I imagine “out there” somewhere there exists a growing group of people who would love to live in a bubble. A protective bubble where no harmful organisms exist. These mysophobes would love to dine on irradiated foods, completely sterilized of all harm, nutrition and flavor. They seek to sanitize the world. If ever they were to step outside this bubble the very first sneeze, whiff of warm soil, or sight of someone drinking raw milk would cause their immune system to collapse and they would implode…(one can hope…)
If first impressions are correct, then, James E. Mc. Williams inhabits this bubble. His latest Op-Ed piece for the NY Times, “Free-Range Trichinosis ” reeks of the sort of fear-mongering that bubble dwelling Mysophobes spout through the clean room intercom. It certainly doesn’t pass as the sort of scholarly, well thought out piece that a history professor at Texas State University at San Marcos should be putting his name to. Or is there another reason Mr. Williams wrote this piece of Pork Industry propaganda?
We have to ask this question, because the absence of any reference to where he gets his facts discredits the information from the outset. In fact, many of the statements are purely ludicrous. Either Professor Williams is suffering from some sort of mental trauma, or he is purposefully corrupting the facts to sway his audience against Sustainable Agriculture and the pastured, free-range meat movement. Why would he do this?
Let’s explore some of the mis-information…
The premise of the article is that free-range pork contains far more pathogens and disease causing organisms than its confined, factory counterpart. If that weren’t enough to raise eyebrows, the good professor goes on to mis-cite findings from the Journal of Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. Only he forgets to state that the study was ordered by the National Pork Board and he purposefully misleads readers into thinking the study involved 600 free-range pigs from three states, instead of 324 free-range pigs and 292 confinement-pigs:
The study published in the journal Foodborne Pathogens and Disease that brought these findings to light last year sampled more than 600 pigs in North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin. It discovered not only higher rates of salmonella in free-range pigs (54 percent versus 39 percent) but also greater levels of the pathogen toxoplasma (6.8 percent versus 1.1 percent) and, most alarming, two free-range pigs that carried the parasite trichina (as opposed to zero for confined pigs). For many years, the pork industry has been assuring cooks that a little pink in the pork is fine. Trichinosis, which can be deadly, was assumed to be history.
This paragraph really contains the crux of the issue. How and when was the salmonella measured? Before or after slaughter? Is it not possible that poor slaughter techniques led to the higher salmonella count? Properly handled, as it should be, raw meat is no more harmful than wiping one’s own arse. Are we supposed to stop that as well? Again, we are supposed to be shocked that two out of 600 pigs carried the parasite responsible for trichinosis. However, the statement is misleading.The report is specific in that those two pigs only tested positive for carrying antibodies linked to exposure to trichinosis, not the actual parasite itself.
At the end of the above quote we are regaled with, “For many years, the pork industry has been assuring cooks that a little pink in the pork is fine. Trichinosis, which can be deadly, was assumed to be history.” Obviously, McWilliams doesn’t cook or know anything about what he is writing about–trichinosis dies at 137ºF when the meat is still too raw to be appealing. Perhaps he prefers to use the Center for Disease Control’s guidelines for cooking pork–170ºF–which would mean the meat would be so overcooked and dry as to be almost inedible. In fact, “a little pink in the pork” can be achieved by stopping cooking at 145ºF and letting the meat carry-over cook until it reaches 150ºF, which is medium. Plenty safe to eat. Especially if the pork has been frozen below 10ºF for any amount of time–another method for killing the trichina cyst which the Professor forgets to mention…
As a producer of carefully raised, quality, farm-slaughtered free-range, pastured pork I find this sort of obfuscation of the facts to be annoying to say the least. The fact that it comes from someone who should know better and spouts off in a major public forum is reprehensible. This sort of shilling for Agribusiness does not help the issues we are facing–the end of cheap petroleum, the awakening of the public to the abuse of livestock and the lack of nutrition in industrial raised foods, and the growing need to find energy efficient, local solutions to feeding ourselves–a hedge against the day the industrial production of food fails completely; either through lack of safety controls or by being “too big to fail”. The deliberate confusion of the different terms, “free-range”, “pastured”, “natural” by industrial Agribusiness is one more tactic to demean and belittle those of us who are out there working hard to make sure local, quality food has a future and that the livestock gene pool remains diverse.
