Determining+Our+True+Dietary+Nature

Danielle Davy 8796122 Tutor: Michelle Cornford Determining Our True Dietary Nature ** Eat Less Meat for Greater Global Food Security - Humans Relationship with Meat, Consumption and Disease ** ** Artefact ** This artefact challenges my beliefs and understanding regarding our relationship with meat. The picture is displaying a large banquet of raw meat; it is symbolic of a westernised diet, the volume and availability of meat that humans can consume. Some historians and anthropologists say that man is historically omnivorous. However our anatomical equipment such as our teeth, jaws, and digestive system favors a fleshless diet. Humans do not handle more than small quantities of fat well. The greed in this picture could present illness and disease if consuming too much of the wrong types of food. ** Public Health Issues Associated ** Australia faces unprecedented amount of diet related disease including obesity, hypertension, heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW 2012) there are many contributing factors to these conditions. The over consumption of meat produced in unsustainable manners is certainly one of them. There is a tendency in Western society to eat too much animal fat, and current health recommendations are for everyone to decrease saturated-fat intake by approximately 25 percent, as red meats tend to raise blood-cholesterol level. The Australian Dietary Guidelines (2013) recommends 80g to 100g of lean meat per day. ** Literature Review ** The evidence revealed by the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) was very disturbing, they reported on a cohort study that started in 1995, where approximately half a million men and women enrolled in the study. They were followed for ten years, and during that time 47,976 male and 23,276 female deaths were recorded. The men and women in the highest quartile of red meat intake had elevated risks for overall mortality (men: 95% women: 95% and for overall cancer mortality both men and women 95%) (Lanou & Stevenson 2010). Higher levels of processed meat intake were also associated with increased cancer mortality risk in both men and women compared with lower intake of processed meat. (Lanou & Stevenson 2010) It was reported that there was convincing evidence linking red and processed meat intakes with colorectal cancer, and suggestive evidence linking red meat and esophageal, lung, pancreatic, and endometrial cancer, and processed meat with esophageal, lung, stomach, and prostate cancer. (Lanou & Stevenson 2010). Antibiotics are employed to treat and prevent infectious bacterial diseases in factory farms. A report from the Joint Expert Technical Advisory Committee on Antibiotic Resistance (JETACAR 1999) stated that there was evidence for the emergence of resistant bacteria in humans and animals following antibiotic use and the transfer of antibiotic resistant genes from animal pathogens and resistant strains of animal bacteria causing disease. In review of this literature it seems possible to come up with a comprehensive appraisal in order to contrast the positive effects of meat consumption with the negative consequences of meat production. Red meat is an excellent source of protein and energy it provides B vitamins, iron, and minerals, and in this way may contribute positively to the diet. (Australia Dieticians Association 2013) The reality is that we are living in a food-industrial complex (FIC), which focuses on efficiency, high volume production and profitability. (Currey & Hinote 2011) Many of us are unaware of the inner workings of this FIC along with the dangers inherent in factory farms. (Currey & Hinote 2011) Employing Ritzer’s (2006) theory of McDonaldization which has emerged from Weber’s classic sociological work on rationality and bureaucracy. In analysis of this The McDonaldization theory is focused on **Efficiency, Calculability, Predictability and Control**. Over the recent decades, agriculture and food production has undergone a number of significant changes, in particular sizes of farms and profitability. These trends towards large-scale production and corporation have come to dominate virtually all spheres of social and economic life. (Currey & Hinote 2011) Using Reitzers economic model to explain the way that factory farming is organized, it is clear in establishing the following; **Efficiency** – Maximising livestock with minimal space with minimum effort, which in turn requires less time and cost. An example of this is, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO’s) this goes against the traditional methods of putting the livestock out to pasture. This is the optimal method for accomplishing the task, which is to rear the livestock in the most efficient way so that it can go to slaughter within the fastest time possible. The method of this process that accounts for all stages of animal production such as handling, transportation, veterinarian meat processing and rendering does not redress the implications of increased risks of infectious diseases for the animal and worker. (Currey & Hinote 2011)


 * Calculability** – The produce must be made to keep up with the demands of the public within a given time period. Factory farms have the principle that quantity is desired over quality to achieve this output. However due to the conditions in factory farms where animals are kept in unsanitized conditions the consequence does not redress the over use of antibiotics that is predominant and unfortuantely ends up being ingested by humans. (JETACAR 1999)

For this principle quantity is desired over the principle of the livestock for achieving the greatest output within a given time period. Therefore head of livestock can be measured by amount of feed, water, square meters and drugs which allows the McDonalization of this process to know exactly how long a process will take and resources needed, the profit to be collected and the amount of workforce. This is a true example of Capitilisation.


 * Predictability** - This applies to the consumer or recipient of the process than the actual process of production. In this case services need to be predictable, for example when a customer visits there local supermarket there expectation is to be supplied with a choice of well stocked meats that are affordable. In this case predicatable both over location and space. Meaning that if you were in a different location that same supermarket could still provide you with the same product. Supermarket competition imposes a cheap price on the product, that in turn lowers the quality of the process for the animal that is dictated by this pressure. Which also applies to the employees of the factory farms, abboitoires and supermarkets. The tasks are highly repetitive, routine and predicatable and encounter great health risks. For example the exposure of dust from CAFO’s that results in respiratory health effects such as asthma, wheezing and allergies.


