Photos of recipes from the new book Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Photos of recipes from the cookbook Tender Grassfed Meat
Traditional Sea Salt Is a Vital Nutrient
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Natural Celtic Sea Salt on the left and factory salt on the right.
Salt is one of the most vital human nutrients, and our ancestors knew this. Yet, the consumption of salt is now under attack.
The government is trying to reduce the amount of salt people consume, claiming that it will improve health and prevent strokes and heart disease.
Part of the Paleo movement is opposed to adding salt to food, believing that our Paleolithic ancestors did not add salt to food.
Many people believe salt is very harmful.
Because I advise against pre-salting grassfed meat in my cookbooks, some people assume I do this to reduce salt consumption.
All of these beliefs are mistaken. If we do not consume enough salt, our bodies do not function properly. Ultimately, if people do not get enough salt, they die.
The Two Types of Salt
While all salt originally came from the sea, it is available in different forms. It must be understood that two general types of salt are available. They are not the same.
The most common salt is factory salt, which is composed of salt that has been stripped of its minerals, and has had chemicals and flavoring agents (often including sugar) added. This salt is a pure white color. It is ground very fine and flows easily out of a salt shaker, almost never caking. This kind of salt did not exist before the twentieth century. This is by far the most common form of salt in the United States, used extensively in processed foods and by most people, who are usually unaware that the minerals have been stripped out, or that chemicals and even sugar have been added to the refined salt.
Then there is pure, unmodified salt from nature, often harvested from the sea, though it is also found in solid deposits on land. This salt, consisting of nothing but sea salt and minerals, is the traditional salt that humanity has used since the beginning. This traditional salt is the only salt I use or recommend.
Humans Have Added Salt to Food Since the Earliest Times
The belief that early humans did not add salt to food is mistaken. I remember reading about how the early colonists of the United States would choose a site for settlement. They would always have someone, usually a skilled hunter or scout, follow some of the wild animal trails in the area. They were looking for one thing they absolutely had to have, or they would not settle in that area—salt. Wild animals also need salt, and they would find salt deposits, usually called “salt licks.” The animals would find salt deposits, and get their salt by licking them. There is every reason to believe that early hunters and gatherers did the same, and found salt by following wild animals or their trails.
All the old writings on cooking, including those going back thousands of years, describe the addition of salt to food. Salt was greatly valued in ancient times, being more expensive than gold in some areas.
The reason is quite simple. Our ancestors knew that they needed to add salt to their food to live and thrive.
Our ancestors used salt to preserve and ferment foods, and created many artisanal foods based on the use of salt, including sauerkraut, ham, cheese, jerky, sausage, and countless others. Our ancestors ate far more salt than we do.
Why We Need Salt
Salt is one of the most crucial nutrients we need. Our bodies use salt for many body functions, including digestion, regulating blood pressure, creating and regulating hormones, proper adrenal function, proper functioning of the nervous system, and proper functioning of the brain, among others. (See The Salt of the Earth.)
If we do not get enough salt, these vital body functions are adversely effected. If you were to put anyone on a totally salt-free diet, they would eventually die, after much suffering.
We often crave salt, because our bodies so desperately need it. If you crave salt, it may be that you are not getting enough.
Is Salt Good? Or Bad? Or Both?
There is a belief in mainstream medicine, supported by some research, that associates salt intake with increased risk of heart disease or strokes. There is other research that disputes this theory, and shows great harm occurring from salt restriction. (See The Salt of the Earth.)
In the past when heart disease and strokes were very rare, traditional peoples and most humans consumed much more salt than people do today. And we know that the Japanese, who have the highest average salt consumption on earth, have among the highest average lifespans on earth.
So how do we know what is true, when the research is conflicting and history contradicts some of the research?
My own personal, anecdotal, common sense belief is this:
The difference may be in the type of salt consumed. Prior to the twentieth century, all the salt consumed on earth was traditional salt, without chemical additives, with the natural minerals left in. I believe that this kind of salt is not harmful, and is vital to our health. The studies done that support the idea that salt increases the risk of stroke and heart disease were all done at a time when factory salt was used. These studies are only relevant to the use of factory salt. To the extent that studies have found harm from salt consumption, it may be because of the chemicals, or the fact the minerals are stripped out, or both. So my own personal belief is that it is good, and important, to eat all the traditional salt I want, without fear. At the same time, I avoid factory salt as much as possible.
Please be aware that I am not a doctor, or a scientist, and I am not legally qualified to give any kind of health advice to anyone, so I am not giving advice—just stating my personal belief and what I do.
I do feel that the salt restriction now being pushed by the government, part of the medical profession, and the food industry is ill-advised, and I base this belief on history, and the excellent research done in this article, which I highly recommend. (See The Salt of the Earth.)
Salt and Grassfed Meat
I advise against salting most grassfed meat too far in advance. This advice is given solely because I have found that long pre-salting tends to toughen some grassfed meats. I do use plenty of traditional salt at the table, and will often salt meat just before it is cooked. The right amount of salt really brings out the flavor of food, and is absolutely vital to the taste, nutrition, and flavor of homemade broth.
I do enjoy the salt of the earth, and I do not fear it.
Related Post
Natural Salt vs. Industrial Salt
This post is part of Fat Tuesday, Monday Mania, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Real Food—The Best Way to Improve Schools
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Pastured butter is an easy way to get vital nutrients from animal fats and it's delicious!
The poor academic performance of so many American schoolchildren is a matter of great concern. Over the years, more and more money has been spent on schools. Many programs to enhance education have been introduced. Class sizes have been substantially reduced. Many teachers have aides to help them teach. A host of administrators, counselors, special educators, and other specialists have been hired. Despite recent cutbacks, the amount of real money per child spent today is much higher than it was during my schooldays, yet the academic results are far worse.
