November 17, 2010 01:54 PM UTC by John Stossel

This Week’s Column: Natural Is Not Always Better

“Natural” food sounds so pure. Tampering with nature feels wrong.  So it’s easy to believe that things like chemical pesticides and genetically modified food are unhealthy.  It’s intuitive to believe that they harm the planet. But as so often happens, what we know just isn’t so. My Fox Business program this week (Thursday at 9pm ET) takes on some of those cherished environmental beliefs.

In my syndicated column this week, I examine one:  “Natural” food promoters claim grass-fed beef is better for the environment that corn-fed cattle:

Michael Pollan, the prolific food author and activist, wrote in The New York Times that “what was once a solar-powered ruminant (grass-fed steer) (has been turned) into the very last thing we need: another fossil-fuel machine”. How so? Farmers burn fossil fuels to ship corn to feed cows instead of letting them eat what’s naturally under their feet.

The American Grassfed Association — surprise, surprise — says cattle are better for the environment because harmony is created between the land and the animals.

People believe. Nobody likes the idea of cattle jammed into feed lots.

…But so often, what sounds logical is just wrong.

…Once again, modern technology saves money and is better for the earth. By stuffing the feed-lot animals with corn, farmers get them to grow faster. Therefore they can slaughter them sooner, which is better for the earth than letting them live longer and do all the environmentally damaging things natural cows do while they are alive.
Read more: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/11/17/this-weeks-column-natural-is-not-always-better/#ixzz161Oad4wL

 Response to John Stossel’s piece – Busting Another Food Myth, Natural is No Always Better

 I currently serve as President of the American Grassfed Association (AGA) and represent around 400 grassfed producers.  Our membership is primarily comprised of small-scale family farms that put care and pride into the protein they produce.  Our foundation is that we produce food for the table with respect for the animals, the land, the quality and healthfulness of the food and the farm. 

 Grassfed versus grain-fed beef is a topic that seems to provoke controversy. Determining which of these methods of production is “best” is a complicated matter bringing in animal welfare, human health and environmental outcomes. It is unfortunate that Mr. Stossel appears to have taken a rather blinkered and biased approach to this very complex subject.

In making the statement about grassfed meat that “there’s no evidence it’s better for the environment or better for you” Mr. Stossel relies heavily on the evidence of Dr. Jude Capper. Dr. Capper has presented a few brief papers and posters at recent Animal Science conferences but her main published work is on dairy cattle. Aside from the fact that dairy production is a very different thing to beef or lamb production Dr. Capper does not mention that she has close associations with organizations that have a vested interest in promoting the most intensive systems of production. At AGA we are of course in favor of sustainable, pasture base systems but at least we come right out and say so!  Why did Stossel not ask Capper who funded her research?  Don’t forget the idea of follow the money.  It just might prove bias in the outcome.

 We are very familiar with Dr. Capper’s work. Her dairy paper was the subject of significant conversation “Bad Science” blogs [see http://www.animalwelfareapproved.org/2009/11/16/beware-of-bad-science/]

 Capper claims that a ‘whole-system approach’ proves that intensive livestock systems – where meat or milk production is maximized per animal, per acre – are less environmentally damaging than ‘inefficient’ pasture or grass-based systems.  Yet it is Dr Capper who is not looking at the ‘whole system’ – or indeed the ‘bigger picture’ we all face. For the vast majority of scientists who are working in climate related issues contend that it is intensive agriculture – with its heavy reliance on fossil fuels and other damaging environmental practices – which is the real climate culprit. And in the face of the reality of climate change and ever-decreasing oil reserves, ‘business as usual’ agriculture is just no longer an option.

 AGA was not the only organization to challenge this report from Dr. Capper and indeed other similar reports from other authors. One of the biggest problems is the fact that any report that states grassfed meat is less environmentally friendly than grain fed meat does not take into account the environmental costs of all the inputs needed for the industrial system. The true cost of feedlot beef has to take account of the full environmental footprint caused by producing cattle feed – raising vast monocultures of corn which is the most heavily laden fossil fuel crop in the country, including the destruction of vast tracts of rainforest in order to grow soy and corn and the dead zone in the gulf caused by runoff of artificial fertilizers into the Mississippi River.   This is before we start adding in the environmental pollution from feedlots, the greenhouse gas emissions from the stockpiled manure and no mentions of the positive influence of carbon sequestration that is specific to grazing grassfed animals.

