What exactly is "Antibiotic Free" meat?

Browsing through the isles of any supermarket that sells other than the standard factory produced food products, you will see a variety of labels and terms. There is organic, free range, grass fed, vegetarian fed, antibiotic free, hormone free, etc. The list goes on and on.  What do all these labels mean? We want to start taking a look at each of these and give a little background into what you are buying and feeding your family.

Today, lets explore the label "antibiotic free". It can be worded a number of ways, but all have a similar meaning. To have this label, the meat inside the package can not have been fed any antibiotics while the animal was alive. That sounds good, right? but wait.. lets ask a simple question... why would you need to put that on a label? everyone today knows that you don't take antibiotics unless absolutely necessary, and only take them under a doctor's supervision, right?

Not so in factory farms. That tidbit of basic understanding is completely ignored within the confines of factory food production. It is  in fact necessary to feed the factory food animals a constant diet of low dose antibiotics their entire lives. The politically correct reason for this is "to keep them from getting sick". But wait.... lets ask another simple question... why would they get sick? Didn't these same animals exist for thousands of years before man invented antibiotics a few decades ago? How is it possible that animals today cant live without constant antibiotics yet the same animals did fine for all of recorded history?

There are two answers to that. First, these are not always the same animals. The factory farms use machines to do much of the meat processing, so it is to their advantage to ensure that all the animals have identical growth rates and body shape. The natural variety that occurs within genetics is unacceptable to a corporation wanting to produce meat on an assembly line. So, these animals have been altered... carefully bred to produce carbon copies of themselves only. They have also been bred to cause faster growth on less feed, to increase the profits of the corporations. Unfortunately these genetic alterations do not come without a price. The animals become genetically more fragile and disease prone. The breeding has become so advanced today, that the problem is magnified. It is somewhat true that the animals used for food in America can not always exist without antibiotics any longer. Genetically speaking, the animals we eat are "freaks of nature" that could not exist in the wild, because nature itself removes such genetically inferior animals to protect the species. That in itself should make us all take pause... we are genetically altering the animals so that they can no longer exist in the real world.

The second answer is even worse. The reality of confinement based factory food plants is that the animals are in such deplorable unsanitary conditions that bacteria is rampant, and even good healthy genetically superior animals would become ill in those conditions. Oddly, in many situation, the government recognizes that the  conditions in which the animals live are hazardous to the point that humans are not allowed to enter the facility without protective clothing to protect themselves, not the animals. It would be "illegal" to place a unprotected person in the environment that these animals live in day to day. That, my friends, is the main reason animals in factory food production need antibiotics, to fight off the daily onslaught of bacteria they live in.

There is a third answer in some species is in the unnatural food fed to the animals. In order to increase profits in one way or another, food is provided to the animals that nature never intended for them to eat. A prime example of this is feeding grain diets to cows. When this is done, the only way to keep the cows alive seems to be antibiotics. The cows themselves do not have the ability to fight off the effects of this unnatural food in the quantities provided.

Here is an interesting quote from Stanford University on the effects of antibiotics use in factory food production:

Shopping for meat and dairy products that contain no antibiotics or growth hormones is a winner for your health and the environment. Because of crowding, stress-inducing conditions, and unnatural diets that often occur in the conventional meat and dairy industries, antibiotics are needed to fend off disease. In addition to antibiotics, animals are also given growth hormones— to stimulate year-round high production of milk, for instance. It is estimated that as much as 80-90% of all antibiotics given to humans and animals are not fully digested or broken down and eventually pass through the body and enter the environment intact through wastewater and runoff. When bacteria in the environment interact with these antibiotics, they may transform into more resistant strains that pose a greater risk to both animals and humans. By choosing hormone-free and antibiotic-free meat and dairy products, you can help keep the environment clean and healthy.



source: http://sustainablechoices.stanford.edu/actions/at_the_store/antibiotichormonefree.html



So... an interesting thing happens... when the farm is producing "antibiotic free" meat, suddenly everything changes. The animals pens actually have to be cleaned. The food has to be right for the animal. The animals have to be provided healthy living conditions to eliminate a bacteria laden environment. The breeds have to be capable of having their own immune system.  So, in essence, "antibiotic free" means that a fairly decent life was provided to the animal. Antibiotic fed meat (anything without that label)  virtually guarantees a life for the animal that is sad, unhealthy, and against the laws of nature.

