The Honest Plate

Local is everywhere.

There's a mathematical function called the "s-curve" (or sigmoid curve); it looks like this:

Economists, sociologists and business-types use it to describe trends.  Typically the vertical axis will represent units of product or number of users, and the horizontal axis represents time.  Right in the middle of the graph is the inflection point, where the trend changes sign -- it's still growing, but the rate of growth begins to slow down.  But in the lower left-hand portion of the graph is where the growth sharply accelerates, giving the curve a "hockey stick" shape.  This is sometimes referred to as the tipping point -- when a previously rare or niche product suddenly and rapidly becomes common. 

I think the Summer of 2008 might be remembered as the point when local food tipped. Marian Burros has a feature on the front page of the New York Times food section on the growth of local food -- "Supermarket Chains Narrow Their Sights".  Loads of sound bites in her article, such as Wal-Mart announcing that it will spend $400 million this year on locally grown produce, and Wegman's Food Markets seeing a 20% increase in sales of local produce this past year.  Sure, it may be tempting to view some of this with a suspicious eye (Wal-Mart?).  But on the whole, that major chain retailers are shifting their focus toward local food systems is a very good thing. 

Michael Pollan at Slow Food Martha's Vineyard Potluck.

I was fortunate enough to attend the Slow Food Martha's Vineyard Potluck this past Tuesday (7/22/08), and in addition to having a really great time (the world needs more potluck dinners!), I got to hear Michael Pollan speak.   

There wasn't much new in his presentation; essentially, he outlined the main ideas in his book In Defense of Food, including:  1) The American Paradox (the country most obsessed with healthy food is actually the least healthy) ; 2) The Ideology of Nutritionism (food is a delivery vehicle for nutrients, you need experts to explain which nutrients are good);  3) Industrialization of Food; 4) Eater's Manifesto (Eat food, not too much, mostly plants.)  But he did offer a few anecdotes about his relationship with Martha's Vineyard.  For starters, he's been a regular visitor since the 1970's, and still visits with his family today.  And when he was younger, started a small business on the island that delivered New York City bagels, lox, cream cheese and a copy of The New York Times (although he admitted that the carbon footprint was nothing to be proud of). 

Both Martha's Vineyard and Michael Pollan have come a long way since then.  Thirty-five years ago, there were only a handful of farms on the island, which meant that nearly all of the produce, diary and eggs had to be shipped in by boat.  Today, there are dozens of amazing farms on Martha's Vineyard, and nearly all of them practice organic, sustainable agriculture.

And whereas Michael Pollan used to deliver the New York Times, he now writes for them. 

New Michael Pollan interview.

Great new interview with Michael Pollan, in which he talks about grass-fed beef, sustainability, and the current food crisis.

Link to interview on Alternet.

HFCS and other four-letter words.

According to the FDA, High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is a "natural" ingredient, just like honey or refined table sugar.  The ruling, issued last week by the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, states that the government (with their clearer understanding of the HFCS manufacturing process -- shout-out to the Corn Refiners Association and Archer Daniels Midland!), is now comfortable with this ingredient bearing an "all natural" label.  Click here to see the FDA's letter to the Corn Refiners Association.

Doesn't this make your blood boil?  Over at the excellent Ethicurian blog, Bonnie really unleashes on this topic.   

Yet the more I dug into this, it strikes me that the term "natural" is untenable.  When we hear "natural", we presume that it comes from nature.  That an ordinary person could go outside, obtain the ingredient, process it in their barn or kitchen, and presto -- natural ingredient.  HFCS, for all the hair-splitting with the FDA's definition, doesn't meet our intuitive understanding of the concept.  How could something that requires such specialized equipment to manufacture (grinders, pumps, centrifuges, catalyzers, etc), be natural?

The problem is that technically, everything on earth is natural.  If you fight the Corn Refiners Association's argument hard enough, then the counter-punch might be that lots of things we think of (and label) today as natural -- table sugar, for example -- aren't necessarily any more un-natural than corn syrup.  Consider the extensive refining that sugar cane must go through to become white sugar.  Or how about chocolate? 

