Balance of Food

Saying goodbye to the Colbert Report

No news show, no program on the Food Network or the Cooking Channel has done more to attack the hype of food, food obsession, and food marketing than the Colbert Report.

Whether that be Thought for Food or challenging Dr. Robert Lustig on high-fructose corn syrup or many spirited battles with Michael Pollan or his classic Wheat Thins segment, Stephen Colbert has been a champion for a better-run society when it comes to food.

The Colbert Report started out to be a spoof of shows such as the O'Reilly Factor. Colbert took his success and used it to call out hypocrisy and food marketing shame. As himself, he testified before Congress about the plight of farm workers.

BalanceofFood.com coverage of the Colbert Report

BalanceofFood.com coverage of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart

Colbert is ending the Colbert Report tonight to take over for David Letterman on CBS sometime in 2015. We fear very deeply that Colbert won't cover food topics with the vigor he did on the Colbert Report, if he covers them at all.

Here are some of the many segments that made us laugh and think over the last 9 years.

Stephen Colbert mocks concept of serving size in Wheat Thins parody

Stephen Colbert opens up can of sand as Taco Bell lawsuit gets more publicity

What's Tempting: Food labels listing added sugars

What's Tempting: Banning trans fats

School lunch

Colbert deservedly mocks Domino's Smart Slice

Stephen Colbert fights for school tater tots and Taco Bell 'food'

Colbert Report: Tom Vilsack and school lunches

Stephen Colbert calls out Tom Vilsack for ag policy contradictions

Dr. Robert Lustig

Dr. Robert Lustig's slightly shifting views on high-fructose corn syrup

Stephen Colbert knows more than Dr. Robert Lustig about high-fructose corn syrup dangers

Food quality

Colbert showcases government extreme on addressing raw milk

Behind the jokes, Stephen Colbert shines light on plight of farm workers

Stephen Colbert holds up a mirror to the meat industry

Colbert Report to shine spotlight on farm workers and their sacrifices

Colbert gives a lick about salt and the FDA

Colbert weighs in on the politics of sugar

Animal cruelty

Stephen Colbert fights for 'huge' chicken cages

Colbert Report pokes at Prozac in poultry

Michael Pollan and other supporters

Michael Pollan goes 'cooking' with Colbert Report

Will Allen gains new audience with Good Food Revolution

Weight of the Nation should be serious about why we're obese

Michael Pollan needs to be straightforward about high-fructose corn syrup

Michael Pollan says our bodies don't know what to do with HFCS

Way too much corn in our food

Snack foods

Colbert Report's Thought for Food: Can't stop at one?

Temptation of the Week: Doritos Tacos Locos

Portion sizes

Colbert Report pokes fun at shrinking candy bars, second breakfasts

Pyramids, plates offer 2-dimensional help in a 3-dimensional world

Food obsession

Colbert frowns on air in chocolate, and overdoing undercooked bacon

Colbert's Thought for Food: Fruit puree in a pouch

U.S. standards need to limit labeling 'cheese' for actual cheese

Colbert's Thought for Food: Foot-long cheeseburger and sugary cereals

Colbert's Thought for Food: Grilled Cheese Burger Melt

Colbert weighs in KFC Double Down, cupcakes for Germans

Our high-fructose corn syrup obsessions wrapped in Colbert humor

What's Tempting: KFC Go Cup used for healthy snacks

photos credit: Colbert Report

Farmland is propaganda, but Katie Couric doesn't help Fed Up credibility

The two most-buzzed about food documentaries this year are Farmland and Fed Up. One is propaganda and one isn't.

At least, that is one interpretation.

I first heard about Farmland via friends on Facebook. Fair enough. It seemed odd that I hadn't heard much about it otherwise.

With a modicum of digging, I figured out why Farmland hadn't crossed through: the movie was released by Big Food as propaganda. The reception I saw about Farmland on Facebook was generally positive. Not overwhelmingly positive, but positive.

Further reading proves why I'm glad I didn't waste my money and time. A lot of these documentaries flow together; I certainly didn't want to ruin my mind on a film that was trying to trick me.

Fed Up is not propaganda, though if you question the film's intent, you could easily conclude that the film is propaganda.