McWilliam’s, the author of the forthcoming “Just Food: How Locavores Are Endangering the Future of Food and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly”, also states “The long history of animal husbandry has been a fervent quest toward intensified control.” Who says so? Why? How has a long history of animal husbandry led to this? Only a select group of people have sought this. The rest of us have quietly resisted the trend towards this because we could see the writing on the wall. The confinement pork industry is running scared. They are using whatever means they can to maintain their control over the market. I fear it is only going to get worse. In the coming months, I think we should turn such standard thinking on itshead and ask instead, “How can locavores eat responsibly, when the future of food is endangered”?
Technorati Tags: free-range pigs, pastured pork, confinement pork, trichinosis, salmonella, Op-Ed, James E. McWilliams
14 Responses to “Free-Range Pork Versus Confinement Thinking”
- 1 Pingback on Apr 15th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Show any mysophobe this, and they’ll implode.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate.html
I’m sure it would be more fun to drink a tall glass of raw milk to do it, though.
Oh, how I dream of a return to the old ways…
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1255518
I agree with you whole heartedly! Very well said.
The intensive pork industry is running scared and finding themselves being backed further into a corner. Trouble is, their only form of defence is attack, and that will be with scaremongering and misinformation.
I’m afraid your misinterpretation of the McWilliams article is as egregious as his supposed sins. Why is it that people who raise scientific issues that might benefit one side over another are automatically assumed to be shills of that side? And your mistatement of the history of animal husbandry is as bad as his misuse of science. Many responsible historians would agree that control has long been the aim of the animal industry. Isn’t it possible to have a discussion of different views without paranoia and ad hominem attacks on the other side?
Please would everyone just stop? As a person who has been involved in farming my whole life
would all the talking heads just shut up. There is a little truth to what everyone says but
no complete truth by either side because everyone is polarized! Going back in time to the way we used to raise animals makes no sense
just like throwing away all of our computers, TV’s, Cell Phones, IPods etc. makes no sense.
Going back in time in raising animals is not sustainable to feed our planet, but there is nothing wrong with
it. If you have a portion of our population that wants to eat this type of product
have it, but on the reverse side of it don’t misrepresent the nutrition or health attributes
of it either, or get people to think that it is greener! We have a lot bigger problems in
this world than whether or not I am going to eat organic or free range tonight! Let agriculture
be modern like the rest of our world. We have the best and the safest food system on the
planet. Lets all quit being soooo negative and focus on being better citizens in all
that we do. Life expectancy is growing every year, and I got news for you all we are not
immortal, forget about the news casts that you see every night that prey on bad news and
get positive. As for obesity, instead of watching news go out and get a run and watch what you
eat! It is not that complicated!
Peace,
Bob
Look at the picture accomanying this article and you will see one of the problems with “free range” or “pastured prok.”
Raising pork in outdoor production systems is environmentally devastating. The pigs root constantly in search of tid-bits fo food. this means they destroy the plant cover of the soil leaving it open to erosion. At the same time, the pigs greatly modify the biodiverstiy of the area over which they range. In addition, the manure in most outdoor production systems is completely un mmanaged, washing off into streams with the next rainfall.
In addition, outdoor production of pork is much less resource efficient than raising pigs in managed environment systesm. Outdoor pigs gain slower and require more feed to put on a pound of gain.
Also, outdoor reared pigs are exposed to a broader range and higher intensity of parasites and pathogens. Since most outdoor produtions systems preclude the use of preventative or treatment antibiotics, the result is much higher mortality.
The questions Prof. McWilliams raises in his NY Times op-ed are certainly reasonable and deserving of more study and discussion.
At the root of the discussion lies this question: Since pigs are not natural animals in North America, is it reasonalbe to expect that they should be raised in a natural system?
@Warren, sorry. I don’t see it that way. Mankind has sought to control animals, that is true. But I do not see that intensification of control has to be the natural and logical outcome of animal husbandry. Most livestock operations in America have fewer than 100 animals. That is not all that intensive. It is only the lowest common denominator that seeks to intensify something which in and of itself is self-limiting. The higher stocking density, the worse the situation for animals, their keepers and the environment. Just ask anyone who’s fallen into a manure lagoon…oh, wait..you can’t.