For the record, the animals at Little Sprouts Farm are never fed routine chemicals or antibiotics. We even discourage use of medicines for illness unless all natural methods have failed. We use nature, instead of fighting her. The irony here is that ultimately, profitability increases when this is done, over the long run. This is one of the proofs Little Sprouts is trying to show. Most farmers that have converted from the accepted knowledge of chemically sustained poor quality of life to natural healthy environments have lowered labor costs, increased product quality, and increased profits.

So, when your shopping labels and you see "antibiotic free", you know what the history of that is. When you don't see that.. you also know the history. The choice... is in your hands alone.

First taste of the Red Wattle pork!

We picked up our first set of pork from our Red Wattle hogs and cooked some for the ultimate taste test. For the last year we have been hoping and praying that we made the right choice in our hog breed to raise. So far we have been impressed with this breeds ability to live on their own in a social group, breed and raise young naturally with no intervention, protect themselves from the harsh weather, summer and winter, and a host of other positive traits. But, we didn't know how the finished product would come out.

Well, we are happy to report that we have now tried sausage and pork chops, and both are absolutely incredible! The sausage was well balanced, tender, and uniquely flavored. We cooked it with no additional spices to get a feel for the natural taste and I have to say it was the best breakfast sausage I have ever tasted!

We also made pork chops for dinner and again, the meat was incredibly tender, had  good fat to meat balance, and a very pleasing flavor without much extra seasoning. Cooked to allow the natural goodness of the meat to come through, it is a gratifying experience.

So, we are pleased with our choice of Red Wattles in entirety. I can recommend this pork to anyone who wants to try some real, fresh, healthy meat that tastes the way pork was intended to taste.

We are considering offering samples to help spread the word about this incredible product. If you interested in tasting some, please let us know.

Blueberries Arrive Finally!

Today the blueberry bushes were delivered! Apparently there was quite the demand for mature blueberry bushes in the southern Oregon area, because several other people showed up at Little Sprouts to pick up their plants too. The bushes arrived on a rather large flatbed, which barely fit in our circle drive.  Here it is waiting to be unloaded with about 40 blueberry plants on the trailer.

Blueberry bushes waiting to be unloaded

We ordered 20 plants ourselves, and the other farmers that showed up all had a few each, so it took a while to unload the plants into the various trucks and trailers. What a fun way to spend a Saturday afternoon! It was really wet and muddy after the last few days of rain...  the ground is very soft. and an inch off the driveway and its like being in quicksand. Times like these I am thankful for 4 wheel drive tractors!

Loading some plants into a trailer

And of course, my usual supervisor was on site making sure everything was done right. Most of his time was spent inspecting the water puddles.

Is this puddle compliant with OSHA?

Sure does make a nice splash!

So now we have 20 mature blueberry plants in hibernation resting comfortably by the front fence. They can sit there through the winter since they are dormant. Come March we will start planting them along the fence line to provide a nice privacy hedge and buckets and buckets of blueberries! There should be enough blueberries to harvest this coming summer to provide all we need for our family, and have plenty left over to sell. We are considering offering them as dried, jellied, jam, or baked into something yummy.

Iowa State chooses cash over truth?

One of the realities within the sustainable agriculture movement is that higher education has turned against truth in favor of profit. I know that sounds harsh and extremist, but before you disregard this as "extreme radicalism" take a few moments to consider the arguments. the story below is a good example of a case where, from all appearances, the obvious conclusion is that Iowa state prefers to say what supports big money in big agriculture even when it conflicts with the truth.

I'll leave the details of the story to your reading of the original article, but here are a few interesting clips;

When the dean of the agriculture school in Iowa State was asked "have cows evolved to eat grass?" her answer was a very politically correct "I don't have an opinion on that statement". So apparently a basic understanding of agriculture is not required to be dean of agriculture? Or is that she does not wish to loose her job over speaking the truth. Oddly enough, all of the images about agriculture in Iowa State that the public sees show cows eating grass, although virtually every cow within the state of Iowa actually is fed Grain, and then antibiotics to keep it from getting ill from the grain. (yes, that is the way it is done, grain followed by necessary antibiotics, because without antibiotics, the grain could kill the cows from disease).

The story speaks for itself, and you must draw your own conclusion, but I am firmly on the side of concluding that Iowa State is choosing to ignore truth, teach a lie, and keep receiving money from the big business that need the lie to be accepted to succeed.  and yea, that is harsh, but can you honestly say its not true?

