U.S. Food Supply Ranked Subpar to Other Major Nations

Attention Congress and USDA/FDA leadership: the U.S. tumbled embarrassingly into 21st place in OxFam's worldwide ranking of 125 nations' healthy, plentiful food supplies and policies. 

Iceland, Australia, most western European and all Scandinavian countries all scored well above the United States, which barely edged out Estonia, Slovakia, Hungary, Israel, and New Zealand.  

Oxfam's in-depth survey, taken from October through December 2013, tallied data on food reality worldwide using four categories. The U.S. ranked admirably in two categories, average in one, but fared shamefully low in one... 

Afford to Eat, or the price and price volatility of food - U.S. ranked 1st  overall in  food affordability, mainly because food prices nationally are extremely stable and relatively inexpensive.

Food Quality, or the availability of clean water and nutritious foods - U.S. ranked 4th overall in this category, despite ranking a painful  41st in access to clean drinking water. 

Enough to Eat, or hunger within the country - U.S. ranked 35th overall among 125 nations. Although few U.S. children were underweight due to lack of food, many are malnourished. 

Unhealthy Eating, or frequent consumption of non-nutritious foods - U.S. ranked 120th among 125 nations, indicating that U.S. eating habits are causing obesity and diabetes among Americans. 

These shocking results shout that most Americans have access to both healthy and unhealthy foods, and are choosing unhealthy foods for both adults and children.

The U.S. is ranked the fattest and most diabetic nation among all major countries. The U.S. populace ranks as healthier only than Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Mexico, Fiji, and Jordan. in obesity and diabetes, two lethal health conditions.

Critics firmly believe that American health has plunged radically in recent decades due to the extreme prevalence in the food supply of fast and casual foods larded heavily with salt, fat, and sugar, and of industrial-manufactured "fake foods" riddled with salt, fat, sugar, chemicals, additives, fillers, and artificial flavors and colors.  

(Click here for "Salt Sugar Fat" - Stunning Big Food Tactics to Hook, Trick, Harm Americans.)

Why do Americans have extremely easy access (and thus, temptation) to unhealthy foods, especially when compared to the other 124 nations? 

One main reason: lack of political will in Washington D.C. to stand-up to corporate political donors and lobbyists in order to bring  the U.S. food supply up to international standards by mandating...

• Manufacturers to offer a higher percentage of food products with more nutritious and better quality ingredients
• Restaurants and fast food purveyors to eliminate and/or minimize purposely addictive levels of salt, fat, and sugar 
• Markets across the country to prominently display and emphasize a plethora of fresh, healthy products, rather than continue to exclusively push industrial-made chips, cookies, candy, ice creams, cereals, crackers, hot dogs, baked goods, frozen fare, etc, etc etc.

Congress, are you listening?  USDA and FDA leaders, are you there?  Are you working for the health of our nation, or for mega-corporate interests and your donors and political patrons?

Before answering that query, remember the warning of famed British historian and Oxford professor Arnold J. Toynbee (1889 - 1975) who observed and believed that the health of a nation is only as good as the health of its diet, and that a downward spiral in the quality of a nation's diet foretold a nation's cultural and political death spiral.

If unchecked, this U.S. tumble in Oxfam's data-driven survey of healthy diets around the world will be more than an embarrassment. This terrible tumble could be warning of a permanent downward spiral of our nation. 

Public Forces Food Industry to Sell Non-GMO Products, Ingredients

The good news in 2014 is that market forces are alive, well, and working quite effectively to label GMO foods, or to remove them entirely from grocers' shelves.  And instead, to pressure retailers to offer non-GMO foods for sale. 

The political process may have failed, thus far, to label or halt GMO foods, but public sentiment is firmly forcing manufacturers and retailers to begin taking bold steps.  

Per Forbes this week:

"... public opinion is reaching critical mass. Ninety-percent of Americans believe that GMOs are unsafe, 93 percent of Americans favor stringent federal GMO labeling regulations, and 57 percent say they would be less likely to buy products labeled as genetically modified." 

Retailers and manufacturers respond when the public demands. Among big-deal changes in 2014 are...

Target has quietly introduced its Simply Balanced  "wellness" brand of foods to its grocery shelves, including the USDA-certified organic blue corn tortilla chips pictured above.  The USDA-certified organic label means that all ingredients are non-GMO, as well as dozens other attributes. 

(I bought two bag of these chips this past weekend for family football-watching munchies. The chips are delicious! Target got the requisite taste right.)