 AGA are disappointed that Dr. Capper maintains that there is no evidence of the health benefits of grassfed versus grain-fed beef. On the contrary there are many published papers on the health giving benefits of omega 3 fatty acids, conjugated lineoleic acids (CLAs) and vitamin E – all found at higher levels in grassfed rather than grain fed meat. Dr. Capper states that the differences in the levels of these compounds between grass and grain fed are “minor”. Perhaps she hasn’t read a recently published report (partly carried out by the USDA) that states CLA levels were 117% higher in animals that were simply pasture finished – not on pasture all their lives – compared with those finished on concentrates. Or another study that showed grassfed meat was several times higher in vitamin E than either grain-fed animals or – surprisingly – grain-fed animals that were given high doses of synthetic vitamin E.

 The representation by Stossel and Capper that other inputs to the industrial system such as synthetic hormones and sub-therapeutic antibiotics are of no importance is a travesty.  They contend that since it has not been proven that these inputs cause direct harm in the beef produced then it is not logical to demand products that do not have them involved in their production.  This ignores the research that indicates otherwise.  But more importantly it ignores the desires of society who may choose not have them as a part of their diet.  A growing number feel strongly that while sub-therapeutic antibiotics and synthetic hormones contribute significantly to the accelerated growth of feedlot animals but ignore the issues of antibiotic resistance and pre-mature puberty.  It is the height of elite mind sets that does not allow a consumer to choose what they want in their diet without being presented all the facts and instead presents a one sided approach to a complicated issue.  It must be remembered that the consumer has the freedom to vote for what agricultural system (pasture based or industrial) by how they spend their dollars.

 Mr. Stossel sadly relied on only one source for his information.  He didn’t take the time to listen to both sides of the argument and, like a poorly researched paper, published his article without review or evidence. This lack of rigor academically and journalistically appears to be the only way industrial agriculture can defend itself.

 Mr. Stossel I challenge you to follow up and present both sides instead of the biased report you presented on the show.

Sincerely,

Patricia Whisnant, DVM

President

American Grassfed Association

Grass fed producer

The goal of the event was to provide a learning opportunity and with that opportunity to connect restaurants and food professionals directly with producers and distributors in the creation of a more efficient and affordable supply chain for sustainable meat in Chicago. State of the Plate laid a foundation for building a bridge from the farm to the table that not only educates but creates real solutions to the sustainable supply issues.

Goals accomplished included the discovery of the differences between the industrial farm and sustainably raised systems for producing meat and their impact on public health and the environment.  Presented were ranchers and distributors that supply Chicago with verified sustainable meat products of which Rain Crow Ranch/American Grassfed Beef is one.

In addition, the event allowed attendees to taste and compare industrial and sustainably farmed meat from the participating ranches and companies that sell in Chicago.  Armed with 50 8oz patties of our grassfed beef the burgers were prepared by the Robert Morris Culinary School students and chefs.  These folks kept a steady supply of fresh warm grassfed burgers coming out of the kitchen to be sampled.

Keynote speakers included Robert Kenner, writer, producer, and director of Food, Inc.  Food, Inc is one of the top 25 grossing theatrical documentaries of all time, selling nearly 500,000 DVDs.  The movie received widespread critical acclaim, dozens of awards and nominations and has influenced current food policy decisions.  One of my personal highlights of the event was having dinner with Robert along with Troy Roush and Carol Morrison, farmer heroes who took the risk and talked to the cameras in Food, Inc.  http://robertkennerfilms.com/films/files/detail_current.php

The other keynote speaker was Fedele Bauccio, founder of Bon Appétit Management Co.  One of the first food service industry professionals who made the effort to source fresh, made-from-scratch, local and sustainable foods to the contract market.  http://www.bamco.com/page/59/fedele-bauccio.htm.

We offer many thanks to the planners and sponsors who allowed us an opportunity to speak on a panel that educated and answered questions about that which we have a passion – our grassfed beef.

The event was put together by The Chicago Restaurant Co-op and associated steering committee. It was the brain-child of Dan Rosenthal, President of The Rosenthal Group, cofounder and chairman of The Green Chicago Restaurant Co-op.  Other members of the steering committee included Christopher Koetke, Vice President of Culinary Arts at Kendal College; David Rand, Director Farmers Market Coalition and Farm Forager, Green City Market; Chef Bruce Sherman, President Chefs Collaborative, Chef of North Pond Restaurant; Jim Slama, Founder and President, Family Farmed.org and Kerri McClimen, Pew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming.  This group did a wonderful job of pulling the event together to make it top notch.

