Open Forum on Food Politics

[ProfessionalHobbit]

I couldn't care less whether they say their policies have improved.  I don't trust them and their history only proves my point that they haven't changed.

[Martin Fisher]

There's lots of bad history out there.

I'm certainly not defending them in any way (their food is crap)...just seems me that improvement should be welcome.

[kayb]

Look. Nobody thinks they're social pioneers. Nobody thinks they're haute cuisine. What they are, if you are an ominvore, is a source for a reasonably decent breakfast, (am not fond of any of their other meals) when you're on the road, in a hurry, and don't have time to scope out the local offerings. Until some recent evidence of wrongdoing, I'll consider them an adequate, if barely so, option. They beat MickeyD's.

 

 

 

[ProfessionalHobbit]

On 8/30/2016 at 5:43 PM, kayb said:

Look. Nobody thinks they're social pioneers. 

 

 

 

 

And Chick-Fil-A's owners donated to a hate group that supported Uganda's legislation which would have levied the death penalty against Ugandan LGBT.  The chain's owners also regularly donate to many other anti-LGBT groups.  It's out in the open for all to see.

 

They're not social pioneers either.  And when an outcry was raised against that restaurant chain, their corporate bullshit got trotted out for all to see.  #sorrynotsorry if I don't exactly toe the line here.

 

Or are you saying that we shouldn't talk about such things on eGullet, that it should be swept under the rug?  That's also pathetic.

Edited September 1, 2016 by ProfessionalHobbit (log)

[Tri2Cook]

Nobody is saying it shouldn't be discussed and brought to the light for people who don't know. We're saying we agree that what they do/were doing is wrong but according to the reports available for us to see, as a company they're trying to do better. We're not claiming they're a role model for equal rights or that they don't have people on the individual level that are as bad or worse than ever. We're just saying that according to the reports we have access to, they seem to be heading in the right direction. But you're saying you're not interested in whether they're trying to improve or not, you will continue to be angry over what they've already done. So what is there for the rest of us to talk about if anything we say is shot down with "I don't care"?

[Martin Fisher]

FWIW, there's been a big change in Cracker Barrel's management in recent years (since 2011) — four of the top seven executives are women.

 

Edited September 1, 2016 by DiggingDogFarm (log)

[kayb]

11 hours ago, ProfessionalHobbit said:

 

And Chick-Fil-A's owners donated to a hate group that supported Uganda's legislation which would have levied the death penalty against Ugandan LGBT.  The chain's owners also regularly donate to many other anti-LGBT groups.  It's out in the open for all to see.

 

They're not social pioneers either.  And when an outcry was raised against that restaurant chain, their corporate bullshit got trotted out for all to see.  #sorrynotsorry if I don't exactly toe the line here.

 

Or are you saying that we shouldn't talk about such things on eGullet, that it should be swept under the rug?  That's also pathetic.

 

Well, I thought I replied to this, but I either hallucinated it (a distinct possibility) or it vanished during the transfer of topic titles.

 

Speaking of which, I have absolutely no problem with the discussion of the issue on eGullet (though I think the switch in topic is probably a Good Thing). I don't eat at Chick Fil A in large part due to their abysmal food, but if they had GOOD food, I'd abstain because of their social policies. I did hate giving up their lemonade, though, because that stuff rocks.

 

I am simply saying I do not think that either the corporate policy OR attitude at Cracker Barrel is what it was when the outcry over its treatment of LGBT employees or potential employees took place. I may well be wrong, and if so, it won't hurt my feelings too much to bypass them, too. There's always convenience stores, granola bars and Diet Cokes when you're on the road.

[IowaDee]

I choose not to support any so called faith based business.  That includes the chain of Pizza Ranch restaurants.  Looking at their website almost makes me think that they won't serve you until you have said grace.  I can't say what their position is on LGBT employees but I have a hunch it isn't good.  

[ProfessionalHobbit]

17 hours ago, Tri2Cook said:

Nobody is saying it shouldn't be discussed and brought to the light for people who don't know. We're saying we agree that what they do/were doing is wrong but according to the reports available for us to see, as a company they're trying to do better. We're not claiming they're a role model for equal rights or that they don't have people on the individual level that are as bad or worse than ever. We're just saying that according to the reports we have access to, they seem to be heading in the right direction. But you're saying you're not interested in whether they're trying to improve or not, you will continue to be angry over what they've already done. So what is there for the rest of us to talk about if anything we say is shot down with "I don't care"?

 

I am saying that you should talk about both the good and the bad.

