Photos of recipes from the new book Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Photos of recipes from the cookbook Tender Grassfed Meat
Our Ancestors Thrived on High-Fat Diets
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Grass-fed beef with its natural fat cap.
If you study the history of food, and read what contemporary people wrote and said about it, you will be struck by one inevitable fact—our ancestors considered fat a vital nutrient, and loved to eat it. The only bad thing about fat was the difficulty in obtaining it, as it was often expensive and hard to get.
This fact is shocking to modern people, who have been subject to a propaganda campaign that labeled most fat as bad, unhealthy, and the cause of most illness. This propaganda campaign began in the 1960s, and became accepted as absolute fact in the 1980s. Even though there never was any real evidence to support the all-animal-fat-is-bad theory, nearly everyone believed it. Even today, most people believe that fat, especially saturated animal fat, is bad for health and should be restricted.
This belief remains common even though it has never been proven and many studies and much research has totally discredited it.
Now, I am not a doctor, or a nutritionist, or a scientist. But I am an attorney, and I have been one for a very long time. Attorneys are experts in evaluating evidence. I have evaluated the available evidence on fat, and it is my opinion that animal fat from healthy animals eating their natural diet is one of the healthiest, most vital, and most needed foods we can eat.
The Case Against Traditional Animal Fat
The claim that fat is bad and causes illness began with the infamous “lipid hypothesis “developed after World War II. This unproven theory tried to connect cholesterol with heart disease, and eating fat with the creation of excess cholesterol.
This theory was of great benefit to the makers of factory vegetable fats and modified foods, who had to find a way to get Americans to drop the healthy traditional foods of their ancestors, so they would buy the new products. It also created a whole new set of illnesses and medical conditions, which increased revenue for the medical profession and the drug industry. These powerful forces supported the lipid hypothesis and the related belief that eating saturated animal fat caused too much cholesterol, and therefore, heart disease. Since eating factory foods makes people fat, a huge diet industry grew and added its money and power to the propaganda campaign. Eventually, these industries were able to persuade most people and institutions that eating traditional animal fats caused many other illnesses. Since these industries have a great deal of influence over government, they were able to get government agencies to support the fat and cholesterol myths.
A number of careful reviews of the studies supporting the lipid hypothesis have shown that there is no real evidence to support the theory. The same is true of the theory that eating animal fat is unhealthy. A number of these reviews are available at the website of the Weston A. Price Foundation. The lipid hypothesis is believed not because it is true, but because it has been marketed so effectively.
The Case for Traditional Animal Fat
Human history and even animal history establishes conclusively that traditional animal fat is a vital nutrient. The very first part of the animal eaten by predators is the fatty liver, followed by the other fatty organs. Caves which sheltered prehistoric peoples are full of bones that have been cracked open to get at the fatty marrow. Nearly every traditional people valued natural animal fat as one of their most important foods. Pemmican, the traditional survival food of the Native Americans who lived on the Great Plains, was one-third bison fat. European poets wrote poems about their love and appreciation for fatty foods. There are countless other examples.
Dr. Weston A. Price, a dentist and researcher, became aware that each generation of his patients had worse teeth than the preceding generation. He noticed how healthy some traditional peoples seemed to be. He decided to visit a number of them, all over the globe, and learn what made them healthy. Dr. Price was convinced that nutrition was the key, and expected to find that these people were vegetarians. He spent ten years travelling the world, visiting these healthy peoples in person and learning what they ate, and did not eat.
He learned that none of them were vegetarians, and all of them relied heavily on what he called sacred foods—which were always foods rich in animal fats, including butter, the back fat of moose, fish eggs, seal blubber, cod livers, milk that had six times the fat content of American milk, and other similar foods.
These people were healthy, having perfect teeth, no degenerative diseases, no mental illness, and no birth defects. When the very same people began to eat the processed foods of civilization, their health collapsed, they lost their teeth, and became the victim of many horrible illnesses, like tuberculosis.
Dr. Price had thousands of traditional foods studied in labs, and concluded that the most important nutrients were found in traditional foods rich in animal fat.
I find Dr. Price’s research convincing, and adopting a high animal fat diet based on his research brought me from being very ill to being free of all illness.
My cookbooks, Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue, are true to the principles discovered by Dr. Price, and make full use of traditional animal fats in the recipes.
This post is part of Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday , and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Real Lard, Great Food
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Real pork lard.
Most Americans are horrified by the very thought of eating lard. Some seem to think that even a small amount of lard will stop their hearts, or make them obese, or both. Yet lard was once the most popular cooking fat in America. Lard was also the most popular cooking fat in China.
Lard was demonized so margarine, hydrogenated oils, and other creations of the processed food industry would sell. The artificial fats created by the food industry taste and feel much worse than the traditional fats of our ancestors. This means that the only reason people would buy the factory fats is if real fats are believed to be unhealthy. There are no shortages of scientists and studies that the food industry could and can buy to scare people into giving up real food. Lard, and all saturated fat, was blamed for heart disease, and countless other illnesses.
The truth of the matter is that real lard, from healthy pastured pigs, is very healthy and nutritious, and one of our best sources of vitamin D.
Real lard is one of the very best cooking fats, having a high smoke point, and being unlikely to spatter in most circumstances.
And food cooked with real lard can be incredibly delicious.
The Two Types of Lard
Nearly all the lard you will find in the supermarket is hydrogenated, which means that the very molecular structure of the fat has been changed to something that never appears in nature. This lard almost always comes from pigs that have been kept in confinement, may never see the sun, and are fed almost totally on GMO soy and GMO corn. This lard does not need to be refrigerated, which means that it has been processed to the point that it will not spoil. But lard like this has a horrid, greasy, slimy texture, and a truly disgusting taste, at least to me, and many others. It will, in my opinion, ruin any food cooked with it.