Sponsors included The Green Chicago Restaurant Co-op, Family Farmed.org, Animal Welfare Approved, Bon Appétit Mgmt. Co., Kendall College, Chicago Dept. of Environment, Robert Morris University, Kimpton Hotel and Restaurants, edible Chicago, and others.

Read more and look at conference pictures at http://stateoftheplate2010.com .

It was my great pleasure to participate in the Chefs Collaborative National Summit 2010 held in Boston October 3-5.  I spoke on a panel about rare breeds and pastured animals.

 True to the theme of the event we looked at the past and how before industrial-scale factory farming with livestock raised in CAFOs became the norm most of our country’s meat supply came from many breeds of pasture-raised livestock.  These breeds raised on pasture land were suited to regional cultures and cuisines.

  With the advent of surplus corn production after WWII the livestock industry began to consolidate into factory production.  Today, however, heightened awareness of the ecological and public health risks associated with industrial animal production has put the pasture-based system into the spotlight.  Pasture based agriculture is not new but it is rather looking back to our roots to discover a more sustainable future. 

Our purpose was to explore how chefs and producers can work together to supply a quality and dependable source of pasture protein for restaurants.  The first step is finding and forming relationships between the chef and the farmer to make that happen.  Then both need to pull their heads together to work out the specific logistics in a way that is fair, dependable and sustainable.

  It takes effort and some outside-the-box thinking at times but the rewards are great.  Dealing with and understanding chefs can be a learning curve for the farm but at the same time understanding how that animal is produced is a learning effort for the chef.  For a chef used to the boxed beef world it is easy to order the number of premium steaks needed.  For a farmer faced with selling the whole carcass (when only a small percentage is steak) the challenge is to sell the large percentage that is ground beef.   

The couple of days I spent in the community of chefs dazzled my palate with the wonderful flavors of great food, opened my mind to the thoughts and challenges in the restaurant, and renewed my passion that what we do on our farm is not to just produce livestock but that we produce food.  Food that deserves care and pride in its production as well as respect and reverence in what it does to nourish our body, soul and culture.

Chefs Collaborative is the leading nonprofit network of chefs that fosters a sustainable food system through advocacy, education, and collaboration with the broader food community.  They advocate for sustainable food in the greater culinary community.  They provide chefs with the information and tools necessary to make sustainable purchasing decisions – through workshops, publications, and events. And they connect chefs and sustainable food producers.

Several times in the course of events the board of the Chefs Collaborative read aloud their statement of principles which created in me a renewed passion for the food system which our farm is a part. These principles are:

1. Food is fundamental to life, nourishing us in body and soul.  The preparation of food strengthens our connection to nature.  And the sharing of food immeasurably enriches our sense of community.

2. Good food begins with unpolluted air, land, and water, environmentally sustainable farming and fishing, and humane animal husbandry.

3. Food choices that emphasize delicious, locally grown, seasonally fresh, and whole or minimally processed ingredients are good for us, for local farming communities, and for the planet.

4. Cultural and biological diversity are essential for the health of the earth and its inhabitants.  Preserving and revitalizing sustainable food, fishing, and agricultural traditions strengthen that diversity.

5. By continually educating themselves about sustainable choices, chefs can serve as models to the culinary community and the general public through their purchases of seasonal, sustainable ingredients and their transformation of these ingredients into delicious food.

6.  The greater culinary community can be a catalyst for positive change by creating a market for good food and helping preserve local farming and fishing communities.

The Chefs Collaborative has a vision that as a result of their work, sustainable practices will be second nature for every chef in the United States.  As a farmer who supplies the building blocks of what they do I am very proud and happy to be a part of this group.

Our loyal customers are concerned about how their food is sourced as well as how it is raised.  Grass fed in the United States started on small family farms but as its popularity grew . . . industrial beef has represented a niche market that has grown immensely over the last few years. 

 What began as an inclination of consumers toward healthier and safer foods now represents a larger group who not only wants the perceived health benefits but comes to grassfed because of the management model.  Some consumers come because they care intensely about the humane treatment of animals we harvest for food.  Some come because they support sustainable agricultural practices that benefits the environment rather than depleting resources.  Many choose to support small family-scale farming over the factory farm model of agriculture.  For whatever reason most consumers who choose to buy grassfed products have in mind animals humanely raised on pasture with the most natural process possible.

