Photos of recipes from the new book Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Photos of recipes from the cookbook Tender Grassfed Meat
When Organic Tests No Better, Check the Soil, and the Bias
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Magnificent olive trees thriving on the rich soil at Chaffin Family Orchards.
Recently, another study claiming that organic food has no more nutrients than conventional food was published. Since this study appears to defend the chemical-laden conventional food, it has been widely spread by the mainstream press. Yet several important factors should be noted about this latest study.
First, it provides no new data, but is a review of approximately 200 previous studies.
Second, nearly all studies of this nature, including most, if not all, of the studies they reviewed, are done by universities who are completely committed to supporting conventional agriculture, and receive large donations from Big Ag and the biotech industry, including Monsanto.
Third, and most important, it completely ignored, as do nearly all studies of this type, the most important factor in how many nutrients will be in food—the soil.
The Fatal Flaw in Conventional vs. Organic Studies
Have you ever been puzzled about why almost every study comparing organic food to conventional food finds no difference in nutrients? I have. It just does not make sense. Yet university study after university study finds no real difference. The answer was given to me by a farmer who attended a famous agricultural program in a well known university. I will honor my promise to keep his identity confidential.
This farmer, while a student, assisted with agricultural studies and is completely familiar with how they were conducted. Universities and food research organizations have their own land, or land that they use to raise crops and animals for studies and experiments. When they study the qualities of crops or animals, they raise them on their particular research land. Since nearly all of the research they do involves conventional farming, this land is heavily spayed with pesticides on an ongoing basis, and artificial fertilizers are regularly used. This has the effect of greatly depleting the natural nutrients in the soil, and filling the soil with substances that block the absorption of nutrients.
When “organic†farming is done on this land for the purpose of a study, the same blasted, depleted soil is used that had previously been used to raise conventional foods.
Since the nutrients are not there in the soil in the first place, plants that are grown with organic methods on that dead, depleted soil do not have more nutrients than conventional food raised on the same soil. The plants and animals cannot absorb nutrients which are not there. The same chemical residues that block the absorption of nutrients in conventional agriculture will block the absorption of nutrients when organic methods are used on the same poor soil.
This fact alone makes all of these studies fatally flawed.
The Database for the Study Is Flawed
A study relying only on other studies has all of the flaws of the studies it relies on. Most of these studies were conducted by researchers beholden to Big Ag.
So many studies these days are nothing but an analysis of other studies. I do not consider this method to be of value, since studies of this type rely on all the bad information gathered and interpreted by the previous studies. This is particularly true in this case. The agricultural research done in this country is completely dominated by conventional and high-tech methods, especially GMOs and Bio Tech. Chemicals rule, and GMOs are touted as the solution to every problem. The reason for this bias is obvious—money. Big Ag and the biotech industry make huge grants to agricultural schools, with Monsanto leading the way. In fact, one of the largest and most respected agricultural schools in the nation has been called “Monsanto U†by its students. My anonymous friend was openly mocked by his professors when he questioned the desirability and safety of GMOs. Funding is also provided by the Federal government, which appears to only fund research of conventional agriculture and GMOs.
Just about all agricultural research done in these institutions is on conventional methods and GMOs. The extent of how bad and biased this really is was shown during debate on the most recent farm bill. Senator Jon Tester of Montana introduced an amendment that would require that just five percent of federally-funded agricultural research be devoted toward the development of classic non-GMO seeds and biological diversity in seeds, as opposed to the current zero percent. That amendment was killed. Which tells us that one hundred percent of federal agricultural research funding, which goes to the very institutions that do agricultural research and studies, is devoted to GMOs and similar unnatural methods.
Do you trust institutions whose funding is targeted solely toward supporting Big Ag and GMOs to be unbiased when it comes to research that affects the value of Big Ag and GMOs?
The Healthy Peoples Studied by Dr. Price Got Far More Nutrients than We Do
Dr. Weston A. Price spent ten years traveling the world to learn about nutrition. He studied a number of traditional peoples who ate the diets of their ancestors. Dr. Price sent over twenty thousand samples of their foods to be studied in the U.S. It was found that these peoples got far more vitamins and minerals than modern peoples, often five times as much or more, depending on the nutrient. All of their food was organic. All of their food came from soils and environments that had never been sprayed with chemicals, or subject to artificial fertilizers. All these peoples were careful to rest, restore, and fertilize the soil they used, using totally organic methods. Dr. Price wrote that many of the nutritional deficiencies suffered by modern peoples were due to the poor, depleted soil that was used for farming. I might add that the soil he wrote about was far less depleted than the soil we use today.
Dr. Price considered good soil to be the foundation of nutritious food, and devoted an entire chapter to this subject in his book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration.
Yet this latest study totally ignored the quality of the soil used to raise the food in the studies.
Grassfed Meat Is Far Superior to Factory Meat, and Depends on Good Soil
Like almost all such studies, the issue of whether the meat people ate was grassfed or factory meat was totally ignored. But the truth of the matter is that grassfed meat contains far more nutrients than factory meat, containing far more omega-3 fatty acids, much higher levels of CLA, and many other nutrients. This has actually been established by studies, whose information is superbly presented and summarized in this excellent article at EatWild.com, Health Benefits of Grass-fed Products.
While most grassfed beef is not organic, it is raised with methods that are the equivalent of organic, and it must be raised on soil that is rich enough to support good grass, or the cattle will not thrive and fatten. Many grassfed ranchers use traditional rotational grazing methods to enrich their soil and improve their grass.
Truly Organic Food, Grown on Good Soil, Is Much More Nutritious than Conventional Food
I have eaten organic food that seemed quite ordinary, and organic food that filled me with energy, made symptoms disappear, and made me feel like I had just taken a drink from the fountain of youth. The difference? I am convinced it was the soil. Much organic food is grown on soil that was once used for chemical agriculture, which ruins and depletes the soil.
But some organic food is grown on clean soil, free of chemicals, which has been carefully nurtured with traditional methods. I have eaten fruit and meat raised at Chaffin Family Orchards. The fruit, eggs, and meat from this farm is raised on land that has never been sprayed with chemicals. Land that has not been tainted with artificial fertilizer. Land whose fertility is carefully nurtured and preserved by traditional methods, such as rotational grazing.