Real lard, the lard enjoyed by our ancestors, is not hydrogenated. It comes from pigs raised in the open air, who forage for a great deal of their own food, and see plenty of sun. It is hard to find, but it tastes and feels a thousand times better than the hydrogenated abomination. You can get this kind of lard at some farmers markets, though it can be very expensive. My favorite Internet source is U.S. Wellness Meats, which sells rendered lard from pigs who spend most of their life in the open, foraging for a large part of their food. The price is also quite reasonable.
The Benefits of Real Lard
Real lard gives incredible flavor to food. It is great for basting meats, and has been used for that purpose for thousands of years, from Sardinia to China. Meat basted with lard is more tender, retains more of its juices, and tastes fantastic.
Real lard is also great for baking, and played a huge part in traditional European and American biscuits, pies, cakes, and breads. It gives incredible flavor and texture to these dishes, one that is unique and wonderful.
Real lard is perhaps the best fat for frying and sautéing. It has a very high smoke point, spatters rarely, and adds its own wonderful flavor to the food that is cooked in it. We do not have French fries or fried chicken very often, but when we do, it is usually fried in real lard. It is the fat of choice in most of our stir fries. Not only is frying easier, safer, and smoother, but the taste benefits are immense.
And real lard is healthy, to the great surprise of most people. The Weston A Price Foundation, which I consider to be the most knowledgeable food organization on earth, recommends the use of real lard in cooking. Not only does real lard provide a valuable balance of essential fatty acids, it is one of the best sources of natural Vitamin D, and other nutrients.
Today, following the suggestion of a seventh generation English butcher, we fried eggs in real lard for the first time. Awesome.
We use real lard in cooking all the time, and enjoy it immensely.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Traditional Food for Winter
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Our ancestors sipped traditional beef bone broth throughout the day.
The huge storm that struck the Eastern United States is a sobering reminder of the power of nature. The storm has brought an early winter to much of the nation, causing intense cold and snowstorms in some areas.
Our ancestors had a number of traditional foods that they used to help them survive the long, cold winters. These time-tested traditional dishes kept people warm and filled their bodies with the nutrients needed to deal with the demands of winter. They were also delicious. My family has adopted the custom of having lots of bone broth, stews, pot roasts. and the occasional celebratory roast for a special occasion. We use only grassfed or pastured meats for this purpose. Not only do we enjoy the wonderful tastes of traditional food, but we stay healthy, without medication. Our ancestors had a lot of wisdom.
I have described some of these traditions in an article I posted on Handpicked Nation. Here is the link:
Cold Weather Cooking for Grassfed Meats
Traditional Sea Salt Is a Vital Nutrient
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Natural Celtic Sea Salt on the left and factory salt on the right.
Salt is one of the most vital human nutrients, and our ancestors knew this. Yet, the consumption of salt is now under attack.
The government is trying to reduce the amount of salt people consume, claiming that it will improve health and prevent strokes and heart disease.
Part of the Paleo movement is opposed to adding salt to food, believing that our Paleolithic ancestors did not add salt to food.
Many people believe salt is very harmful.
Because I advise against pre-salting grassfed meat in my cookbooks, some people assume I do this to reduce salt consumption.
All of these beliefs are mistaken. If we do not consume enough salt, our bodies do not function properly. Ultimately, if people do not get enough salt, they die.
The Two Types of Salt
While all salt originally came from the sea, it is available in different forms. It must be understood that two general types of salt are available. They are not the same.
The most common salt is factory salt, which is composed of salt that has been stripped of its minerals, and has had chemicals and flavoring agents (often including sugar) added. This salt is a pure white color. It is ground very fine and flows easily out of a salt shaker, almost never caking. This kind of salt did not exist before the twentieth century. This is by far the most common form of salt in the United States, used extensively in processed foods and by most people, who are usually unaware that the minerals have been stripped out, or that chemicals and even sugar have been added to the refined salt.
Then there is pure, unmodified salt from nature, often harvested from the sea, though it is also found in solid deposits on land. This salt, consisting of nothing but sea salt and minerals, is the traditional salt that humanity has used since the beginning. This traditional salt is the only salt I use or recommend.
Humans Have Added Salt to Food Since the Earliest Times
The belief that early humans did not add salt to food is mistaken. I remember reading about how the early colonists of the United States would choose a site for settlement. They would always have someone, usually a skilled hunter or scout, follow some of the wild animal trails in the area. They were looking for one thing they absolutely had to have, or they would not settle in that area—salt. Wild animals also need salt, and they would find salt deposits, usually called “salt licks.” The animals would find salt deposits, and get their salt by licking them. There is every reason to believe that early hunters and gatherers did the same, and found salt by following wild animals or their trails.
All the old writings on cooking, including those going back thousands of years, describe the addition of salt to food. Salt was greatly valued in ancient times, being more expensive than gold in some areas.
The reason is quite simple. Our ancestors knew that they needed to add salt to their food to live and thrive.
Our ancestors used salt to preserve and ferment foods, and created many artisanal foods based on the use of salt, including sauerkraut, ham, cheese, jerky, sausage, and countless others. Our ancestors ate far more salt than we do.
Why We Need Salt
Salt is one of the most crucial nutrients we need. Our bodies use salt for many body functions, including digestion, regulating blood pressure, creating and regulating hormones, proper adrenal function, proper functioning of the nervous system, and proper functioning of the brain, among others. (See The Salt of the Earth.)
If we do not get enough salt, these vital body functions are adversely effected. If you were to put anyone on a totally salt-free diet, they would eventually die, after much suffering.
We often crave salt, because our bodies so desperately need it. If you crave salt, it may be that you are not getting enough.