Recently, the USDA published into the Federal Register a grassfed (forage) claim for use as a voluntary marketing distinction.  This should make the producer and consumer happy, right?  Well, not exactly.  Last year when invited to comment the majority of the 19,000 responses (an enormous amount) linked the term grassfed to animals raised on pasture. 

The new USDA claim is so loosely constructed that it may allow for practices far from the idyllic pastoral scenes the consumer envisions.  One major objection to the USDA claim has to do with the same issues the organic dairies have in regard to the provision in the NOP for access to pasture.  Long-term confinement practices are allowed under the USDA grassfed (forage) standard since access to pasture and frost dates are easily manipulated.

Organic dairies have come under harsh criticism with very loose interpretations of access to pasture.  In this picture by the Cornucopia Institute you see one interpretation of access to pasture.  Animals are raised in confinement with the practice of skirting around the spirit of the standard.  Further, the picture could be completely in USDA standards where animals are being fed harvested forage, antibiotics, hormones and raised in confinement where continual access to pasture during the growing season can be loosely interpreted and sidestepped where the animal is virtually never on pasture.  Ruminant animals were made to graze and it is their normal behavior to graze on open pasture.

Compare the above with this picture taken on our farm where cattle are allowed to fulfill their natural behavior and remain on pasture.  I believe this is what the consumer envisions with the term grassfed.  Further, these animals never receive antibiotics or synthetic hormones.

Today America is witnessing a food revolution where customers want to know how their food is grown and who grows it. Knowledgeable customers ask questions, read labels, do their investigative homework and decide ethically what food they want to eat.

This new consumer is met by a new generation of caring farmers. This new generation of sustainable farmers can be referred to as grandpa’s gutsy grandkids. These pioneers are willing to take risks and tread where the industrial factory farms feared to go.

These sustainable farmers are selling direct and flaunting the attributes of their products that can’t be replicated by the industrial factory farm system. They seek and find a market where customers appreciate the cattle raised with pride on American family farms. They are finding a niche where their farms, their families and their communities can thrive.

Many kids are returning to their family farms after graduation and taking on the new challenge by seriously studying the market and their farm’s place in it.

All of our children play an important role in the success of our family grass fed beef business. Our son, Peter, manages our processing plant and keeps a close eye on the production end of raising our cattle.

Jack, our oldest son, helps with marketing our beef. Katie Grace, our daughter, travels with us to food demonstrations and seminars. Logan, Cody and Trenton help with raising our cattle.

The future looks bright as this new generation of Whisnant’s are able to incorporate fresh energy and ideas to reach new customers with our sustainable products.

Some consumers like the idea of supporting American family farms.  Another huge segment chooses the grass fed model of production because on the environmental concerns associated with factory farming.

Mintel, a marketing research group, recently published results of consumer surveys that reflect this idea. As more and more Americans are moving toward greener purchases the production of green products have increased over 200% in the last 5 years.  Mintel noted a trend in consumers’ growing interest in products that are not just organic or natural but address their environmental concerns.  More than ever shoppers want to purchase goods that help protect and preserve the world around us.

In this vein the green lifestyle has welcome arms around the solar based, environmentally friendly grass fed model of production.

As grassfarmers you have probably heard me say that what we do is grow grass, right?We then use cattle to harvest our crop.Why would we want to burn pasture?

September and time to renovate some of our finishing pastures for winter grazing.We use a no-till drill to plant grass seed into the ground.This allows you to plant without having to disturb the soil by tillage.In our steep to rolling hills the potential for soil erosion is significant. A great advantage to this no-till planting is to conserve soil and decrease any erosion.

Another advantage is that we try to time the planting shortly after a rain.Conventional methods of tilling would require for the pasture to dry out before disking.Since you don’t remove the top layer and the soil is not directly exposed to the sun the soil retains moisture longer.  This promotes the germination of the grass seed.

One unconventional method we employ in our no-till strategy is to try to utilize burning to kill the cover crop. Most no-till methods involve using herbicides to get rid of the cover.We prefer to burn the old pasture.

Burning is a natural occurrence usually ignited by lightning strikes causing a burn of from up to a couple of acres to hundreds of acres. Native Americans used fire to drive game, encourage growth and improve pasture.