Also, how have I mis-represented the article? Granted, there are some things I left out, but I have by-and-large remained true to the statements made and provided factual information and links to back up my view–which is more than McWilliams did in his piece. Ad for ad hominem attack..I certainly didn’t go there, but now that you mention it…I did leave out the fact that Mr. McWilliams is a vegetarian who seems to believe that animals use for food should end. How sustainable is that? Where will organic growers get their manure? What will people eat in winter when crops aren’t growing…oh, wait.. the good professor thinks organic agriculture ruins soils and is poisoning the earth slowly…
@Former Ag…you get all that from one photo of a piglet in a dirt pen? My pastures are never left bare during the winter and are much more resource efficient than conventional systems. My hogs harvest 30% of their own feed and recycle nutrients back into the system. They do not require me to haul tons more feed or use petroleum to harvest feeds for them. As for outdoor pasture systems being mismanaged, some may be. But I use Management Intensive Rotational Grazing. I am extremely careful to avoid creating run-off situations–unlike most confinement hog operations whose manure lagoons frequently burst and ruin habitat.
My outdoor system provides the hogs with a robust immune systems. They do not require medicines of any kind and as I have their welfare in mind at all times I make sure I do not need to dose them with anything as that is unnatural. Quality natural feeds, sunshine and fresh air usually sees them through anything. No animal should need preventative or maintenance antibiotics. That’s incredibly naive of the industry to think that is a good, long term solution.
Yes, my pigs do take longer to raise. But I have worked out the values very carefully. It takes no more bought in feed to raise my outdoor hogs to 10 months old than it does to fatten them up quickly to 6 months. It’s all about quality, not quantity. Meanwhile my hogs are improving my soil, sequestering carbon and helping me maintain fire-breaks.
Pigs may not be natural to America, but neither is the White Man and a vast majority of foods we take for granted. If you want to return to a native only diet, your welcome to, but it will be sadly limiting. The earthworms currently inhabiting the States aren’t native either–there are moves to eradicate them. Where will agriculture be without worms? Where will American ag be without hogs? It is certainly more natural to keep pigs outdoors, where every they live, than in confinement houses of any scale.
Stirring things up Podchef!
I haven’t looked at the study from the Journal Of Foodborne Pathogens And Disease
(yikes fun read I bet)but the investigation is probably worthy. If for nothing else,
it will allow for subsequent studies that improve upon its methodologies. The
truth is the truth, but I’m guessing this will be a very, very elusive truth.
Taken in general, it would seem to me that it is easier to establish a control for
the large-scale industrialized practices. They benefit from similar processes of
raising their animals and there is probably little variation. But.. I don’t think
it will be so easy to classify “pasture” raised. So many smaller-scale farmers with
some of them raising quite responsibly and perhaps others who don’t. This is much like
the raw milk problem. The typical raw milk producer does just fine; it’s the one who
screws up on cleaning something that creates the problem for the rest of the careful
producers.
So in the meantime, I’d rather buy my pork from a farm that I know. If I see steaming, bubbling
vats of pig feces with the slaughter happening in the brown goo, I’ll know I don’t want to
buy that pork. Large-scale facilities will have to forgive me if I choose not to buy from them.
I can not observe them as often.
Regulation of small farmers is impractical. Let the careful consumer select. Let
the careful small-scale farmer succeed.
Unfortunately, this kind of “science” writing has become far too common these days. It seems like they’re just trying to whip people up in to a panic, so they can sell more newspapers/magazines/what-have-you.
A fair and balanced editorial would have at least pointed out that the study was comissioned by an organization whose very involvement introduces bias. Not that there was necessarily direct “you will produce these results” influence, but if they were signing the cheques, there would definitely be at least unspoken pressure to produce something favourable for their bosses.
I have raised pigs both ways and I have seen the rotational pasture referred to in England a maritime environment. I have seen the Seagull migrating to the water cups in the British sow pastures and white excrement coating the sow and piglets water sources. There is no perfect way to raise pigs, I believe that is the choice of the producer and his customer to make. What I do get concerned about is why does one producer berate the other’s system?? There is a lot of science out there that is good describing the two systems by good third party sources.