It is clear that throwing more money to the schools will not fix the problem. We have been doing that for many years, and performance continues to decline. Money for education is important, but it is not enough.
Academic performance continues to decline, and the U.S. is far behind many other countries, nearly all of whom spend far less money per child on education. Why? Whose fault is it? The teachers? The schoolchildren? The curriculum? The parents? My answer would be—none of the above.
I am convinced that the real cause of poor academic performance is the Standard American Diet, known as SAD. The fact of the matter is that schoolchildren need proper nutrition for their brains to develop and function well, and many of them are not getting it.
SAD makes some kids appear to have learning disabilities. But the problem could be solved by feeding children the foods they need for their brains to develop and function well. The food is animal fat. The most demonized, yet the most desperately needed food of all
The Brain Needs Traditional Animal Fats to Develop and Function Well
Traditional animal fats such as butter, lard, beef tallow, chicken skins, fatty fish, and others are the best source of omega-3 fatty acids. Omega-3 fatty acids are necessary for the brain to develop and function properly. It is that simple. Cholesterol is desperately needed by the brain to function properly. In fact, mother’s milk is higher in cholesterol than any other food. Nature recognizes the need of children for cholesterol, and so should we.
Yes, cholesterol and animal fats have been demonized through massive marketing campaigns. The demonization is just not true. These vital nutrients promote good health, and are vital for survival. See The Skinny on Fats.
The current emphasis on avoiding animal fats and cholesterol deprives children of the nutrients they need for their brains to develop properly and function. How can they possibly learn and do well in school when they are starved of the nutrients they need for their brains to function properly? How can they be expected to behave well when their brains are deprived of the very nutrients needed to keep them in balance? The effect of nutrition on the brain and learning is described by Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, in this excellent article: Nutrition and Mental Development.
Vegetable oils and factory fats lack cholesterol and lack omega-3 fatty acids. These oils and fats have a huge imbalance of omega-6 fatty acids that can cause inflammation and have other harmful effects. When you substitute vegetable oils and factory fats for animal fats, the children do not get the vital nutrients they need for their brains. It is that simple.
This problem is especially bad for children who depend on the government for food. The government provides free formula to two million infants. Yet the only formula allowed in the program is made from GMO soy, which contains a number of toxins and none of the vital fatty acids needed by developing brains.
The revised school lunch program only makes things worse, being virtually fat-free and severely restricting protein. It is a prescription for malnutrition and even poorer academic performance.
Real Food Has Improved Academic Performance in the Past
It stands to reason that giving the children the very nutrients they are deprived of, the animal fats that are rich in omega-3 fatty acids and cholesterol are exactly what are needed. This has been done before, with great results.
Last week, I wrote of the school lunch program devised by Dr. Weston A. Price, and the wonderful results it had for some poor children. These children ate an early form of SAD—factory bread and pancakes served with lots of sugar and syrup. They had terrible teeth, poor health, and did terribly in school. Some had severe behavior problems. Dr. Price fed them a lunch rich in animal fat and meat, including plenty of bone marrow and butter. Not only did their dental decay stop cold, but two of their teachers sought Dr. Price out to ask why a particular child, who had been the worst student in the class, had now become the best student.
All that Dr. Price changed was the food they ate at one meal. The schools, parents, teachers, and children did not change. Good nutrition alone was all they needed to go from being complete academic failures to being the best student in the class.
This is only one example. There have been many description of how feeding schoolchildren a diet rich in traditional foods during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries greatly improved their academic performance and behavior in school. Many of the educators who worked with poor children made sure they arranged a good lunch for them as a vital pre-condition for their being able to learn. It should be mentioned that the healthy peoples studied by Dr. Price, all of whom had diets rich in animal fats and cholesterol, had no mental illness, and no problems in educating their children, who had to learn skills that were far harder to use and master than the easy-to-do tasks typical of modern life.
A Solution Worth Trying
The solution I suggest to fix U.S. schools is new, yet very old. Have an affordable school lunch program that will present students with foods rich in traditional fats such as butter, whole eggs, full-fat hormone-free milk, rich meats, bone marrow, and other animal foods that nourish the brain. Give them generous servings, and let them have seconds if they want to. Ban all GMOs, vegetable oils, and factory foods from the program. Give them real food only. If we do this, we can expect the same kind of vast improvement that was noted by Dr. Price, so many years ago. Yes, it will cost money, yet I submit that there is no better area to spend the money on. With proper nourishment, there is every reason to expect that children will be able to focus on school and learn. It has been done, time and time again. Clearly, the current system is not working. Real food is worth a try, and will have other benefits, such as good health and better behavior. It worked for Dr. Price and others, and it can work now.
Related Post
The Best School Lunch Ever — Designed by Dr. Price
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
The Best School Lunch Ever—Designed by Dr. Price
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
A rich meaty stew is good traditional eating, loaded with nutrition.
The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 is misnamed. This act mandated the recent unpopular changes to the U.S. school lunch program. The act imposes an almost vegan diet on all children in the program. The lunches are composed almost entirely of plant-based foods, with fat and protein being severely limited. Many parents and students have complained that the students are hungry and unsatisfied. Many, if not most, of the students throw out the factory fruits and vegetables that they are placed on their trays in the lunch line. Many have trouble paying attention to their classes, because they are hungry. Rather than fighting hunger, this program is causing hunger.
But it is possible to design a school lunch program that will provide excellent nourishment to children, improving their health, and even their school work. Such a program was designed by Dr. Weston A. Price, many years ago.
If his program was followed today, the health and performance of our schoolchildren would both increase greatly.