Prescribed grassland burning can improve stands of native grass, control weeds and trees, enhance wildlife habitat and improve animal gains. Without burning pasture the new growth each season has to compete with a mantle of dead and decaying vegetation.This stifles new growth by depriving the newly emerging seed of space and light. Burning encourages this new growth and plant diversity.

Burning also releases the nutrients in the dead vegetation so it can be used by the new growth. Our pastures require continual control measure for shrubs and tree sprouts; otherwise the pastures will turn into forests.This control can be done by mowing, dozing or chemicals.

We believe that the natural, prescribed burning each year is a better choice. It is healthier for the soil, healthier for the environment where we live and doesn’t rely on heavy fossil fuel input.

REPORTER:There are many suppliers who claim grass fed status.Who are the real McCoys in your opinion?

DR. WHISNANT:Without a legal definition in place for grass fed, many operations especially those larger entities that purchase cattle from various producers and market under a “corporate” business model have grass-raised the ruminant and yet grain finish to speed the finishing process, this is often done in confinement.

In this unique time, when we are still in an atmosphere without a legally binding standard for grass fed, there is opportunity to borrow traits of factory farmed livestock production and speed the rate of finish.

Over the last 5-6 years the demand for grass fed beef has continued to increase.  Since grass fed beef is marketed at a premium this offers opportunity to large corporate farms.  Many are currently spending multi-millions in developing a brand name before the rules go into place.

Specifically, I mean that several of the new brand names are finishing on corn and yet can still label as grassfed.

Other corporate farms or marketing entities are adding grassfed by using imported grassfed beef from Uruguay, New Zealand or Australia.  It is cheaper to buy grassfed beef from these off-shore sources than to produce it here in America.  As a family farmer who is passionate about the survival of the American Family Farm I would like to see COOL implemented, but then that is another entire subject…

I can only hope that when the grass fed standard is adopted that those producers who do not currently conform to the 99% would either change their process or not be allowed to use the label.  Further, I can only hope that the regulation will have enough grit to make the term Grassfed have some meaning.

In my opinion, the real McCoys are local family farms who put their care, labor and reputation into the quality of beef they raise.  They believe that grass fed just makes sense to the order of how the world works.  Ruminants are just made to graze forage out on pasture.  The system of taking solar energy captured in the food produced by plants and harvested by a unique animal that has the machinery to digest the cellulose of that plant is brilliant in its simplicity.  These farmers have a heart felt appreciation and stand amazed at how the system works when allowed to do so the way it was intended.

These real McCoys do not stand behind a corporate label but stand face to face with the consumer by marketing direct.  They open their farms to invite customers to visit.  Many of us call it relationship marketing but it is having pride in what you do and enjoying developing relationship with customers who have an appreciation for your labor.  They represent the most direct route from farm to the table and as such both the farmer and consumer benefit.

I can only speak for American Grass Fed Beef and know that the beef we produce is 100% grassfed and finished.  No beef has ever received antibiotics in feed or even therapeutic (these are excluded from the program) antibiotics, we do not implant with synthetic hormones to speed the growth, we do not feed grain or grain by-products, we feed no animal by-products, we do not confine the animals in pens, we handle our animals with the utmost care to humane treatment and low stress, and we connect directly with our customers.

As many grass fed producers who finish their animals on grass we have come to understand the importance of breed selection in the quality of the beef we produce.Many fellow grass farmers are returning to heritage breeds in beef,poultry and swine as they journey back to the basics in livestock production.

Beef characteristics such as tenderness,cut out,disposition,birth weight,age at maturation (finished weight) and even loin size all affect the finished product.At American Grass Fed Beef we have returned to the shorter-legged English types that reach puberty earlier and finish faster on grazing conditions.Further, we select for those animals that do particularly well in our specific environment,those momma cows that maintain their body weight through the winter and through the lactation period on our hill country.In many cases this has meant a return to the cattle that are the breed types of pre-WWII (pre-feedlot) era.

On July 21,RAFT’s Jennifer Hall, Don Bixby,Jeanette Beranger and Makalé Faber joined with rare breeds rancher Nathan Melson of Sloans Creek Farm and Chef Thom Fox of Acme Chophouse in San Francisco, CA to discuss how ranchers, chefs and conservationists are working together to reestablish historic breeds for today’s modern menu.

