jungle and Cook'sToxin, I have already seen the dangers of the meat industry. Heck, I grew up in town with a slaughterhouse where it was not uncommon or disturbing to see tractor trailers packed to the brim with swine one day and to smell their roasting flesh while going grocery shopping the next.
With or without books like these, the question remains why am I not disturbed? Am I really just too ingrained with the habits of a carnivore? Do I just have no sympathy for animals whose whole life and death would simply not ever occurred if they weren't factory farm products? Or is it the belief that as a superior species at the top of the food chain, humans have earned the right to eat what they please because we are smarter? To paraphrase one comedian, "if God didn't intend for us to eat beef, he would've made cows harder to catch. You don't see people eating leopard burgers." I probably have a mixture of all these beliefs which is part of the reason I know dietary change for me is highly improbable. However, there is another factor which is far more startling. It's the idea, as Edmonds suggests, that most of us simply don't have the means or the luxury to find and pay the high cost of the 1% of meat that is humanely farmed.
In exposing the realities behind most everyday facets of our lives like the food we eat, authors like Foer show us the frightening extent to which modern conveniences have limited the choices in how we live our lives. We are all just unknowing, conditioned, and mostly willing cogs in the production-consumer driven machine of big agriculture. Watch The Informant, a film about how agriculture conglomerates globally set prices for corn-based food additives, to learn the extent of the conspiracy. Corn bi-products are in pretty much every food we eat. So would I like to eat only animals that the farmer down the street has raised with care? Would I like to avoid high fructose corn syrup because I know it is unnatural and contributing to my eventual adult diabetes? Sure, but at what cost? My salary, my debt, my responsibilities, zoning laws, my education and lack of farming experience offer me little alternative than the family pack of supermarket brand chicken breasts at $4 a pound.
Maybe those are all excuses and it is people like me who insure a corrupt, detrimental food production system will stay in power. I'm sure I could change if I put my mind to it, but I fear the disruption it would cause in my life and my planned future wouldn't be worth it. I guess either way, we will always be forced to do things we don't want to do in exchange for other goals. But I hesitate to read preachy books that tell me my diet makes me an evil person while minimizing the multitude of other real-world time-consuming concerns preventing me from driving out to Lancaster county every time I want a guilt-free burger.
That being said, I still think it is admirable for April Mae and others to try to make a stand that they deem worthwhile for their families' health and eating habits, so don't think I'm saying my conclusion is the only correct one. It's just my best option at the moment, but maybe I'll get tired of being the slave of agri-business giants, get rich and buy my own farm one day. Then I can write a book about it telling all of you how becoming a farmer is the best choice you could ever make and all the damage at risk if you don't get back to living off the land.
Oh and by the way, if you are planning on reading this book, it's quick and easy to purchase it from Amazon.com through the link on the left hand column of The Lunch Break Blog. Sorry for the plug, but hey, you gotta sell out to one business or the other.
I remember when I read "Fast Food Nation" it pretty much ended my relationship with McDonalds/Burger King, etc. I would imagine "We Are Eating Animals" would be a good companion piece to it.
Dugan raised a point about when, as a society, we are going to think about increasing the amount we spend yearly on food from 11% of our income to 25-30% for better quality. I must agree with Nick to a degree...who amoung us has the disposable income to double or triple our food costs for what amounts to debatable benefit?
All organic, farm-raised food purchases sound great. I would also prefer to buy from Mom and Pop stores over huge mega-marts however, cost always plays a role in everything we do.
If more people were more sensible about their food selections AND had some form of regular exercise, this nation would be in much better shape literally and figuratively. There is nothing wrong with an occasional donut or Big Mac. When it becomes a staple of your regular diet, then that is where the problems start. Compound that with the majority of the owrkforce being behind a desk and computer instead of doing physical labor...you are left with a very unhealthy populace.
I do not think doubling your food budget eliminates these problems. You can make smart and healthy food choices for your family without having to fall into the "Organic, farm-raised, all natural" market.
Interesting responses from all. Aprilmae's point that this discussion creates a great deal of anger and divisiveness can be seen within the tone of responses here, which is great because that reality lends itself to much of Foer's argument throughout the book. People are very passionate about their food and that is well reflected here.
