Azure Jane Lunatic (Azz) 🌺 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
azurelunatic) wrote2014-06-04 11:33 am
azurelunatic) wrote2014-06-04 11:33 am
Tumblr post (this is likely a reblog, and may have more pictures over there)
Posted in full at: http://ift.tt/1rKYp1j at June 04, 2014 at 04:30AM
"While the natural/artificial and unprocessed/processed oppositions are clearly central in defining..."
“
While the natural/artificial and unprocessed/processed oppositions are clearly central in defining ‘good’ or ‘healthy’ and ‘bad’ or ‘unhealthy’ food, they are cultural constructions that ignore the conditions of food production and distribution in modern societies. Many foods contain inherently occurring toxins that are lost in processing. Most fresh fruit and vegetables are subject to the addition of chemicals while they grow, and some are irradiated, sprayed with chemicals or coated with wax to maintain freshness. In the United states, for example, lemons are commonly refrigerated for between three and six months before sale. They are picked green and treated with ethylene oxide to turn them yellow, then dipped in solutions containing copper, sodium carbonate and other fungicides and coated with wax to keep them looking shiny (Visser, 1986: 270-1). Many other foods commonly regarded as ‘fresh’ and ‘natural’ such as fruit juices, milk, grains, fish and poultry are processed in some way before reaching the consumer, while others are ‘processed’ by the consumer in the home during preparation and cooking in ways that reduce their nutritional content (Warnock, 1994: 2). Food scientists argue that processing may in fact reduce loss of vitamins or enhance vitamin content, particularly if the foods are processed while still fresh. Commercial processing, it is contended, also preserves food and reduces the risks of illness from microbiotic decay, such as botulism (Bender, 1986: 47-8; Coward, 1989: 136-7).
As this suggests, the continual opposition of ‘processed/artificial’ and ‘natural’ foods is a response to uncertainty. If we can believe that a food is ‘natural,’ then we feel better about eating it. In the context of a climate of risk and uncertainty, being able to hold on to such binary oppositions and their moral associations makes it easier to live one’s everyday life.
”
- I love Deborah Lupton and I cannot lie.
"While the natural/artificial and unprocessed/processed oppositions are clearly central in defining..."
“
While the natural/artificial and unprocessed/processed oppositions are clearly central in defining ‘good’ or ‘healthy’ and ‘bad’ or ‘unhealthy’ food, they are cultural constructions that ignore the conditions of food production and distribution in modern societies. Many foods contain inherently occurring toxins that are lost in processing. Most fresh fruit and vegetables are subject to the addition of chemicals while they grow, and some are irradiated, sprayed with chemicals or coated with wax to maintain freshness. In the United states, for example, lemons are commonly refrigerated for between three and six months before sale. They are picked green and treated with ethylene oxide to turn them yellow, then dipped in solutions containing copper, sodium carbonate and other fungicides and coated with wax to keep them looking shiny (Visser, 1986: 270-1). Many other foods commonly regarded as ‘fresh’ and ‘natural’ such as fruit juices, milk, grains, fish and poultry are processed in some way before reaching the consumer, while others are ‘processed’ by the consumer in the home during preparation and cooking in ways that reduce their nutritional content (Warnock, 1994: 2). Food scientists argue that processing may in fact reduce loss of vitamins or enhance vitamin content, particularly if the foods are processed while still fresh. Commercial processing, it is contended, also preserves food and reduces the risks of illness from microbiotic decay, such as botulism (Bender, 1986: 47-8; Coward, 1989: 136-7).
As this suggests, the continual opposition of ‘processed/artificial’ and ‘natural’ foods is a response to uncertainty. If we can believe that a food is ‘natural,’ then we feel better about eating it. In the context of a climate of risk and uncertainty, being able to hold on to such binary oppositions and their moral associations makes it easier to live one’s everyday life.
”
- I love Deborah Lupton and I cannot lie.
no subject
I'm just distressed that no one questions the fact that we can get strawberries year round, that they don't go bad in the same ways that they used to. I know there are other examples, but that's the big one I can point to, possibly because I know that the season for strawberries is maybe a month at best.
Really it would make me happier if people thought about their food a little, no matter what they decide to do in the end.
And then of course there is the whole issue of access (in terms of both availability and time for preparation, etc) where food becomes a class issue. Ugh. food! I just want you to be healthy and tasty, why u so complicated /o\