Companies that get rich off of high-fructose corn syrup and corn would think Fed Up is propaganda. Then again, some of those companies were involved in the propaganda that is Farmland.

If you look at the marketing of Fed Up, the corn people should be somewhat happy. After all, the marketing lumps corn sweeteners as "sugar." The film's Web site compares the addictive properties of sugar as "tobacco and alcohol." "The more sugar you eat, the more you need to satisfy your craving." Except that not all "sugar" is sugar.

We have a huge problem in this country with high-fructose corn syrup and artificial sweeteners. But the marketing of the film lumps everything together as "sugar." That doesn't help address the issue.

Marketing a film as "the film the food industry doesn't want you to see" sounds noble, but the motto inspires laughter more than anything else. The food industry won't care if you see Fed Up or Forks and Knives or King Corn.

Forks over Knives has good message, but presentation needs work

Forks and Knives and King Corn are other similar films are more straightforward, but their message is more general: eat better grown food.

Fed Up takes a simplistic position on a complex topic and takes a side, an obvious side. On some level, that is propaganda.

The difference might be whether you like the message in the film. The Farmland message is that farmers work hard so you shouldn't question how your food is grown or how animals are treated. We know that is propaganda because the people behind the film are being deceptive about the truth to further themselves.

Katie Couric is one of the major players involved in Fed Up — an executive producer and narrator. Couric's popularity has overshadowed her journalism sins.

Some might remember the plagiarism incident where Couric was reading first-person essays that didn't come from her experience. The sham was unveiled when a CBS News Web producer was fired for plagiarizing a Wall Street Journal column. Couric was never punished for her role.

Couric's worst journalism sin was "being deceptive about the truth to further themselves." In July 2008, Couric interviewed then GOP presidential candidate John McCain on the CBS Evening News. The answer McCain gave to a question was edited out of the interview and an answer to a different question was inserted into the interview.

The substitution was a direct violation of CBS News rules. The blame was shifted to an unnamed producer who edited the piece. Yet no one involved, especially Couric, were ever punished much less fired.

What Couric did was propaganda and passed it off as news. This isn't to say that Fed Up is propaganda, but you'll have to forgive me if I don't trust the journalism skills of Couric.

BalanceofFood.com film coverage

I didn't go see Farmland because I know from good sources that it is propaganda. I didn't go see Fed Up because of a major player in the film who has done propaganda. While I am not directly comparing the two situations, others will make different choices.

Propaganda is not always black and white. Elements of Farmland are true or relevant. Elements of Fed Up are true and relevant. While Fed Up has distinct advantages over Farmland in being true and relevant, to preach outside the converted, the voices have to be credible. There are a lot of voices in Fed Up that are absolutely credible: Katie Couric is not one of them.

What's Tempting: Marijuana edibles

"The caramel-chocolate flavored candy bar looked so innocent, like the Sky Bars I used to love as a child." — Maureen Dowd, columnist for The New York Times.

We certainly applaud food tourism. But if you are headed to Colorado this summer, you might want to exercise some portion control … but not for the usual reasons.

Dowd clearly had some problems with her marijuana edibles, as profiled in Tuesday's column.

The "worst" of it for Dowd is that she "lay curled up in a hallucinatory state for the next eight hours."

Dowd got advice the next day that she clearly needed before eating the candy bar: "candy bars like that are supposed to be cut into 16 pieces for novices; but that recommendation hadn’t been on the label."

Like a good journalist, Dowd threw herself into her quest to sample the marijuana edible at full force. If Dowd had followed the advice, there would be no column.

We don't know from the column how long Dowd waited once she arrived to eat the candy bar. Having been in the Canadian Rockies in 2012, higher elevations can mess with you. There's a reason why John Denver sang about "Rocky Mountain High."

Dowd might be better off exercising that right in Washington state, though that state has been really sssllooooooww in implementing legal marijuana. Soon, you will be able to get pot-infused coffee in Washington state. That product might be more Dowd's speed.

Marijuana edibles serve a significant purpose where marijuana is legal. Smoking pot has many drawbacks. Some physically can't handle smoking. The smell turns off some people. And it's more obvious that you are consuming pot when smoking it.