Is Salt Good? Or Bad? Or Both?
There is a belief in mainstream medicine, supported by some research, that associates salt intake with increased risk of heart disease or strokes. There is other research that disputes this theory, and shows great harm occurring from salt restriction. (See The Salt of the Earth.)
In the past when heart disease and strokes were very rare, traditional peoples and most humans consumed much more salt than people do today. And we know that the Japanese, who have the highest average salt consumption on earth, have among the highest average lifespans on earth.
So how do we know what is true, when the research is conflicting and history contradicts some of the research?
My own personal, anecdotal, common sense belief is this:
The difference may be in the type of salt consumed. Prior to the twentieth century, all the salt consumed on earth was traditional salt, without chemical additives, with the natural minerals left in. I believe that this kind of salt is not harmful, and is vital to our health. The studies done that support the idea that salt increases the risk of stroke and heart disease were all done at a time when factory salt was used. These studies are only relevant to the use of factory salt. To the extent that studies have found harm from salt consumption, it may be because of the chemicals, or the fact the minerals are stripped out, or both. So my own personal belief is that it is good, and important, to eat all the traditional salt I want, without fear. At the same time, I avoid factory salt as much as possible.
Please be aware that I am not a doctor, or a scientist, and I am not legally qualified to give any kind of health advice to anyone, so I am not giving advice—just stating my personal belief and what I do.
I do feel that the salt restriction now being pushed by the government, part of the medical profession, and the food industry is ill-advised, and I base this belief on history, and the excellent research done in this article, which I highly recommend. (See The Salt of the Earth.)
Salt and Grassfed Meat
I advise against salting most grassfed meat too far in advance. This advice is given solely because I have found that long pre-salting tends to toughen some grassfed meats. I do use plenty of traditional salt at the table, and will often salt meat just before it is cooked. The right amount of salt really brings out the flavor of food, and is absolutely vital to the taste, nutrition, and flavor of homemade broth.
I do enjoy the salt of the earth, and I do not fear it.
Related Post
Natural Salt vs. Industrial Salt
This post is part of Fat Tuesday, Monday Mania, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
The Lonely Truth, Real Food, Second-Hand Smoke, and Hope
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: Aaron Escobar
Sometimes, knowing the truth can make you feel lonely and isolated.
Almost everyone who has switched to real food and grassfed meat knows what I mean. Nearly everyone you know eats factory food, and considers it normal. Most people accept what the media, the medical profession, the food industry, and conventional belief tell them about food. And when you reject factory food, you are often alone. People, especially family members, can get very angry at you, especially at social occasions when you will not eat what they eat. Or when you will not let your children eat the candy and other factory foods they want to give them. At the same time, they will be horrified that you actually eat saturated animal fat, plenty of real red meat, and butter. I have lost count of the times that friends and family members have claimed that my real food diet will cause all kinds of fatal diseases. Some of your friends and family may even consider you crazy.
In fact, the very fact of trying to eat only clean, wholesome food has been described as a mental disorder. See Eating Healthy Is a Mental Disorder? Nonsense.
It takes real courage to step out of the herd, to think for yourself, to learn and adopt a better way of eating. And it has consequences, both social and personal.
But take heart. Eventually, the truth that most people now reject will become accepted. The time will come when the truth about real food and grassfed meat will overcome the lies and biased studies that keep people eating factory food. But only if enough people stand strong and keep to their principles.
This is not a fantasy. I have had an experience where my “crazy†belief eventually became the conventional belief.
The Truth about Second-Hand Smoke
Second-hand smoke is tobacco smoke that you do not inhale from a cigarette or cigar, but inhale from the air. As a matter of common sense, tobacco smoke is tobacco smoke, and breathing it into your lungs will do harm, whether you get it from the air, or from a cigarette.
But many years ago, the tobacco companies funded studies that claimed that second-hand smoke was completely harmless. And these studies were accepted as absolute fact, by almost everybody.
When I was eleven years old, almost everybody believed that second-hand smoke was harmless because of the studies. But second-hand smoke made me choke and wheeze, I was more sensitive to it than most people. When I was exposed to it, and breathed it in, I hacked and coughed and could not control it. My parents were concerned the first time this happened, and took me to a doctor. The doctor told them that second-hand smoke could not possibly harm me, and that I was “faking it.†If only that was true. My parents believed anything any doctor told them. They got very angry at me, and threatened severe punishments if I did not “stop it.â€
Later that week, my father’s second-cousin, who had a PhD in something, visited our home. He started smoking, filling the air with second-hand smoke. I tried hard not to choke and cough, but my efforts failed. The PhD pronounced that my cough did not sound “real.†I said the smoke was choking me. He stated that studies proved conclusively that second-hand smoke had no effect on anyone, and that I must be faking it. He told my parents that I should see a psychiatrist. As far as my parents were concerned, that was the final word. After all, he was a PhD. They refused to listen to me, and I was severely punished.
Seeing the psychiatrist made things even worse. He insisted that the studies proved that second-hand smoke could not affect anyone, and that I was faking it for other reasons. Since I knew I was not faking anything, and that the smoke made me choke, I would not “confess,†which angered him. He finally told my parents that I would not cooperate and was defying him. Fortunately, psychotropic drugs were not routinely given to children at that time. However, my parents inflicted more punishments on me, but no amount of punishment could stop me from choking and coughing when I breathed second-hand smoke. My parents lost all respect for me, and treated me with contempt. We became adversaries, and I was very unhappy. I thought something was wrong with me, that I was a bad person. It terrified me to think that I might be faking it without even knowing it. At the age of eleven, I began to believe that I was crazy, to some degree. My schoolwork and social life suffered greatly, because I was not the same child.