The first Chaffin food I ate was some organic apricots. The skin on two of my fingers was quite dry and was peeling and cracked in a few small areas. I thought it was due to the hot, dry summer and not drinking enough. While apricots are not my favorite food, these apricots were delicious beyond dreams, I felt so good and renewed when I ate them. Within two days, the skin on these fingers had healed completely, as if it had never been damaged. I had been eating plenty of organic fruits and vegetables before I ate the Chaffin apricots, and I am convinced that it was the good soil that made the difference. There was some nutrient in those apricots that my body used to heal the dry skin. Anecdotal? Totally.
But let us remember something. Humans have been learning and passing down information for tens of thousands of years, maybe longer. All of that knowledge was anecdotal. Modern scientific studies have been around for less than two hundred years, and would have never been invented if it were not for the anecdotal information that came first. There is old saying—experience is the best teacher. What I learned from the Chaffin apricots taught me to appreciate the value of food grown on pure, rich, chemical-free soil. I trust this experience far more than any number of flawed studies.
Based on the knowledge of how agricultural research is conducted today, the work of Dr. Price, and my own experience—I am convinced that organic food, or the equivalent of organic, raised on good soil—contains far more nutrients than conventional foods.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday and Freaky Friday blog carnival.
“Just Eat Real Food†Means Just Eat Real Food, Not 20% Junk
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
This beautiful grassfed meat is 100% grassfed and 100% real—much better and tastier than anything that comes out of a factory.
JERF, which stands for Just Eat Real Food, is the best nutritional advice I have ever seen. And in only four words. This terrific phrase was coined by Sean Croxton, of the Underground Wellness Show. I try to live up to it, and the results have been amazing in every way. If you just eat real food, you will avoid many toxins, and get the nutrition your body so desperately needs. But to get these benefits, it is important that you just eat real food, and nothing else, to the best of your reasonable ability.
Yet there are those who are claiming it is okay to eat any junk food you want, as long as you do it no more than twenty percent of the time. While that would be so convenient and make things so much easier, it is just not true. While eating real food eighty percent of the time is much better than eating junk food most of the time, shooting for eighty percent is just not good enough, in my opinion. If you want to enjoy the full range of benefits that comes from a real food diet, it is important to do your best to just eat real food. If you are eating twenty percent junk, you are still eating a significant amount of junk, which will affect your body, and maintain your addictions to various factory ingredients, like processed sugar. After all, junk is junk, and should be avoided to the extent possible.
We did an experiment last week, dropping off the real food wagon and allowing ourselves to eat the junk food we wanted for one major meal. It was a mistake, as is described below.
But the bottom line is this—if you want the full benefit of real food—JERF. Just Eat Real Food.
The Real 80/20 Rule
The 80/20 concept in terms of diet was created by Mark Sisson, one of the most influential people in the Primal/Paleo movement. It was created to help people make the significant diet and lifestyle changes advocated by his program, the Primal Blueprint, without feeling bad if they could not do it all of the time. The concept was that if you do eighty percent of the program, you will receive substantial benefits. Yet some people have taken the 80/20 rule to mean that you only have to eat real food eighty percent of the time, and it is fine to eat any junk you want for the other twenty percent of the time.
Not only is real food a distinct concept from The Primal Blueprint, the eighty/twenty rule was never meant to be a license to eat junk twenty percent of the time. Mark Sisson himself made that very clear. Here is a link to an article by him that explains what he meant: 80/20 Revisited
If you read the article, you will see that he advocates trying for 100 percent compliance with the program, but not kicking yourself if you can only reach eighty percent. That is not a license to eat factory junk twenty percent of the time.
My Experiment in Eating Some Junk
My wife and I have been just eating real food, to the best of our reasonable ability to do so, for many years. We tried for 100 percent real food, but did not feel guilty for the times when we did not make this goal because of circumstances. Our path is to do the best we reasonably can to just eat real food, but not to feel bad about the occasions when this does not happen. We have seen enormous improvements in our health, energy, productivity, happiness, attitude, general joy of life, and ability to deal with whatever happens. If the medical profession and drug industry was depending on people like us, they would go broke, because we have no need for them.
Yet I do miss, from time to time, some of the factory foods I was addicted to. And the truth is that avoiding toxins and eating only real food is not easy. It can be awkward socially, in restaurants, at parties, at family dinners, where toxic factory food is often served. It is so much easier just to go along with the crowd and eat as they do. After reading some of the advocacy for the version of the eighty/twenty rule that allows you to eat any junk you want in the twenty percent portion, we decided to investigate. After all, the idea that we could maintain all the benefits of real food and eat any junk we wanted twenty percent of the time was tempting. So, last Friday night, we dropped off the real food wagon and ordered a pizza from a large chain that we used to frequent before we switched to real food. We got our old favorite toppings, though I could not bring myself to order a topping that contained feedlot beef.
After I took the first bite of pizza, I was astonished at how I immediately wanted to eat more and more and more of it. The taste was mediocre, yet I wanted to keep eating and eating it, to wolf it down as fast as I could cram it into my mouth. Normally I prefer to eat slowly, thoroughly chewing my food before swallowing it. I was astonished by how strong the desire to wolf it down and eat more was. As we continued to eat the pizza, I became aware of an overwhelming thirst, something that never happens when I eat real food. When I discussed this with my wife, she also had the desire to eat more and more of the pizza, and she also got very thirsty.
While I have no scientific proof of this, I am convinced there was something added to the pizza to make me want more of it, and something in it that made us very thirsty, perhaps so we would order factory soft drinks.
We finished the pizza, and still felt hungry and unsatisfied. Yet we wanted more and more of the pizza, an urge we resisted. I also felt bloated and uncomfortable, a feeling I never have when I just eat real food. There were other uncomfortable digestive consequences, as my body tried to get rid of the chemicals and toxins in the pizza. I also had some headaches, something that I normally never get. And I was low energy and tired. After two days of just eating real food, I was fine. Since then, we have tried to eat one hundred percent real food, and we have been fine, without any of those unpleasant symptoms. It is clear that the “you can eat twenty percent junk†rule did not work for us.
