Chipotle Founder: USDA "Natural" Meat Standards Should Be Tougher

The Denver Post:

The Department of Agriculture recently released its long-gestating definition of "naturally raised" meat. Previously, the word "natural" had been ill-defined and virtually unregulated. The new standard is a step in the right direction for our nation's food supply, but doesn't go nearly far enough.

Under the USDA's new standard, producers or sellers of meat who want to claim it is natural must ensure that "livestock used for the production of meat and meat products have been raised entirely without growth promotants, antibiotics (except ionophores for parasite control) and have never been fed animal by-products."

There are several serious flaws with USDA's proposed approach. First, the new definition makes no demands on meat producers to provide natural living conditions of their animals. "Naturally raised" doesn't mean that the animal was raised with access to the outdoors or even the opportunity to exercise.

Read the whole story: The Denver Post

Comments

[JScott]

And your menu selections should have less sodium in them.

[tokenconservative]

Of course they should be tougher - the FCC regulates percentages that medical companies can contend on their commercials (and to which decimal degree at that), but we can't have an accurate, consistent definition for what we put in our stomach?

[jsarets]

I'm not sure I agree with this entirely. I think that all consumers should absolutely be informed on the packaging of any non-nutritive substances that may have been administered to the animals, and I even think that discerning consumers should ideally be able to reference the feedstock components in descending order of relative mass.

But in terms of living conditions, I think that the focus should be on sanitation rather than "humane" treatment. There is plenty of evidence and common sense logic suggesting that limited mobility results in safer, more consistent meat products with more efficient conversion of feed calories. Modern pork production is a great example of using controlled environments and feedstock to dramatically improve the health and safety of the product.

When it comes to vegetarian ideology, I buy the health aspects and the ecological angle, but I don't buy the moral part of the argument. I don't see how raising chicken necessitates a level of moral sensitivity that exceeds that of raising corn. We prevent corn from reproducing sexually and spouting wherever it likes because we get better results by replicating successful genetics and planting it in neat rows. I don't see how chicken is any different.

Undoubtedly many people are interested in the treatment of animals, and Chipotle should by all means advertise its high standards. But I think that the regulated definition of "natural" should apply only to what goes into the animal and not what goes on around it.

[tokenconservative]

I don't think I've ever actually met someone with the lack of moral acuity to recognize where the moral aspect of raising animals comes from - they have the capacity to feel emotions more acutely than severely retarded humans, and many animals (pigs especially) have the cognitive ability greater than you had for the first years of your life. Only a depraved or ignorant society would treat animals the way we do, and I'll be damned before I sit around and cry about how we need to rise unemployment benefits more while 7 billion animals a year are consigned to sub-rational treatment.

[Connee]

I like Chipotle saying that we need tougher standards. I challenge them to make a commitment to changing their menu to a more vegetarian fare. They should have a goal of at least fifty percent of their menu appealing to vegetarians and vegans within the next few years. The corporation could charge as much as they do for the meat, going meatless and could create a market that was moving toward a humane and responsible answer to many of our environmental problems. I think it took some guts and a lot of marketing savvy to stand up and say this by Chipotle, now, they need to raise the bar.

[Treehuggindirtworshiper]

The menu is very simplistic. There are many choices for vegetarians.They offer 2 kinds of beans,rice and several different vegetables as well as salsa. The menu is not exstensive but it is only limited by the person ordering.

[AngieMom57]

Could it be that the time is not too far distant when the idea of animal food will be found REVOLTING to civilized man?

[Squawkencluck]

I have to disagree with the article. There is no perfect degree of regulation. If all we accomplish with this is the consumer's ability to purchase meat that has not been given prophylactic anti-bacterial antibiotics and no growth promoting hormones it is a HUGE step in the right direction.

Food is like any number of giant aspects of our lives that needs change. Fix one aspect, even subtly, and you can have an enormous impact on environmental quality, food saftey, and long-term health security. This means less environmental release of antibacterial drugs, lower rates of resistence evolution in pathogens, and no side effects in humans due to consumption of meat with unusually high levels of growth regulators. This is a win.

[mergina]

Now All of America's food standards should be tougher. Why do you think so much cancer is on the dramatic rise? Why do you think the fastest growing age group for colon cancer is 19-30 years of age, (and the medical profession still says you do not really have to be screened until you are 50)? WE ARE POISONING OURSELVES THAT'S WHY.

[mergina]

All of America's food standards should be tougher. Why do you think so much cancer is on the dramatic rise? Why do you think the fastest growing age group for colon cancer is 19-30 years of age, (and the medical profession still says you do not really have to be screened until you are 50)? WE ARE POISONING OURSELVES THAT'S WHY.