Gourmet's Barry Estabrook investigates the plight of Florida tomato pickers. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
A little slavery is okay, just not too much of it.
At this writing, that appears to be the official government position in the state of Florida, and it could explain why the fields of the Sunshine State provide such fertile ground for modern-day slavery. In the past dozen years, police have broken up and prosecuted seven slave operations there, freeing more than 1,000 men and women who were kept captive and forced to work for little or no money and threatened with death if they tried to escape. (For more on the plight of the Florida tomato pickers, see my article "The Price of Tomatoes" in the March 2009 issue of Gourmet.)
Late last year, two members of the Navarrete family, the operators of what has been recognized as the most brutal slave ring the state has seen, were sentenced to 12 years in prison; two others received lesser sentences. Justice having been done, it was an ideal opportunity for Governor Charlie Crist, who enjoys a very high approval rating, to spend a bit of that political capital to condemn the practice and announce bold steps to prevent it.
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook investigates the possibility of the presence of cloned beef's existence in the nation's meat supply. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
I just found out that I may have dined on meat from the progeny of a cloned cow. You may have, too.
In January, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decreed that meat and milk from cloned livestock was safe to eat. Last week, the agency went a step further and said that it was "theoretically possible" that the meat from the offspring of cloned cattle was already in the food supply.
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook investigates VP candidate Governor Sarah Palin's dealings with Alaska's salmon industry. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
At the very least, there was something fishy about Alaska Governor (and Vice Presidential hopeful) Sarah Palin's decision to speak out publicly against the state's Clean Water Initiative late last month. There may also be something blatantly illegal about her advocacy for defeating the ballot initiative, which ultimately failed to pass when 57 percent of Alaskans voted against it.
A bit of background. The Clean Water Initiative (aka Ballot Measure 4) was put in place to restrict the amount of arsenic and other toxic pollutants that new, large-scale mines could dump into the state's waterways. Its stated goal was to protect human health and safeguard salmon that use the rivers and streams to spawn. More specifically, it was aimed at a massive gold and copper operation called Pebble Mine located directly upstream of Bristol Bay, site of one of the world's largest and most sustainable wild salmon fisheries, which produced 31 million pounds of king, sockeye, and chum salmon in 2007.
The law in Alaska forbids a governor from officially lobbying for or against a ballot initiative such as Ballot Measure 4. To get around the law, Palin exercised what she called "personal privilege" when she said to reporters, "Let me take my governor's hat off for just a minute here and tell you, personally, Prop 4-I vote no on that."
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook finds that the latest nutritional studies are at odds with what some manufacturers' campaigns might have us believe. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
Nothing spoils a good marketing campaign as surely as solid, scientific facts. So I imagine the folks over at the Corn Refiners' Association-who have recently spent a fortune on PR and advertising to convince "moms and healthcare professionals" that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) was no better or worse for us nutritionally than sweeteners such as table sugar and honey-were shocked when they opened the latest issue of the Journal of Nutrition.
It contains a paper by a group of researchers at the University of Texas who report that fructose, the primary sugar in HFCS (which finds its way into just about every non-diet soft drink sold), made subjects of a study fatter than glucose, another sugar.
"Our study shows for the first time the surprising speed with which humans make body fat from fructose," said Elizabeth Parks of the Southwestern Medical Center.
It also may explain why the current obesity epidemic in this country dates back to 1980, the year HFCS entered our diet. Starting from zero, Americans now gulp an average of 66 pounds of the stuff each year.
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook makes sense of the battle over the benefits of organic food. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
It's never a good start to your day when the first email you open is an authoritative-sounding press release forwarded by your boss that directly contradicts something you published on the company's website.
"You know anything about this?" she asked ominously.
The release came from the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH). Made public on Tuesday, it was headlined: "Scientist Debunks Myth of Organic Nutritional Superiority," and, not surprisingly, it received considerable media attention.