The marijuana edibles world is similar to how things go in the food world: a little goes a long way.

Eating 1/16 of a candy bar seems eccentric. However, a marijuana edible is not a regular candy bar. In fact, if you do it right, you might want a regular candy bar … or three once the marijuana edible has kicked into form.

Dowd pointed out a couple of extreme cases in the column. Same message for Dowd goes for everyone: a little bit goes a long way and know how much you can handle. Same goes for food, though not for the same reasons.

Marijuana edibles are not food in the traditional sense, even if they look like food. Perhaps the labels should reflect that better (a marijuana leaf on the package, perhaps) but we live in a country where front labels can be pretty deceiving.

Know what you are putting into your body: food or drug or both.

Jason Greenslate is no proof of food stamps fraud

Meet Jason Greenslate.

In one world, Greenslate is the poster child for food stamps fraud because he bought lobster even though he draws $200/month in food stamps.

The Fox "News" cameras catch him buying lobster and sushi. Does that mean Greenslate buys lobster all the time? The one time for the camera? We don't know.

By capturing one moment of ringing up lobster, but not showing the actual purchase with food stamps, the outrage caused GOP politicians to push for — successfully — to reduce money for food stamps for those who truly need help.

“This is the way I want to live and I don’t really see anything changing,” Greenslate said on camera. “It’s free food; it’s awesome.”

Off-camera, Greenslate was more in the reality world "I don't think that one person should be the decision for 47 million people," he told the Huffington Post.

Previous coverage:

Expensive seafood on food stamps is latest conservative lie

Greenslate could be a genius on some level, though the Fox cameras don't portray him as such. Chances are Greenslate got played by a sophisticated media strategy; seems quite plausible.

Two conclusions from this effort should scare us as a society: 1) this was the best Fox "News" could come up with as an example, and 2) this worked to reduce money for food stamps.

For the record, you can buy lobster with food stamps. Sushi, too. But if you want to eat for the rest of the month, you aren't likely to do that too often. In a world where calories are king, lobster isn't even the best purchase. You can load up on a lot of steak for the price of lobster, but a lot of what you get with a lobster are parts you can't eat.

Food stamps recipients not on TV aren't buying lobster or tons of steak because they live in a non-TV reality world.

A true news investigation would show a widespread pattern of buying lobster or hidden outside income or a luxury apartment or something to show that Greenslate is typical.

But Fox does none of those things. You only see Greenslate buy lobster once. Greenslate paints a picture where this happens all the time, but you don't see any proof.

Two conclusions to take away from the Jason Greenslate "example": 1) Nothing Greenslate admitted to on camera is illegal, and 2) Even the Fox pundits aren't arguing for a change in the law.

When James O'Keefe first burst onto the scene, he was painted by Fox as a independent journalist. Well, O'Keefe wasn't from the start, using unethical tactics and incorporating heavily edited recordings to paint a false picture. By the time that was revealed, the perceptions of what he had done stuck with much of the public. Never mind that truth played no part.

We definitely aren't comparing Greenslate to O'Keefe, but both examples don't pass the smell test.

Jon Stewart also plays selective quotes to paint a picture on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. And some of those quotes are used to draw laughter, a non-partisan activity. As we've seen all too often from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, it takes a comedian, lots of comedy writers, and an arsenal of news footage to show more truth than any cable news TV outlet.

Temptation of the Week: Eating out 365 days in one city

The job that seemed perfect for me in the persona of both of my primary blogs was eating out every day for a year in Richmond, British Columbia, Canada. Psychologically and gastronomically, I was ready for such an adventure.

But as we know, I didn't get the position. Richmond hired Lindsay Anderson to assume the role. And last week, Anderson finished up her 365 days of consecutive dining.

Will Richmond be an eating destination thanks to Anderson's work? Nothing personal to Anderson (other than she got to do what I wanted to do), but the setup seemed pointless. Were people going to go out of their way to eat in Richmond's restaurants?

From Anderson's blog entries, she learned a lot about different Asian cuisines. This exercise felt more like showing those who might not know much about this kind of food and making them more comfortable about ordering in Asian restaurants.