To start with Dugan's comments though, your stat is a little low according to New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/05/03/business/20080403_SPENDING_GRAPHIC.html, which has our expense at around 15%, but your point is still valid. Worse yet is the fact that within the 15% expense for food, more than a third is spent on restaurants and fast food, which are the epicenters (especially fast food) for much of our current woes. However, Foer does not focus on the fast food industry too much, because the reality is they are a small aspect of this problem. Like I said, it is not just McDonalds and Burger King and KFC, but pretty much all food purchased at classy restaurants and procured in supermarkets that come from factory farming. It is almost impossible to avoid this form of meat without a deliberate effort of doing so. And while obesity and all its subsequent effects are legitimate concerns, they pale in comparison to the overall impact of sustaining our current form of meat production.
As for Roche's insight, I'll have to read the book you mention. I imagine this book was influential for making driving and all transportation an issue of public safety, which reduced the number of accidents and deaths dramatically. However, the difference is that as far as food goes, we already have government oversight in the USDA and FDA, as Aprilmae pointed out. For anything to significantly change, our government would have to admit to the damaging effects of factory farming, but how can they now after supporting it for all these years? Foer explains the huge conflict of interest for the USDA because its primary goal is to promote meat consumption, but at the same time must make sure that the meat we eat is healthy. Foer establishes that this second goal is near to impossible considering the size of the industry, and the only way to ensure accountability would come at a great financial expense to us, which we have established we are unwilling to do. Watching the State of the Union, I couldn't help but laugh when Obama pledged to fight global warming and the energy crises and in the same breath said we would also find new ways to improve our agriculture, which I assume mean ways of sustaining the factory farm system. The fact that our own president is willfully ignorant to the problem does not bode well for any of us.
Finally, for CJ and Caraway, our seemingly lone dissenting voices, you both bring up valid points but much of what you say is standing on wobbly legs. But so as to not sound too preachy, be aware that I am genuinely struggling with this reality of limiting or completely giving up meat. The opening paragraph is a list of my favorite food items and before reading this book, it would not be uncommon for me to have three different servings of meat in one day. But my personal love affairs can not be used to win this argument. As Foer points out in the book, "Food choices are determined by many factors, but reason (even consciousness), is not generally high on the list".
Caraway, you are right in pointing out that it is naive to think we can simply reform this problem by eating traditional farmed animals. The book explains that there is not enough chicken produced by traditional farms to feed Staten Island's current consumption rates, let alone the entire US. Furthermore, it's even more naive to assume that the rest of the country is even aware of these facts. I wasn't until a month ago, and I consider myself a fairly well-read individual. How do you address this problem in inner-city communities and rurally impoverished areas who are often less educated and more dependent on more affordable food? And while Foer conveniently ignores these practical questions, it does not make his data and research any less true and pressing a concern.
Caraway argues, "I'm sure I could change if I put my mind to it, but I fear the disruption it would cause in my life and my planned future wouldn't be worth it". What dramatic disruption would occur if you were to possibly limit your meat consumption? How would this actually effect your planned future? Your argument that you can not afford to purchase traditionally farmed products is based on the assumption that you would also maintain your current eating habits. Is it so absurd to contemplate limiting your meat consumption to a few days a week, thus offsetting the more expensive cost of traditionally farmed animals?
You go on to argue, "But I hesitate to read preachy books that tell me my diet makes me an evil person while minimizing the multitude of other real-world time-consuming concerns preventing me from driving out to Lancaster county every time I want a guilt-free burger". I wonder why it seems odd or a waste of time to know where one's food comes from. We know where we purchase our cars, our TVs, and other goods, and we often expect a certification when we do so, most times buying insurance if something goes wrong with the item. So why is it so bizarre to consider where your food is coming from and how it is being produced? I don't think Foer would say you are evil, just irrational, like most people when it comes to eating, myself included. Much of his book is dedicated to the people who make a living raising animals for consumption only. And he calls these people heroes.
As for CJ, you seem to be dubious about this subject, much like I currently am. You start by saying that reading Fast Food Nation severed your ties with fast food, but then conclude that eating a Big Mac on occasion is okay. However, your response limits the argument to this being strictly about one's own health. Foer points out towards the end that he has focused on a few of the variables of this issue, and for the most part, provided a large surveyed perspective of them. He explains that one could easily write an entire book just about the cruelty argument, or the health argument, or the environmental argument against factory farming. As for me, I completely excluded the detriment our consumption of fish is having on the environment, which is a major part of the book, but doesn't effect me as much personally. The book doesn't even touch on the fact the majority of factory farmers are migrant workers, often illegal, being paid below minimum wage and working in the most horrific of conditions. The world decries the exploitation of migrant workers by Walmart, but is more than willing to accept food produced by just as many, equally as exploited, worse treated individuals without batting an eyelash.
This goes way beyond a person's budget and a desire for a Big Mac.
Thank you for this piece, Edmonds.
