The first new year's resolution on most people's lists is lose
weight. James Strauss made a connection between the growing problem of
obesity in the United States and the use of growth hormones and
antibiotics in the food chain. I don't know why no one else has asked
that question, but it is a good one.
A quick Google search provided me with some interesting information. Enhancing
animal and poultry farms with growth hormones has been going on since
the 1960s and factory farming really took off about the 1980s to become a
widespread business, pushing out generations of farmers that worked the
same land for decades, and even a couple of centuries in some cases.
Fewer animals fed growth hormones to get the most meat, dairy products,
eggs, and poultry out of the fewest animals. It sounds like a good idea
unless you begin to connect the dots. Add antibiotics to the mix and the
growth of antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria, like MRSA and MSSA,
and a picture begins to form that no one, except James Strauss on one
of his rants this morning, seems to have seen.
MRSA
(Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) and MSSA
(Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus) are of nearly epidemic
proportions in the U.S. and in the world, and no one is immune. Once
these bacteria get into your system, treating the disease assumes the
proportions of stopping a wildfire with bucket and shovel. And these are
just two of the super bugs that have been spawned in recent decades.
I
have read that these bugs and bugs like them are the result of the
indiscriminate use of antibiotics. I think the problem goes deeper,
right back to our food sources. Evidently, Europeans feel the same way
because they have banned the use of growth hormones and antibiotics in
food animals, but what about the effect on humans.
According to
the studies I read this morning -- and I didn't get to all of them,
there are just too many -- the amount of hormones and antibiotics
remaining in tissue after it has been processed is negligible. First,
I'd like to know what constitutes a negligible amount and, secondly, I
want to know if there have been any studies connecting hormones to the
current problem of obesity in humans.
I have seen photos of dairy
cows with massive udders and pigs, chicken, beef, and lamb twice and even 3x the size of the same types of animals just a few decades ago. The
animals are bigger and have more meat on their bones, and a considerable
amount of fat. The animals eat less but their bodies grow and fill out
faster, which means less money in feed for more meat on the hoof. That
must make those corporate farming bean counters very happy.
Unfortunately, it also seems to have a direct effect on humans.
Haven't
you see children at the age of 5 or 6 that are bigger than 10- and
12-year-olds 30 or 40 years ago? I have, and it's frightening. More and
more people point to sedentary lifestyles and eating more fast food, but
I'm beginning to see a very different picture emerging. Sometimes it
takes just one question in the right place to set the wheels in motion.
What
I see is factory farmed animals and the eggs and dairy products from
factory farmed animals full of growth hormones at the heart of the
obesity problem facing most Americans. Some people seem to be more
resistant to the growth hormones, but there are other additives in their
causing equal problems, additives like steroids. Ever hear of 'roid
rage? I'll bet there is a connection between steroid use in factory
farming and the increase of violence and road rage in the past 30 or so
years.
I eat less now than I ever have and weigh more than I ever
have. I don't think it's the yo-yo diet syndrome, although I have been
down that road a few times. I mostly eat organic, but spent too many
years eating the same things everyone else eats, and I didn't spend a
lot of money on fast food. Once upon a time, I ate more sugar, more fat,
and a considerable amount of food, but I stayed in the plump region.
Now I eat less and eat as healthy as my budget allows, but I keep
gaining weight. It's not about how much I'm eating but what I'm eating,
and the damage done to my body by factory farmed food. The weight
increase has become worse in the past 20-30 years than it ever has been
before, and I didn't have a weight problem until then. (I don't count
baby weight as the problem I'm currently struggling with.)
It all goes back to one maxim. We are what we eat.
Look
closer and more problems begin to shake out. The increase of autism,
immune deficiency disorders, multiple sclerosis (MS), fibromyalgia,
lupus, etc. Chronic diseases that were statistically rare in the
population now affect more and more people every year. Add to that, the
over use of antibiotics and the increase of super bugs and we probably
need look no farther than the factory farms that produce the food we eat
for the root cause of most of our modern ills.
We can give up
eating fast food, go vegetarian, work out like we're planning to compete
in bodybuilding competitions, and eat only organic, but the damage has
already been done. It may take another generation before the tide is
turned and the damage begins to heal.
Factory farms are
profitable, but we were all healthier when our food came from family
farms and not corporate farms focusing on making more money. I'm not
saying that farms shouldn't be profitable. What I am saying is that
profit should not be the only reason for a farm to exist. We need to ban
the use of growth hormones, steroids, and antibiotics in the food chain
and get back to the basics. Corporate farms may go the way of the dodo,
and good riddance, but at least we won't be poisoning the well any
more.
We are what we eat.
Think about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment