Food, Health, Values, and Complexity

Complexity is a key feature of our postmodern world. Some universities are now offering degrees in ‘complex systems theory’. Managing an ever growing number of intricate and intertwined systems brings both potential upswings in material standards of living, while increasing the risk of an ever more horrific disaster. This is certainly true of our contemporary food system, which in its current state remains heavily dependent on industrial farming. We are presented a double-edged sword and some difficult questions we must all ask about our values and preferences about the food we want to eat.

The New York Times has carefully tracked the multitude of food scares that occurred over the past year and today addressed the macro-level issue of food safety – has eating become more dangerous? The Times seems to indicate this is not the case, but that an industrial food system with myriad players in the production and distribution of food enables pathogens and toxins to spread more widely than in the past. The upside is the number of incidents is declining since the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) initiated comprehensive food illness tracking in the mid 1990s. Herein lies our dilemma – the risk of a potential systemic disaster offset by an overall level of never-before-seen safety.

The discourse presented by the CDC and FDA in the United States is one that focuses on individual instances of sickness. It ignores, however, longer term illnesses and effects of eating processed and packaged foods – bagged salads being an excellent example as there is increasing concern over the use of plastics in our food supply. Is it worse to be sick for a week in hospital with a strong chance of survival (and of working age) or to remain illness free for most our lives while meeting a miserable cancerous end in our later years? When framed in the discourse of economics, naturally good health in productive years would be valued at a premium. But this is not an article on health economics, but rather one that asks you what you want out of your food supply.

Consider that we irradiate, pasteurise, preserve, and doctor so many of our foodstuffs in the name of convenience. Yes, many of us are working longer hours than ever, but what do you value – your work or your body? I am not convinced it is an ultimate trade-off but it is an oft-ignored question our society asks. As a result we are told to trust our food supply of questionable sustainability in the name of safety and convenience. What of a horrible toxin or pathogen that somehow makes its way into our interconnected food supply? What are the long term effects of our present practices?

Local and organic food is part of the answer and cooking homemade dishes from unprocessed, raw ingredients is an ideal for us all to look to. Is this ideal unachievable for many? From a price perspective it may be, but again it all comes down to values. As communities we have the ability to address this issue collectively as mentioned in previous entries. At a minimum, paying attention to where your food comes from (a single farm or producer?) and how it is packaged (paper or plastic – degradable?) is a good first step. Attempting to cook as much as possible from raw ingredients is another step in the right direction. This is where minimalist cookery meets ecology. There are so many simply easy dishes to prepare that incorporate concepts of sustainability without being burdensome. The ‘Minimalist’ series in the New York Times is a good start and this blog will also attempt to be such a resource. At the end of the day, however, you must ask yourself what risks are acceptable. Are you too tired to care about what you are putting inside your body? This is fraught with class implications and normative values that have been constructed over many years, but nevertheless needs to be raised. Do you have faith in a complex system faced with innumerable uncertainties? Indeed that may be the key question of our age.