 

Pretending that the chain is an upright corporate citizen with respect to the customers they purport to serve doesn't do anyone any favors when their actions don't mirror their policies.

 

We know that Cracker Barrel is trying to be a good company that treats everyone equally but our community's memory is long and we don't forget.  And we are watchful.

[JoNorvelleWalker]

I thought of this thread tonight as I read Herve This quoting "Brillat-Savarin's classic definition of gastronomy" as natural history, physics, chemistry, cookery, business, and politics.

 

[JohnT]

Just heard on the radio that German chemicals giant Bayer has signed a $66 billion (58.8 billion euros) takeover deal with US genetically modified (GM) seeds firm Monsanto.

[heidih]

This is an interesting take on the status  http://www.wsj.com/articles/behind-the-monsanto-deal-doubts-about-the-gmo-revolution-1473880429

[Yiannos]

The one thing holding me back from getting a Nespresso machine is Nestlé's apparent lack of a moral compass when it comes to drinking water. The machine is supposed to be great, is very cheap at the local Costco, but I somehow feel one of the few ways to really send a message anymore is with your wallet. Especially living in California with the drought, I just can't bring myself to send $ Nestlé's way.

[Porthos]

A friend of mine just posted this on Facebook. Is this a real tax or a photoshopped hoax?

 

[gfweb]

It is real.

 

Phila's Mayor Kenny said he needed money for preschool and forced through a sugared bev tax to benefit the wee ones.

 

Most of the proceeds it is now known will go to solving the city's pension "crisis".

 

Talk radio has been going nuts for some time.

[Porthos]

@gfweb Thanks for the answer.

 

California legalized the Lottery to benefit education. Sacramento's answer was to cut education funding. Nothing new under the sun.

[GlorifiedRice]

58 minutes ago, gfweb said:

It is real.

 

Phila's Mayor Kenny said he needed money for preschool and forced through a sugared bev tax to benefit the wee ones.

 

Most of the proceeds it is now known will go to solving the city's pension "crisis".

 

Talk radio has been going nuts for some time.

 

Actually universal Pre-K is in place and going forward in Philly.

Yay less diabetes in Philly!

[gfweb]

Actually.....50% of it  (at least ...at this point) has nothing to do with preK. It is just an old-fashioned money grab. But this is probably out of the scope of eG.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20160614_Drink_tax_proposal_had_some_sweetners.html

https://billypenn.com/2016/06/09/after-soda-tax-switch-philly-city-council-wants-to-know-why-are-we-broke/

http://thephiladelphiacitizen.org/soda-tax-philadelphia/

 

Edited January 7, 2017 by gfweb (log)

[Paul Fink]

Well I figured out why I can't find my beloved French cheeses.

You got it, its the FDA. 

Quote

 In 2014, the FDA stopped French cheeses like Roquefort, St. Nectaire, Morbier and Tomme de Savoie from coming into the country. 

http://www.foodrepublic.com/2016/05/03/why-is-the-u-s-government-waging-a-secret-war-against-french-cheese

I'm not sure what the current status of the FDA band is but I miss my cheeses. 

Maybe Trump will fix it all.

Edited January 28, 2017 by Paul Fink (log)

[blue_dolphin]

As you mention, this has been going on since 2014 ( FDA restrictions keeping some great cheeses out of stores LATimes Sept2014) though I continue to see many of the cheeses locally. 

[paul o' vendange]

 

Insane.  Anecdotally, as a drinker of raw milk (2 gallons weekly) and maker of my own raw milk cheeses, I'm well, alive, and writing this. 

 

Scientifically, it can drive you nuts, the absolute ignorance of the FDA on the topic.  Not to mention the USDA - and the fact its upper management tends to come from agribusiness concerns.  Until they understand the goal is not sterilization of all bacterias and yeasts, but rather the environmental encouragement of the microbes we want in order to outcompete the ones we don't want, we're lost as to millenia of food culture.  It's so exasperating. 

 

Small case in point - don't know where it stands since I'm no longer considering taking my French-alpine cheeses professional - but a few years back, out of NY, a USDA inspector on her own decided wood shelving was "inherently unsanitary," and shut down a creamery until they retrofitted their aging room shelving with plastic or stainless.  To the tune of 10's of 1000's of dollars.  The idea caught fire, and all of a sudden inspectors everywhere were giddy with a new rule, completely unsupported by science (in fact, quite the opposite).

 

I and hundreds of others flooded anyone and everyone we would with science proving that not only was wood a sensible choice, it was the safer choice.  Why?  It was loaded with good microbes, strong microbes we wanted in our cheesemaking, who out-competed pathogens exceedingly well.

