OC Slow Food Membership Drive Only $25 to Join Thru October 15th

September 27th, 2010 by Stacey Blaschke

In order to provide greater access and grow our membership base, Slow Food USA is offering a discounted membership rate from now through October 15th. A contribution of $25 or more enrolls you a as member of Slow Food USA. A contribution of $60 or more also gives members access to the Slow Food USA member discount program.  (Existing members who joined with a contribution of $60 and dual members will be enrolled in the discount program until their membership expires.)

Be sure to select Orange County as your local chapter in order to access the following local benefits:
·      Member only classes
·      Early notification of events

Become a member of Slow Food USA or renew your existing membership today by clicking here

Post a Comment »

Some Recent Slow Food Headlines

September 12th, 2010 by Heather Pritchard

Here are some links I’ve posted recently at our Facebook page with news, recipes, etc. that I thought would be great to share.

One Hungry Mama is one of my favorite recipe and all around slow food blogs for the busy parent who wants to cook better food for their kids.  The Mama brings some great ideas for back to school breakfasts!

{recipe} Back-to-School Breakfasts

I know. We’re so close to a holiday weekend and here I am posting about back-to-school. But Tuesday is coming sooner than you think. (Plus, I’ve got a holiday weekend surprise coming your way soon!)

I had to share this great post with 8 back-to-school breakfast ideas and recipes fromSimple Bites. The ideas are healthy, inventive and easy (with many make-ahead options). Pair it with another one of their great posts, The Best Do-Ahead Breakfast Foods, and you’ve got mornings covered, baby!

Grist is one of my favorite environmental blogs which includes lots of information on food.  They had a great article the variety of foods we eat everyday, at every meal that many of us may not even think about.

The omnivore’s delight: One day, four meals, and 53 species

There is nothing more fundamental about our relationship with Nature than the species we eat.

One evening, while trying to discern exactly what was in the bean casserole my traveling wife had kindly left in the fridge, I wondered: What is the biodiversity of my diet? How many plant and animal species do I consume regularly? And where did they come from?

Later, I compiled a species list from one typical day for four meals: breakfast (cereal and toast), lunch (yogurt and a wrap), afternoon snack (cookie and tea), and dinner (scallops, broccoli, salad, and a brownie). Then, using food labels and knowledge of where I bought the food, I tracked down their origin and ecological niche. I looked up scientific names and kingdoms in the Integrated Taxonomic Information System. I knew where the local food came from, and for other items, where the food label did not specify the source, I determined foreign ones by knowledge of what does not grow in the U.S. (e.g., cacao) and presumed the rest were of U.S. origin.

I calculated that in 24 hours, I ate 53 species spanning four biological kingdoms and five continents.

And then with Slow Food, there is always the scientific, not only on where we grow our food, how we grow our food, but how we store it, transfer it and sell it.  Grist has another piece about the politics of BPA, a hot topic for anyone who’s paying attention to the chemicals that affect our food in every day life.

Scientists believe BPA is risky—it’s just a matter of agreeing on how much

On the heels of Canada’s recently announced banon bisphenol-A (BPA), The New York Times has asubstantial report reviewing the state of the science regarding the safety of this substance. Used primarily to line food and drink cans, some studies have shown BPA to be a hormone disruptor and a potential factor in the rise of obesity. Even the FDA has acknowledged we should reduce our exposure to it.

The Times piece is dedicated to comments from scientists, rather than from industry spokespeople, which is all to the good, though I’m not crazy about the headline: “In Feast of Data on BPA Plastic, No Final Answer.” The good news is that the thrust of the article undercuts this declaration quite a bit.

It’s true that the piece is chock full of scientific circumspection — many scientists are waiting for definitive results before declaring an unequivocal position on the BPA controversy, including whether low-dose exposure to the chemical truly represents a health risk. But most scientists quoted in the article chalked up much of the uncertainty to details of the experimental techniques used, rather than to real doubts about the underlying hypotheses. In fact, the only denials mentioned were from industry and the Republican party — and no corporate or GOP spokesperson seemed willing to offer a quote on the subject.

And speaking of the scientific, our friend Jill Richardson will be paying close attention to the news on the FDA’s recent approval of genetically altered Salmon.  Needless to say, some in the slow food community are concerned.