The Problem to Be Solved—Poor Children with Severe Tooth Decay
Dr. Price had decided to study the nutrition of children in a poor area. The depression had hit this area very hard, and the quality of food that families could afford was very low, The diet consisted of coffee, and grain-based foods such as white bread, pancakes, doughnuts, all heavily sweetened with sugar and syrup, along with vegetable oils. The children in this area were suffering from severe dental decay, showed many markers of poor health, and did poorly in their schoolwork.
The Solution—A Great Nutritious Lunch
Dr. Price designed a study to see if the health and schoolwork of these children would improve if given a diet based on his nutritional studies.
Dr. Price arranged for a number of these children to receive a lunch at a local mission, for six days a week. Detailed records were kept of the children’s height, weight, and dental condition, as well as their grades in school. The food they ate at home was unchanged. The only difference is that the children were given a meal designed by Dr. Price.
The menu is as follows:
Meat and Bone Marrow Stew
The main item on the menu was a very rich stew, made up mostly of bone marrow and fine cuts of meat. The meat was broiled very quickly to retain the nutrients, finely chopped, then added to the rest of the stew which was described as a bone marrow and meat broth. The stew also included various finely chopped vegetables, always including carrots. The recipe for my version of this stew is in Tender Grassfed Meat. A full pint of this stew was given to the children on most days. On a few days, for variety, organ meats or a rich fish chowder were substituted for the stew. The meat and bone marrow the children were given were from pastured animals, as factory meat did not exist at that time.
Whole Milk
The children were given two glasses of full-fat milk, which was almost certainly raw.
Rolls Made from Freshly Ground Whole Wheat, Served with Plenty of Rich Butter
The wheat for these rolls was made from freshly ground whole wheat, and the rolls were spread thickly with rich butter. The wheat was ground just before the rolls were made.
Cooked Fruit
The children also received a helping of what was described as cooked fruit, with very little sweetening.
Supplement
The children were given one teaspoon of a mixture that was made from high vitamin cod liver oil, and high vitamin butter oil.
It is interesting that no raw fruits or vegetables were served. Most of the calories in this meal were from animal fat, and the meal was largely based on fatty animal foods.
This is the exact opposite of the almost vegan diet mandated by the U.S. school lunch program, which is based almost totally on fruits and vegetables, with almost no fat or protein allowed. Many of the fruits and vegetables served in the school lunch program are raw, and calories are severely restricted.
Many of the children who are on the current school lunch program stuff themselves with candy, chips, and fast food as soon as they get out of school, because they are hungry. Student athletes have reported passing out during practice, because they are not getting enough food.
So, which diet was better for children?
The Results
Regular saliva testing was done on the children in Dr. Price’s program. Within six weeks, the children had changed from a condition of rampant and severe dental decay to a condition where no further dental decay was indicated. Every child who was on this program had their dental decay stop and be completely controlled. Two of the children’s teachers came to Dr. Price to ask him what he had done. Each teacher spoke of a different particular child who had been one of the worst students in the class, but was now the best student. The behavior of the children in school also improved greatly. Dr. Price mentioned that there had been other such incidents and other improvements, but he did not describe them in detail in his book Nutrition and Physical Degeneration.
If the government really wants to improve the health of children in the school lunch program, I suggest they adopt the program devised by Doctor Price.
Related Post
Real Food—The Best Way to Improve Schools
When it Comes to Food, “One Size Fits All”—Fits Nobody
This post is part of Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
The Lonely Truth, Real Food, Second-Hand Smoke, and Hope
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: Aaron Escobar
Sometimes, knowing the truth can make you feel lonely and isolated.
Almost everyone who has switched to real food and grassfed meat knows what I mean. Nearly everyone you know eats factory food, and considers it normal. Most people accept what the media, the medical profession, the food industry, and conventional belief tell them about food. And when you reject factory food, you are often alone. People, especially family members, can get very angry at you, especially at social occasions when you will not eat what they eat. Or when you will not let your children eat the candy and other factory foods they want to give them. At the same time, they will be horrified that you actually eat saturated animal fat, plenty of real red meat, and butter. I have lost count of the times that friends and family members have claimed that my real food diet will cause all kinds of fatal diseases. Some of your friends and family may even consider you crazy.
In fact, the very fact of trying to eat only clean, wholesome food has been described as a mental disorder. See Eating Healthy Is a Mental Disorder? Nonsense.
It takes real courage to step out of the herd, to think for yourself, to learn and adopt a better way of eating. And it has consequences, both social and personal.
But take heart. Eventually, the truth that most people now reject will become accepted. The time will come when the truth about real food and grassfed meat will overcome the lies and biased studies that keep people eating factory food. But only if enough people stand strong and keep to their principles.
This is not a fantasy. I have had an experience where my “crazy†belief eventually became the conventional belief.
The Truth about Second-Hand Smoke
Second-hand smoke is tobacco smoke that you do not inhale from a cigarette or cigar, but inhale from the air. As a matter of common sense, tobacco smoke is tobacco smoke, and breathing it into your lungs will do harm, whether you get it from the air, or from a cigarette.
But many years ago, the tobacco companies funded studies that claimed that second-hand smoke was completely harmless. And these studies were accepted as absolute fact, by almost everybody.
When I was eleven years old, almost everybody believed that second-hand smoke was harmless because of the studies. But second-hand smoke made me choke and wheeze, I was more sensitive to it than most people. When I was exposed to it, and breathed it in, I hacked and coughed and could not control it. My parents were concerned the first time this happened, and took me to a doctor. The doctor told them that second-hand smoke could not possibly harm me, and that I was “faking it.†If only that was true. My parents believed anything any doctor told them. They got very angry at me, and threatened severe punishments if I did not “stop it.â€
Later that week, my father’s second-cousin, who had a PhD in something, visited our home. He started smoking, filling the air with second-hand smoke. I tried hard not to choke and cough, but my efforts failed. The PhD pronounced that my cough did not sound “real.†I said the smoke was choking me. He stated that studies proved conclusively that second-hand smoke had no effect on anyone, and that I must be faking it. He told my parents that I should see a psychiatrist. As far as my parents were concerned, that was the final word. After all, he was a PhD. They refused to listen to me, and I was severely punished.