My Eating Rule—JERF, But Don’t Stress
I try to eat real food one hundred percent of the time, yet I am fine with the fact that I will not always meet that goal. I will carefully make sure that every item of food that enters our home is real food, and nothing else. I will cook and serve nothing but real food. Once you get in the habit of doing this, it becomes a routine, and being healthy and functioning better is well worth the time, trouble, and additional expense.
The problem comes at social gatherings and restaurants, where most of the food is never real. I will often eat a large snack of real food at home, rich in animal fats, before I go out. This helps protect my body from the toxins I may ingest, and satisfies my hunger before I am exposed to factory food. When offered desserts and food items that I should not eat, I politely decline them without trying to preach the merits of real food. If it seems like an explanation is needed, I calmly and quietly explain that I am on a strict diet for my health, which is absolutely true. Most people will accept that explanation. I will eat whatever seems the closest to real food, from what is available, and I will not eat very much of it. In a restaurant, I will carefully choose food that is as free of toxins and as close to real food as I can find, and I am not shy about asking the waiter for details. I also try to eat only at restaurants that have something that is good to eat, even though I avoid most of their menu.
Now prior to eating the pizza, we had done our usual best to just eat real food for the rest of the week and the rest of our meals, so the pizza was far less than twenty percent of our diet. But it was far too much. The benefits of just eating real food are so great that we will not throw them away to indulge in junk, or to fit in with the crowd. And we do not feel deprived because we enjoy our real food so much. There is such a huge variety of foods we can eat, and they are so much better and so much more satisfying. And we do follow a rule set down by Sally Fallon Morell, the founder and president of the Weston A. Price Foundation—never eat carbs without plenty of good animal fat.
But the main rule I follow is simple, profound, and it works—JERF. Just Eat Real Food.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Not Fit for a Dog, or for Humans Either
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Grassfed meat and bones, the most traditional and best food for dogs.
The pack of wild dogs stalked hungrily through the tall grass, sniffing for prey. Suddenly, the pack leader stiffened as he smelled something. The pack froze, watching the leader. The leader bounded forward, and the pack followed, howling. They burst furiously out of the grass, and pounced upon a — patch of GMO soybeans?
Sounds unbelievable, does it not? Well, so does a can of vegetarian dog food. But, believe it or not, I saw such a can recently, proudly marked as “vegetarian†dog food. Not trusting my eyes, I took a look at the ingredients. They included water (the first ingredient), soymeal, soybean oil, and a host of artificial vitamins. Oh yes, there was also some brown rice. Dogs are real big on brown rice. The ingredients were described as “natural.†In reality, this means that the soy was almost certainly GMO.
Dogs are carnivores. They are designed to hunt prey and eat raw meat. Not soybeans, especially not GMO soybeans. Of course, dogs will eat this, if they get hungry enough. In fact, they will probably wolf it down, as their bodies search desperately for the vital nutrients that aren’t there. And just in case hunger is not enough, flavor-enhancing chemicals can be used to give a meaty flavor to this stuff. But that does not make it meat.
Come to think of it, soymeal and soybean oil, highly processed to remove the stench and horrible natural taste, are added to all sorts of foods made for humans. While we are omnivores, replacing meat with soy is a bad idea for us too.
In other words, processed soy is not fit for a dog—or humans either.
Would You Rather Eat Grassfed Hamburger or Soymeal?
The answer is very obvious, for most people. And almost all the people who would choose soymeal would do so because of their vegan or vegetarian beliefs, or because they are scared to eat red meat. But the reason that most humans would choose grassfed hamburger is because grassfed meat is one of the oldest and most traditional foods of humankind, a food that has nourished humankind for thousands of generations. In contrast, unfermented soy has been eaten for little more than one hundred years. And GMO soy did not even exist until the 1990s. All soy includes hormone-disrupting chemicals and other toxins, though traditionally fermented soy has much less.
To say that grassfed meat tastes better than unfermented soy is like saying water is wet. And grassfed meat and fat are full of valuable nutrients, and are not toxic. This wonderful meat provides many nutrients that our bodies crave, and make us healthier and stronger.
While the soy industry has planted all kinds of misinformation all over the Internet, trying to convince us that soy products have been eaten since the dawn of time, the truth is very different. Soy was first grown as a crop in China, thousands of years ago. This soy was not eaten at first. It was used to restore nitrogen to the soil, and would be alternated with food crops at various intervals. The fact that soy was not eaten or fed to animals tells us that the early Chinese knew it was not good to eat, as even this early, non-GMO soy had toxins, hormone disruptors, and smelled and tasted horrible. Eventually, the Chinese learned to ferment soy to make various foods. The traditional fermentation process reduced the toxins, and greatly improved the taste and smell. Even this fermented soy was only eaten in small amounts, and used mainly as a condiment and seasoning.
It was not until the twentieth century that the eating of unfermented soy really began. Industrial processing made it possible to extract large amounts of oil from soy. This oil could only be made by refining soybeans, and had never been eaten by humans before. At first it was used solely for industrial uses, but soon was used as an ingredient in processed food and as a cooking oil. The sludge left over after the oil was extracted was thrown out as smelly, slimy garbage. Then someone came up with the idea of adding this sludge to foods, as it does contain protein. This sludge is still the basis of most soy foods, though now it almost always GMO. Since this stuff is truly revolting in its natural state, it is highly processed and mixed with sweeteners and flavor enhancers. Unbelievably, soy products are marketed as “health foods.â€
I choose grassfed hamburger.
Grassfed Meat and Organs Can Be Great for Dogs, and Humans
I have often written about how grassfed meat can help people recover from all kinds of injuries, including physical ones. This applies to dogs as well as people. My friend John Wood, a terrific grassfed farmer and the founder of U.S. Wellness Meats, learned this firsthand about four years ago. John’s dog, Buck, was severely injured in an accident. The Vet found a severely broken hip, and did not think Buck would ever recover. John did not give up. He put Buck on a diet of raw grassfed meat, grassfed liver, and grassfed marrow bones. There was no surgery. John also gave Buck a very high-quality liquid calcium magnesium supplement. After three months, Buck was completely recovered. X-rays showed that the hip had healed completely.