 * Control** – Applies to the workers of the system enforcing rules, regulations, and punishments. It also involves the replacement of human by non-human technologies. We can look at the mechanism of slaughter and how spinning blades have replaced the work of human hands. This part of the theory has de-humanised the process, which can be explained by Ritzer who outlines Irrationality of Rationality as a fifth aspect of McDonaldization and quotes "More specifically, irrationality means the rational systems are unreasonable systems. By that it means they deny the basic humanity, the human reason, of the people who work with or are served by them". (Ritzer 1994)

This method does not redress the carbon footprint of livestock be it transport, refrigeration or the animals themselves that attribute to environmental woes by the methane they produce. (Currey & Hinote 2011)


 * Cultural and social analysis**

Australians have always been among the world's most enthusiastic meat eaters as culturally we are a nation that likes to BBQ, making meat the main focus point. However changing consumption patterns suggest health, environmental and ethical considerations are playing a greater role in decisions about what Australians are putting on their plates.



While they remain among the biggest per capita consumers of meat, second only to Americans. The latest government agency figures show Australians are increasingly favoring chicken and pork over red meat, which has traditionally been considered a centerpiece of the dinner table. For decades, beef has been the most widely consumed meat in Australia. But estimates by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences show per capita consumption of beef in Australia has halved over the past 25 years while consumption of pork and chicken have doubled and tripled respectively. (FAO 2011)

These trends are in line with global figures, which suggest chicken is poised to overtake pork as the most widely consumed meat in the world. According to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation, pork accounts for more than 36 per cent of world meat intake, followed by poultry at 33 per cent. The poultry sector, however, is the fastest-growing meat sector worldwide, consistently expanding at a rate of more than 5 per cent a year since the 1960s, according to a (FAO 2011) working paper. Leading epidemiologist and public health researcher Tony McMicheal who is a member of the Commission on Climate Change reports the social, economic and environmental repercussions of meat consumption are beginning to weigh heavily on Australians. He believes there is a growing awareness of the cruelty of many aspects of intensified meat production. (McMichael & Powles 2007)

Due to new migrants, price and ethics they have influenced changes in multiculturalism in Australia. There is an increasing influence of other cuisines now available such as Mediterranean and Asian foods that lessen meat intensive options. This is suggesting there could be an international dilemma, as even if red meat is falling in Australia, they are still a major exporter, so more animals are being produced which is increasing greenhouse emissions for the sakes of export sales. On the flip side of this we are a nation that has an epidemic of overweight and obesity at an estimated 1 billion and there is another 1 billion in the world that are malnourished. This is a good enough reason to reduce the consumption of meat, which in turn would free up existing grain fields for human food consumption in the developing worlds.

While there is evidence to prove the detrimental impact on health and environment there is a positive current shift in the patterns of consumption and diet. (FAO 2011) Australians attitudes indicate a desire to expand plant based food intake such as using alternatives such as soy, tofu and meat substitutes. A recent trend is ‘flexitarism’ which is anything from a part-time vegetarian to someone who just likes more balance in their diet in terms of meat and animal proteins. (Lea & Crawford 2006) ** Analysis of the Artefact and my own learning reflection **. The artefact was representing the sheer volume of meat available in westernised societies. The question being why is this so accessible, and is it a result of factory farming and unfortunately Australia has been consuming the product of factory farming, which is not how our traditional methods of farming have been accustomed to. This is leading to the globalization of this foreign product; we are just merely the cogs in this process. I had been questioning my own diet over the last year in terms of consuming meat, the taste and whether we should be eating it all. In particular the ethics of the process involved in factory farming, the cruel inhumane way that livestock is reared and slaughtered. Since researching this topic it has confirmed my beliefs and I have since adopted a vegetarian diet. I feel, cleaner and healthier for changing to a plant-based diet. If more and more people choose to cut down on their meat consumption then pressures would alleviate the demands of meat production. It was positive to see that organic farming in Australia had grown 11.6 per cent over the previous five years which had been fuelled by growing consumer interest in sustainable food production and rising disposable incomes. The planet needs to revert back to humbler traditional farming methods if we are going to see an improvement in human population health at all levels. **Engagement and Reflection** I have visited and reviewed two wikis and left comment on the following:
 * http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/share/view/64704792**


 * http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/share/view/64708156**


 * References **

Anthony J McMichael, John W Powles, Colin D Butler, & Ricardo Uauy. (2007). Energy and health 5: Food, livestock production, energy, climate change, and health. The Lancet, 370(9594), 1253.

Allen, J. S. (2012). The omnivorous mind: Our evolving relationship with food. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press

Currey & Hinote (2011) The evolution of industrial food production, mcdonalization and population health. Retrieved from: http://www.mtsu.edu/soc/faculty/bhinote.php

Department of health (2013) Report of the joint expert technical advisory committee on antibiotic resistance (JETACAR) October 1999. Retrieved from: [|http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main publishing.nsf/content/ /health-pubs-jetacar-cnt.htm]

FAO (2005) Livestock information, sector analysis and policy branch AGAL. Retrieved from: [] en/publications/sector_briefs/lsb_AUS.pdf

Lanou, A. J., & Stevenson, B. (2010). Reduced cancer risk in vegetarians: An analysis of recent reports. Cancer Management and Research, 3, 1-8

Lea, E. & Worsley, A. 2002, "The cognitive contexts of beliefs about the healthiness of meat", Public Health Nutrition, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 37-45.

Lea, E. J., Crawford, D., & Worsley, A. (2006). Consumers' readiness to eat a plant-based diet. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 60(3), 342- 351. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602320

National health and medical research council. (2013) Australian dietary guidelines. Retrieved from: [] [|/publications/attachments/n55_australian_dietary_guidelines.pdf]

The Australian National University (2013) social, economic and environmental repercussions of meat consumption. Retrieved from []