The FDA thinks frankenfish – genetically engineered salmon – are safe. Not good. I’ve included a press release from Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, and Food and Water Watch on this below. (Acton alert here)

Here is the press release courtesey of Jill and here Blog La Vida LocaVore for you to read.  It’s not pretty.

Press release by Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, and Food and Water Watch:


FDA’s Incomplete Data Release is “Too Little, Too Late”

Fails to Uphold President Obama’s Call for Openness and Transparency

Washington, DC September 3, 2010 – A broad coalition of consumer and environmental groups, along with commercial and recreational fisheries associations, chefs, and food retailers, declared today’s partial data release by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on the genetically engineered salmon up for approval as a human food product insufficient and unacceptable.

“For the millions of consumers, fishermen, and stakeholders who will be affected by the FDA’s decision, FDA’s release of incomplete information today is simply too little, too late,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director for the Center for Food Safety.  “FDA’s fundamentally flawed process flies directly in the face of President Obama’s executive order for openness and transparency in government.”

Materials made available today on FDA’s website relate to an announcement by FDA officials on August 25 that the agency will potentially approve the long-shelved AquAdvantage transgenic salmon as the first genetically engineered (GE) animal intended for human consumption.  The data provided by FDA today is rather scant given that the FDA has had 10 years to review the product. The study on changes in the morphology of the new GE salmon involved only 12 fish. The limited study on possible allergic reactions involved only 6 fertile GE fish and 6 infertile fish. These small sample sizes are inadequate for a full review of the health and safety of these fish when they are raised in a commercial operation. Rather than tell the company to run new studies with adequate samples sizes, the FDA is recommending the fish not be raised in the US, but that the eggs be produced in Canada and the fish be grown in Panama and imported into the US.

The GE Atlantic salmon under consideration was developed by AquaBounty Technologies, which artificially combined growth hormone genes from an unrelated Pacific salmon, (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) with DNA from the anti-freeze genes of an eelpout (Zoarces americanus).  This modification causes continuous production of growth-hormone year-round, creating a fish the company claims grows to full size at twice the normal rate of non-GE farmed salmon. This could allow factory fish farms to crowd fish and still get high production rates despite the stressful conditions found there.

While some materials released today relate to the transfer of the genes and DNA construct, and the chemistry of small samples of the flesh of the GE fish were compared to that of other farmed salmon, no data from long-term clinical feeding trials were required.  “Without the required testing and safety data we have no way to prove the transgenic salmon is safe to eat,” said Michael Hansen, Senior Scientist at Consumers Union.  Moreover, while the FDA is only recommending approval of sterile females for meat, the data released today show that up to 5 percent of the eggs produced may be fertile.   They did not list what protocols they will require of the company to assure that only infertile eggs are shipped to produce the salmon. Moreover, there is no discussion of potential sex changes in the fish.

One of the most serious issues regarding AquaBounty’s GE salmon is that FDA currently has no adequate means to assess the fish as a GE animal intended as a human food product. Rather than developing an appropriate evaluation method, FDA is currently proceeding to approve the GE fish through its process for reviewing a new animal drug. “By choosing to use the animal drug process for reviewing this GE fish, basic health and safety data was kept a secret until just before the hearing on its approval,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch. “It is outrageous to keep this vital information secret – consumers have a right to know what FDA is trying to allow into our food supply.”  Additionally, the materials released by FDA may not include anything claimed by AquaBounty as “confidential business information.”

“This is not a process that leads to full and informed public participation,” said Charles Margulis, Food Program Director at the Center for Environmental Health.  “After 10 years of this application sitting at the FDA, failure to give the public all available data in a timely manner shows just how misguided and deficient FDA’s approval process truly is.”

“No new data relating to the environmental and economic risks that transgenic salmon will pose if they escape into the wild was included in the materials released today,” said Erich Pica, President of Friends of the Earth US.  Despite being slated for widespread commercial production, the Environmental Assessment conducted by AquaBounty only focuses on two locations – Canada and Panama.  If approved, GE fish could be the last blow to wild Atlantic salmon stocks.  The US FDA maintains the fiction that producing the eggs on a Canadian island in a gulf of the Atlantic Ocean will assure that the fertile fish won’t escape into the wild. “This conclusion is based on a flawed assessment completed by Aquabounty itself and wrongly assumes nothing will go wrong when in reality there are countless points where GE salmon can escape into the wild from this system”  said Pica.

Post a Comment »