Does anyone really think that Buck would have been healed by eating canned soymeal?
I know a number of humans, including myself, who have rebuilt their bodies and health by eating grassfed meat. So, I say that grassfed meat is fit for a dog, and humans, as both species thrive on it.
I am not a veterinarian, and am not qualified to advise people on what to feed their dogs. But no one needs to be a vet to know that feeding dogs a vegetarian soy-heavy diet from a can just does not make sense.
Related Post
Avoid Second-Hand Soy—Just Eat Grassfed
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Avoid Second-Hand Soy—Just Eat Grassfed
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
This dry-aged grassfed steak contains no soy toxins.
I was about to roast a 100% organic chicken, from a brand I had never tried before. As I washed the chicken, it just did not look right to me. I got a funny feeling that there was something wrong with this chicken. But it was 100% organic. What could be wrong with it? I roasted the chicken in a way that should have turned out delicious. But it didn’t. The chicken did not taste good, and I had indigestion after eating it.
I went to the butcher who sold it to me, who worked for a large chain store, and complained about the taste and after effects of the chicken. The butcher, who I knew well, leaned close to me, and said quietly, “This company feeds a very high percentage of soy to their chickens. I hate the way they taste. I won’t eat them myself.â€
That was the first time I learned what soy feeding could do to the taste and quality of meat. And since unfermented soy has always given me indigestion, I learned that the nasty qualities of soy could survive in the meat of animals that ate it.
But my experience was “anecdotal†and not a valid scientific study.
But now, I have learned that various scientific studies confirm my experience by reporting that the meat or eggs from animals fed soy contain soy toxins.
The best way to avoid soy toxins from meat is to JEG—just eat grassfed.
You Can Get Toxins from Second-Hand Soy
Some of the many toxins in soy are known as soy isoflavanones, and the soy industry claims they have “health benefits.†Based on the excellent book, The Whole Soy Story, by Dr. Kaayla Daniel, and my own subjective experience, I believe these substances are toxins, pure and simple.
Recently, I was fortunate enough to read an excellent article by Dr. Daniel, called Soy-ling of America: Second-Hand Soy from Animal Feeds, on the website of the Weston A. Price Foundation. I learned a lot from this article, which is the source of the data that this post is based on. My thanks to Dr. Daniel for graciously giving me permission to use information from her article.
Several studies were done that showed the presence of soy isoflavones in egg yolks and meat tissues. One study tested eighteen commercial brands of eggs to see which of them contained soy isoflavones. The study found that all eighteen brands of eggs contained soy isoflavones, even the organic and free-range varieties. One study found soy isoflavones in the meat of poultry.
While none of the studies addressed red meat, there is no reason to believe that soy isoflavones are not present in the meat of every animal fed soy.
What this means is that you can avoid every soy product, and still ingest soy toxins. They can be hidden in the meat and eggs of animals, and can cause the same sorts of problems that result from eating food that contains soy.
If you are one of the many people who are allergic to soy, it is important to realize that you can get soy just by eating meat or eggs from an animal who was fed soy. While I have seen no study on this, it is quite likely that you could also ingest soy toxins from farmed fish that were fed soymeal, which is a common feed for farmed fish. These facts are just as important to those of us who choose to avoid unfermented soy, or all soy.
How to Avoid Second-Hand Soy Toxins from Animals
So how do you avoid ingesting soy toxins from animal products? The obvious answer is to avoid eating the meat or eggs of animals or fish that have been fed soy feed. The problem is that the government does not require the labeling of soy feed in animal products, so there is no way to know if a particular conventional meat or egg comes from a soy-fed animal.
My rule is simple: just eat grassfed. Grassfed meat, raised and finished on grass alone, is fed no soy, and contains no soy toxins. You can avoid soy toxins in fish by just eating wild fish. Soy is not part of the natural diet of wild fish, obviously. I have been able to find eggs that are from chickens raised without soy feed, though they are more expensive. It is worth the extra expense, and they feel and taste much better.
And you can find chickens that are pastured and raised without soy feed. These chickens can be very expensive. I find that I do not eat much chicken these days, as I would much rather spend the money on grassfed red meat, which is so much more satisfying.
I recommend that you read Dr. Daniel’s article at the link given above, as it provides an excellent, detailed description of the problem. I am deeply grateful to Dr Daniel for her research on the dangers of soy, her excellent book, and her continuing efforts to expose the truth about this noxious substance, which has done so much harm to the health of humanity and our planet.
I am including a short bio provided by Dr. Daniel, for those who would like to know more about her and her work:
Kaayla T. Daniel, PhD, CCN, is The Naughty Nutritionist™ because of her ability to outrageously and humorously debunk nutritional myths.  A popular guest on radio and television, she has been on The Dr Oz Show, ABC’s View from the Bay, NPR’s People’s Pharmacy and will appear this summer on PBS Healing Quest. Dr Daniel is the author of The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food, a popular speaker at Wise Traditions and other conferences,  Vice President  of the Weston A. Price Foundation and recipient of its 2005 Integrity in Science Award. Her websites are www.naughtynutritionist.com and www.wholesoystory.com.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Why Taste Enhancers Should Be Avoided and How to Do It
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
The smell of good food cooking is the only taste enhancer needed.
What if the food you ate was spiked with a chemical that caused you to have hallucinations? A chemical that distorted what you saw to the extent that you could not trust your eyes, because the chemical was causing your brain to see things that were not there? A chemical that caused you to see things the manufacturer and seller wanted you to see?
Would you object to such a chemical? Would you want such a deceptive chemical banned from the food supply?
Almost every person would. After all, we need to be able to trust what we see with our own eyes, to get accurate information from our senses. Yet you almost certainly have ingested many chemicals designed to deceive and trick your senses. Except the sense they deceive is not your eyesight, but your taste.
These chemicals are known as taste enhancers. If they appear on a food label at all (and they often do not), they can be called artificial flavors, or a host of other names.