Seeing the psychiatrist made things even worse. He insisted that the studies proved that second-hand smoke could not affect anyone, and that I was faking it for other reasons. Since I knew I was not faking anything, and that the smoke made me choke, I would not “confess,†which angered him. He finally told my parents that I would not cooperate and was defying him. Fortunately, psychotropic drugs were not routinely given to children at that time. However, my parents inflicted more punishments on me, but no amount of punishment could stop me from choking and coughing when I breathed second-hand smoke. My parents lost all respect for me, and treated me with contempt. We became adversaries, and I was very unhappy. I thought something was wrong with me, that I was a bad person. It terrified me to think that I might be faking it without even knowing it. At the age of eleven, I began to believe that I was crazy, to some degree. My schoolwork and social life suffered greatly, because I was not the same child.
When I became a young adult and made my own decisions, it suddenly hit me that I was the only one who could possibly know how tobacco smoke affected me. No matter what those studies found, they did not study me. I decided that what I experienced had to be real–for me.
I avoided tobacco smoke whenever I could, and breathed as shallowly as possible when I could not. On social occasions, I politely asked people not to smoke, telling them I was sensitive to it. Many people would agree to what I asked, and many would not. I lost a lot of potential friendships that way, but I stayed true to what I had learned from my own experience.
Over the years, many people who suffered from second-hand smoke came to realize that the studies were wrong. They organized and made their voices heard. They got the attention of some scientists, who began to reinvestigate the issue. These people held their ground and insisted that what they had was not a mental illness, but actual harm from second-hand smoke.
Many years later, the fact that second-hand smoke is almost as harmful as smoking was proved without doubt. All the biased studies paid for by the tobacco companies were wrong. Laws that restricted smoking were passed to protect people from this harmful second-hand smoke. I had been right, all along, even when I was an eleven-year-old boy.
The truth about second-hand smoke finally broke through the deception and biased studies, and became accepted.
The same will happen to the truth about real food. The sooner the better.
The Truth about Real Food Will Come Out
If you try to eat only real food, and to protect your family and children from factory food, you may feel alone. But you are not alone. There are more of us every day, and the movement is growing. Keep going with what you know is true, and do not be discouraged by the lack of knowledge of those around you. They have received a huge amount of propaganda designed to keep them eating factory food, and they get more of this propaganda every day.
And something wonderful is happening. The biotech industry financed a number of studies claiming that GMOs were harmless and the same as other food. This is the reason behind the fact that GMOs are not labeled. Yet an initiative that will require the labeling of foods containing GMOs is on the California ballot this November, and is still winning in the polls despite the massive marketing campaign against it that has been financed by Monsanto and other giants in the biotech and food industries. You can find out more about how to support Proposition 37 at: Yes on Prop 37.
I encourage you to politely and calmly continue to do your reasonable best to eat real food, and reject factory food, when possible. Eating real food is much better, and the fact that most people do not know this does not change the truth about food.
The more people who know about real food and spread the word, the sooner our truth will spread. And the day will come when everyone knows the truth about food. And that will be a great day for everyone except a few greedy corporations.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Grassfed Cattle, Not Junk-Fed Cattle
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Grass is the natural feed for cattle and grassfed beef is delicious!
The prices of corn and soy have skyrocketed recently. Have most ranchers returned to grass? After all, the great advantage of corn and soy as feed was that they were cheap. Sadly, the answer is no. The amount of corn and soy fed to cattle, which is almost always GMO, has declined greatly because of the high price. But it is being replaced by ingredients that are even less appealing.
Ingredients such as expired candy, cookies, marshmallows, gummy worms, fruit loops, and a host of other industrial foods that are full of sugar and chemicals, often including high fructose corn syrup, and almost always containing GMOs. Another line of the new feed consists of the plant residue from distilling corn for ethanol, and the leftovers from milling flour, along with cottonseed hulls.
I would suggest that they just return to grass.
Why Is Garbage Being Used to Feed Cattle?
Because this garbage is much cheaper than corn and soy. What is actually happening is that food products that have been thrown out are being gathered and sold as animal feed. It is fair to call these things garbage, because they were actually thrown away, as garbage.
The justification behind doing this is the claim that you can take this garbage and turn it into food by feeding it to cows. In fact, farmers who do this are being commended for their “creativity.†Another word comes to mind, but I am not going to use it here. And garbage is cheap, though the price is going up as demand increases.
The proponents of feeding this garbage to cattle claim that ruminants, designed to eat grass, can turn this garbage into food just by eating it. No mention is made of what eating this stuff does to cattle, or what it does to the content of the meat. And as far as I know, no one has studied the effect of eating meat from garbage-fed cattle on people. Nor has anyone done an impartial study on the effects that eating this garbage would have on the nutritional content of the meat. The FDA and USDA allow this practice, so it must be safe. But it certainly is not desirable, at least not to those of us who want to eat meat from cattle that are eating their natural diet.
After all, the old saying, “You are what you eat,†is just as true for cattle just as it is for humans.
The Return of Swill to Cattle Feed
Herds of cattle used to be raised near distilleries in many cities in the nineteenth century. The cattle were fed the grain mash left over from distilling the grains into whiskey. This garbage had little or no nutritional value, and the cows whose diet consisted entirely of this slop were weak and sick. The milk from cattle fed this swill was bluish in color, and so thin that flour and chalk were added to it to make it resemble healthy milk. But this milk was not healthy, and huge numbers of children died from drinking it. In fact, pasteurization was developed to deal with this problem. Eventually, these kinds of dairies were banned.