The workshop, part of American Grassfed Association’s annual conference,engaged ranchers, chefs, retailers, and consumers from Wyoming to Georgia in a discussion of the cultural and genetic landscape of America’s historic breeds;the attributes chefs seek when sourcing meat;and the ways in which ranchers and chefs can partner in agricultural conservation efforts through the Collaborative’s Meat of the Matter project and Slow Food presidia projects.

As an example of how chefs and ranchers can work together to recover rare breeds and regional ecosystems, Alan Sirull, Executive Chef for Antlers Hilton in Colorado Springs, prepared a comparative tasting of grain fed and grassfed Red Poll Cattle.With the belief that consumer demand for a particular flavor can provide economic incentive for ranchers to raise rare breeds, the panelists facilitated a discussion on the taste quality of the beef and began outlining ways in which chefs, producers, retailers and consumers can eat em to save em.

Eric Schlosser was our keynote speaker at the American Grassfed Association conference in Colorado Springs last month. He was a delight to get to know and held our group of 250 grass fed producers in rapt attention.

It was thrilling to us as producers to hear him speak to the benefits of raising animals on grass the way nature intended rather than opting to enter the world of industrial meat industry with it is behemoth feedlots and mega-processing plants.

I had read Fast Food Nation years ago and found it a good read.  Thoroughly researched, it was as provocative in message focusing in light of the modern meat as Upton Sinclair was in writing about the meat industry in the early part of the century.  Eric has followed through in writing Chew on This which is the kid’s version of his earlier book.  It is required reading at my house.

It will be exciting to see the reactions to the movie version of Fast Food Nation which will be out this fall.  If you would like a sneak preview peek here:

http://www.fastfoodnation-movie.com/trailer.php
 

Super Healthy, Not Super Size
Fast Food Nation’s Eric Schlosser talks to Epicurious about
getting kids to eat healthy

The movie Fast Food Nation will be released on October 20.

With Americans —and their kids —super sizing themselves, and with one in five public schools in America offering brand-name fast food in the school cafeterias, we are reaching a health crisis. It is particularly alarming in the youngest and most vulnerable segment, our children.

Since the early 1970s the rate of obesity among adult Americans has risen by 50 percent, writes Schlosser. Among preschoolers it has doubled. And among children aged six to 11 it has tripled.

Schlosser was so concerned that he set out to teach kids directly how to make the right food choices. Chew on This, his latest book, is a kid version of his famous exposé, Fast Food Nation.

But parents play the most crucial role. Be active and aware of your children’s eating habits before it’s too late,Schlosser urges. He notes that a child who is obese at age 13 has 90 percent odds of being obese in his mid-30s.

While parents can encourage their children to develop healthy attitudes toward eating by sitting down to family dinner every night and teaching them about food, Schlosser admits that peer pressure and commercial messages are tough to compete with: People are really going to have to work to change what’s going on outside the home, he says. There’s constant bombardment from mass culture. He claims that on average a child watches three hours of junk-food ads on TV every week, and that fast-food chains spend $3 billion a year on television ads. They also sponsor playlands,hand out toys, and offer free materials to schools in an effort to win over the youth market, he says.

Schlosser believes that getting rid of soda and fast food in schools is crucial. Food companies know that parents are obligated to send their children to school, and the schools desperately need the money, he says.They are making children pay for their own education and pay for it with their health. I’d rather see a Gap in every high school than a Taco Bell or McDonald’s.

Children should be informed about what goes into fast food, who makes it, the true costs of the food, and how it is marketed, Schlosser maintains. Then they can decide if they want to buy it. Every dollar that you spend on food is a vote, he writes in Chew on This.

Schlosser is encouraged by projects such as Jamie Oliver’s campaign to improve the quality of school lunches in Britain, and Alice Waters’s Edible Schoolyard in California. While other famous chefs are opening chain restaurants and putting their names on frozen meals, Alice is trying to protect the environment, support independent farmers, and change the way American children think about food, he writes.
So how can parents step up and take charge of their children’s lunchtime diet?

Packing a healthy lunch for your child is one way to avoid unhealthy cafeteria food, says Schlosser, though he admits that it can be tricky finding a nutritious option that will compete with the lure of the fast food being eaten by other children. There are all kinds of ways to make healthy meals that taste good, but they have to be compelling.

In our household we’ve never been puritanical about food, he adds. We enjoy major lapses, but always with foods made from real ingredients rather than industrial ones, such as brownies made with real butter rather than out of a box.