The purpose of these chemicals is to trick your mind into believing it is eating something that is not there. Since our sense of taste serves many important functions, these functions are also deceived by this false information, and cannot function accurately. These chemicals have one purpose, to get you to buy the product they are placed in.
The Importance of Taste
We have over ten thousand taste buds in our mouths and tongue. They are there for a reason. The reasons include these:
- To detect poison
- To detect food that is good to eat
- To detect spoiled food
- To detect the presence of nutrients in a particular food
- To signal the digestive system so it can properly prepare to digest the food that is coming
- To stimulate the production of and release of saliva with the right mix of enzymes to predigest the food as we chew it
- To regulate our appetite
- To let us know when we have had enough
There are many other functions, almost certainly including functions we have not yet discovered. An accurate sense of taste is vital to our knowing what and how much to eat. For most of human history, we could trust our sense of taste. It protected us from harm, and provided the best possible feedback on how much we should eat.
I consider it crucial to have accurate taste feedback at all times. If the natural taste of something is really bad, or even a bit off, our body is telling us not to eat it. If the natural taste of something is really good, our body is telling us that we need the nutrients in that food, and to keep eating it. If we have eaten enough of a particular food, the taste changes, and we know when we have had enough.
For example, the first bite of a perfectly cooked grassfed steak will make me want to eat more, as it tastes so good. But after I have swallowed the nutrients that I need, the steak no longer tastes as good. My body is letting me know that I have had enough. If I were to force myself to eat more, the taste would become worse and worse. This is nature’s way of letting us know when we need to eat more of something, and when we need to eat less. If you eat only real food, cooked with the traditions of our ancestors, your sense of taste should work properly to let you know what to eat and how much. Since every one of us is unique, this is much more useful, in my opinion, than “one size fits all” nutritional guidelines.
But if you eat food spiked with taste enhancing chemicals, it is a different story.
The Trouble with Taste Enhancers
The first widespread flavor enhancer was Monosodium Glutamate, also known as MSG, which was invented in Japan. During World War II, American soldiers eating captured Japanese rations were astonished by how good they tasted. This lead to the widespread use of MSG in the American food industry, and to the creation of many other flavor enhancers.
Taste enhancers work on a neurological level, which means that they deceive the senses and directly affect the brain. Some make food appear to taste much better than it actually does. Others fool your brain and body into thinking you are eating meat, even when you are not. Others convince your brain that you are experiencing a particular taste, but you are not. This gives false information to your body and brain, and your natural functions act according to this false information. There are literally hundreds, perhaps thousands, of chemical combinations that are used to enhance and create taste in processed foods, and in fast foods. They are created and modified by skilled chemists who are trying to create a particular taste or effect. Unfortunately, these chemists are very good at their jobs.
Why are taste enhancers used? To enhance profits. Processed foods and factory foods are designed for long shelf life. They often contain many ingredients whose natural taste is foul and revolting to humans. They are processed, often heavily, to remove these foul tastes, and often have very little flavor. Tasteless foods often contain fewer nutrients than tasty foods. If the flavor was not enhanced to be better, much better than it naturally is, very few people would eat these products, because they just would not taste good enough. While giving a false good taste to inferior processed foods is a major reason for the use of taste enhancers, it is not the only one.
Taste enhancers can get you to eat more and more of a particular food. They do this by sending false information to your brain that makes you believe that you want to eat more and more of the food they are added to. The problem is made even worse by the poor nutritional content of factory and packaged foods, which makes your body hungry for nutrients which are not there. This combination is one explanation why so many people will eat a whole bag of cookies, or pint of ice cream, or huge amounts of soft drinks, cereal, fast foods, and any number of other factory foods. Obviously, if people eat more and more of a product, profits are enhanced. Getting us to eat much more food than we actually need is a big key to the profits of the food industry. These chemicals can be so effective that they totally override the natural appetite control built into our sense of taste.
A third and related use is to get our brains to crave a particular product. If you crave a particular fast food item, or packaged food, what you really crave is the chemicals used to enhance its taste. I still have a craving for a particular fast food item. I have had that item only once in the last ten years, yet I still crave it. When I ate it, I wanted to eat more and more of it, no matter how much I had. I tried it a few months ago, just to see what would happen. I ordered a small amount, which I quickly wolfed down, much faster than I intended. I immediately wanted to eat more, and more. It took a lot of willpower to leave the place. When I researched the contents of that particular food, I found that it contained several chemical taste enhancers.
The biggest problem with taste enhancers is that they deceive our sense of taste, and reduces its ability to perform its natural functions. Which means that the ability of our sense of taste to prevent us from eating foods that we should not, and to regulate our appetite, is greatly diminished.
The Solution
It takes work, but there are great benefits to avoiding chemicals, eating real food, and helping your body function as it was intended to do. It has made a huge difference in my life, giving me much more harmony, joy, and health. And my sense of taste has improved steadily, greatly increasing my appreciation of the food I eat. And I eat much less than I used to, without effort.
The only way I have found to restore my sense of taste to its proper function is to avoid taste enhancers. This means avoiding all packaged foods, except certain organic items. Even then, I read every label and reject everything that has an ingredient with a scientific or chemical name, or includes the words “flavors,†or “spices.†There are some wonderful traditional fermented foods out there, but I will only buy from a company that I have checked out and trust. To the extent that I can, I cook everything from scratch. I do my best to obtain foods that have been raised without chemicals, and which are traditionally raised on good soil.
I use traditional cooking methods and ingredient combinations. I only eat grassfed meats, or in the case of pork or poultry, meats that are pastured or naturally raised. I generally avoid most restaurants, and I am very careful to know the food of the few restaurants I will eat in. I never eat fast food, except for that experiment I described above.
What if you do not know how to cook? I respectfully advise you to learn. I think cooking is one of the most important skills anyone can have, as it gives you the freedom and ability to eat and prepare food that will be wonderful for you and your loved ones. And, given that we are what we eat, what could be more important?