When I became a young adult and made my own decisions, it suddenly hit me that I was the only one who could possibly know how tobacco smoke affected me. No matter what those studies found, they did not study me. I decided that what I experienced had to be real–for me.
I avoided tobacco smoke whenever I could, and breathed as shallowly as possible when I could not. On social occasions, I politely asked people not to smoke, telling them I was sensitive to it. Many people would agree to what I asked, and many would not. I lost a lot of potential friendships that way, but I stayed true to what I had learned from my own experience.
Over the years, many people who suffered from second-hand smoke came to realize that the studies were wrong. They organized and made their voices heard. They got the attention of some scientists, who began to reinvestigate the issue. These people held their ground and insisted that what they had was not a mental illness, but actual harm from second-hand smoke.
Many years later, the fact that second-hand smoke is almost as harmful as smoking was proved without doubt. All the biased studies paid for by the tobacco companies were wrong. Laws that restricted smoking were passed to protect people from this harmful second-hand smoke. I had been right, all along, even when I was an eleven-year-old boy.
The truth about second-hand smoke finally broke through the deception and biased studies, and became accepted.
The same will happen to the truth about real food. The sooner the better.
The Truth about Real Food Will Come Out
If you try to eat only real food, and to protect your family and children from factory food, you may feel alone. But you are not alone. There are more of us every day, and the movement is growing. Keep going with what you know is true, and do not be discouraged by the lack of knowledge of those around you. They have received a huge amount of propaganda designed to keep them eating factory food, and they get more of this propaganda every day.
And something wonderful is happening. The biotech industry financed a number of studies claiming that GMOs were harmless and the same as other food. This is the reason behind the fact that GMOs are not labeled. Yet an initiative that will require the labeling of foods containing GMOs is on the California ballot this November, and is still winning in the polls despite the massive marketing campaign against it that has been financed by Monsanto and other giants in the biotech and food industries. You can find out more about how to support Proposition 37 at: Yes on Prop 37.
I encourage you to politely and calmly continue to do your reasonable best to eat real food, and reject factory food, when possible. Eating real food is much better, and the fact that most people do not know this does not change the truth about food.
The more people who know about real food and spread the word, the sooner our truth will spread. And the day will come when everyone knows the truth about food. And that will be a great day for everyone except a few greedy corporations.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Eating Healthy Is a Mental Disorder? Nonsense!
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: cliff1066™  Is it a “mental disorder” to make a pleasant trip to a Farmers’ Market to buy healthy organic produce?
The real food movement is a real problem for the food industry and the medical industry. More and more people are refusing to eat foods containing artificial ingredients. More and more people are refusing to let doctors tell them how to eat. More and more people are avoiding foods containing toxins, chemicals, and preservatives. More and more people are thinking for themselves. Can’t have that. People should do as they are told, by those who know better. So the powers that be are turning to a tried and true method of controlling the masses.
The methods used to keep people ignorant and compliant are many, and the tyrants and exploiters who live off the fear and suffering of others have used a huge variety. One of the most despicable methods is to label people who dare to disagree with conventional belief as crazy. Nowadays, the term of choice is “disorder,†which can be used to condemn any dissenting opinion and dismiss those who hold it as having a mental illness. That way, the truth of the dissenting opinion is never addressed, and the people who have it are condemned, made fun of, often institutionalized, and sometimes killed. Most people become afraid to even consider the dissenting opinion, for fear they will be labeled as mentally ill. A very effective way of killing free thought and preserving the status quo.
The latest use of this freedom killing method is the creation of a “mental illness†called “Healthy Eating Disorder,†which is usually called by the scientific-sounding name they picked for it, Orthorexia. Rhymes with Anorexia, which helps invoke the fear of a known disease. If it sounds like a mental disease, it must be a mental disease, right? If you avoid foods that contain chemicals, preservatives, GMOs, or any toxins, you are mentally ill with this so-called disorder. I kid you not. Psychiatrists have actually been quoted saying that this is a “serious mental disorder,†which can lead to “malnutrition,†social isolation, obsessive behavior, and many other horrible consequences, including death.
In other words, if you try to avoid eating toxins, if you try to only eat the healthy, unmodified foods of our ancestors—you are mentally ill and should be treated with psychotropic drugs. I suppose the only way you can avoid being labeled mentally ill is to eat the worthless factory foods industry promotes without hesitation or complaint.
This is nonsense. But it can and will be used to control our behavior. Unless we reject this evil and cynical fiction for the nonsense it is.
Some Examples of How Accusations of Mental Illness Were Used To Maintain The Status Quo:
Most people have never heard of Dr. Ignaz Semmelweiss. Yet Dr. Semmelweiss has saved the lives of more women than anyone who has ever lived. During his time, and before, in Europe and the U.S., many women died from a horrible, painful disease. It was called childbirth fever. Fatality rates ranged from fifteen to eighty percent. A woman was at great risk of getting this horrible disease every time she gave birth. Many millions of women died from this illness.
The medical profession of the day could do nothing to cure childbirth fever, and treated it as a normal risk of giving birth.
In the mid-nineteenth century, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweiss, a Hungarian obstetrician, began doing something remarkable. He began washing his hands before assisting in childbirth. Semmelweiss noticed that his patients did not get childbirth fever. He assisted a number of women, from the rich to the poor, and they did not get this horrible disease that was so common. Semmelweiss decided that all who assist with childbirth should thoroughly wash their hands. He vigorously advocated his theory, and was astounded and dismayed when most doctors refused to wash their hands, despite his findings. He wrote letters to newspapers, letters that offended the medical profession. The doctors denounced Semmelweiss as insane. Semmelweiss was lured into visiting a mental institution. When he realized that the real purpose of the visit was to commit him, he tried to leave. He was savagely beaten by the brutal thugs used to control the inmates, and committed. His wounds became infected, and he died within two weeks. An autopsy revealed severe internal injuries from the beating.