The Target website exudes:

"The products include wholesome ingredients, and more than 40 percent of the assortment is organic. There are no products with hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils, high-fructose corn syrup, synthetic colors, artificial preservatives, artificial flavors or artificial sweeteners.

"The good news doesn’t stop there: The majority of Simply Balanced items are made without genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and Target will eliminate all GMO ingredients from the line by the end of 2014. Target is also setting a goal to increase organic food offerings by 25 percent by end of fiscal year 2017."

Cheerios, original only, have been altered to include only non-GMO ingredients.  General Mills spokesman Mike Siemienas commented, "We switched from what we were using to non-GMO corn and non-GMO pure sugar cane... We do value our Cheerios fans and we do listen to their thoughts and suggestions." Siemienas noted that "did not change the formula and has never used genetically modified oats."

Whole Foods recently announced that starting in 2014, Chobani Greek Yogurt will no longer be sold in its 370 stores because of "the yogurt maker’s use of milk from cows whose feed is derived from genetically engineered crops," per The New York Times. Chobani yogurt sales topped $1 billion in 2013.  

Replacement of Chobani with other, non-GMO Greek yogurts is part of Whole Foods' larger, ambitious goal of removing or clearly labeling all GMO products from its shelves by 2018. Boasts the Whole Foods website:

"We now have thousands of products within our stores verified as certified organic and/or Non-GMO Project Verified. In fact, we sell 4,800 Non-GMO Project verified products, more than any other retailer in North America."

Yes, the American political process has, so far, failed to allow the law to reflect public will on GMO foods.   Industrial food corporations outspent California grassroots voters $55 million to $9 million to defeat Prop 37 in 2012, yet won by a paltry margin of 51 percent to 49 percent, and spent $22 million in Washington state for another razor-thin victory. 

But political prospects for GMO foods labeling are brighter in 2014 in state legislatures than ever before. 

"As many as 26  state legislatures could consider similar bills for labeling genetically engineered foods during the 2014 legislative season. Two Northeastern states, Connecticut and Maine, have passed bills requiring labeling of genetically engineered foods, but both of those laws are contingent on other states in the region taking the same action." (Source - Food Safety News, January 7, 2014)

Indeed, market forces are alive, well, and working quite effectively to label GMO foods, or to remove them entirely from grocers' shelves.  

These positive changes by major corporations newly offering non-GMO products and clearly labeling or dumping GMO foods are potent reminders of the power wielded by the purse of the American people. Power to the people! 

Boldly Healthy Christmas Dinner Earns Praise, Second Helpings

They ate my thoughtfully planned, carefully crafted, boldly healthy dinner, and they enjoyed it. Really enjoyed it, believe it or not. 

"They" are my immediate family... four adult children, one fiance, and my husband of twenty-something years. 

The dinner in question was Christmas dinner, a few days ago. My family invariably enjoys my meals, as I'm an experienced and fairly imaginative cook. In our home, meals are meant to be enjoyed, not endured. And my Yuletide fare is a special feast. 

This year's Christmas dinner, though, was different. Experimental, sort of.  It was vegetarian. (Well, except for the Boar's Head ham on the side, for those who just couldn't hack a meatless holiday.)

Yup, I boldly ventured where few middle-class baby-boomer cooks tread on indulgent foodcentric holidays... vegetarian!   Here was my scrumptious Christmas 2013 menu:

• Penne pasta with elegant tomato-parsley sauce, Marcella Hazan rustic-style
• Organic carrots, sauteed in butter, kissed with cinnamon
• Organic greeen beans, sauteed in olive oil and soy, sprinkled with sesame seeds
• Organic applesauce, spiced with light brown sugar, cinnamon
• Asiago-rosemary rolls (source: Trader Joe's)
• And yes, a Boar's Head ham, unglazed, succulent in its own juices
• San Pellegrino water, fruit juices

All dishes and elements were homemade, except for the pasta (and except as noted). All produce was selected from our weekly CSA carton delivery, except vine-ripened tomatoes from Sprouts.   

As a delightful result, our family Christmas spread was healthy, low fat, largely devoid of dairy, and not loaded with carbs, salt, or sugar. 

I heard nothing but compliments on taste and that requisite feeling of satisfaction.  Eating was hearty, and second helpings were scooped up by all. To several of us, it was a revelation that a holiday meal could quench our appetites, yet not leave our bellies uncomfortably stuffed.  (I confess that three of us seven, including me, also sampled the ham. It, too, was delicious.)  

