Whew!!  The holidays "roared in" and "roared out".  It was fun but I'm ready for a holiday from the holidays.  I try so hard to keep up with having something fresh to "chew" on here at Food For Thought.  If you've read any of my previous posts, you probably know that I strongly encourage all food consumers to take a personal initiative to educate yourself and those in your own circles and to take every opportunity to engage the food production industry with your own food activism.  I came across a good site that offers those kinds of opportunities.  I hope you'll give it a look and pick a link that you can give some attention.  It's the voice, vote and dollar of the food consuming public that will change the quality of food that we are offered in the general marketplace.  Remember, many people do not have the education or the means to affect such a change.  If any of us are blessed to be in a position where we can say or do something, I think it becomes our responsibility to do so, otherwise, we will continue to become a failing nation of underachievers and malcontents and poisoned/poor quality food could be a significant contributing factor.  (Poorly nourished children have a full range of mental/physical maladies due to improper nutrition.)  Better food = better health.

The "seeds" we plant today are the "harvest" of tomorrow!

http://my.cspinet.org/site/PageServer

Bon Apetit!

I came across an article this morning that really got me to thinking.  For instance, I've always had the understading, in my limited knowledge, that when there was a glut of something on the market, it would bring the price of that item down.  I understand, as with any production, you want to make the best money you can for your efforts, and the better the profit margin, the more you like it.  So, after reading this article, I see that when the US markets had an excess of dark chicken meat, they sold outside of the country.  I guess I would have liked to have seen that commodity come down so that more Americans would have access to it and buy it.  When I was a single mother with three children, I had to be highly selective when it came to meat purchases which were the costliest.  And, chicken/turkey legs were where I could get the most real food for the most affordable price.

The other aspect of this article that really deomonstrates how we as consumers affect these kinds of decisions is that we(as the public) indicated that we didn't really want to make significant purchases of dark chicken meat.  I can only speculate why that might be.  Possibly, we perceive dark chicken meat to be 'poor peoples food'?  Just a thought.  So, the people who had the buying power rejected the dark meat, and it went to overseas markets.  Interesting.

Then, I noted that the dark chicken meat is actually higher in nurtritional content than the white chicken meat.  So, it would seam that it didn't matter what the real value was of the chicken meat, it was the 'look' and perception of the white meat that made it more desirable over the dark meat which was lost to the market.  I wonder if there's anyone who studies these kinds of things???

Maybe it would be the psycho/sociology of food and how it affects the public food market?  Now, there's a thesis for some brave soul!

Here's the link that got me going:

http://www.delish.com/food/recalls-reviews/what-to-do-with-dark-chicken-meat?GT1=47001

Bon Apetit!