Yet Semmelweiss had managed to publicize his findings enough that more doctors began to experiment with them. Eventually it was realized that childbirth fever was caused by the filthy hands of doctors and some midwives. And it became standard practice to wash and clean the hands before assisting in childbirth. Childbirth fever almost completely disappeared.
The old Soviet Union had a problem. Many of its citizens were complaining about the harsh conditions and constant shortages, and were expressing their opinion that the system did not work. The government decided that, since Soviet Communism was the best governmental system on earth, anyone who questioned or criticized it must be mentally ill. Tens of thousands of Soviet citizens were drugged or sent to mental institutions for questioning the system. The very fact that they complained was taken as proof they were mentally ill and needed “treatment.†This so-called mental disorder disappeared when the Soviet Union was overthrown.
Both Dr. Semmelweiss and the Soviet citizens were perfectly sane. Yet they were labeled as mentally ill and forcibly committed and/or drugged. Their real crime was to find a better way of doing things that threatened the established powers of their societies.
Now Comes Orthorexia
When I first read an article treating Orthorexia as a serious mental disorder, I thought it was a joke. Unfortunately, it was not.
The basic theory of this non-existent “disorder†is the idiotic claim that being concerned about the content and quality of your food is a mental disorder that requires treatment.
If you avoid foods containing toxins, pesticides, or particular ingredients such as soy, sugar, corn, or GMOs, you are considered mentally ill. That is nonsense! If a “disorder†claims that not wanting to eat poison is abnormal and crazy, then the disorder is nonsense. Most people in history, over the entire globe, were deeply concerned about the safety and quality of their food, and paid a lot of attention to it. It is only in modern times that people have blindly eaten whatever the food industry places before them. I consider it vital to consider the quality and content of my food, and my health has improved greatly as a result.
Some of the “symptoms†of this phony “disorder†are so ridiculous that I cannot understand how anyone can take them seriously. Here are some of the most idiotic:
Planning the Next Day’s Meals in Advance
Really? I plan the next day’s meals in advance all the time. In fact, I have a general idea of what will be eaten during the week, which enables me to know what foods to purchase. Is there anyone on the planet who sincerely believes that this is a sign of insanity?
Feelings of Happiness, Satisfaction, Esteem, or Spiritual Fulfillment from “Eating Healthyâ€
This is a problem? Eating real food does create feelings of happiness and satisfaction. What is wrong with that? Do I feel good about the fact that I carefully select and prepare the best real food I can get for myself and my family? You bet I do. Do I feel fulfilled when I eat a great meal of real food free of toxins and chemicals? Of course I do.
And I am certain that all of my many friends in the real food movement have the same experience, and most of humanity has had and cherished this experience throughout history. This is a “symptom†that everyone should be blessed with.
Noticeable Increase in the Use of Supplements, Herbal Remedies, and Probiotics
Well, this must be the ultimate proof of insanity. Anyone who does not use Big Pharma’s drugs is crazy. Anyone who finds a cheaper, safer way to health is crazy. Anyone who tries to make up for our nutrient-depleted soils by taking supplements is crazy. Anyone who uses probiotics instead of drugs is crazy. Certainly this has nothing to do with corporate profits. Actually, this “symptom†has everything to do with profit.
I could give further examples, but I have made my point.
Orthorexia is not a mental disorder. In fact, if the entire human race had the “symptoms†of this “disorder,†and insisted on clean food free of toxins and chemicals, we would all be much better off.
In closing, the very fact that the real food movement has a phony mental disorder being used to try to control us is an admission that we are being heard, and that there are more of us every day. We should not give any credibility or consent to this cynical attempt to control us and should always call it what it is—nonsense.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday, and Freaky Friday blog carnivals.
Real Food Is Best with Real Cooking
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Real cooking makes holiday meals special, but it is great for everyday cooking as well.
Many people are starting to realize that the traditional food of our ancestors, real food, is much better for us than the chemical-drenched industrial stuff turned out by the big food industry. Fruits and vegetables grown without chemicals, grassfed and pastured meats, real dairy, traditional fermented foods, and other traditional foods, have nourished humankind for thousands of years, and are so much better than the factory stuff, both in taste and nutrition. Real food generally is more expensive, and is harder to find. But it is truly worth it, as you feel so much better and are likely to experience great improvements in your health, vitality, mood, mental functions, and general quality of life. Real food does a great job of supporting the natural functions. After all, real food has been supporting our bodies for uncounted thousands of years, and our bodies have adapted to thrive on it. Factory food has only been around since the twentieth century, and new artificial ingredients and processes are introduced every year.
But real food comes with a hidden price. It is not convenient. If you are really going to switch completely to real food, someone in your family is going to have to cook it. And that someone might as well be you.
The Death of Real Cooking
Once, America was full of fantastic home cooks who were proud of their cooking. This was not limited to women, as many men were proud of their skill at barbecuing and cooking meat. Cooking knowledge was passed down from generation to generation. Home-cooked food was so good that restaurants had a very hard time competing, and had to struggle to provide food that was even better than home-cooked. This posed a huge problem to the processed food industry, as it slithered into existence. Why would anyone want to eat their dead, relatively tasteless food? Much research was done, and three answers were found:
The first was to claim that packaged, factory foods were more “scientific,†and modern. People in the early twentieth century were in awe of science, and this argument alone was enough to get many people to give up lard and switch to hydrogenated vegetable fats, for example.
The second was to claim that certain traditional foods were “unhealthy,†and to finance “scientific†research to prove the so called “unhealthiness.†This was even more successful, persuading hundreds of millions of people to give up the sacred foods of their ancestors for inferior processed substitutes.