Would I serve vegetarian again at Christmas? Absolutely, although the group tentatively approved next year's theme to be Mexican cuisine.    

Would I again serve a Christmas meal that was healthy, low fat,  minimal dairy, and not saturated with carbs, salt, and sugar? Absolutely.  

In fact, consider it a new White family tradition. It feels terrific to grasp that we can genuinely enjoy holiday meals, without our table groaning with 2,000-calorie meals so typical in American homes. 

Yes, they ate my thoughtfully planned, carefully crafted, boldly healthy dinner, and they enjoyed it. Really enjoyed it. I am proud and pleased. 

FDA Blackballs Top Food, Clean Water Activist Group

Consider Food & Water Watch as you ponder year-end giving to worthy organizations. Put Food & Water Watch at the top of your giving list for two main reasons:

First, FFW is perhaps the most effective and prolific organization in working "to ensure the food, water and fish we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced" both in the U.S. and around the world.  

Second, the FDA is apparently blackballing FFW, in a strong-armed attempt to intimidate and silence this "non-profit organization that advocates for common sense policies that will result in healthy, safe food and access to safe and affordable drinking water."

Through info research  and dissemination, an authoritative website, events, media coverage, and protests, in addition to "tens of thousands" of petitions and comments filed with the FDA yearly, FFW is involved in dozens of vital issues, including...

• Food safety, including factory farming
• Food and water justice
• Groundwater protection, including fracking
• Water conservation
• Water privatization, including bottled water
• Federal budgeting
• Consumer food labels, including GMOs
• Congressional Farm Bill legislation
• Climate change

Seems the FDA chafes at watchdog FFW's vigilance  at protecting the public and public health. And FDA brass have apparently taken action to blunt FFW's influence and access... 

Reported FFW yesterday:

"Last week, a representative from the USDA’s Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) Office informed Food & Water Watch staff that its invitation to participate in a USDA event featuring CFC registered organizations had been cancelled. The representative stated in an email on December 5, 'I regret to inform you that I’ve been notified your organization has not been approved for entrance into USDA to attend the USDA-CFC event on December 10, 2013.  I do not have specific information on the reason approval was not granted...'

"This email denial came two weeks after Food & Water Watch staff members were turned away from an earlier CFC event at the USDA on November 20, 2013 when an agency guard insisted the organization was not on the confirmed list for the event, contrary to an email confirmation Food & Water Watch received from the event organizer on November 12, 2013. 

Food & Water Watch staff has attended multiple CFC fairs over the past several years without incident. The CFC is the Federal Government’s workplace giving program that encourages federal employees’ charitable giving...  Despite inquiries, Food & Water Watch has yet to receive any further information from the USDA as to why the organization was refused entry to this charity-related event."

Is the FDA attempting to...

• Limit contributions given by federal employees to support FFW?
• Inhibit FFW access to FDA resources and decision-makers?
• Deter FFW investigations?
• Curtail FFW activism and advocacy?
• Suppress FFW's free speech rights?
• All of the above?

The terrific news is that Food & Water Watch is clearly putting strong pressure on the FDA to protect  public health over corporate profits... or the FDA wouldn't push back, or push so hard, against FFW. 

The FDA should know better: FFW is not going away. Far from it. 

"Clearly, we are a thorn in the USDA’s side. But to block us from entry to this event by denying our security clearance is not only bogus—it’s intimidation. But we won’t be intimidated,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director. “We’ll continue to force the USDA to do its job to protect consumers, not corporate profits.”

Show the FDA that you support the causes of safe food, clean water, and food and water fairness.   

 I ask that you consider Food & Water Watch as you ponder year-end giving to worthy organizations. Click HERE to donate to Food & Water Watch. 

About Waffles, Fried Chicken and Freedom of Food Choice

I ordered a fried chicken and waffle plate last weekend at a local cafe. The trendy entree was on the eatery's Fall Special Menu, and it was luscious... a smallish round waffle with warmed maple syrup, and a freshly fried chicken leg and thigh. 

Most of my meals these days are what friends would call healthy: Greek yogurt, whole-grain granola and seasonal fruit for breakfast; salads for lunch; and dinners filled with veggies, whole-wheat pastas, homemade soups.  Not much bread. Often an apple for dessert.  Coffee and water to drink. No soft drinks.  Vegetarian days are not unusual. 