Now, the mash left over from making ethanol is being sold as cattle feed.
No doubt the cows that are fed this stuff are fed many other things as well, rather than having a diet that is 100 percent swill, as was done in the nineteenth century. And I just cannot believe that any decent cattleman would sell bluish milk from a sick cow, in this day and age. And we are protected by the FDA and the USDA. So I am not saying the milk and meat from animals fed this stuff is unsafe. But it appears almost certain that the nutritional quality of the meat and milk from such animals would not be ideal.
And since the mash is made from GMO corn, the feed will contain GMOs. But that is nothing new, as almost all the corn and soy previously fed to factory cattle are GMO.
Agricultural and Industrial Waste Is Not the Natural Food of Cattle
In addition to expired candy, factory food, and ethanol mash, many other things are now being fed to cattle in place of soy and corn. These include cottonseed hulls, the waste leftover from making flour at mills, waste products from making rice and potatoes, and probably a lot of other things that used to be thrown out. The cottonseed hulls are particularly unappealing to me, because most cotton is GMO and has been heavily sprayed with pesticides. But the bottom line is that none of these things are the natural food of cattle.
Green, living grass is the natural food of cattle. Dried grass, often known as hay, is also a good food for cattle. The meat of cattle that are grassfed and grass-finished is much more nutritious than meat from cattle fattened on grains in a feedlot, as seen in this informative article at EatWild.com, Health Benefits of Grass-fed Products.
Surely grassfed meat is also much more nutritious than the meat of garbage-fed cattle.
And grassfed meat is much tastier than the grain-finished variety, when properly cooked, which is why I wrote Tender Grassfed Meat: Traditional Ways to Cook Healthy Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue: Traditional, Primal and Paleo.
This is yet another reason why I will continue to only eat grassfed and grass-finished meat from a producer I know and trust.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Nine Ways to Enjoy Butter without Grains
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Adding grass fed butter to organic Earl Grey tea makes it more delicious and nutritious.
Most people seem to think that butter can only be eaten with bread or some other grain. Many people who cannot tolerate grains do without butter. This is a shame, because real pastured butter from grassfed cattle is one of the very healthiest foods we can eat, loaded with many nutrients that are hard to find elsewhere. Our ancestors realized the worth of this sacred food, and developed many ways to eat it.
Here are nine of my favorite ways to use butter without grains:
With Grassfed Beefsteak
This is one of the truly simple and magnificent combinations of flavor. It is best to have the butter at room temperature. Just before serving the steaks, place several thin slices of butter on the plate, and quickly cover them with the hot steak. The butter will melt, and mingle with the meat juices to make one of the easiest and most delicious sauces you will ever enjoy. Dipping each piece of meat in the butter just before eating is so delicious.
Alternatively, you can place the butter on top of the steak, but that will not melt as efficiently. Or, you can place the steak on the sliced butter and put some more thinly sliced butter on top of the steak. Delicious and nutritious.
With Roasting Meat
I have read literally thousands of old recipes for roasting grassfed meats. A huge number of them advise placing butter on the meat before roasting. It is utterly traditional. This technique is especially good for these fat phobic times, when butchers usually trim all of the fat off roasts. It is so simple to use. Just cover the top of the roast with butter. The butter will add wonderful flavor and nutrition to the roast.
With Hot Vegetables
One of the oldest and most delicious ways to use butter is to put it over steaming hot vegetables. This will greatly increase the taste and nutrition of any hot green vegetable, even making steamed vegetables palatable. Just put some thinly sliced butter over the vegetables just before eating them.
With Roast Sweet Potatoes
Sweet potatoes have enjoyed new popularity recently, and are full of nutrients. I like to roast sweet potatoes in their skins until they are very soft, slit them open, and stuff slices of butter into the sweet potato. I will mash the butter into the potato with a fork. When it melts, it is utterly delicious. And you get the vital nutrients of butter as well.
With Hot Coffee
Many people put cream in their coffee, but butter is even better. It works best with room temperature butter and hot coffee. Stir the butter into the coffee with a spoon, and drink while hot. Start with a small amount, and increase to your taste. It adds a wonderful buttery richness to the coffee. This will also work with coffee substitutes. Different but delicious.
With Hot Soup
Many traditional recipes call for adding butter to soups just before serving. This is especially good with soups that are based on cream or milk, like a traditional Boston clam chowder, but can be used with most western soups. The trick is to make sure the soup is hot, and to stir the butter in with a spoon. The butter adds a wonderful richness and its own unique nutrition.
With Hot Tea
Adding butter to hot tea sounds strange, but is an old tradition in Tibet. Tibetan butter tea is sipped at all hours of the day, being used to help withstand the cold, nourish the body, and prevent dehydration at Tibet’s high altitude. The Tibetans use yak milk and yak butter, which are richer and more pungent than cow’s milk and cow’s butter. Tibetan tea is complicated to make, but it is easy enough to slip some butter into the very hot tea of your choice. Forceful stirring with a spoon is advised, to mix the butter into the hot liquid, but the tea suddenly becomes a nutritional powerhouse, with a smooth rich flavor. You will have to experiment with the amounts you like, as this is different.
With Sauces
This is one of the most European ways of enjoying butter. Many of the classic sauces are difficult and time consuming to make, but there is an easy alternative. If you are making any dish with a sauce, add some butter to the simmering sauce. The butter will add richness and great flavor to the sauce, along with some unique nutrients.
With Eggs
Fried eggs are out of this world if you drizzle some hot melted butter over them just before serving. You can also add thinly sliced butter to hot scrambled eggs, or an omelet. The freshly melted butter will add a new dimension of taste and even more nutrients!
