Dinnertarianism
There's a refreshingly libertarian approach to food and government regulation of it in a story by Nevin Martell in Washington City Paper. I'm all for this approach, and then some. Enough with bans on the sale of unpasteurized milk, Four Loco, and all the rest on which the government claims to know best. (I have a Mommy and I no longer need her to make my food decisions for me.):
"If you want to buy a Happy Meal with a horsemeat burger, a can of Four Loko, trans fat fried foie gras, and a side of shark fin soup, I applaud your right to make those choices," says Baylen Linnekin as we sit on his porch in North Bethesda.The 39-year-old executive director of the nonprofit Keep Food Legal has a decidedly libertarian perspective on food politics. "We want you to have the right to grow, raise, produce, buy, sell, cook, eat, and drink the food of your own choosing," he says. "We're opposed to subsidies that skew those choices and bans that clear those choices off the board. People are not stupid. They can make their own choices and live with the consequences."
To that end, we're sipping on cans of lemonade-flavored Four Loko, malt liquor cranked up with guarana, caffeine, and taurine. When I admit my ignorance over the final ingredient, Linnekin offers, "I think it's approved for use in animal feed as a stimulant, but not in human food." That's reassuring.
The boozy energy drink was banned in several states in 2010 after it was linked to illness and, in some cases, death. Before the company pulled it off the shelves, Linnekin ran out and bought several cases, but not because he likes it.
"It's disgusting," he admits. "But I don't believe that my personal tastes should dictate what other people choose to enjoy."
Government out of our stomachs!
via @radleybalko
The issue with shark fin soup isn't that the sharks are disgusting, it's that some of the species the fins are taken from are endangered, and if their killing isn't limited, then NO ONE can enjoy sharks anymore.
NicoleK at May 3, 2012 3:15 AM
Right Nicole. Also, letting me buy a horsemeat burger is great, IF I am aware that's what I'm buying. Someone has to make providers be honest about what they serve. Past that, I'm all for letting the people decide for themselves.
momof4 at May 3, 2012 5:48 AM
Raw milk cheese, please!
Astra at May 3, 2012 6:50 AM
What momof4 said.
Feebie at May 3, 2012 7:01 AM
In the 60s a neighboring family got hepatitis from drinking raw milk someone gave them. I'm pretty sure the cows were grain fed because it was the 60s. The whole family was quarantined for a month. That made an impression on me. If buying and selling raw milk was legal, at least it could be regulated and you could know it was as safe as possible.
nonegiven at May 3, 2012 1:41 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/dinnertarianism.html#comment-3173326">comment from nonegivenThe cute thing is thinking government regulation protects you from disease or food poisoning. Look up all the recent food deaths -- I bet 99 percent of them come from government-regulated entities.
Amy Alkon
at May 3, 2012 1:45 PM
"We're opposed to subsidies that skew those choices and bans that clear those choices off the board. People are not stupid. They can make their own choices and live with the consequences."
Unfortunately, some people ARE stupid - and most of them are the ones trying to impose all these regulations!
Kidding. But seriously, some people really ARE stupid when it comes to doing things for themselves that make any sense. But why everyone else should have to suffer for the stupidity of those few idiots is beyond me.
Flynne at May 3, 2012 4:25 PM
"The cute thing is thinking government regulation protects you from disease or food poisoning. Look up all the recent food deaths -- I bet 99 percent of them come from government-regulated entities."
Wow, is this non-think or what? I am sorry you said this.
Because all commercial food providers are regulated in the USA, it would take effort on your part to poison yourself with a product NOT subject to regulations. Eat mushrooms you collected yourself, for instance.
While it is strictly true tha a regulation does not protect you against food poisoning, it is overwhelmingly true that adherence to food handling standards DOES protect you.
With food consumption, you can't observe others and learn from their mistake.
Just as when misbehavior of police is NOT indication of the justness of a law, a failure to conform to food preparation and handling regulations is NOT an indication that a regulation should be dropped.
I am reminded that we often don't know what's risky. If I get an Italian sausage dog at the racetrack that is cooked in front of me, I'm at far less risk than at a church potluck. Even if I drop the dog on the pavement and pick it back up.
Radwaste at May 3, 2012 5:23 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/dinnertarianism.html#comment-3173531">comment from RadwasteRad, I live near the renegade Venice raw food coop that got shut down and I read about independent farmers (and have stayed with some in the past and eaten their unregulated food), as well as eating eggs from Christopher Leonard's unregulated chickens, etc...and let's see...dinners at friends' homes...there are many instances when you can eat unregulated food products. Bake sales, etc.
Many food providers get in under the wire.
And regulators are often lax -- there were a number of scares in the past year...e coli in vegetables, I think...something with chickens, I think. I can't look them up now - have to get back to work. But, these regulated products often sicken people. Again, regulations don't protect you -- conscientious food producers do.
Amy Alkon
at May 3, 2012 5:41 PM
"Again, regulations don't protect you -- conscientious food producers do."
Be consistent.
Who sets standards and enforces them - such that you don't have to test the clam chowder for botulin toxin yourself?
You don't have any other way to see that Green Giant or Hormel, with which you have no personal relationship and which produces food by the megaton, doesn't let toxins into their process.
A single supermarket has more food items, from more countries than the entire market you saw get shut down, and when I walk in, I can be pretty sure nothing in there will poison me immediately, and the enforcement of standards is why that is.
Radwaste at May 4, 2012 6:17 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/dinnertarianism.html#comment-3174472">comment from RadwasteWho sets standards and enforces them - such that you don't have to test the clam chowder for botulin toxin yourself?
A company that kills people will be ruined.
Amy Alkon
at May 4, 2012 6:52 AM
That's not going to help you as you gasp for breath. It won't help your offspring, born with flippers due to mercury.
Yes, food poisoning doesn't just take one form.
How many could McDonald's kill in just one day with bovine spongiform encephalitis?
Who do you blame whe a giant like ADM or Beatrice or Pepsico gets it wrong? Look at the ingredients of a frozen pizza. How do you tell if the ingredients were clean?
How do you tell Lucy's dog food doesn't have parasites in it?
See, the regulations apply at each stage of preparation, so that the causes of incidents can be identified.
You're arguing with a broad brush - for the elimination of consumer protection in food industries.
Say what you WANT to happen and how to get there and you have a chance. Roadside vendors can sell oranges in Florida, because it's easy to check an orange - and because the groves are inspected for pests and pesticides by the state's D of Agriculture.
Radwaste at May 4, 2012 10:54 AM
Leave a comment