What I think we mean is that HFCS is not traditional.  We can't make a rough facsimile of it by hand; our grandparents and great-grandparents wouldn't recognize it; it has no history in any traditional cultures or societies.  Couple this with the the evidence that, while safe, corn syrup may not be good for us, and I think we're justified in being wary of it.  My family avoids it entirely.

What we really need is a new, impartial institution (or set of institutions) to create smarter, perhaps stricter definitions for our food.  Perhaps an institution that can accommodate producers of all sizes (rather than just the very big), and tailored to producers who want to bring us organic, ethical, sustainable, local and traditional foods (rather than inexpensive, value-added convenience foods).  Such an institution would have no place for obscenities like "all-natural HFCS" -- that's for the FDA to handle.

Beak-to-tail.

So here's the deal -- if an animal (or plant) is going to give its life to us, the least we can do is use all of it.  Nose-to-tail, farm-to-table, whatever you want to call it, the goal is the same:  waste nothing.  Aim for maxiumum economy.  I mean, face it: life wasn't a trivial matter for the animal (or plant)! The honorable thing to do is to consume it slowly and incrementally, rather than gobbling it up all at once.

I bought a 5 ¼ lb duck yesterday, but before I did I made sure I knew exactly what I was going to do with every part.  Not that there’s anything to brag about here -- duck is easy.  All of it is good.

The run-down:

1)  Breast:  Duck Proscuitto.  This was, in fact, what compelled me to buy the duck in the first place.  Duck Proscuitto is incredible:  creamy, rich duck fat wrapped in dark, earthy, salty duck meat.  Preparing it is ridiculously easy -- no special charcuterie equipment or training required -- just requires a little patience.

Here is the process, adapted from James Peterson's The Duck Cookbook:

12 Juniper Berries
2 Tbl kosher salt
1/2 of a fresh large bay leaf, chopped finely
1/2 Tsp corriander seeds, crushed under a saucepan
10 black pepper corns, crushed under a saucepan
1 clove garlic, crushed and minced into fine paste
1 Whole duck breast (skin on), separated into two

Mix the dry ingredients and the garlic together to make the curing/seasoning salt.  Generously coat both sides of each half of the duck breast with the mixture.  Wrap in plastic wrap and refrigerate for 24 hours.  Remove plastic wrap and pat dry.  Wrap in a clean, thin towel or doubled-up cheesecloth, tie with string (as though making a sausage).  Hang in the refrigerator for 3 to 4 weeks -- when the proscuitto is firm, it's done.

2)  Legs:  Roasted, Smoked Duck Legs.  Another super-easy preparation.  Place the two duck legs in a small to medium-sized baking dish. Trim all skin and extra fat off of the duck carcass, and cut into 1" (appx) square pieces; add the fat and skin to the baking dish with the duck legs.  The fat will render-out and help slow-cook/braise the legs.  Put into an oven and set to 350 (no need to preheat).  Cook for 2 hours, basting twice or so during the second hour.  When there done, you'd swear you had duck confit -- just add a little of the leftover seasoning salt (from the duck proscuitto) and it's ready to eat.

After the legs are slow-roasted, you can bring them to another level by hot smoking them. 

To do this, start a grill (charcoal is best).  When the coals cool down to medium heat (and if using charcoal, be sure coals are to one side for indirect heating) and get a handful of wood chips, which have been soaked for at least 30 min (I used oak, from wine barrels).  Add the chips to the fire, then put the cooked duck legs on the grill (but not directly over the coals) and cover.  Allow them to smoke for 20 to 30 minutes.

A great thing about duck legs -- it's very hard to overcook them.

3)  Fat:  Rendered in the oven (along with the legs).  When the legs are done, you'll have about 1 1/2 cups of beautiful duck fat.  Strain the fat with a fine mesh sieve, and put into a non-reactive container with a cover.  It will keep in the refrigerator for weeks -- perfect for cooking or even spread on toast with some sea salt.

4) Skin:  The skin, which we rendered into fat (in the duck leg preparation above), makes excellent duck cracklings.  Ariane Daugin, who runs the duck-centric specialty foods company D'Artagnan, used to have a restaurant in New York City (also called D'Artagnan); she served salted duck cracklings at the bar(!).  Immediately after the duck legs come out of the oven, remove the cracklings and sprinkle with salt (again, you can use the leftover seasoning/curing salt from the proscuitto).