Previous coverage:

Richmond, BC gets PR blogger in Lindsay Anderson, but little else

Lindsay Anderson brings too little attention to Richmond, BC food scene (CanadianCrossing.com)

You could do the same in Vancouver, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Toronto, and other major North American cities. But no major city would have pulled off this exercise since tourists come to those cities anyway.

If you did eat 365 days in one of those cities, you can enjoy a different cuisine each night. That would be a fun exercise, especially if you were new to the city. Anderson had some idea about Richmond where I had no experience at all.

The Travel Channel had a comparison between Chicago and Toronto. The show wasn't meant to judge a city overall in only a few minutes, though in the Chicago example, one of the 3 highlights isn't even known for its food. But I could have picked better places in Chicago (where I live) and Toronto (where I want to live) than they picked.

If I had to pick a major North American city to eat in 365 days in a row, Toronto would be a great place since you can get every kind of food under the sun. San Francisco would knock your socks off, and that is true even if you limited yourself to "the City" itself. New York City is a place where I haven't sampled a whole lot, so that would be a new adventure. Los Angeles is similar to me, but might not be as exciting. Montréal would be fun for the unique dishes you wouldn't get as good anywhere else.

Chicago would also offer a lot, though I'm likely biased in that I've eaten a lot of meals in Chicago. But if Chicago wanted me too, I would try some places I might have missed from living here.

Cincinnati and Milwaukee have produced some great meals for me, so they should get a mention. Boston would also be an eater's paradise. I don't know New Orleans, but that city could be fun for a year of eating.

I would gladly choose Paris or Rome for eating 365 days in a row, but the line would be long to join me in that adventure.

If you've lived in a place long enough, you've likely eaten 365 meals in restaurants, though not in a row. But you've likely done a few places multiple times. The joy in the challenge of eating 365 days in a row in a city is trying places where you never would have eaten otherwise.

Since most of us won't get that financial incentive to eat in a city 365 days in a row, utilize some of what Anderson did for your own eating individual. Try a place in your city that you always wondered about, but never stopped in before. Sure you might get a dud, but you might get a joyous surprise. And you won't have to travel or get a blogging gig to make that work.

photo credit: 365 days of dining

Temptation of the Week: Part-time vegan

You can punch a time clock on the whole vegan thing: start the day punching in as a vegan and when it's time to go home, you can punch back out.

That may not be the spirit of what Mark Bittman is extolling in his new book "Vegan Before 6," but he does offer a more approachable take on being a vegan. Bittman says he can eat whatever he wants for dinner, though I'm willing to admit that his version of "whatever he wants" is more limited than yours or mine.

Bittman is a believer of meat, just in a supporting role.

You certainly don't have to take "vegan before 6" literally. You can flip the script, eat one meal vegan, add some vegan ingredients, or go part-time vegetarian.

The main issue to take is that you don't have to go deep in the water to make a difference. After all, Bittman, The New York Times food writer, eats meat and fish and uses butter — just not all the time.

Though I find myself a conscious omnivore, I do find the idea of being more vegetarian friendly to be tempting. Experimenting with coconut oil and almond milk might get me to be more vegan friendly.

The only thing that separates me from being "vegan before noon" on most days is the milk I usually drink for breakfast and the pecorino romano cheese I put on my spaghetti. The cheese is purely out of habit. Then again, I use very little cheese. The milk is also somewhat out of habit. The milk and cheese do have a protein purpose.

Except for an occasional use of pancetta, bacon, or anchovies, the usual morning meal is vegetarian, just not vegan. Fake cheese could substitute for the pecorino romano, but I would rather go without. Almond milk or other fake milk could supply the missing protein.

Yes, I get some protein from the whole wheat spaghetti and the mushrooms, but feel like the morning should have more substantial protein.

The general consensus is that adult women should get 46 grams of protein per day, men 56. Getting that protein sooner rather than later can help you get through the day.

I see almond milk as a great sub for baking or cooking, but am not convinced for regular drinking … yet.

Some days, I do go "vegetarian before 6" especially if I'm eating bread and cheese for lunch. I don't feel like I'm missing the meat as much if I'm consuming protein. Right now, that protein is dairy-based, though I might need to rethink this.