Is all of this a lot of trouble and work? You bet it is. But it is worth it. Convenience was and is the great temptation that convinced most of us to rely on packaged foods and factory foods. The work of obtaining good food and the work of preparing and cooking them allows my sense of taste to function properly. I eat much less, though I eat as much as I want. I feel content and renewed after every home-cooked meal. I enjoy my meals without any negative consequences. And eating this way has resulted in the best health of my life, by far, as my natural functions work as intended, without being deceived by chemicals.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Grassfed Meat Should Be Savored, Not Gulped
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
A delighful dish to savor, Stir-Fried Beef with Mushrooms and Onions, Vietnamese Style, page 124, Tender Grassfed Meat.
I try to feed and nourish my family by providing the best nutrition I can. So how do we provide the best nutrition, for ourselves and our families?
Many of us try to buy the very best real food we can afford. And there is some wonderful real food out there, full of taste and nutrients. In particular, a nice cut of grassfed meat is a nutritional treasure. But buying great food is only part of the process.
I have spent years learning how to cook real food and grassfed meat in particular, perfecting many traditional and delicious ways to cook it. But knowing how to cook real food and grassfed meat is also only part of the process.
There is a third and vital part of the process of enjoying good nutrition, one that our ancestors knew and honored. One that has been largely forgotten and ignored in our modern world. One that takes time, but provides many benefits. One that helps our bodies absorb the nutrients in the food we eat, and aids digestion. After all, even the best food, perfectly cooked, will do us little good unless our bodies absorb and digest the nutrients in the food.
That is the old custom of savoring the food we eat, as we eat it.
What Is Savoring Food?
Savoring food can best be described as the practice of eating slowly, chewing the food thoroughly, taking small breaks from eating to talk and enjoy the companionship of the table, and giving full attention to how delicious the food tastes as we eat it. Doing this is one of the greatest pleasures in life, when you are eating good food.
Savoring food is the opposite of what so many people do at mealtimes, which is to give a chew or two, gulp down the food as fast as possible, and have a short, hurried meal, usually thinking about anything other than the food that is being eaten. Not only is the modern fast meal stressful, it has a very bad effect on our ability to absorb the nutrients in the food we eat, and can lead to a host of digestive difficulties and even disease.
The Benefits of Savoring Food
A wonderful benefit of savoring food is the great taste sensation. When we obey the laws of our own bodies, we are often rewarded by feelings of enjoyment and pleasure, which are great to experience. I contend that the full taste of even the most delicious food is not enjoyed unless the food is slowly and thoroughly chewed, with attention devoted to how good it tastes. It is then that you get the full enjoyment of the wonderful tastes of perfectly cooked grassfed meat, or other real food, which is a true pleasure. Many subtle nuances of taste and texture appear that are not noticed if you just gulp the food after a fast chew or two. I am convinced that the pleasure obtained from savoring wonderful food also helps our digestion and absorption, as the natural processes of our bodies always work better when we are happy and relaxed, and enjoying ourselves.
Another huge benefit of savoring food is to start the digestive process as we chew our food. The saliva in our mouth contains digestive enzymes which are meant to mix with the food and start the digestive process. Gulping food prevents this natural and vital process from taking place. Our digestive systems were not meant to break down big chunks of gulped food, and have a hard time doing so. Gulping down chunks of food can actually result in choking, and people have actually died from it. Slowly chewing each bite of food until it is broken down into small easily digested pieces presents the food to your digestive system as it was intended to receive it, which greatly increases the absorption of nutrients and aids digestion. The slow and thorough chewing of food also allows the enzymes in your saliva to mix with and predigest the food, which also helps the process. Some nutrients are absorbed directly through the mouth in this process. When I chew a bite of grassfed steak into tiny shreds, I get a wonderful feeling of contentment and satisfaction, as my body absorbs some of the nutrients. Taking small breaks from eating to talk also helps the digestive process, as it gives time for our bodies to process the incoming food at a natural pace.
There is a third major benefit, one that will appeal to many. When you slowly and thoroughly chew and swallow your food, you are getting more nutrients, which means you are satisfied with less food, and will naturally eat less. The very process of thorough chewing takes time, and this also seems to reduce the appetite. The opposite is also true, as when you gulp down barely chewed food, you do not get the nutrients that are normally absorbed in the mouth, and the difficulty of breaking down the chunks means your body takes much longer to get the nutrients, which makes you want to overeat. In other words, savoring your food can help you lose weight.
The fourth major benefit is one most people never think of, but is important. Our bodies are not designed to gulp big chunks like a snake, but to digest thoroughly chewed food. If you gulp food, your teeth and jaws are not being used the way nature intended, which weakens not only the muscles, but the bone structure of your teeth and jaws. Thoroughly chewing food gives your jaw and mouth muscles the exercise they need, and this exercise helps make the bones in this area stronger as well.
The Tradition of Savoring Food
When enough food was available, many of our ancestors would enjoy meals served in many courses, eaten slowly. Dinners like this could easily take hours. In fact, eating long, slow dinners has been an honored tradition in relatively modern times, especially in France, Italy, and Spain, and many other countries. Very often the first course served would be a soup, usually made with rich broth, which is known to aid the digestion of more solid foods. Many cultures would have soup available throughout the entire meal, for the same purpose. In Western cultures, people were expected to be relaxed and friendly at the dinner table, avoiding controversial subjects, because it was known that peace and relaxation aided the digestive process. The order in which various foods were served was based on tradition and experience, and a whole evening could be spent eating such a meal. Our ancestors might not have understood exactly how our organs and natural functions digest food, but they certainly understood what aided digestion.
But What Can We Do in Modern Times?
The sad truth is that most of us are so busy that we just do not feel that we have the time to cook, let alone eat a long meal with distinct courses. Many people quickly gulp down factory food for most of their meals, never realizing what they are missing and how this hurts their bodies. No wonder drugs to deal with stomach and digestive problems sell so well. Even if you have real food, gulping it down is a real disadvantage.
I would like to say that I have plenty of time for each meal, but I do not always feel that way. So I have reached a compromise, which is to purchase the best real food, especially grassfed meat, that I can afford, carefully prepare it, and serve a nice variety of food at once, including broth. I will take the time to thoroughly chew each piece of food, especially meat, until it has been reduced to shreds. I will swallow it slowly, no gulping allowed. I must confess that this does make meals take longer, but the rewards are immense. And I must confess that sometimes I do not follow my own rules and eat too fast, especially when time is short.