I feel better when I eat this way... and frankly, feel lousy when I've eaten greasy, dense, sugary, or carb-heavy foods.  But oh boy, once in a while, an indulgent dish such as The Filling Station's fried chicken and waffle plate satisfies to a full, pleased smile.  

I tell you this to clarify the mission of my FakeFoodWatch.com blog: I don't directly eat for health. I eat to feel good, and to savor the experience of delicious food.  And I don't believe that scolding or nagging others ever leads to healthier eating habits. Ever. That's simply not human nature!  

FakeFoodWatch.com is not a health site. Nor is it an animal rights advocacy site.  

FakeFoodWatch.com is a food policy and investigation site.  I fervently believe that all people in free societies have a right to full facts about the foods they choose to ingest... origins, added ingredients, cleanliness, age, and processing, handling and storage protocols and realities.  

The goal of FakeFoodWatch.com is to inform and surprise you, the reader, with info about:

• food commonly consumed  in the U.S. and around the world;
• how today's food supply affects public health; 
• how government food policies affect or could affect your home;  
• how food you eat affects how you feel, and ultimately how it affects your and your loved ones' health and longevity.  

You see, I believe that we should have enough information to make well-informed choices about food.   The federal government and mega-corporations should NOT be making those choices for us, and should NOT be allowed to cleverly obscure or hide accurate, understandable, relevant info from consumers.  

Sadly, the FDA in the 21st century acts far more interested in protecting corporate profits (and political donors) than the health and welfare of Americans. And industrial food mega-corporations are interested in only one goal: profits. Period. Your health matters naught to most fake-food makers and purveyors.  

I believe that every American has the right to the real, old-fashioned food enjoyed by our grandparents and ancestors: food unadulterated by chemicals, additives, cheap fillers, artificial flavors, colors, and taste enhancers, or genetic engineering. 

And every American has the equal right to indulge in fast, fried, and highly processed foods, and anything and everything legal and non-poisonous.  

Indeed, everyone has the delightful right to feast on a fried chicken and waffle plate, at their whim.  

So please, don't mistake FakeFoodWatch.com for a health site. Think of this pet project of mine as a site that advocates for transparency in all things related to food. And respects your right to make your own choice.  

The FDA Deserves No Credit for Banning Trans Fats in 2013!

Count me out as congratulating the FDA for proposing a ban on trans fats.... a fake, chemically-made food additive... from U.S. foods. Finally... 

Famed New York University professor Marion Nestle, Food Politics author, applauded the FDA for "finally taking care of the trans-fat... loophole" and exulted, "The FDA is Back!"

Really? Not so much, in my view. Accolades in 1993, maybe. But in 2013? When studies conclusively proved 20 years ago that trans fats clearly exert a toxic impact on public health, especially heart disease?   When, as early as 1956, scientists suspected that trans fats caused a major jump in coronary artery disease?

Briefly, trans fats were created as part of the early 20th-century rise of industrial food manufacturing, to augment for shortages of butterfat to meet growing consumer demand for fried and baked foods.  Trans fats also are a cheap substitute for pricey, purer fats. 

"Trans fats are a type of unsaturated fat which is uncommon in nature but can be created artificially. In food production, liquid... unsaturated fats such as vegetable oils are catalytically hydrogenated to produce partially or completely saturated fats that melt at a desirable temperature (30–40 °C).

"Trans fats are an artificial contaminant introduced... in partial hydrogenation. Although trans fats are edible, consumption of trans fats increases the risk of coronary heart disease..." (Source: Wikipedia)

NOTE - "Catalytic hydrogenation" is chemical treatment with gaseous hydrogen to change molecular structure.  The process is commonly used by the petrochemical, pharmaceutical, and food product industries. 

Trans fats are commonly used in fried and baked foods and meat products found in U.S. grocery stores and some restaurants in 2013, including:

• Margarines and spreads
• Cake mixes and canned frosting
• Microwave popcorn
• Coffee creamers
• Ice cream
• Ground beef (as fatty filler)
• Packaged jerky and meat sticks
• Frozen pizzas and other entrees
• Fried chicken and fish
• Bakery goods... donuts, cookies, sweet rolls, biscuits, cakes

Clogged cardiovascular systems aren't the only health problems caused or exacerbated by trans fats in foods. Among health hazards tentatively associated with trans fats are Alzheimer's, certain cancers, liver dysfunction, female infertility, and depression. 

