ChowBaby

I should start by telling you that I woke up feeling annoyed this morning. And, no, it has nothing to do with the time of the month. Ah, shit! Saying that makes it seem like it must have something to do with that time of the month, but I promise it doesn't.

See, last night I read about a new book written by a pediatrician and the chief of infectious diseases at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia that presents a case against the link between vaccines and autism. Notice I'm not linking. I don't want to step into that fray today. Especially since it wasn't anything about either side of the vaccine debate that got me worked up. Instead, it was a (probably throwaway) quote by actress Amanda Peet who has become a spokeswomen for a vaccine advocacy group. Here's what she said:

“Where I live in L.A., there’s this child-rearing trend—only feed your kids organic food, detoxify your house. And there’s a lot of anticorporate fervor, anti-pharmaceutical company fervor.” She went on, "I'd have lunch with my friends who were moms, and they'd say they wouldn't vaccinate, or would space out their vaccinations and hadn't I heard?" 

Wait! How did organic food come into this? (And, side question: is detoxifying your house a bad thing?)

I think I know the answer to my own question. Organic has become trendy. Something no longer associated with an authentic movement, but with mega corporations that market over processed foods and questionable nutritional claims trying to get in on a new consumer interest. Organic products are often exorbitantly expensive (and, ironically, bringing the price down often means hoping that the big, bad companies who can produce and distribute on a scale that makes the whole enterprise more affordable get in the game). There is uncertainty over what organic even means and if the label can be trusted. This is related, at least in part, to the issue of industrial organic (which is also related to the fact that over sweet, over processed foods can be made with organic ingredients--i.e., organic doesn't necessarily mean healthy), and the fact that organic products can only be truly organic under particular conditions that are supposedly overseen by the USDA. You know, the same agency that also oversees industrialized meat production and processing. And that's worked so out well, right? And all this isn't just news of the past. Our soon-to-be secretary of agriculture, Tom Vilsack, who will oversee the USDA, has a history of supporting biotechnology and genetically modified foods. What are we to make of all this? Especially in a time when related government agencies have failed parents with their positions on bisphenol-A and melamine in our baby formula? Oh, there's more, but I'll spare you. Needless to say, I get it. I understand why you're skeptical. I am, too.

That's why, along with my wicked sense of humor (oh yea), I'm the first one to make fun of the whole obsessive mommy questioning, "Is it organic?" about every "O" shaped cereal and puffed fruit snack you try to hand a kid these days. Even though I'm one of those moms. And why, depending on my mood, I laugh or cringe every time I write a recipe for this blog and specify "organic" next to every single item in the ingredient list. But, let's take a moment and breathe. Or at least give me a moment to catch my breath. 

Organic means grown without the chemical pesticides, chemical fertilizers, sludge sewage, bioengineering, antibiotics, or ionizing radiation. I know that this requires diligent oversight that has been brought into question, but go with me for a minute. Seems pretty straight forward that we would want our government to ensure that our food is grown in as natural a ways as possible. If we can support natural growing techniques without jeopardizing health or food supply, we'd want to. Right? It would not only result in less toxic food, but also cleaner soil and water supplies. I'm guessing we're all, more or less, on the same page here.

Now, are organic products in the US actually less toxic and reliably grown on farms that have cleaner soil and help keep water supplies clean? Not an easy question to answer. I'd guess that, realistically, we can say "some". But some is better than none. And some can lead to many. Many leads to most. Support for organic farming and products both in the form of consumer purchase and activism can help push us towards stricter policy and oversight and greater organic supply. In the meantime, I get that most of us can't be cavalier about spending extra money on organic just to help push us towards a tipping point. (Though, for the record, I don't believe that's all your doing when you buy organic. I believe there is compelling evidence that an organic diet reduces the amount of toxins that you and your children take in.) If that's the case, you might want to consider buying organic just for your little ones (since they eat more fruits and veggies relative to their body weight and developing bodies cannot break toxins down as effectively as ours) or focusing on the dirty dozen (also listed here along with the 12 least contaminated foods, and on Greenopolis with some useful notes on why certain produce is safe to buy non-organic). If you can afford organic and are interested in considering pro-organic research data, here are some points that I find compelling:

