News: Top story
Pollan advocates shift in food ideology
Go Big Read author critical of Western approach to consumption; farmers make presence known at lecture
ZACH ZABAN and BECKY VEVEA/Herald video
JEFF SCHORFHEIDE/Herald photo
Michael Pollan lectures a crowd of several thousand Thursday on the Western ideology surrounding food consumption.
JEFF SCHORFHEIDE/Herald photo
Students, community members and Wisconsin farmers sit and wait at the Kohl Center before Pollan’s lecture on Go Big Read’s “In Defense of Food.”
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Kyle Mianulli:
- Finishing touches leave Randall prepped for puck (February 1, 2010)
- Year of the Tigger! (February 1, 2010)
- Ad hoc report denies reform (January 25, 2010)
- Restructuring no longer dire (January 17, 2010)
- Snow fight set for today (December 9, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
Highlighting the University of Wisconsin’s first annual Go Big Read common book program, “In Defense of Food” author Michael Pollan told a 7,000 person crowd of UW students, community members and Wisconsin farmers Tuesday at the Kohl Center the Western ideology of food consumption needs reevaluation.
Consistent with the spirit of the project, hundreds of Wisconsin farmers attended the event wearing green shirts that read “In Defense of Farming: Eat Food, Be Healthy, Thank Farmers” in an act of solidarity expressing their opposition to some of Pollan’s ideas.
Pollan acknowledged not everyone in the audience was sympathetic to his work, or even his presence, but said he greatly appreciated them being there and partaking in what is shaping up to be a crucial national conversation.
Pollan added those who disagree with his ideas would likely be surprised by the amount of common ground they will find.
“I happen to believe America’s farmers hold the key to solving the national health care crisis, climate crisis and energy crisis,” Pollan said.
Considering Wisconsin is well-regarded as America’s demonstrable dairyland and leads the nation in other agricultural forays — comprising 9 percent of the state’s income —Chancellor Biddy Martin said in her opening address she could not imagine a better place to engage in a thoughtful, wide-ranging discussion about food.
The main point of dispute between the farmers and Pollan, according to Randy Roecker of Roecker’s Rolling Acres Dairy Farm, is the author’s criticism of the reliance on technology in modern farming practices.
“We’re never going to be able to feed all the mouths in this country and in the world without having technology,” Roecker said.
He added technology is used on his farm every day, and it is a necessary tool to maximize efficiency.
The debate over the use of technology in the agriculture business is often framed incorrectly, Pollan said.
“Feeding the world is not simply a matter of technology. I do know that merely increasing yield does not necessarily solve the problems,” Pollan said.
He added this is not a pro-technology versus anti-technology argument.
There needs to be ways to utilize technology in ways that eliminate the reliance on excessive amounts of fertilizer, growth hormones and feed additives, Pollan said.
For Duane Chaptman — a third-generation family dairy farmer from Tomah — however, denying farmers the ability to use technology is an unfair expectation.
“It just makes them more efficient — no different than a factory putting in a robot to do work to make them more efficient. We’re the same way,” Chaptman said.
Beyond the technology dispute, however, Pollan is highly critical of what he calls “nutritionism,” or the controlling ideology that shapes the way Westerners think about and approach food.
“Nutritionsim,” according to Pollan, is not the scientific understanding of healthy eating, as most would assume, but has rather become a marketing tool for large corporations to sell highly processed food under the guise of being healthy.
This and similar practices have effectively created a market where 90 percent of the money spent on food by Americans goes to marketers and processors, while farmers are left with mere fractions of actual food revenue, Pollan said.
9 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!
IP hash: 83527407
“I happen to believe America’s farmers hold the key to solving the national health care crisis, climate crisis and energy crisis,” Pollan said.
Everything is a “Crisis”, that erudite socialist college lecturers like Pollan and Obama will save us all from! If only we would listen to them?!
Are you sick of this alarmist rhetorical drivel, from people that have never done a hard days work in their lives but are driven by their flawed philosphies only? Or are you still drinking the Crisis Kool Aid?
IP hash: 34f51f46
I agree that there are too many crises, but this is not a “socialist” trick or a recent gimmick. The war on terror, war on drugs, war on Christmas… blah, blah. Only Limbaugh and Bush can save you from Bin Laden, Satan and LIBERALS, right? You get attention by calling it a war, crisis, or comparing it to Hitler.
Alarmist drivel, perhaps, is worth it this time. Especially when you consider the health care debate its relation to the obesity plague.
IP hash: 043702e2
Your comment sounds alarmist. And full of hate. Get some Jesus and love in your life.