Why did the FDA delay banning trans fats from the food supply for 20 years, if the fake-fat is so lethal to public health?  

• Fear of upsetting fake-food corporate donors to political campaigns?
• Close ties between fake-food corporations and the FDA?
• Fear of hurting fast food and fake food sales, which would impact the economy?
• All of the above?

Who profited from the FDA postponing a ban on trans fats in U.S. foods? Mega-corporations, both fast food chains and fake food manufacturers, who spent billions and two decades to develop new, cheap chemical additives and fillers to substitute for trans fats.  "Some nutritionists worried that trans fats would simply be replaced by saturated fats," noted the New York Times.

"No trans fats," hawk McDonalds and other fast food chains, never mentioning that the substitute fat is equally harmful to health.  

Why, in 2013, did the FDA finally propose a ban on trans fats? After 20 years, it's an easy step to take, one already fixed by major corporations at their own snail's pace, using their vast resources to produce a result that won't hurt profits. No major political donors will be miffed. 

The FDA desperately needs a spate of good publicity in 2013, given that it's ignoring the tremendous harm done by Monsanto to the U.S. food supply, and calamitous nationwide controversy over genetically modified foods (GMOs).  

How many Americans died due to the FDA's long delay in banning trans fats, despite clear and damning scientific evidence that the fake-fat food additive was lethal to public health? 

"Banning them completely could prevent 20,000 heart attacks and 7,000 deaths from heart disease each year, the F.D.A. said," reports the New York Times.  By FDA measure, then, at least 400,000 heart attacks would have been prevented and 140,000 lives saved had the FDA enacted this ban when it became scientifically known 20 years ago that trans fats are lethal to human health.

In 1993, the FDA should have been lauded and applauded for enacting this ban to protect Americans from the toxicity of trans fats.

In 2013, the FDA deserves no credit whatsoever for taking the no-brainer step of finally banning trans fats from the U.S. food supply.

Pro Athletes Hawking UnHealthy Foods: LeBron James, Peyton Manning, Serena Williams

Yale University's Rudd Center for Food Policy summarized findings of a recent study analyzing food endorsements by sports celebrities by concluding:

"The promotion of energy-dense, nutrient-poor products by some of the world’s most physically fit and well-known athletes is an ironic combination that sends mixed messages about diet and health."

That's muted academic-speak to say that professional athletes are hypocrites for endorsing junk food. But endorse they do... to the tune of millions of dollars in rich endorsement deals. 

The fascinating study, published in the Pediatrics journal in November 2013, found that of the 100 professional athletes with the highest-value endorsements in 2010:

• They were paid to promote 44 different food and beverage brands
• Food and beverage brands were the second largest category of endorsements, behind only sporting goods 
• 79% of their 62 food endorsements were for fast food or junk food
• 93% of their beverage endorsements were for drinks with "100% of calories from added sugar"

The biggest hypocritical fast-food offenders among health-conscious, physically fine-tuned professional athletes?

Peyton Manning (pictured below), reportedly earns $10 million per year from Papa John's pizza, Gatorade (owned by PepsiCo), Wheaties (General Mills), as well as DirectTV and Sony. In 2012, NFL quarterback Manning bought 21 Papa John franchises in Colorado.

LeBron James, NBA superstar, "received $5 million to endorse Bubblicious Gum, including his own flavor, LeBron's Lightening Lemonade," in addition to his lucrative contracts with McDonalds, Sprite, and Powerade.

Joe Maurer, six-time All Star baseball player and Minnesota Twins catcher, peddles Pepsi-cola, Gatorade, and Kemps ice cream, including Joe Maurer-blessed Grand Slam Monster Cookie flavor ice cream and a limited-edition 12-pack of Joe Maurer ice cream sandwiches. 

Serena Williams, perhaps the all-time greatest woman tennis champion, endorses Oreo cookies (owned by Kraft/Nabisco), Gatorade (owned by PepsiCo), and Nabisco 100-Calorie Snack Packs. 

Kobe Bryant, 15-time NBA All-Star and Los Angeles Laker team captain, is rumored to earn a whopping $12 million annually solely from his contract to push McDonald's menu. 

Dale Earnhardt, Jr., NASCAR driver, is paid to shill for Mountain Dew, Hellman's/Best Foods Mayonnaise, and Amp Energy, a "flavor extension of the Mountain Dew brand", which is owned by PepsiCo.