But the more I take the time to savor my food, the better I like it.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
When It Comes to Meat, Just Eat Grassfed
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Cows grazing on grass, their natural food.
Sean Croxton, of the Underground Wellness Show, has a saying that I love—JERF—Just Eat Real Food. That sentence alone says the essence of what we need to know about food and healthy eating. I asked Sean if he minded my using an acronym so similar to his, and he graciously told me to go for it. Sean’s saying has inspired me to come up with my own acronym—JEG—Just Eat Grassfed, which contains the essence of what we need to know about eating meat. Here are a few examples of the wisdom of JEG.
Want to avoid residues of the artificial growth hormones that are common in factory meat? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to avoid ingesting antibiotic residue in your meat? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to avoid ingesting steroid residue used to make conventional cows grow faster? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to avoid getting a huge imbalance of omega-6 fatty acids in your meat? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to get a healthy dose of omega-3 fatty acids, in perfect proportion to omega-6 fatty acids? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to get a healthy dose of CLA, a valuable fat that reduces inflammation, aids weight loss, and enables the body to fight off many inflammatory diseases? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to avoid the risk of getting Mad Cow disease by eating meat? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to avoid eating meat from an animal fed huge amounts of GMO corn and GMO soy? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to avoid eating meat from an animal that was fattened on candy bars, chicken manure, rendered restaurant waste, plastic balls, candy wrappers, chicken parts, chicken feathers, and all kinds of similar garbage? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want a roast that has not shrunk to half its original size when it is done? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want a steak that does not have to be cooked at super-high heat? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to enjoy lamb that tastes of the pasture rather than the feedlot? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to enjoy bison that tastes like bison instead of factory beef? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to enjoy beef in a multitude of local flavors, instead of standard feedlot flavor? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to eat meat from an animal that has lived its life on pasture, and has never been in a feedlot? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to eat meat that tastes wonderful even when cooked with only a few ingredients? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want meat that never makes you feel stuffed or bloated, but makes you reel refreshed and renewed? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to eat a food that will nourish the natural functions of your body, giving strength, and helping your body recover from injury or illness? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to support the raising of animals who actually create good soil and farmland? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to eat the oldest food of humankind, the food our bodies know how to use and benefit from more than any other? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
Want to eat the tastiest, healthiest, most satisfying meat on the planet? JEG—Just Eat Grassfed.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
When it Comes to Food, “One Size Fits All†Fits Nobody
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: Jeffrey Beall
The recent confiscation of a four-year-old’s homemade lunch, which resulted in her being given chicken nuggets instead, has outraged people all over the United States. Many comments on the Internet have made it clear that this is not an isolated incident, but that many similar actions have occurred, not only in preschools, but in elementary schools as well.
The Federal government is attempting to dictate what constitutes a healthy meal, and what every child should eat. While the intent might be good, the execution is a disaster, as flawed standards are dictated, and these standards are required for every child, regardless of their individual needs. The basic human right of parents to select food for their children is completely ignored.
The inevitable result is that the children are much worse off, because their needs as individuals are ignored.
Federal Standards Ignore Quality and Individuality
The federal government has decided that all children in preschools, even home preschools, will have a lunch that consists of the following:
- One serving of meat or meat substitute;
- One serving of low-fat or nonfat milk;
- One serving of grain;
- Two servings of fruit and/or vegetables;
- Each serving size is set at three ounces.
No mention is made in the standards as to the quality of the food. The government standards treat all food as being of equal quality, and demand the same lunch for every child. The truth is that every kind of food varies greatly in quality, from heritage organic foods raised on small sustainable farms (the best), to factory foods raised on huge factory farms that are lacking in many vital nutrients, and are full of pesticides and other chemicals, often containing GMOs and soy protein isolate (the worst).
The government programs often mandate that the cheapest source of the required foods be selected, which guarantees that the worst quality food is selected for government-financed food programs. Yet the government insists that each lunch must contain the required servings, and ignores the issue of quality.
Lunch Inspections Lead to Worse Nutrition, Not Better
The incident that sparked so much outrage deserves a close look. A four-year-old preschool student brought a lunch prepared for her by her family. The lunch included a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, a bag of potato chips, and some apple juice. Her lunch was INSPECTED, by some kind of official. This resulted in the child being told that the lunch her family packed was not good enough. She was told to put the home lunch away and to get a cafeteria lunch. The only portion of the cafeteria lunch that the child actually ate was three chicken nuggets. The nuggets, since they had to be the cheapest available, almost certainly were made from slaughterhouse scraps treated with ammonia, the infamous pink slime. Soy protein isolate was almost certainly added to this mix, along with artificial flavor enhancers and who knows what else.
Does anyone seriously contend that this child got a better lunch than the one her family packed for her?
By trying to force the child to eat the one-size-fits-all government lunch, the government deprived her of a good lunch and caused her to have the equivalent of no lunch at all.
In fact, government interference resulted in her having a truly inadequate lunch, rather than the much more nutritious lunch packed for her by her family, consisting of foods that her family knew she would eat.
The incident was later blamed on “teacher error,†by a school district administrator. Yet even this administrator said the child should have been given a container of milk. This must have been the cheapest possible low-fat or non-fat factory milk. What if the child was allergic to milk, as so many children are? What if her parents did not want her to drink that type of milk? What if milk gave her indigestion? What if they wanted her to drink only high-quality organic milk? What if they did not want her to drink milk at all? What if they knew the child would not drink milk, but would eat the cheese they put in her sandwich?
The point is, the government does not know any of these details, and does not appear to care. To them, one-size-fits-all, every child gets a carton of factory milk, whether they or their parents want it, or not. Whether it is good for the child, or not. That is exactly why the government should not be making food choices for children, why parents know best, and why one size fits NOBODY, when it comes to food.
Here is a link to a great post by my friend, Kimberly Hartke: Keep America Safe for Brown Bags!
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Aging in Reverse with Real Food—Then and Now
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo  credit: 4johnny5  The redwood tree gets stronger and more beautiful with age.