It is often possible to buy excellent pastured butter from a local farmer. If you cannot find local pastured butter, Kerrygold has made pastured butter widely available. I only buy the unsalted version, as it has a higher butterfat content, which is more traditional.
As you can see, there are so many ways to add butter to your diet. Traditional peoples who ate butter used it in many other ways as well. I never tire of the wonderful taste of pastured butter, and my body never tires of the wonderful nutrition that butter brings.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Monday Mania, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Good Meat Comes from Nature, Not a Test Tube
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: Håkan Dahlström
Stem cells from cows are cultivated in a vat full of chemicals, including serum from animal fetuses. They multiply up to 30 times, and grow into something resembling muscle fiber. They twitch spasmodically in the vat. They are attached to strips of Velcro to stretch them out. They will be complete when they reach a size 3 centimeters long, by 1.5 centimeters wide, half a millimeter thick.
What is their purpose?
To replace meat.
The Frankenburger
The scientists who have created these twitching fibers have predicted that they would have a “hamburger†ready for cooking this coming October. 3,000 of these “muscle†fibers will be combined with 200 similarly created “fat†fibers to create a “hamburger.†Sound more like a frankenburger to me.
No information has been provided as to whether this frankenmeat will continue to twitch until bashed into submission with a meat hammer, or whether it will be “killed†in some other manner before cooking. Or perhaps it is meant to be cooked alive, and will contract in agony on the grill.
What could it possibly taste like?
What nutritional value could it possibly have?
Why would anybody want to eat it?
Could this possibly replace a real grassfed hamburger, from a real steer grazing on green, living grass?
Perhaps the best answer to the question of what it will taste like was provided by the creators of this stuff, who plan to ask a famous chef to cook the first one. Expect him to season it heavily, and I mean HEAVILY. If this stuff fulfills its purpose and replaces meat, expect the MSG industry to expand substantially.
It would have little or no nutritional value, as nothing like it has ever been produced by nature, or eaten by humans. Muscle fibers and fat from cells that have never been part of a whole living animal would not be meat, and have no natural nutrients. We have no way of knowing how our bodies would react to this stuff.
I cannot imagine why anyone would want to eat it.
There is no way it could ever replace a grassfed hamburger, from a real steer, raised in the sun, grazing on the living grass, full of vital nutrients straight from nature, cooked to perfection.
The Plan to Replace Real Meat
The creators of this technique have been quoted as saying that there would be a limited herd of donor animals in the world, which could provide millions of times more “meat†using this process.
It appears that the rest of the world’s meat animals would be done away with, as they would no longer be needed.
There also would be a limited donor herd for pigs, lambs, and chickens. This lab grown “meat†would be all that was available. This “vision†has actually attracted the support of vegan organizations that want artificial meat developed. The project is being financed by an anonymous donor, who was described as a household name, who turns everything he touches into gold.
This sounds like vegan heaven, but it would soon turn into hell for everyone, as fertile soil turned into deserts without grazing animals to renew the land. A mass slaughter of the world’s farm animals would take place, and the lost breeds could never be replaced. Countless species that depend on good soil would quickly become extinct. Grazing animals are a vital part of nature’s balance, and life as we know it will not survive without them. In a matter of years, the only food available would be created in a lab, or taken from the sea. Mass starvation would be the most likely result.
The Products of a Lab Can Never Equal Nature
There is an incredible arrogance among many scientists, who seem to think that they can create foods that are just as good as those provided by nature. That is just not true. No artificial food is even remotely comparable to real food. People who eat a lot of artificial food often get sick, obese, and depressed.
Scientists understand part of the picture, but their knowledge is always incomplete. New nutrients in nature are constantly being discovered, and the very fact that these new nutrients are discovered proves the incompleteness of the information relied on by scientists. The way most nutrients interact with each other is not known to science. Since they only have incomplete data, and do not understand the whole picture, how could they possibly design a nourishing artificial food?
Our bodies were meant to eat the foods provided by nature, and humanity has eaten those foods for hundreds of thousands of years. Nature contains every nutrient our bodies need. The meat and fat of grassfed animals is the oldest human food, and our bodies thrive on it. Cooked properly, it is delicious and satisfying. It rebuilt my health, and has done the same for many others.
Dr. Weston A. Price, who learned more about nutrition than anyone else, said:
“Life in all its fullness is mother nature obeyed.â€
Completely true. When we follow the laws of nature by eating the traditional foods of our ancestors, we are strong, healthy, happy and long lived. We must return to the foods nature has provided for us, not eat lab-created abominations.
If I have a choice, I will never even taste the frankenmeat. I will just eat grassfed.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
A Sacred Food You Can Buy and Enjoy—Red Boat Fish Sauce
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: noramorgan  Sunset over Phu Quoc Island, famous for the quality of its fish sauce.
Every healthy people studied by Dr. Weston A. Price had sacred foods—foods that were so nutritious and renewing that the people held them sacred. These foods were packed full of all kinds of nutrients. They were used to increase fertility, help recovery from illness and wounds, and to promote general good health.
One of the most common sacred foods throughout history has many names. The Ancient Greeks called it garos, and ate it with every meal. The Ancient Romans called it garum, and used it to season almost all soups, meat and fish dishes, and as a table condiment that was always available. The Chinese called it ke-tsiap, and used it extensively. The Malays called it ke-chap, and also used it for cooking and in condiments. The Vietnamese called it nuoc mam, and used it extensively in cooking, and served it as a condiment, often mixed with other ingredients. In fact, this sacred food was used throughout the traditional world, and was still in use in relatively modern times.
We know it as fish sauce. In its traditional form, fish sauce was made from tiny fish, usually anchovies, and sea salt, fermented over a very long period of time, then pressed, which caused all the nutrients from the tiny whole fish to dissolve into a tasty brown liquid, full of valuable nutrients from the sea.