But the third technique was the most effective. Convenience. Factory packaged foods were designed to be convenient to prepare. It was much easier to add a few ingredients to a mix, or heat something in the oven or a pan, than to actually cook from scratch. Or you could pour factory dry cereal directly into a bowl, add a few things, or not, and eat it with no preparation at all. The advent of the microwave made things even faster and more convenient, as you could “nuke†a huge variety of packages for just a few minutes, and have something resembling a meal.
It took absolutely no skill or knowledge to prepare food this way, and most Americans simply gave up on cooking. Today, it is estimated that two-thirds of American adults do not know how to cook, though they can pop a package in a microwave, or pour cereal into a bowl, or buy a pre-made salad at the supermarket. People eat a huge portion of their meals at fast food joints or restaurants. But this convenience comes at a terrible price. Malnutrition. Most Americans suffer from malnutrition without even knowing it. Processed and factory foods are far inferior to real food in supporting the natural functions of our bodies. Chronic illness is at an all time high, and many of the afflicted are young adults, which is something new and disturbing. In fact, the physical condition of American youth has deteriorated to such a degree that 75% of those who try to join the military are rejected as being physically unfit to serve.
I believe that switching to real food is the ultimate solution to these problems, and it certainly worked for me and many others. But you cannot get real food out of a package, or just nuke it in a microwave and expect to have a meal. Real food requires real cooking.
Many people complain about the cost of real food, but I believe in the truth of the old saying, “Pay the farmer or pay the doctor.â€
The Return to Real Cooking
I cook just about everything from scratch, using real food ingredients. And the benefits to my well being have been enormous. I have gone from being chronically ill to healthy. If you are not used to cooking, learning how to cook might seem overwhelming. But it can be far easier than you might think. Real home cooking is simple, and consists of learning certain skills which are well within the abilities of most people. You do not need to be a fancy chef. And I will share a little secret with you. The more you cook, the easier it gets, if you are on the right path. Eventually, it becomes second nature, like riding a bicycle. And the real food you prepare will taste so much better. And you can take pride in the fact that every meal you make is truly nourishing and helping the natural functions of the people you feed, helping them to feel better and be better in every way. Another benefit is the sheer pleasure you can bring to others with a tasty, home-cooked meal of real food.
There are some excellent resources for learning how to cook real food. The Weston A. Price Foundation has a series of instructional cooking videos on their website, which are very informative and well done. I also recommend Sally Fallon Morell’s excellent cookbook, Nourishing Traditions as a great basic cookbook. It is also full of valuable nutritional information. When it comes to grassfed meat, I recommend what I use, Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue. I use them regularly. I designed them to be easy to use and traditional. While the inspiration is traditional, I have adapted these traditions to the modern kitchen.
There are other resources, as well, but learning how to cook real food is a very important part of receiving the benefits of real food. Real food deserves real cooking.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Traditional Tuesdays, Real Food Wednesday Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Not Fit for a Dog, or for Humans Either
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Grassfed meat and bones, the most traditional and best food for dogs.
The pack of wild dogs stalked hungrily through the tall grass, sniffing for prey. Suddenly, the pack leader stiffened as he smelled something. The pack froze, watching the leader. The leader bounded forward, and the pack followed, howling. They burst furiously out of the grass, and pounced upon a — patch of GMO soybeans?
Sounds unbelievable, does it not? Well, so does a can of vegetarian dog food. But, believe it or not, I saw such a can recently, proudly marked as “vegetarian†dog food. Not trusting my eyes, I took a look at the ingredients. They included water (the first ingredient), soymeal, soybean oil, and a host of artificial vitamins. Oh yes, there was also some brown rice. Dogs are real big on brown rice. The ingredients were described as “natural.†In reality, this means that the soy was almost certainly GMO.
Dogs are carnivores. They are designed to hunt prey and eat raw meat. Not soybeans, especially not GMO soybeans. Of course, dogs will eat this, if they get hungry enough. In fact, they will probably wolf it down, as their bodies search desperately for the vital nutrients that aren’t there. And just in case hunger is not enough, flavor-enhancing chemicals can be used to give a meaty flavor to this stuff. But that does not make it meat.
Come to think of it, soymeal and soybean oil, highly processed to remove the stench and horrible natural taste, are added to all sorts of foods made for humans. While we are omnivores, replacing meat with soy is a bad idea for us too.
In other words, processed soy is not fit for a dog—or humans either.
Would You Rather Eat Grassfed Hamburger or Soymeal?
The answer is very obvious, for most people. And almost all the people who would choose soymeal would do so because of their vegan or vegetarian beliefs, or because they are scared to eat red meat. But the reason that most humans would choose grassfed hamburger is because grassfed meat is one of the oldest and most traditional foods of humankind, a food that has nourished humankind for thousands of generations. In contrast, unfermented soy has been eaten for little more than one hundred years. And GMO soy did not even exist until the 1990s. All soy includes hormone-disrupting chemicals and other toxins, though traditionally fermented soy has much less.
To say that grassfed meat tastes better than unfermented soy is like saying water is wet. And grassfed meat and fat are full of valuable nutrients, and are not toxic. This wonderful meat provides many nutrients that our bodies crave, and make us healthier and stronger.
While the soy industry has planted all kinds of misinformation all over the Internet, trying to convince us that soy products have been eaten since the dawn of time, the truth is very different. Soy was first grown as a crop in China, thousands of years ago. This soy was not eaten at first. It was used to restore nitrogen to the soil, and would be alternated with food crops at various intervals. The fact that soy was not eaten or fed to animals tells us that the early Chinese knew it was not good to eat, as even this early, non-GMO soy had toxins, hormone disruptors, and smelled and tasted horrible. Eventually, the Chinese learned to ferment soy to make various foods. The traditional fermentation process reduced the toxins, and greatly improved the taste and smell. Even this fermented soy was only eaten in small amounts, and used mainly as a condiment and seasoning.