The myth that was supposedly debunked was featured in this space a few months ago. It was a study co-authored by Dr. Charles Benbrook of the Organic Center, an affiliate of the Organic Trade Association, an industry group, which reported on the results of a review of nearly 100 scientific papers examining levels of nutrients in organic versus conventional crops. Benbrook and his associates concluded that organic food was on average 25 percent more nutrient-dense. Their work was regarded as one of the first scientifically valid research projects that clearly showed such an advantage. Earlier studies had been inconclusive. I felt some vindication for my own preference for organic foods and applauded the findings.
The release from the ACSH sharply criticized Benbrook's paper. Its condemnation of his work was based on a critical review written by Joseph D. Rosen, emeritus professor of food science at Rutgers University. To be kind, it is scathing. Some choice arguments...
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook finds that more food producers are addressing the issue of sustainability. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
Carnivore's Delight
It's not often that you'll find this space singing the praises of vertical integration in agriculture, but I was heartened to read this week that Joel Salatin of Polyface Farm (the subject of a September 2002 profile in Gourmet who became the national face of sustainable food production after being featured in Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma) had bought the small, 70-year-old slaughterhouse in Virginia that processes his grass-fed cattle.
This is good news because small meatpacking operations in this country have been closing in droves, unable in many cases to comply with stringent USDA regulations designed for the enormous facilities that handle most American meat today. As a result, sustainable livestock farmers have had to truck their animals over great distances, or in some cases cease raising cattle, sheep, and hogs altogether for want of an approved slaughterhouse. T&E Meats, as Salatin's company is known, will continue processing his animals and also those of nearby small producers.
I'm going to knock on wood, but I dare say Salatin may be part of a trend here. Earlier this spring, two other grass-fed beef producers, White Oak Pastures in Georgia and Paicines Ranch in California, opened their own slaughterhouses.
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook investigated why this season's most sought-after catch is suddenly scarce. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
Life is not good here. The fish are not running. And things are going from bad to worse. Due to the extremely low king return, fishing anything is entirely and wholly out of the question."
That dispatch was sent early this week from Jack Schultheis, operations director of Kwik'pak Fisheries, a processor of salmon caught out of the lower Yukon River in remote western Alaska, to Jon Rowley, who handles communications for the small, Eskimo-owned company. (Rowley is also a Gourmet contributing editor.)
In the last year or so, Yukon River kings have become the "new" Copper River salmon, the most sought-after catch-of-the-day at top-end seafood restaurants because of their unusually high oil content. For a while, it looked like everyone was winning. The salmon were moist, tasty, and healthful. Exports to the Lower 48 provided vital income (sometimes the only income) for struggling native Yup'ik fishing families that use earnings from the fishery to purchase gasoline (currently $7.60 a gallon up there) for necessary subsistence activities such as hunting moose and gathering berries. And, better yet, the stocks were sustainably managed.
Then disaster struck. So few king salmon returned to the Yukon River this month that fishery managers ordered drastic cuts to subsistence fishing. There will be no commercial harvest.
Gourmet's Barry Estabrook investigated the hows and whys of salmonella's introduction to the produce we eat. The following is an excerpt of his findings published on Gourmet.com.
How in the hell does salmonella get inside a tomato?
Excuse the bluntness, but that question has been much on my mind this week in the wake of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) warnings against eating raw red tomatoes. The agency took action after 145 diners in 16 states were sickened by tomatoes tainted with salmonella, a bacteria carried in the intestines of animals and humans.
After making several calls and receiving no satisfactory answer to my simple question, I finally reached David Gombas, senior vice president of food safety and technology at the United Fresh Produce Association, a trade organization. He frankly admitted that while there are a number of potential ways for salmonella bacteria to get from some animal's intestines into your fresh salsa, the exact mechanism remains a food-safety mystery that the industry would dearly love to solve. This explains why outbreaks of the disease are so common. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says that more than 3,000 Americans have been sickened by tomatoes in 24 different outbreaks since 1990, a number that looks even more sobering when you realize that the Center for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that only 1 in 30 salmonella cases ever gets reported.
What Can I Get You Folks? - Server Revenge
Reality-Show Celebrities Serve Up Chef Curtis Stone's 'Hundred-Dollar Burger'
Foods Celebrity Chefs Hate