IP hash: 34f51f46
90% of money for food goes to marketers and processors, wow!
Eat local, eat healthy, thank the farmers, and exercize. Stay the hell away from fast food.
IP hash: 2202493f
If you think Obama is a socialist, then you’ve consumed a handful of hallucinogens washed down with Fox News Kool-Aid. My personal health care crisis is that I’m sick of people presenting insulting diatribe in place of intelligent discussion or even respectful argument.
IP hash: aed2dc03
It is very silly of farmers to suggest Pollan is telling them not to use whatever is necessary to do their jobs efficiently. Chemical fertilizers and pesticides damage the environment and make food less wholesome; this is empirical fact. But instead of blaming farmers for using them, Pollan tells consumers to make choices which give farmers incentives to move to better methods. Read: pay farmers more for doing it the right way. Farmers should be rejoicing at this!
Randy Roecker also misleads us in this article by saying Pollan is against technology use on farms: ‘“We’re never going to be able to feed all the mouths in this country and in the world without having technology,” Roecker said.’ No kidding. Fortunately Pollan never said to use less technology; in fact he said we need more technology and more research into technology. He happens to favor technology choices that make us healthier instead of solely making companies more profitable. Is there anything wrong with that?
IP hash: 3412785f
Addison Smith wrote: “Pollan never said to use less technology; in fact he said we need more technology and more research into technology.”
Not true. Pollan repeatedly claims we should shun technology. From his book:
“Just don’t eat anything your Neolithic ancestors wouldn’t have recognized and you’ll be ok.”
That pretty much rules out technology.
“Innovation is interesting, but… approach novelties with caution.”
Be afraid of the new - i.e., technology.
“…novel food or culinary innovation resembles a mutation.”
A MUTATION??!! In other words, nature is good, changing nature (i.e., technology) is bad.
“It [innovation] might represent improvement, but probably doesn’t”
Don’t trust technology it’s probably bad.
“avoid any food that has been processed to such an extent that it is more a product of industry than of nature.”
Nature is better than technology. Processing is bad.
“The industrialization of our food… is systematically and deliberately undermining traditional food cultures everywhere.”
All technology “undermines” tradition. The car “undermined” the tradition of horse transportation, the supermarket “undermined” the tradition of only having locally available food choices. To be against undermining tradition is to be against technology.
IP hash: 3412785f
“Pollan never said to use less technology; in fact he said we need more technology and more research into technology.”
Not true. Pollan repeatedly claims we should shun technology. From his book:
“Just don’t eat anything your Neolithic ancestors wouldn’t have recognized and you’ll be ok.”
That pretty much rules out technology.
“Innovation is interesting, but… approach novelties with caution.”
Be afraid of the new.
“…novel food or culinary innovation resembles a mutation.”
A MUTATION??!! In other words, nature is good, changing nature (i.e., technology) is bad.
“It [innovation] might represent improvement, but probably doesn’t”
Don’t trust technology it’s mostly bad.
“avoid any food that has been processed to such an extent that it is more a product of industry than of nature.”
Nature is better than technology. Processing is bad.
“The industrialization of our food… is systematically and deliberately undermining traditional food cultures everywhere.”
All technology “undermines” tradition. The car “undermined” the tradition of horse transportation, the supermarket “undermined” the tradition of only having locally available food choices. To be against undermining tradition is to be against technology.
Addison Smith wrote: “Pollan never said to use less technology; in fact he said we need more technology and more research into technology.”
Not true. Pollan repeatedly claims we should shun technology. From his book:
“Just don’t eat anything your Neolithic ancestors wouldn’t have recognized and you’ll be ok.”
That pretty much rules out technology.
“Innovation is interesting, but… approach novelties with caution.”
Be afraid of the new - i.e., technology.
“…novel food or culinary innovation resembles a mutation.”
A MUTATION??!! In other words, nature is good, changing nature (i.e., technology) is bad.
“It [innovation] might represent improvement, but probably doesn’t”
Don’t trust technology it’s probably bad.
“avoid any food that has been processed to such an extent that it is more a product of industry than of nature.”
Nature is better than technology. Processing is bad.
“The industrialization of our food… is systematically and deliberately undermining traditional food cultures everywhere.”
All technology “undermines” tradition. The car “undermined” the tradition of horse transportation, the supermarket “undermined” the tradition of only having locally available food choices. To be against undermining tradition is to be against technology.
IP hash: a8cfcc85
When you mix technology with food, like we have today you have massive mutation. Technology has gone too far in efficiency and its killing our environment, animals and us.