It was not until the twentieth century that the eating of unfermented soy really began. Industrial processing made it possible to extract large amounts of oil from soy. This oil could only be made by refining soybeans, and had never been eaten by humans before. At first it was used solely for industrial uses, but soon was used as an ingredient in processed food and as a cooking oil. The sludge left over after the oil was extracted was thrown out as smelly, slimy garbage. Then someone came up with the idea of adding this sludge to foods, as it does contain protein. This sludge is still the basis of most soy foods, though now it almost always GMO. Since this stuff is truly revolting in its natural state, it is highly processed and mixed with sweeteners and flavor enhancers. Unbelievably, soy products are marketed as “health foods.â€
I choose grassfed hamburger.
Grassfed Meat and Organs Can Be Great for Dogs, and Humans
I have often written about how grassfed meat can help people recover from all kinds of injuries, including physical ones. This applies to dogs as well as people. My friend John Wood, a terrific grassfed farmer and the founder of U.S. Wellness Meats, learned this firsthand about four years ago. John’s dog, Buck, was severely injured in an accident. The Vet found a severely broken hip, and did not think Buck would ever recover. John did not give up. He put Buck on a diet of raw grassfed meat, grassfed liver, and grassfed marrow bones. There was no surgery. John also gave Buck a very high-quality liquid calcium magnesium supplement. After three months, Buck was completely recovered. X-rays showed that the hip had healed completely.
Does anyone really think that Buck would have been healed by eating canned soymeal?
I know a number of humans, including myself, who have rebuilt their bodies and health by eating grassfed meat. So, I say that grassfed meat is fit for a dog, and humans, as both species thrive on it.
I am not a veterinarian, and am not qualified to advise people on what to feed their dogs. But no one needs to be a vet to know that feeding dogs a vegetarian soy-heavy diet from a can just does not make sense.
Related Post
Avoid Second-Hand Soy—Just Eat Grassfed
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Avoid Second-Hand Soy—Just Eat Grassfed
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
This dry-aged grassfed steak contains no soy toxins.
I was about to roast a 100% organic chicken, from a brand I had never tried before. As I washed the chicken, it just did not look right to me. I got a funny feeling that there was something wrong with this chicken. But it was 100% organic. What could be wrong with it? I roasted the chicken in a way that should have turned out delicious. But it didn’t. The chicken did not taste good, and I had indigestion after eating it.
I went to the butcher who sold it to me, who worked for a large chain store, and complained about the taste and after effects of the chicken. The butcher, who I knew well, leaned close to me, and said quietly, “This company feeds a very high percentage of soy to their chickens. I hate the way they taste. I won’t eat them myself.â€
That was the first time I learned what soy feeding could do to the taste and quality of meat. And since unfermented soy has always given me indigestion, I learned that the nasty qualities of soy could survive in the meat of animals that ate it.
But my experience was “anecdotal†and not a valid scientific study.
But now, I have learned that various scientific studies confirm my experience by reporting that the meat or eggs from animals fed soy contain soy toxins.
The best way to avoid soy toxins from meat is to JEG—just eat grassfed.
You Can Get Toxins from Second-Hand Soy
Some of the many toxins in soy are known as soy isoflavanones, and the soy industry claims they have “health benefits.†Based on the excellent book, The Whole Soy Story, by Dr. Kaayla Daniel, and my own subjective experience, I believe these substances are toxins, pure and simple.
Recently, I was fortunate enough to read an excellent article by Dr. Daniel, called Soy-ling of America: Second-Hand Soy from Animal Feeds, on the website of the Weston A. Price Foundation. I learned a lot from this article, which is the source of the data that this post is based on. My thanks to Dr. Daniel for graciously giving me permission to use information from her article.
Several studies were done that showed the presence of soy isoflavones in egg yolks and meat tissues. One study tested eighteen commercial brands of eggs to see which of them contained soy isoflavones. The study found that all eighteen brands of eggs contained soy isoflavones, even the organic and free-range varieties. One study found soy isoflavones in the meat of poultry.
While none of the studies addressed red meat, there is no reason to believe that soy isoflavones are not present in the meat of every animal fed soy.
What this means is that you can avoid every soy product, and still ingest soy toxins. They can be hidden in the meat and eggs of animals, and can cause the same sorts of problems that result from eating food that contains soy.
If you are one of the many people who are allergic to soy, it is important to realize that you can get soy just by eating meat or eggs from an animal who was fed soy. While I have seen no study on this, it is quite likely that you could also ingest soy toxins from farmed fish that were fed soymeal, which is a common feed for farmed fish. These facts are just as important to those of us who choose to avoid unfermented soy, or all soy.
How to Avoid Second-Hand Soy Toxins from Animals
So how do you avoid ingesting soy toxins from animal products? The obvious answer is to avoid eating the meat or eggs of animals or fish that have been fed soy feed. The problem is that the government does not require the labeling of soy feed in animal products, so there is no way to know if a particular conventional meat or egg comes from a soy-fed animal.
My rule is simple: just eat grassfed. Grassfed meat, raised and finished on grass alone, is fed no soy, and contains no soy toxins. You can avoid soy toxins in fish by just eating wild fish. Soy is not part of the natural diet of wild fish, obviously. I have been able to find eggs that are from chickens raised without soy feed, though they are more expensive. It is worth the extra expense, and they feel and taste much better.
And you can find chickens that are pastured and raised without soy feed. These chickens can be very expensive. I find that I do not eat much chicken these days, as I would much rather spend the money on grassfed red meat, which is so much more satisfying.
