It's the Agribusiness, Man!

By -
I have seen, many times, people who adhere to some non-standard diet claim that the food guidelines put out by places like the Harvard School of Public Health recommend what they do because these organizations are in the pockets of "agribusiness."

How does this fit with what is actually shown in the chart linked to above? The US has a huge beef industry... and yet Harvard is recommending very limited intake of beef.  The US produces a whole spitload of bacon... and yet bacon is out.

And why in the world would "agribusiness" care whether you ate whole grains or processed grains? Presumably their profits are similar on either. Look at the vegetable section: "french fries don't count"! McDonald's and the potato farmers must have forgotten to pay their agribusiness dues.

Limit dairy! The huge US dairy industry must have forgotten to pay up as well. And olive oil instead of butter?!

Oh, wait, I think I'm getting it: it's supposed to be Italian agribusiness that pays for these charts!

Comments

  1. August4:57 PM

    Well, the subsidies certainly don't help the situation.
    Nor shall those crying out against agribusiness care too much, because they don't like the American animal products industry either.
    I've actually heard the Italians implicated recently, which was fun, but not very believable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:10 AM

    the agri-business owns the nutritionists at Harvard, etc? lol! then why aren't people lining up to be Harvard nutritionists, since it is so lucrative? I think what you're hearing, Gene, is actual agri-business propaganda.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more