Sports celebrities endorsing fast food, junk food, and/or sugary drinks hail from football, basketball, baseball, hockey, tennis, skateboarding, even Olympic sports as speed skating. 

Without exception, professional athletes promoting "energy-dense, nutrient-poor products" are extraordinarily fit physically, and must adhere to a disciplined, health-conscious diet.  

Yet, the food and beverages they endorse to Americans... particularly to U.S. children... are unhealthy. 

Kids revere and often long to emulate professional athletes as LeBron James, Peyton Manning, Serena Williams, Joe Maurer, Kobe Bryant, and Dale Earnhardt, Jr.

Which, of course, is why fake-food corporations dangle million-dollar contracts to entice popular athletes to lend cache and credibility to their unhealthy fare.  And per the study, "research shows that athlete endorsements are associated with higher healthfulness ratings on the products they endorse." 

Greedy industrial food mega-corporations will do what it takes to sell their highly processed, salty, sugary, fatty food products. That's a sad given in 2013. 

But professional athletes know better. In their own lives, they do better. But certain athletes choose to enrich themselves by hawking an unhealthy dietary mantra to the American public.   

Exhorted the study, "The promotion of energy-dense, nutrient-poor products by some of the world’s most physically fit and well-known athletes is an ironic combination that sends mixed messages about diet and health."

Indeed! I wonder... do these athletes feed a steady diet of fast food, soft drinks, and junk food to their children and loved ones? 

Chicken Nuggets Secrets: Mystery Ingredients, Dog Food Parts, Profits Galore

Chicken nuggets, a food scientist's invention first sold in 1980, are a gargantuan American industrial-foods sales success far beyond the initial imaginations of even fake-food corporate executives. 

Billions of chicken nuggets have been sold in every U.S. supermarket, served in all family-style restaurants, and are essentials on fast-food menus.  

First and foremost, chicken nuggets are widely seen as healthier kid-friendly options than greasy cheeseburgers in spongy white-bread buns.   Nuggets are purposely formed to fit a kid's hand. Compact, easy to hold and handle, ubiquitous in generic taste and look... nuggets are a perfect, extra-fast food for even the fussiest kids and busiest families. A no-brainer when ordering or fixing a quick meal while on-the-run.

Parents feel good about ordering McDonald's Mighty Kids Meals with chicken nuggets, apple slices, less fries, and milk for their children. Chicken nuggets are viewed by parents as the white meat alternative to red-meat health concerns, first voiced in 1977 by the federal government.

Problem is, chicken nuggets aren't all that healthy. And per a new American Journal of Medicine article, chicken nuggets are made of only about 40% to 50% actual chicken "meat."  

Ordering chicken nuggets for kids might be a convenient no-brainer. But switching on skeptical parental brains would reveal the inconvenient reality that these golden industrial-made orbs are:

• Highly processed, machine-formed lumps 
• Dipped in mystery batter
• Fried or deep fried.
• Chocked with invisible ingredients

McDonald's Chicken McNuggets, for instance, contain 25 ingredients, including heavy doses of salt, fat, and sugar, and chemical additives, preservatives, and flavor enhancers. That's before salty, sugary dipping sauces. 

And the chicken in chicken nuggets? Only about 18% of a nugget is actual meat protein, per two doctors at the University of Mississippi Medical Center." The rest of the "meat" in a chicken nuggets? A slurry of chicken parts, similar to pink slime, made of ground:

• Fat
• Blood vessels
• Bones
• Nerve cells, connective tissues

In short, "stuff that usually ends up in dog food," per NPR. Chicken nuggets would be accurately be tagged as "fat nuggets," commented Dr. Richard deShazo, professor of pediatics and one of the article's authors. 

Those chicken nuggets you serve to your beloved brood? Not much more than pulverized chicken leftovers (plus a smidge of actual meat), mixed with fat, salt, and sugar, and topped with a big dollop of the usual chemicals found in highly processed, highly profitable meat products.  

My suggestion? If the kids crave chicken nuggets, a better, far healthier idea is to create them at home. Recipes abound, including more than a dozen delicious, easy, free ideas at  AllRecipes.com. 

Meanwhile, don't fool yourself that industrial-made chicken nuggets are healthy kid-friendly food options. They're not. Fast-food and supermarket chicken nuggets are just one more fake-food industrial product larded with addicting fat, salt and sugar, and loaded with chemical additives, emulsifiers, preservatives, and fillers. 

And billions in corporate profits.  