However, as with so many other foods, the modern food industry ruined it for profit. They used inferior fish, often from polluted waters, diluted it with water, used quick chemical fermentation, used factory salt, added MSG and other taste enhancers, and various sweeteners. The result was a concoction that often had very little nutritional benefit, and was full of nasty additives. A few brands were much better than the others, but the traditional sacred condiment of our ancestors was just not available.
Until now. Until Red Boat Fish Sauce was created and made available.
Why Fish Sauce Is a Sacred Food
Nearly all of the healthy peoples studied by Dr. Weston A. Price greatly valued foods from the sea and sea nutrients, and would go to great efforts to get them. Many of the foods from the sea they obtained were fermented, in one form or another. These people stayed free of modern diseases like cancer, diabetes, heart disease, birth defects, tooth decay, and others by eating the traditional foods of their ancestors. Fermented food from the sea was often a valued part of their diet.
In its traditional form, fish sauce is made from the entire bodies of tiny fish, and sea salt. Nothing else is added. The fermentation process turns the tiny fish into a brown liquid. Since the entire fish is used, all the organs, bones, meat, and skin of the fish are used to make the liquid, which is literally pressed from the fermented fish. This means that you get all the nutrients of the fish, which are rich in minerals, vitamins, all kinds of natural substances that our bodies need and crave. I cannot think of a better source of natural iodine, among many other valuable nutrients.
Much of the soil our food is raised on is mineral-depleted, but the ocean is still full of minerals and nutrients, which are contained in these tiny fish. The process concentrates the nutrients of the fish into the liquid, making it a natural mineral concentrate. And the precious liquid contains all the substances from all the organs and glands of the fish. Our ancestors traditionally would eat the whole fish, knowing how valuable these nutrients are. Even small amounts of this liquid are very nutritious, because the nutrients are concentrated in the liquid.
The Ancient Greeks and Ancient Romans, two of the healthiest and most powerful of ancient peoples, ate fish sauce in some form every day, often at every meal. It was used both as an ingredient and a condiment. Huge amounts of fish sauce were shipped all over the Roman Empire, and there were many different brands. In fact, the discovery of an ancient Roman ship loaded with jars of fish sauce revealed that some brands were even labeled Kosher!
Why Red Boat Is Different, and So Much Better
I decided to add fish sauce to my diet after reading Sally Fallon Morell’s classic cookbook, Nourishing Traditions. I wanted the concentrated sea nutrients it contained.
There are many fish sauces on the market. I have tried many of them. Many tasted so bad that I would never use them again. Others were full of additives that I do not want in my body. Others were so diluted with water that they had little or no flavor. I finally found a brand, recommended by the Weston A. Price Foundation that tasted and felt good. Yet even this brand had some sugar added to it. Then I tasted Red Boat Fish Sauce a couple of months ago. Now Red Boat is the only fish sauce I ever want to use.
Red Boat Fish Sauce is made from only two ingredients, black anchovy, and sea salt. The anchovies are caught from the clean, unpolluted waters of the Phu Quoc Archipelago. Phu Quoc Island has long been famous in Vietnam for producing the finest fish sauce.
The anchovies are salted quickly after being caught, while very fresh. They are placed in barrels made of tropical wood, and allowed to ferment for over one year. Yes, over a year. Then the fermented fish are pressed, and the liquid from the first pressing only is bottled as Red Boat Fish Sauce. This is as basic, pure, and traditional as you can get. This technology could have been used thousands of years ago. The process is artisanal, not industrial. This process preserves and enhances the many nutrients from the whole fish, turning them into a form that is easy to digest and assimilate. Like all such traditional processes, it sounds simple, but every step must be done perfectly, by skilled artisans.
The fact that no additives, chemicals, flavor enhancers, preservatives, sweeteners, etc. are added means that your body is presented with pure, vital nutrients from the sea, and nothing that will interfere with their digestion and absorption.
Yet the other great difference in Red Boat Fish Sauce is the taste. It is somewhat salty, yet not too salty. It has a rich, slightly sweet, yet very complex and deep flavor. It does wonderful things to the flavor of food. I have many recipes calling for fish sauce in my two cookbooks, Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue. I recently made a number of these recipes for my family, using Red Boat instead of the other fish sauce. Each time, my family commented on how good the dish tasted, even better than usual. I could taste the difference for myself, easily. The flavor was deeper, tastier, richer, and utterly delicious. And the usual feeling of well being and satisfaction I get from my cooking was even more profound.
I now withdraw my recommendation of the fish sauce mentioned in my books, and recommend that it be replaced with Red Boat Fish Sauce, in every recipe.
How I Use Red Boat Fish Sauce
My two cookbooks are soy-free, yet contain various East Asian inspired recipes. I use fish sauce instead of soy sauce in these recipes. The taste is not the same as using soy sauce, but it is wonderful. It is even better with Red Boat.
I will add fish sauce as an ingredient to soups. My version of Hot and Sour Soup, which will be published in a future book, became the best ever, after I used Red Boat Fish Sauce in it. Even a tablespoon or so will add a lot of flavor and nutrition, although I usually use more than that.
I drink homemade bone broth every day, as a vital part of my nutritional program. I now will often add a teaspoon or more of Red Boat Fish Sauce to my cup of broth. Not only does this really improve the already wonderful flavor, but it contributes valuable nutrients that make the broth even healthier.
I am developing a number of new recipes that use Red Boat Fish Sauce as an ingredient. Many of these recipes have Roman or Ancient Greek roots, and Red Boat makes them so much better.
Why Did I Write this Post? Because this Product Is a Treasure!