5)  Carcass, wings, giblets:  Frozen, to be used later for duck stock.

6)  Liver:  Duck Liver Pate.  We put the livers (there seemed to be two packaged with our duck) in a cold sautee pan.  Add several tablespoons of good olive oil, two anchovies, a large smashed clove of garlic, and a spoon of capers (in vinegar).  Turn the heat to medium high, and let the livers cook through.  Dump the contents of the pan into a food processor.  Puree, adding a little more olive oil as it spins.  Season to taste.  Refrigerate and serve cold.

So this duck will be in my family’s life for many months -- we'll eat the smoked legs right away; the pate will last around a week; the duck fat several weeks.  The proscuitto will last us months, and the duck stock (which we'll freeze) will last as long as half a year.  And we’ll treasure and savor every bit. 

I like to imagine that the duck (or whatever meat or produce I've purchased) cost me ten times as much as what I paid at the cash register; so instead of 5 1/4 lbs of duck for $13.05, it set me back $130.50.  (I know it sounds weird, but try it.)  I also try hard to remember that this food was once alive, talking with other animals, or vying for space with its neighbors.  With these things in mind it’s easy to appreciate the food we have, and elevates how precious its existence really is.

Motherlode of nutritional data.

Ok, as we know, fresh, raw, whole and unprocessed foods -- the stuff you get from the farmer's market, the outer aisles of the supermarket, your garden, etc. -- often don't have a nutrition information label.  And while there's ample evidence that these kinds of foods are far healthier than packaged, processed stuff, sometimes you just want to know, ya know?  For instance, the Swiss Chard you picked up at the farmer's market -- how nutritious is it, exactly?  How many calories are in a carrot?  And what about eating three bananas for dessert -- is that wrong?

All of that and more is right here -- the big Lebowski of nutrition information:

 

The level of detail is insanely high -- not just carbs, fats, and calories, but minerals, sterols, amino acids, vitamins.  Plus there are stunning graphics depicting each food's "Nutritional Target Map", "Caloric Ratio Pyramid", "Nutrient Balance", and "Protein Quality".

The search tool is a tad cumbersome -- you'll need to use the "Food category" toolbar in addition to the main search box, otherwise a look-up on "apple" (leaving the food category at the default "All food categories"), will yield 3 pages of results, including "Apples, Canned", "McDonald's Apple Pie", etc. Make sure to toggle down to the "Fruits and Fruit Juices", or "Eggs and Diary" and so on. Also, once you've dialed-up the food you're looking for, check out the toolbar on the left for "serving size"; apple, for example, allows you to display nutrition information for: a large apple, a medium apple, a small apple, an extra small apple, 1 cup chopped apple, or any of the 8 choices provided. 

Fast foods can also be searched on this site...and just for fun, I found a few doozies:

McDonald's Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese (760 Calories, 430 calories from fat)

Hardee's 2/3 Lb Double Bacon Cheese Thickburger (1300 Calories, 860 calories from fat)

Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pizza, Beef (710 Calories, 320 calories from fat)

My (rhetorical) question -- how is any of this stuff legal? 

Eating less meat: a how-to.

One of my favorite contributors to the New York Times' Wednesday Food Section is Mark Bittman.  A few weeks ago, he wrote a great feature on eating less meat.  The recipes in the article aren't particularly special, but his ideas on meat's place or priority in cooking are worth the price of admission.  For example, he points out:

"Remember that most traditional styles of cooking use meat as a condiment or a treat...meat is seen as a treasure, not as something to be gobbled up as if it were air." 

Since reading the article, we've been using the meat-as-condiment "lens" for nearly every meal we've made at home.  What's so interesting are the places to which this perspective leads you -- the ingredients are the same/familiar, but he ratios have shifted or are upside-down. 

Shopping the farmers markets, we've been picking swiss chard, bitter greens, zucchini and beans as the center of the plate, and we've built up from there.  Early summer vegtables like these are transformed with small (teeny!) amounts bacon, prosciutto, lamb, or grass-fed beef.  Citrus, nuts, raisins, and aromatics (onion, mint, garlic, cilantro) have also been playing a role.  Pino Luongo's Simply Tuscan has been huge source of flavor ideas and techniques.