Doing that day after day isn't going to happen for me. I need flexibility to achieve my balance of food. I can get meals to be mostly vegetarian or mostly vegan on occasion. I'm willing to consider reasonable alternatives throughout the day.

photo credit: Clarkson Potter/Publishers

Dylan Ratigan making nice transition to helping veterans become farmers

Dylan Ratigan fell in my radar May 18 at Green Fest in Chicago. Ratigan was on the main stage talking about Arches Acres, the group that works with returning veterans and turns them into farmers. While he was speaking, I thought back to his days on MSNBC. I knew he gave up the show, but hadn't made the connection between him and Arches Acres.

Ratigan spent most of the talk on hydroponics. I have some idea what hydroponics were, but Ratigan's talking points grabbed me. 3x as fast, 3x as much food, and using 90% less water.

Ratigan showed up Tuesday night on my TV set as Al Madrigal interviewed Ratigan on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart." Madrigal wasn't there to talk to Ratigan for the Daily Show about hydroponics or veterans or the quality of the food we are growing and eating. Madrigal was there as a way to mock the extremes of cable news.

Still, Ratigan sneaked in some talking points about hydroponics: 3x as fast, 3x as much food, and using 90% less water.

I first heard about Arches Acres about a year ago and was impressed with the basic concept. Veterans serve our country but often have trouble adjusting back to society. Teaching them farming gives them a skill, something where they can be their own boss. And for those veterans that are having troubles due to PTSD or other trauma, farming's simplicity might be even more helpful to them.

Ratigan noted at Green Fest that the unemployment rate for Iraq and Afghanistan war vets is 20% and that taxpayers spend #1 million each on service members for training to work on complex equipment. Getting service members to be more active helps reduce the taxpayer burden to take care of them. The bonus is helping to improve the food supply.

The water issue is crucial as many parts of the world suffer from water shortages, including the American Southwest. Ratigan pointed out, and I heartily agree, that the wars for water will dwarf the battles over oil.

Ratigan also said since hydroponics don't use soil, you get rid of 70% of the pests since the pests are soil-based. The way corporate American farming is treating the soil, good soil will become a more rare commodity.

The Daily Show segment played up the saga of someone who had some success in cable news leaving to try and improve people's lives. But Ratigan's experience in that world lends itself to the cause of better farming and hydroponics. Ratigan can explain the benefits in ways that people who absorb a lot of media can easily comprehend.

Hydroponics can seemingly be advantageous to liberals and progressives because of fewer pesticides and improved environment, while conservatives would like the time saved and amount of food that lend them to like the status quo for those reasons.

And Americans don't have to experiment on their own to see if hydroponics works since Israel, Holland, and Canada are all leading the way on hydroponics.

I need to do a lot more research on hydroponics to see the benefits and disadvantages about the method. But Dylan Ratigan is shining the light on hydroponics and leading people such as me to want to learn more.

Michael Pollan goes 'cooking' with Colbert Report

"You can have the pasta. Maybe get whole wheat pasta if you're concerned about that."
"Whole wheat pasta sucks."

Michael Pollan's latest message about the world of food is that you are in good shape as long as a human being is cooking your food.

"This explains the health problem … The most important thing about your diet is not a nutrient, but an activity — cooking."

Colbert pointed out that you can't make Funyuns at home. Pollan added cheese doodles to the list but asked Colbert, "if you were cooking at home, how often would you make French fries?"

Colbert replied that he didn't know how to make French fries.

The theme of Pollan's new book — Cooked: A Natural History of Transformation — isn't that new. Pollan has used the line about cooking one's French fries before.

Yet, Pollan does reduce the issue to a simple term that can penetrate a cynical consumer market. Those that know aren't the cynical ones; this is about getting through to people who hate Michelle Obama because she wants them to healthier.

This doesn't mean that you can't eat out. After all, if a human cooks the food in a restaurant, then that meal qualifies on Pollan's watch.

Colbert's joke in the open of his show talked about how raw ingredients become food. "Simple. You puncture the wrapper and set it on High for 3 minutes."

Jokes aside, this is how some people cook.

Pollan noted that corporations cook with lots of chemicals that you don't have in your pantry. After all, you can't buy high-fructose corn syrup in the store to sweeten your foods.