I know this post seem like a commercial for Red Boat Fish Sauce. But I receive no compensation for writing this, or recommending the product. This is one of the very few times in my life that I have found a truly natural and traditional food product which is so outstanding, in every way—that I have to spread the word about it. I do have an ulterior motive, though. I want Red Boat Fish Sauce to thrive as a company and enjoy great financial success, because I want them to stay in business and keep making this amazing product, so I can continue to enjoy the nutritional and taste benefits it brings.
I also want to express my deep personal gratitude to Cuong Pham, the founder and owner of Red Boat Fish Sauce, who has restored a wonderful traditional food to the world, and made it available to us.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, and Real Food Wednesday blog carnival.
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.
Why Grassfed Meat Is Good for the Planet
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: gr8dnes These magnificent bison and lush grasslands support each other in nature’s balance.
The World Water Conference is now taking place, and misinformation rules. A report came out claiming that meat must be reduced to five percent or less of the world’s diet, so the increasing population can be fed. The report claimed that there will not be enough water to feed the planet without this dietary change. Vegan and vegetarian diets are now necessary to save the planet? Nonsense!
The fact of the matter is this. Vast herds of grazing animals made agriculture possible, by creating and supporting grasslands and soil. The world’s water supply can be greatly increased by increasing the number of grazing animals, and having them follow proper grazing practices. Not only will this greatly increase the water supply, but it will result in the creation of great amounts of new soil suitable for growing crops, and increase the size and richness of grasslands, allowing even more herds to graze. And the grassfed meat made available by following this path will provide the food that is far more nutrient-dense and nourishing than a plant-only diet.
This is not a fantasy. Properly managed grazing has already reversed desertification in many areas of the world, which has resulted in the restoration of dried out streams and rivers and the formation of rich soil.
Grassfed meat is not the problem. It is the solution.
The Vegan Fantasy Holds No Water
This is true in more than one way. The theory that we must reduce meat eating to five percent or less of the world’s diet is based on several misconceptions, ideology, and a lack of understanding of the vital role played by grazing animals.
The assumption is made that most meat will be raised by the factory model, with large amounts of food plants such as soy and corn used to feed the animals. This process is harmful, in that the animals are fed an unnatural diet that makes them far less nutritious, and a lot of water is used to grow these crops that are fed to animals. Even worse, when the animals are not grazing in dense herds, they are not performing their proper function of enriching and creating soil, and creating and recreating grasslands, which hold water in the earth, and prevent desertification and the wastage of water. Properly managed grassfed grazing avoids these problems, and rebuilds the earth and increases the water supply. Grassfed animals need no crops to be grown for them, and proper grazing practices create plant life that holds water in the soil, increasing rainfall and the water supply.
If the world’s supply of grazing animals is greatly decreased as recommended by the report, the world’s soil will literally hold no water, and desertification and a great reduction in the world’s water supply will occur. This could lead to mass starvation.
How the Grasslands Were Created
Once, there were huge herds of grazing animals on the grasslands of our planet. A perfect example was the huge herds of bison, estimated at seventy million or more, that once roamed the Great Plains of the United States. These herds moved in tight groups, as a defense against predators. When they grazed on a particular area of land, they would eat all the old growth, dig up the earth, stomp the grass seeds deep into the churned up soil, fertilize the soil with their manure, and leave. It would be months before they returned, and the rich crop of grass they planted in the earth they dug up with their hooves, and fertilized with their manure, grew and thrived. This rich grass held water in the soil, creating more rainfall that resulted in the creation of rivers and streams that provided more water for richer grass and for the grazing animals to drink. When the herds returned, the whole process was repeated.
The herds supported the grass and the grass fed the herds. This was the perfect balance created by nature, and it resulted in the creation of rich soil that could support food crops. Grazing animals were the key to the health and life of the soil, and still are.
How the Grasslands Are Being Turned into Deserts
The great wild herds of grazing animals are largely gone, replaced by modern monocrops, which suck the life out of the soil and destroy many of the grasses and plants necessary for the land to hold water. Small modern herds do not follow proper grazing practices, and do far less to help the land. Pesticides and chemicals are used to kill many of the native grasses, and the few crops planted by humans take huge amounts of water to grow, without returning any water to the land. Croplands are not rotated, and the land is given no chance to rest and regenerate. These practices have resulted in large amounts of grassland turning into desert. Deserts that cannot be used to grow crops. Deserts that cannot hold water. This is a huge problem all over the world, including the U.S. Reducing the number of grazing animals will only accelerate the process.
The Natural Solution
Since herds create and support grasslands, the solution is herds of grazing animals. This is not theory, it has already been done. Holistic Management, a system created by Allan Savory, uses properly managed herds of grazing animals, including cattle, to rebuild and support soil through an ingenious system that actually reverses the desertification process. You have only to look at the before and after photos maintained at the Savory Institute website to see what a huge difference this process can make.
The Holistic Management system works with and honors the laws of nature to restore grasslands, using grazing animals as a vital part of the process. Many grassfed ranchers have been inspired to use similar grazing practices to improve their land and soil. This includes John Wood of U.S. Wellness Meats, who has greatly improved the grass yield and quality of his soil, as shown in Grassfed Farmer Renews the Land. I can attest to the excellence of the meat he raises, having eaten it many times.
We can support these ranchers and their efforts to heal and restore the grasslands by buying and eating the wonderful grassfed meat they raise. In fact, I submit that one of the best things any of us can do to increase the food, soil, and water supply of the planet is to eat grassfed meat from ranchers using proper grazing practices. This is the most delicious and nourishing “burden†I can imagine.
We need far more grazing animals, not less, and their meat and fat is the most nourishing food humans have ever eaten. We do not need the factory meat system, which goes against the laws of nature and truly wastes resources.
Eating grassfed meat is not the problem. It is the solution.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
« Previous Page — Next Page »