I couldn't disagree any more with CJ's notion that "there is nothing wrong with an occasional donut or Big Mac." Contrarily, there is a tremendous amount wrong with consuming these foods. The antibiotics, bacteria, pesticides, and processed sugars injected and sprinkled into chickens and pastries and over fruit is literally poison to your body. The "24-hour flu" and many other illnesses people always belly-ache about are frequently a type of food poisoning caused by the foods we eat, and not viruses.
Meat offers no necessary nutrients the body needs to remain healthy, so you can avoid the "high-priced meats," or if you must, you can eat it infrequently and purchase beef not infected with these antibiotics. Unfortunately, similarly to politics, very few people are actually informed and would rather remain ignorant to the issues than actually be bothered by this nonsense. "High prices" are quite frankly an excuse. There are both healthy and unhealthy foods at both high and low costs. Sugary cereals and bags of chips are very expensive, but everyone buys them. Subs, Chinese food, and other take out is also expensive, but no one complains about that, either. Incidentally, the cost of my lunches for the week has gone down and my weekly food bill is no higher than it was previously.
As aprilmae warns, people do look at you differently and sometimes with hostility. "You're so weird" seems to remain a crowd favorite. When you always feel exhausted and like crap, I'll respond, "Hm, that's weird."
I tend to exaggerate for dramatic effect. I will occassionaly have a chicken sandwich from a Wendy's when I forget to pack a lunch with me on the road. When I was a kid, a full meal from McD's or BK once a week was normal. However, once I hit my mid-20's no matter how much I exercised I learned that my diet had a lot to do with my results and I pretty much kept a pretty healthy diet since. But, I also will enjoy chicken wings, beer, cupcakes, etc on occassion. The key is always moderation. I run into a lot of people in my line of work who normal breakfast is 2 donuts and coffee followed by a value meal at McD's for lunch. Not surprisingly, these 40 year olds have the internals of a 60 year old. However, this is their choice. One cannot have the excuse "I did not know" in this, the Information Age.
B Tavern, you are taking the act of eating a hamburger and basically putting it on par with shooting heroin in ones veins. Of the 2500 calories everyday of your life one must consume to subside, throwing in a burger or a hot dog will not irreparably harm you. There are many things in this world that are by their very nature bad for you. There is no nutritional value in beer, but is it life or death to have one after work on occasion? Hot Dogs are pretty much nutrional garbage pails but you are going to deny the experience of taking a child to their first ballgame and not eat one?
I tend to think life is tough enough and short enough that sometimes you want to be able to endulge without guilt. You do it everyday, endulging becomes gluttony and we all have seen the end result of that everytime we leave the house. But relax already. You can have the healthiest of diets and lifestyles and still get cancer if it runs in your family.
Sure, anyone can get cancer, and sometimes people are genetically predisposed to a higher likelihood of acquiring certain illnesses (like cancer), but they are not born with it and can prevent it by eating properly. People have cured themselves of terminal illnesses, including cancer, by eating certain ways, even after doctors have sent them home with no hope of survival. Those diets did not include the occasional indulgence.
Each time you eat chicken or a burger from a fast food place, you insert toxins into your system -- anti-biotics, bacterias, E. coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc. -- some that last months lurking throughout your intestinal tract, and in extreme cases can cause kidney failure and death. These toxins you willingly place inside yourself constantly battle against your immune system, making you more susceptible to other illnesses. By eating these animals pumped with anti-biotics, we prevent our bodies the chance of combating sickness, and as Edmonds and Foer point out, actually cause new illnesses.
I know this sounds like preaching, and I apologize because I do not intend it to be; the reality of it is: it is your life and your body, and honestly I don't care at all what you eat. I am not a vegetarian because I'm a moral guy. I am not upset when people criticize what I eat, and I do not criticize what others consume. I don't cringe when other people eat meat. In fact, I love meat. It's tough not eating it. It's tough not eating candy and not smoking, too. As you say, Life is short, so why make it shorter?
Logically, I competely understand going with a vegetarian diet. I know as I get older, it would be in my best interests to head predominantly in that direction. I am well aware of the health risks, though, it is hard to break old habits.
I think you and I Tavern are not completely far off in our thinking. I think the majority of this nation's diet is atrocious. I do not attribute that so much to ignorance as it is to laziness and willpower. Based on what you said iin your response, being a vegetarian takes extraordinary willpower and committment. Are you a vegan or just a vegetarian?
My point is that food is something that can and should be enjoyed on occasion other than mere substinance. One beer on occasion will not destroy your liver just as one hamburger on occasion will not do irrepairable harm.