While we outsource certain kinds of cooking, Pollan breaks down cooking into Earth (cooking with microbes, using bacteria to ferment food: beer, kimchi, sauerkraut), air (baking), Water (soups, stews, braises), and fire (barbecue).

As for whole wheat pasta, I finally found an area of disagreement with Colbert over food. Yes, whole wheat pasta was not good — a long time ago. Improvement has been exponential, especially in the last few years. I suffered in those days and made it the other side. Where I would eat one or two brands, I could pick up most whole wheat pasta and be content to eat in in my home, cooked by me.

A Place at the Table shows making hunger visible leads to solutions

Even food-related situations that are visible can get lost in the shuffle. But no food-related situation is as invisible as hunger.

A Place at the Table did its earnest to put a face on that place at the table. We got three concrete examples, though Rosie from Colorado stole the show. The film didn't spend as much time with Tremonica, the 2nd grade girl from Mississippi. Barbie's Philadelphia story was more about the hunger of her young kids, too young to really tell us what they were feeling. Rosie talked to us about how hunger impacted her school day and concentration. Even though Rosie's life has a lot of problems — she sleeps on the floor of the laundry room and shares that floor with her sister — she comes across as upbeat, further masking the ramifications of what hunger does to her life.

The teachers in the two stories involving school-age children are heroes in their own way. Rosie's teacher is tough with her on why she can't pay attention in class, but later we learn about her own childhood where she went hungry and watch her deliver food to her neighbors, including Rosie and her family. Her anguish as she delivers mostly starches to these families exemplifies the tragic irony of hunger: underfed and overweight.

Temptation of the Week: A Place at the Table

BalanceofFood.com film coverage

Tremonica's 2nd-grade teacher sees that world as she is diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes while Tremonica has asthma and is overweight. The simple act of teaching her students the art of appreciating honeydew melons is a beautiful, lasting lesson.

Pastor Bob in Colorado is also a hero. He develops an after-school day care where kids are fed. His food pantry has to grow to try and meet the ever-growing need for food.

Contrary to the inaccurate stereotype, these people are working. Rosie's mom is a waitress who makes $120 every two weeks, yet that is "too much" for food stamps. When Barbie does land a job, ironically helping others who are hungry to get help, she still can't afford to feed her kids well. Tremonica's mom has to drive 66 miles round trip because she can't find fresh vegetables in her Mississippi town.

Marion Nestle had an intriguing graph in the film, noting that the price of fresh fruit and vegetables has gone up 40% since 1980, yet the relative price for processed food has declined 40% over same time period. We all expect the former to happen; the latter takes some work and screwed up priorities.

The obesity issue in this country is visible in part because we can see it either in person on the street or as headless fat people in TV news stories on obesity. Obesity gets a lot more coverage than hunger, especially on TV. As A Place at the Table demonstrates, the two problems go hand in hand. We do need to talk a lot more about hunger. The best way to talk about hunger is to make that problem visible.

Andrea Tantaros should know food stamps lead to weight gain, not loss

"I should try it because, do you know how fabulous I'd look? I'd be so skinny. I mean, the camera adds 10 pounds, it really does. I would be looking great."

Fox News Channel contributor Andrea Tantaros from "The Five" was on "Varney and Company" responding to the challenge that Newark, NJ Mayor Cory Booker gave to one of his Twitter followers to live on the equivalent of $133/month for a week.

Tantaros should give the challenge a try. Forget about surviving on food stamps for a week; she should try for a whole month.

Tantaros will find out that she will gain weight, not lose it.

The healthy food that she eats because she can afford to eat well won't be as available when factoring in a $133 budget for 30 days. A Starbucks drink costs more than a day's worth of food. On that kind of a budget, cheap carbohydrates and fatty meats are on the menu.

Even if Tantaros could survive on such a tight budget for food, she would have better access to grocery stores than many of those in New Jersey who have to live on food stamps.

From the clip, Tantaros is in rather good shape. The camera shows her and her legs, a normally unusual camera angle. So she could afford to gain a few pounds.

If someone such as Tantaros, with her level of ignornace on the impact of cheap food and food stamps, would gain weight and talk about that on television, that perspective would do more to raise the image of food stamps than any publicity stunt from a liberal or progressive politician.