The perspective that Mark Bittman outlines seems big; it's almost as if the forces that could drive a genuine shift in meat consumption -- price inflation, short and long term health risks, environmental concerns, ethical issues -- are gathering, forming a perfect storm.  His article is a sign that its edging its way into the mainstream...or at least a sub-stream. 

This will be interesting to watch.

A label to look for.

Keep an eye out for products with the Certified Humane label.  Nice video tells their story:

And, a helpful comparison chart, showing products labeled "Certified Humane" vs. USDA Organic, Whole Foods, etc.

Conscious.

No, not conscience -- conscious.  As in being deliberately aware, thoughtful, reflective and curious.

Michael Pollan, Marion Nestle, Carlo Petrini, Eric Schlossberg and others have inspired us to be conscious about the food we consume.  That what we buy, cook and eat really matters. 

An example – you’re shopping at the supermarket, thinking about what to have for dinner.  The ground beef at $1.99/lb catches your eye – it has a beautiful red bloom and appears to have been freshly ground.  You consider for a few moments how much you’ll need and how you’ll prepare it.  Maybe you’ll even think about upgrading to the leaner ground beef at $3.99/lb.  Ten, fifteen, maybe twenty seconds of deliberation, and it’s done – the meat goes into your cart, into your home, and eventually, into your body. 

For most of us, that’s as far as it goes – the ground beef is trivial.  It’s just one of the thousands of small, half-conscious decisions we make every day, not worthy of comment or further thought.

But, there’s a problem.  Like it or not, when you buy, you unwittingly send a signal to the market that you’re ok with everything about that product at that price.  This is really important, and worth repeating:  when you buy, you are telling the market that you are ok with everything about it.  You are agreeing that the price is a fair exchange.  Sure, you’d prefer it if it were $0.10 less; you’d probably be alright with it costing $0.10 more.  In the ground beef example, $1.99/lb seems fair.  If for some strange reason the same ground beef were $99.99/lb, that won’t be a fair deal; you’d tell the market – no, I’m not ok with that.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the ground beef in our example (and just about every other industrially manufactured product) is the presence of negative externalities– e.g. costs that society incurs that aren’t paid for by the consumer or producer.  In the $1.99/lb ground beef example, these hidden costs include:  the manure waste run-off from the feedlot that pollutes rivers, streams and coastal waterways; the risks associated with increasingly resistant bacteria due to excessive use of antibiotics in cattle; the costs to public health through over-consumption of meat; the cost of green-house gasses generated by the industrial food system; the cost to the animals, who endure unfathomably miserable lives. 

Problem number two with our example:  the “unwittingly” part.  The externalities are hidden, or are very abstract.  You can’t see any of these negative impacts – no warnings printed on the package, no history lessons posted at the meat counter, no tax on the $1.99/lb price to accurately reflect its true cost. 

The catch (problem number three):  we ultimately pay for the externalities, one way or another, at some point.  We’re paying that price today, and it keeps going up.

So that’s where conscious consumption comes in.  We can be deliberately, aware, thoughtful, reflective and curious about what we eat.  Being aware (and helping others be more aware) of the hidden costs of our food is a key component of changing our seriously broken industrial food system.  When we’re aware/conscious of this stuff, we can send new signals to the market.  For instance, we can choose to eat less of the high external cost foods (like meat), or choose to avoid it entirely (vegan).  We can send a signal that we prefer foods that are lighter in impact – locally grown, humanely raised, organic.  If we have the space, we can even step outside the system further by growing some of our own food.  Also, if we commit the time and develop the skill, we can bypass parts of the system by preparing our own meals from scratch (e.g., whole or minimally processed ingredients), rather than relying on convenience or fast foods.

The beauty in this approach is that it’s win-win.  When food requires more of our attention and resources, we’re apt to appreciate it more and consume less of it (healthier spiritually and physically).  When we’re closer to food production or participate in it directly, we have more of a choice (and voice) in the impact this activity has on the environment, our health, and on the lives of the plants and animals we consume.  We not only eat better, we save the world too.

Further thoughts on being a conscious food consumer:

The Slow Food Manifesto

An Eater's Manifesto