 

It's part of the larger issue - we don't need to rid the world of pathogens in our foods; we just need to make them unwelcome with the help of the natural, microscopic world.

Edited January 28, 2017 by paul o' vendange
Coupla pics... (log)

[weedy]

9 hours ago, paul o' vendange said:

 

 

Insane.  Anecdotally, as a drinker of raw milk (2 gallons weekly) and maker of my own raw milk cheeses, I'm well, alive, and writing this. 

 

without disagreeing with the gist of the rest of your post, that bit is somewhat like saying "my grandfather smoked 4 packs of cigarettes a day and lived to 99, so smoking is harmless..."

 

pasteurization of milk HAS saved lives.

[Anna N]

5 hours ago, weedy said:

 

without disagreeing with the gist of the rest of your post, that bit is somewhat like saying "my grandfather smoked 4 packs of cigarettes a day and lived to 99, so smoking is harmless..."

 

pasteurization of milk HAS saved lives.

Yep. If you are as ancient as me you know far too much about TB.  Not all of it was bovine related but enough to appreciate the value of pasteurization of milk. 

[Martin Fisher]

FWIW, here are a couple of the most recent FDA cheese import alerts:

 

Import Alert 12-03, Published Date: 11/30/2016, "Detention Without Physical Examination of Imported Soft Cheese and Soft Ripened Cheese from France"

 

Import Alert 12-10, Published Date: 08/22/2016, ""Detention Without Physical Examination of Cheese Due to Microbiological Contamination"

 

 

 

 

 

 

[paul o' vendange]

14 hours ago, weedy said:

 

without disagreeing with the gist of the rest of your post, that bit is somewhat like saying "my grandfather smoked 4 packs of cigarettes a day and lived to 99, so smoking is harmless..."

 

pasteurization of milk HAS saved lives.

 

Weedy, with respect, my "anecdotal" thing was a joke - as in, I'm alive.  Guess it fell flat.  I wasn't using that as any basis for my argument, and never would. 

 

I understand your point of view.  Yes, in an era when sickened cattle were in tightly cramped urban lots, fed leftovers from distillers grains, their milk combined into tanks and shipped to points far and wide, pasteurization was necessary.  Just as now, when milk is gathered from large farms, under only slightly better circumstances, with cows stuffed with antibiotics, the farms' milk again combined; yes, pasteurization is necessary.

 

It is not only unnecessary, but less healthful, if you're drinking raw milk from known small producers using known practices, with healthy cows fed on food they should be eating (grass - pasture) as I do.  Pasteur's germ theory of disease was a landmark development in the history of medicine, but as with all models, it has it's limitations, and here, I'd say, is one. 

 

Just an illustrative example.  Vacherin - named d'Or in Switzerland, du Haut-Doubs in France.  In France, raw milk.  In Switzerland, pasteurized. There has been a history of listeriosis with this cheese - a soft ripened cheese, gooey and stinky as all get.  Raw milk, of course, even more dangerous because of the limited aging time, high water content, and soft paste.  Right?

 

Except it has been the Swiss, pasteurized version, Vacherin Mont d'Or, that has had the history of outbreaks - even deaths, tragically.  To this date, as far as I know, none of the cheeses from France - all, by French law, made with raw milk - have been tainted with listeria.

 

This is just one example.  There really is an entire scientific body of evidence that supports the notion that it isn't so much the presence of microbes - wonderful, delicious, living yeasts and bacterias - in our foods, but rather how well they take over an ecosystem to prevent or contain the growth of pathogens to acceptable or lower limits.  The above Vacherin story merely illustrates this.

 

Another, somewhat related.  The fertilizer theory of agronomy.  That without fertilizer, you cannot have good growth.  So, we've killed our growing fields, now, to the point where the farm's earth really is a kind of dead fiberboard, there merely to push the sticks of plants into, a substrate to drown with fertilizers. 

 

Doesn't it make sense to allow the microbes that transport oxygen to plant roots, to thrive and let them do their job?  All without the cost and detrimental effects of fertilizers?

 

Anyway, big subject.  I've studied it quite a bit, as I love natural food, make it, hunt for it, as I love the earth, so I want to know what drives it all.  Not saying anyone  is incorrect, but I'm convinced by what I've studied, and know my personal choices.  I drink milk from a farm of 4 beautiful girls - and I'm grateful for the gift.

 

 

Edited January 29, 2017 by paul o' vendange (log)