My wife gave me a wonderful gift for Christmas. A DVD showing photos of our son when he was a baby and a small child. He looked great, and it was amazing to see how tiny he used to be. But there was someone else in some of the photos. Someone who did not look great. Someone who looked sick and strained, even at the happy times when these photos were taken. That someone used to be me.
These photos were taken from twelve to seventeen years ago. The man in those photos looks so much older, weaker, and sicker than I look today. The difference is so remarkable that I think it is worth describing. It is a living testimony of the difference that switching to real food can make.
The Skin—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos has pale, pasty skin, quite blotchy, with a very unhealthy pallor. I remember that it was often itchy and irritated, with small growths that would come and go.
Now. My skin is smooth, supple, and a healthy color. It is hardly ever itchy and never irritated. The growths are gone.
The Mouth and Breathing—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos always had his mouth wide open, and often appeared to be gasping for breath. I remember that I was on many medications for asthma and the constant respiratory infections I was afflicted with. I saw doctors frequently and occasionally had to be rushed to the emergency room when I got an asthma attack that the medication could not control. I remember that I could never get enough air, and could only breathe through my mouth. Often breathing and gasping for air would end with a nasty, painful hacking cough.
Now. My mouth is shut unless I am talking, or eating, or laughing. I breathe easily through my nose at all times. I hardly ever notice my breathing, which is effortless. I do not cough, or gasp, or choke. I am on no medications (over-the-counter or otherwise), and have not seen a doctor for at least nine years.
The Hair—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos had dull, damp, thin, coarse hair that looked like it was about to fall out. I remember that I was losing hair, with ever growing bald spots.
Now. My hair is lighter in color, with a fair mixture of gray. But it is very thick, and gleams. It is soft and full-bodied. It never falls out. In fact, the bald spots seem to be shrinking a bit.
The Eyes—Then and Now
Then. The man in the pictures often had a look of pain in his eyes, even at the happy times when those pictures were taken. I remember that I was almost always in pain, with all kinds of discomforts, aches, and soreness—all over my body.
Now. My eyes are calm and serene. Many people tell me I have “kind eyes.†I usually feel good, with no pain or discomfort of any kind. When there is an occasional bump or ache, it goes away very quickly.
Posture—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos is always slumped, whether sitting or standing. I remember that it seemed hard to hold my head up, to sit or stand straight, as I was so tired all the time. It was so hard just to get out of bed in the morning.
Now. I sit and stand straight naturally, without even thinking about it. I am full of energy most of the day and much of the night. I am eager for the day, which is always full of good things. I leap out of bed without effort.
What Did I Do Differently?
I switched completely to real food, in particular, grassfed meat, and stopped eating processed and factory foods. I followed the dietary guidelines of the Weston A. Price Foundation, modifying them a bit to eat only meats that are grassfed and grass-finished. It took years, but all my many illnesses healed, and I have had no need for drugs or doctors.
This is what real food can do.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, and Real Food Wednesday blog carnivals.
CLA—Another Great Reason to Eat Grassfed Meat, the Fatter the Better
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
This picanha (New York tip) roast has a great fat cap, full of CLA.
Where do you find the nutrients our bodies need in these days of industrial agriculture? We are given nutritional advice by the powers that be which is motivated by profit only. Food is not what it used to be. Hybrid varieties are developed for shelf life, not nutrition. Meat animals are fed unnatural feeds (as well as growth hormones and antibiotics) to make them fatten faster and to increase profits. Factory food has made it hard to get essential nutrients. Soils depleted and contaminated by pesticides and artificial fertilizers compound the problem.
My solution is to eat the pure foods of our ancestors, unmodified, raised and cooked in traditional ways. Eating this way has brought me back to good health and greatly increased my enjoyment of food, because real food tastes so much better. Many other people have found the same solution. Every now and them, research comes through that supports the real food way of eating, and science confirms what instinct and feeling good has already told us—real food is good for us, and gives our bodies what is needed to support the natural functions that keep us healthy and strong.
However, many people have turned to using nutritional supplements as a solution. These supplements vary widely in their content and purity. Let me put it this way. What if a substance was developed that would give the following benefits?
- Increases the metabolic rate
- Increases muscle mass while reducing fat
- Decreases abdominal fat
- Strengthens the immune system
- Reduces the risk of cancer
- Reduces the risk of heart disease
- Reduces the risk of diabetes
- Reduces the risk of hyperthyroidism
- Normalizes thyroid function
Would you want to take a supplement that contained this very beneficial substance?
Well, you do not have to. Various studies have shown that all of the benefits listed above come from eating food containing Conjugated Linoleic Acid, more commonly known as CLA.
The very best source of CLA is grassfed meat and fat, which are rich in this wonderful nutrient. CLA is a very useful nutrient that is used by the natural functions of our bodies to create all of the benefits listed above.
CLA is found in its most digestible form in the fat and marbling of grassfed animals. This is yet another reason to eat the fat on and in grassfed meat, and to get well-marbled grassfed meat, rather than the leaner grassfed meat.
The CLA from grassfed animals is not the same as CLA from plant sources, or in supplement pills based on plant sources. CLA is much more abundant in the meat of grassfed and grass-finished animals than in feedlot meat. Almost all meat animals are started on grass, but are finished in a feedlot, eating foods that are not natural for their species, such as processed grains, GMO-corn and GMO-soy, and a host of other things that were never part of the natural diet of any herbivore, often including such substances as chicken manure, cement dust, restaurant plate waste, and even plastic balls. Studies have shown that grassfed meat contains three to five times more CLA than factory meat. The fattier the grassfed meat, the more CLA it contains. (Source What Is CLA?)
Not only does grassfed meat and fat contain 300% — 500% the CLA of feedlot meat, the grassfed meat also contains many substances that promote the absorption of the CLA. It is not known whether factory meat contains these substances, or in what amount. It has been shown that feedlots can cause the amount of nutrients in the meat to greatly decline. For example, the amount of omega-3 fatty acids in meat almost vanishes by a typical stay in the feedlot. (Source Health Benefits of Grass-Fed Products)
While CLA can also be found in dairy products from grassfed and grass-finished cows, I believe that grassfed meat and fat are the richest source, and the easiest to absorb.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
« Previous Page — Next Page »