Foster Farms Chicken Contamination Not Due to Gov't Shutdown, Is Repeat Offender

Contrary to misleading headlines, the salmonella outbreak at three Foster Farms chicken processing plants was not due to the federal government shutdown.  

The spread of antibiotic-resistant salmonella is directly due to corporate industrial processing of supermarket chickens. These operations routinely process and sell poultry infested with poisons and toxins, including e.Coli. 

As explained here two months ago in "Supermarket Chickens Laced with Bacteria, Feces, Chemicals:"

"I used to stock-up on chickens at cheap prices and freeze them for future use.  Five years ago, I roasted at least two supermarket birds weekly to feed my then family of three.  No more. Today, I'm nauseous at the thought of buying, handling, and particularly serving these contaminated industrial food products. 

"What changed? I got educated on the hidden, ugly, unhealthy realities of industrial-produced chickens. Despite 'natural"'appearances, they're a particularly disgusting food product of the industrial fake-food industry."   (Click link HERE or above to read the grotesque facts about four-step industrial processing of chickens.) 

As of last week, 317 people were reported by the USDA as very sickened by Foster Farms chickens processed at three California plants. Half of the 317 were hospitalized.  The public health rule-of-thumb is that 20 people are sickened for each officially reported illness from contaminated food.  

Foster Farms has been charged before with producing infected chickens destined for supermarket sales. Yet the USDA continued to allow Foster Farms to sell its tainted products. 

"Foster Farms is no stranger to CDC studies. The Northwest company has been struggling with this problem for some years. According to the CDC report, Foster Farms chicken was found to be infected with the Heidelberg strain in 2004 and again in 2012. The 2012 outbreak, which is still being tracked, led the CDC to investigate the problem...

"The USDA knew it needed to address this problem urgently, says the report, so in December 2012, the “USDA-FSIS announced that all establishments producing not-ready-to-eat ground or comminuted poultry products, including Foster Farms, will be required to reassess their Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points plans.

"But was the USDA-FSIS monitoring the implementation of that plan? Was the agency’s own “hazard analysis” plan upgraded to meet the increased need? And if it was, how did the USDA-FSIS miss the ongoing, and apparently rampant, presence of salmonella Heidelberg in packaged products?" (Source - Triple Pundit: People. Planet, Profits)

The USDA-blessed fix for Foster Farms' latest sickening of consumers? 

Despite previous (obviously empty!) threats, USDA inspectors allowed the three California plants in question to remain open for business while they "investigated." Reports Mark Bittman in the New York Times:

"Three days later, Foster Farms 'submitted and implemented immediate substantive changes to their slaughter and processing to allow for continued operations.' What’s that mean? 'We cannot tell you what their interventions are, because that’s a proprietary issue,' said Englejohn, adding that the interventions comprise 'additional sanitary measures that reduce contamination.'

"Well, we hope so.  Meanwhile, commerce continues and the chicken is out there. Will it be taken off the market after 800 people get sick? Or 1,200? Or when someone dies?"  

Is this latest widespread incident of public sickening from contaminated Foster Farms chicken over? We, the American public, do not know. 

This we do know:

• A 2009 USDA study found that 87 percent of chicken carcasses tested positive for E. coli after chilling and just prior to packaging.
• Results of extensive lab testing by Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine "revealed that 48 percent of all chicken samples tested positive for feces."
• Consumer Reports noted that its 2009 tests that Campylobacter bacteria was in 62% of the chickens and Salmonella bacteria was in 14% of the chickens
• Consumer Reports reported in the same 2009 tests that 68% of Salmonella, and 60% of Campylobacter bacterias showed resistance to one or more antibiotics

Read Supermarket Chickens Laced with Bacteria, Feces, Chemicals for succinct info about how each of the four steps in industrial processing of chickens contributes to contamination of poultry sold in supermarkets across the nation.  I also offer suggestions on buying uncontaminated chickens at butcher shops, Whole Foods stores, and the like. 

And please... for your health and that of your loved ones... bypass supermarket chickens. They're a particularly disgusting food product of the industrial fake-food industry, whether or not the federal government is shutdown.  

McDonald's: More Devious Marketing, Dumbed Down Menu Changes

McDonald's persists as the devious poster child for what's wrong with the American fast food mega-industry....

Not just because it's the world's largest fast food corporation, which it is with $28 billion in U.S. sales and 34,000 outlets worldwide in 2012.