I do have a bias, having raised pigs both indoors and out. I believe the most efficient system and food safe system is one where there is the maximum control of what the pigs eat and exposed to. Birds carry toxoplasmosis and other harmful human and pig deseases. Indoors we control this. We are now using Biofilters to reduce exposure to PRRS, a deadly hog disease, outdoors can not do this. Also, unless you have a lot pasture equivalent to all the land in Indiana you will simply run out of land to put all of the 110 million hogs produced in the USA each year. Having stated my bias, if someone wants to raise pigs outdoors, more power to them it is a free country and if the consumer wants to eat pig that most likely will more flavorful-great! I could not make living do it that way in Minnesota so I have opted for confinement production and I hope we both make livings from our labor.
Respectfully,
53 year old third generation family pork producer.
PodChef, I got my information on what pigs do to the environment from my experience and observations over 15 years of producering pigs on a small diversified family farm. You have a rather simplistic and idealist view of production agriculture and seem to think thate if everyone isn’t doing things like you, they are bad and are doing it wrong. Not everyone wants to or can produce pork for a niche market the way you do.
You addressed my point on antibiotics in a simplistic manner, but you didn’t discuss the conception nor mortality rates of your hogs. You also totally ignored the point on parasites. Are your hogs exposed to parasites in your pasture system? what do you use to reeat for those parasites?
Your comment about returing to a native diet is non-sensiical diversion and a revesal of your position. I am not the one that wants to force an unnatural animal into a natural production system. If you hadn’t noticed, you are the one that is advocating atainst adapting the animals and the production systems.
Your statement about non-native earthworms inhabiting the U.S. and efforts to eradicate them is interesting. You should post a reference on that one.
I don’t really know what free range pig farming in the US is like, but here on my farm in Australia (we are also certified organic) there is really no problem with feacal waste run-off, as the dung beetles do a fantastic job of breaking down the poo… just like in a good cattle grazing operation.
We also rotationally graze pigs, and would be in a real pickle if the pigs rooted up the whole pasture. We would consider ourselves bad farmers if we let it happen. We find that when the pasture balance is good, the less tendency the animal has to root.
We understand that each and every decision and action that we make on our farm has a direct impact on the land and are always concious to leave the land in better health than when we took over custodianship.
I can address the piece on antibiotics if you like. No I don’t routinely administer antibiotics to my pigs, but I do administer them when necessary. Just as I would not take antibiotics for a bacteria that someone else in my house has, I would not administer preventative antibiotics to animals. Shouldn’t we take the sick animal out and move the rest of the pigs into a different paddock instead?
We have had AQIS inspectors (the export meat inspectors) tell us that they have never seen such healthy intestines or organs as our pigs have. We don’t routinely administer a parasite control as we control parasites with grazing rotation and good nutrition.
I am biased too. I took a walk in intensive sheds and decided that if the smell was enough to turn my stomach, that I couldn’t make the animals in my care live like that. (I don’t care how often a pig shed is washed out, it still smells like a sewerage pit.) I understand the need for intensive production to fill a market for cheap meat at the moment, but do think that the tide is turning to people looking for something different and as I am biased you already know that I think it is better… for the animal, the land, the people that grow it and the people that eat it.
The new swine flu outbreak, it seems, is directly related to CAFO pork operations. http://ow.ly/3Xy3
Hmmm… I think I rest my case…
When coming across your article, I was shocked. There have been many educated and studied progressions in the pork industry to be where we are today. Have you ever raised hogs yourself? There’s this beautiful persona of animals “grazing freely throughout the country side.” In the U.S. there are huge advances made IF a disease breaks out. DO you notice the newest “Pig Flu” origionated in MEXICO…..not in the United States. I feel that EVERYONE has the constitutional right to raise their livestock in good herdsmanship practices, wether it be confinement OR free range. CONFINEMENT farmers take great strides in the safety of their livestock, giving them the constant clean and healthy atmosphere they deserve. DO you happen to live in a tent with your family or a home with a heater, air conditioner, CLEAN running water, windows and doors? PLEASE think about the wonderful farmers out there DOING GOOD, providing a safe, well maintained area for their livestock and animals their family deeply cares about.