• The Environmental Protection Agency reports that children receive 50% of their lifetime cancer risks in the first two years of life.
• According to the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Academy of Sciences, standard chemicals are up to 10 times more toxic for children than for adults. The fact is that children take in more toxic chemicals relative to their body weight than adults and their developing organ systems are less capable of detoxifying chemicals.
• According to the Food and Drug Administration, half of the produce currently tested in grocery stores contains measurable residues of pesticides.
• According to the Department of Health and Human Services, organophosphate pesticides (OPs) are now found in the blood of 95% of people tested. OP levels are twice as high in blood samples taken from children than in adults. Exposure to OPs has been linked to hyperactivity, behavior disorders, learning disabilities, developmental delays, and motor dysfunction.
• The Food and Drug Administration conducted laboratory tests of eight top-selling baby foods which revealed the presence of 16 pesticides, including three carcinogens.
• In blood samples of children aged 2 to 4 years, concentrations of pesticide residues are 6 times higher for those eating conventionally farmed fruits and vegetables when compared with those eating organic food.
• The Centers for Disease Control reports that one of the main sources of pesticide exposure for children comes from the food they eat.

(Source: Organic Consumers Association, US Government Fact Sheet)

Dr. Green, renowned "green" pediatrician, adds, "In 1993, a congressionally mandated study by the National Academy of Sciences expressed concern that existing methods of risk evaluation for pesticide exposure were failing children. More recently, the Consumers Union and Environmental Working Group have released studies confirming that children are overexposed even if their exposure is within legal limits. The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 mandated a review of agricultural chemicals in light of this new information about risk assessment. Included in this act is a requirement to impose a 10-fold margin of safety to protect children when setting standards for the use of pesticides on food. While safety standards have become more strict, buying organic products, if they are available and you can afford them, and supporting organic agriculture may be your best protection."

Phew. Lots of info. I know. One last thing, though. The American Academy of Pediatrics. Despite what I believe are dubious positions on various child health and safety issues, I feel it would be irresponsible to not report the AAP's position that there is no evidence that "organic, natural, or health foods are any more nutritious or taste better than regular foods." You know, the same way a little bit of melamine in your baby's formula won't kill them. OH snap! (And, as a side note, a prerequisite for joining the AAP is dead taste buds.) But, seriously. While I couldn't find the full text of any of their source research without paying (which I didn't do), I've considered their position and thought that you might want to, as well.

There you have it. Why I buy into organic. But convincing you isn't my point. You being indifferent to, pro-, or anti-organic isn't what makes me mad. It's that damn Amanda Peet and her quote, which I feel was irresponsible.

First off, it's judgmental. And, sadly, baby and kids food tends to be a lightning rod for judgement. Breast milk or formula? Organic or not? All natural or processed? Homemade or store bought? And don't get me wrong--I've been a perpetrator as much as (okay, more than) I've been a victim. And I say that even as someone who was emotionally and physically pulverized by breast milk supply issues that forced formula on Isaac starting at 3-months-old. I guess that in a time like ours, when an obsession with self-awareness has intersected with a massive parenting industry that churns out books and products and advice, feeding is one of the last primal ways we have left to nurture our children. But I wish we could find more compassion for each other. And respect for natural food as a fundamental element of our existence and history.

I also find the comment to be dismissive of sound research on both sides of the issue (certainly the pro-organic side, but she also diminishes the anti-organic stance by chalking the whole thing up to some "in-the-know" privileged mommy trend). Lastly, I find it dangerous that she flippantly brings together the organic and vaccine debates. While there is some interaction--some parents promote organic, gluten- and casein-free diets for autistic children--there is no direct relationship between organic and vaccines (i.e., not all parents of autistic children who believe organic matters necessarily believe that vaccines caused their child's autism, and vice versa). These are not just fads that can be clumped together as part of some cockamamie natural movement. They are globally debated health and environmental issues that have sound research--and smart, informed, outspoken parents--on both sides of the debate. And we're all just doing our best to figure it all so we can make the best decisions we know how for our families.