I recommend that you read Dr. Daniel’s article at the link given above, as it provides an excellent, detailed description of the problem. I am deeply grateful to Dr Daniel for her research on the dangers of soy, her excellent book, and her continuing efforts to expose the truth about this noxious substance, which has done so much harm to the health of humanity and our planet.
I am including a short bio provided by Dr. Daniel, for those who would like to know more about her and her work:
Kaayla T. Daniel, PhD, CCN, is The Naughty Nutritionist™ because of her ability to outrageously and humorously debunk nutritional myths.  A popular guest on radio and television, she has been on The Dr Oz Show, ABC’s View from the Bay, NPR’s People’s Pharmacy and will appear this summer on PBS Healing Quest. Dr Daniel is the author of The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food, a popular speaker at Wise Traditions and other conferences,  Vice President  of the Weston A. Price Foundation and recipient of its 2005 Integrity in Science Award. Her websites are www.naughtynutritionist.com and www.wholesoystory.com.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Enjoy your Traditionally-Cooked Grassfed Barbecue without Fear
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Barbecuing tender grassfed meat the traditional way with indirect heat.
July the Fourth is near, and that means barbecue. It is an old American tradition, and a most delicious one. Barbecues in America go all the way back to colonial times, where easy access to inexpensive meat and wood meant delicious grassfed feasts cooked with logs burned down to coals. Barbecues were huge social events, often drawing hundreds or even thousands of people, lured by the ancient pleasure of pastured and wild meat cooked with fire.
But today, many are afraid to barbecue, being concerned by studies that find that suspected carcinogenic substances are created by the barbecue process.
Not to worry. Even if these studies are accurate, you can avoid the cooking method that creates the suspect substances by using traditional techniques, which are perfect for cooking grassfed and pastured meats.
What the Studies Found
I was concerned by these studies, and I must admit I stopped barbecuing for awhile. But I really missed the wonderful flavor that can only come from real barbecue, so I decided to take a close look at the studies. I wanted to resolve this paradox. The healthy peoples studied by Dr. Weston A. Price nearly all barbecued most of their meat and fish, and they had no cancer, despite the modern studies stating that barbecuing created carcinogens. Just as puzzling was the fact that humans have been cooking with fire for uncounted thousands of years, yet cancer is a very modern disease, unknown among people eating a traditional diet. If cooking with fire created cancer, humanity might have died out a long time ago. There had to be another explanation.
I decided to start by looking at the raw data. The studies found that barbecuing created two substances that were believed to be carcinogenic. One substance was created by cooking meat over direct high heat, especially when the flames touched the meat. The second substance was created when fat from the meat dripped directly on to the heat source, which created a smoke that went into the meat.
The key is that these substances were created only when the meat was cooked directly over the heat source.
Traditional Barbecue Methods Avoid the Creation of Carcinogens
My next step was to study the barbecuing methods of traditional peoples, which I did. What I found was fascinating. Most traditional barbecue was never done directly over the heat source. This was true for most peoples all over the world, and over time. The meat was cooked in front of, never directly over the heat source. The meat was invariably cooked over a container to catch the drippings, which were used for basting and as a condiment. This meant that the meat was never cooked over direct high heat, and never touched by the flames. This also meant that fat never dripped into the fire.
There were some exceptions to this rule. Some traditional peoples grilled directly over the fire, but set the grill so high over the coals that the heat was gentle, and the flames never touched the meat. Some European cooks grilled directly over the fire. The people who wrote older cookbooks looked down on this practice, stating that it gave “a noisome stink†to the meat, or that it was the mark of a bad cook.
Some peoples cooked small pieces of heavily marinated meat over a small fire, but this was the exception. Even these people kept the heat of the fire low, and kept the flames from touching the meat. Interestingly enough, the studies found that marinating meat reduced the formation of the suspect substances by 90 percent or more.
In other words, the cooking method that creates the carcinogens was not used by most traditional peoples. Use their methods, and you will not create the potential carcinogens mentioned in the studies.
But What about the Smoke?
A number of articles have been published over the Internet that point out the toxins given off by burning wood. But this is not a problem in traditional barbecue. That is because the most common fuel was one hundred percent hardwood charcoal. Charcoal is made by burning wood under controlled conditions. The toxic chemicals burn off during the process, and are gone by the time the charcoal is made. This process goes back many thousands of years.
Barbecue experts and traditional peoples did not cook over blazing raw wood, but made sure to burn the wood down to coals before cooking. Burning the wood down to coals also burns off the toxic chemicals, which literally go up in smoke.
So you can avoid the toxins in raw wood smoke by using one hundred percent hardwood charcoal, or burning your wood down to coals. These are the most traditional ways of using wood for cooking.
How to Adapt the Tradition to Modern Barbecues
Cooking in front of, not over the fire, is very different from the way most Americans grill. Grilling over direct high heat results in the creation of the substances mentioned in the studies. I believe that this method was created to deal with the extra water in factory meat, which requires direct high heat to be somewhat palatable rather than grey and soggy.
But grassfed meat, including steaks and burgers, cooks beautifully in front of, not over the heat source. The meat is never scorched or charred, and picks up a wonderful flavor from the coals. You can avoid the risks and have a perfect cooking method for grassfed barbecue by cooking in front of, not over the heat source.
This cooking method is used in all the recipes in Tender Grassfed Barbecue, and is the method I use whenever I barbecue. This July 4th, we are going to enjoy a beautiful thick prime rib steak, cut from a beautiful grassfed roast we got from U.S. Wellness Meats. And we will enjoy without fear, following the tradition of our ancestors.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Traditional Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, Freaky Friday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
« Previous Page — Next Page »