And not just because the unhealthiness of its food is legendary. McDonald's greasy fare is intentionally larded with addicting doses of fat, salt, and sugar to create a permanent customer base.

But because McDonald's is quite extreme in its single-minded, often stealth corporate goal of profits over people. public health be damned. 

Again, McDonald's has recently rankled health-conscious Americans with...

McDonald's Mighty Wings, newly introduced at the advent of wing-chomping football season. "Mighty Wings are basically McNuggets With Choking Hazards," commented one NPR on-air host. "I was as surprised to find an actual bone in this as I would be to find a bone in a banana," quipped another. 

Bones in Mighty Wings are about as natural as McDonald's ribless McRib sandwich. 

Mighty Wings are three, five, or ten "pieces" (McDonald's website lingo) per box, with the same ranch, barbecue, or honey mustard sauces used for Chicken McNuggets. Ten Mighty Wings have 960 calories, 60 grams of fat, and a whopping 2,900 mgs. of sodium (salt), 121% of the recommended daily salt intake for an adult. 

Misleading headlines about soft drinks in kids' meals hailed "McDonald's Ditches Soda in Happy Meal Menus," and similar, clearly stating that soft drinks would be eliminated in McDonald's popular Happy Meals.  This very positive change was supposedly brokered with the Clinton Foundation, and released as happy news at Michelle Obama's recent White House to-do on food marketing. 

The Center for Science in the Public Interest naively penned:

"Ronald McDonald’s slow march toward healthier meals made a major advance today... Getting soda out of Happy Meals is historic progress that should immediately be adopted by Burger King, Wendy’s, and other chains. Soda and other sugar drinks are leading promoters of obesity and diabetes and one day it will seem crazy that restaurants ever made this junk the default beverage for kids."

Turns out that McDonald's "major advance" is more fast-food baloney. Reading the fine print revealed that McDonald's agreed only to:

• Promote water, juice, and milk in external advertising directed at children
• New beverages will be "evaluated according to McDonald's food commitment pledges"
• In 3 years, McDonald's will fulfill this commitment in "50% of the 20 markets."
• In 5 years, McDonald's will fulfill this commitment in "100% of the 20 markets."

Lucrative soft drinks dropped from McDonald's Happy Meals? Not hardly, not now. Perhaps when public-health hell freezes over... 

Higher-quality hamburgers were dropped by McDonald's last May presumably because the one-third lb. Angus burgers took too big a bite out of company profits.  NBC News noted that U.S. "beef prices hit all-time highs" and cited"The U.S. Department of Agriculture's wholesale beef market report... showed choice beef carcasses rising 24 cents per hundred pounds (cwt) to a record $204.91 per cwt..."

Introduced in 2009, McDonald's Angus burgers provided better quality beef options than the ubiquitous Big Mac, Quarter-Pounder Cheeseburger, or the dollar-menu $1 Cheeseburger. 

"Who would pay $4.79 for a sandwich when the two sandwiches on the Dollar Menu are perfectly good?” defended one McDonald's consultant to Time magazine. Indeed, what foolish consumer would actually expect a quasi-quality sandwich at McDonald's? Nobody, now. 

Disappearing salads on McDonald's menus include its Fruit & Walnut Salad, which was quietly dropped along with Angus burgers.  The Fruit & Walnut Salad was genuinely delicious with "wedges of crisp apples, juicy red grapes, candied walnuts and our low-fat vanilla yogurt,"

Relegated to a tiny corner of the menu are meal-sized "premium" salads: Caesar, Southwest, Ranch, grilled or crispy chicken optional "with select mixed greens, elegant toppings, and choices galore." 

This near-invisible menu marketing ensures that premium salads will rarely be ordered in lieu of more profitable, more addictive,  carb-heavy burgers, fries, wraps, desserts, and sugar-drenched drinks. Look for premium salads to likely also be dropped because sales were low. 

We must begrudgingly admire McDonald's though, for disciplined corporate consistency. Consistency in:

• Pitching unhealthy fast food to kids, regardless of public and political pressure
• Dumbing down their menu to the cheapest, fastest, saltiest, fattiest food possible
• Eliminating healthier options if profit margins don't reach those of cheap burgers and fries

And consistency in extraordinary corporate profitability at the direct expense of public health.  

There's a reason why McDonald's persists as the devious poster child for what's wrong with the American fast food mega-industry: they've earned and deserve it. 

My only question: when will Americans finally stop supporting McDonald's profits-over-people agenda for our nation's health? For our children?