Sadly, this is NOT unique to Iowa State. check with the agriculture departments in your state universities, colleges, and even high schools. You will see that the vast majority of them teach that is it necessary to continue doing what big business is doing, involving heavy use of deadly chemicals at all stages of food production, artificial fertilizers to keep things growing on dead ground, and antibiotics fed to animals to allow for feeding of wrong or inferior food and unsanitary living conditions. In a nutshell, that is what our children are being taught about agriculture. Oh, you will probably also run into ... you must use lots and lots of petroleum to create food and in the process you wont make any money.

I am sad that so many people in authority have chosen to follow the path of  "repeating what they heard"  without thinking for themselves. How hard is it, truly, to admit that cows eat grass? How hard is it to see that the images required to sell meat show completely opposite scenes than those uses to produce it? Apparently today, in higher education, that type of truth is very hard.. that type of truth gets you thrown out.


Here's the original article, what do you think?:

http://chronicle.com/article/At-Public-Colleges/66044

S.510 - Looking deeper

As S.510 gets bounced around in the government, debating food safety regulations, FDA authority, tracking, recalls, funding, etc. I find myself wondering...

What would happen if the government, a senator or representative, took the brave and bold action to actually do something about the real underlying problem?  It is common knowledge today among anyone who studies the science behind food production, that the problem is systematic. the root problem, is not lack of funding, or too few inspections, or too little authority or too slow to recall... the problem is the approach. Consider this:

The current method of food production is through industrialized factories and factory methods. It honestly has nothing at all to do what what the American public thinks of as farming.  What the public sees in the images on the labels and television, and perceives in their own understanding, is a myth. virtually all of the  food in America today is produced in factories, not farms.  To make this more palatable to the public, and prevent a public outcry, the corporations involved simply change the public definition of "farm" and close the doors to viewing and understanding in the name of "preventing contamination".  If you doubt any of this, just do a little research, its really easy to find the truth on this if you look.

So, food safety... The core problem I see is that the government is dedicated to making factory production of food safe. Their primary goal is to preserve the inhumane and unhealthy practices used in the factories.  The scientific reality of this is that it can not be done. It is not possible to produce good food within the factory based system in use today. Yet, all of the  government focus, energy, money, and regulations are dedicated to preserving the system of factory farming and attempting to minimize the deaths resulting from it.  To their credit, the government actually does a tremendous job at minimizing the deaths resulting from this flawed system. IF the government didn't do what they do today, we would have rampant disease directly due to the factory food production methods. It  truly is that dangerous.  As it stand today, we do have a failing national health, with health care being the new biggest problem America faces. This is almost directly due to the altering of the food supply from farming to factories. Virtually all degenerative diseases can be prevented and sometimes cured by returning to true farming and rejecting the factories.  If the government didn't do what they do to regulate this flawed system, we would not only have degenerative diseases rampant, but we would have many more outright deaths directly from consumption of  tainted food. So, in that respect, I am thankful that the government is doing what it is to contain the spread of disease and death from factory farming.

But, to my original point. what if a senator or representative had the courage to say that the system itself is flawed, as we know it is... to expose the industrial food system for what it is, and propose legislation to start limiting the spread of factory food production and encourage the return to true farming.  Think about that.. if, over the next 50 years, we reversed the trend and saw small family farms springing up all over America, thousands or millions of them, and a corresponding decrease of food factories, our grandchildren could reap the benefits of better health, less health care cost and crisis, better environment, less fossil fuel reliance, less transportation cost in the food system, and overall better quality of life.  Close your eyes for a sec and dream about such a world for your grandchildren.

It starts with one in power who has the courage to do what is right, instead of doing more of the same. Healing our food supply isn't going to come through more inspections, it will come through re-learning how to produce food that does not need to be inspected.  One senator or representative could start this ball rolling. It will take a very long time to see through, but most valuable changes do take a long time. It has to start somewhere.

I throw out a personal call to anyone in power to consider what I say, consider being the one that starts the process, even if you can not finish it. Put your own career aside for a  moment and consider the responsibility you have on your shoulders as a representative of the people to do what is right.  Reject the notion that it is too late, that it cant be done, and take that first step. Outline for America a plan on how to crush the factory food system that is killing us, and restore farming to its rightful place of preserving the health and welfare of America.

Who will take such a challenge?