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!