Poor Amanda Peet. She probably doesn't even remember saying the quote. And I can imagine how she meant it differently than I took it. (See? Compassion. And I'm not being sarcastic!) But she is a public person and has chosen to be a spokeswoman. With great power comes great responsibility. I hope she'll be more careful about how she speaks about her issue at hand. And, if she did mean her comment the way I took it, I hope she'll consider (re-consider?) the research on organic as carefully as she did the research on vaccines. If she ends up feeling the same way and wants to talk about it publicly, maybe she'd be willing to speak more specifically so that moms, like me, who are interested in the issue can reflect on a new, educated, parent-centric point-of-view. Because those are always helpful, even when we disagree. 

-S

related posts:
obama's food policy & choice of tom vilsak for agriculture secretary
dr. alan greene goes organic--is all organic really better
US (non) regulation of baby products
top foods to buy organic
Tree Hugger's "Green Basics" overview on organic food (including criticisms of organic)

as we all know, the price of milk last year reached an all time high. so high, it cost $3.89 per gallon last july. ouch! but the faltering global economy is changing all that. it's driving the demand for dairy products way down even as supply increases. and while consumers are saying yay! farmers (who are also consumers, don't forget) are saying nay!

and just as the government stepped in to rescue banks and car companies, they are now stepping in to help farmers. critics of farm subsidies argue that they allow farmers to continue producing even when the economics don't add up. that means that, ultimately, taxpayers (like you, me, and stacie) pay the price. and while i'd rather see government funds go to struggling farmers instead of poorly managed banks, the whole thing still makes me uneasy. read the details in  new york times article here.  

 
—m

yes... i'm catching up on my New York Times reading before heading to a christmas eve gathering. this is a good one. i've been wanting to write about president-elect obama's selection of tom vilsak for secretary of agriculture since it happened last week, but haven't had time to read up because of my travels and the holidays. this article, Is a New Food Policy on Obama's List, is a nice introduction to what some people are looking for... and what we might get. more on tom after the holiday rush dies down--he's a bit of a controversial pick. or were our hopes too high?

another tidbit--michael pollan on vilsack.

-S

it's about time. though still not enough and not fast enough. but something is better than nothing, for sure. here's the article from today's New York Times.

-S

this is amazing! and hysterical!

this was created by free range studios, a creative agency "with a conscience." (they describe themselves as a "group of people determined to use technology, design and movies to make the world a more just, sustainable place.") i love these guys--very cool. can't wait 'til ChowBaby can do work with them!

they have a bunch of shorts that focus on organic food and sustainability on you tube--check 'em out. you'll laugh (and learn?).

-S

while on the topic of food and politics, i thought i'd share this little tidbit from World Changing.

it's an old post, but i like they way sharon talks about how and why food is political. and how passionate feelings on both sides of the political divide might actually reveal more similarity than difference. 

-S

whoa. i'm just coming out of it--the daze i've been in since election night. it wasn't a comatose sort of thing. rather an overjoyed, did-this-really-happen feeling.

i tried posting several times over the last few days, but couldn't pull my thoughts together clearly enough. and, honestly, i wasn't sure how to approach talking about the election, even before the intoxicating daze clouded my mind. ChowBaby is far from being a mega corporation with a hidden polical agenda, but do you want to know about my personal politics? what if you don't like what you learn? (for example, forever 21 shoppers, do you know or care about their religious proselytizing? or you curves members, how do you feel about their founder and CEO's pro life support?)

well, the election is over and i'm too proud to play neutral or hide my support for president elect Obama (it even feels good to type it!). but, i'm still wondering about politics and business. especially being that we're a food business and food is--or at least has become--inherently political. 

do you want to know the politics of the founders, CEO's, executives of companies you support? when, if at all, does it matter?
would you support a company whose product you like but politics you don't?

do tell...

- S