Shoprite: Africa’s biggest supermarket considers pulling out of Nigeria 

TA-FC ClipBoard: I see Shoprite in America as having many problems, the biggest being living in the past, providing customers food items that are long outdated and passe to the point of wondering why they linger.

Well, retail outlets like Shoprite are the reason, and unless they update their supermarket product lines to primarily plant-based, they’ll die along with the slaughterhouses that keep them open.

Non-Gmo, plant based, animal-free, vegan, low to moderately priced, not in the specialty item aisle, but in every aisle. That’s what people want.

People love to try new products and be the first one to brag on them. Stop dragging your feet. Africans and Americans want to eat healthy but delicious foods, while not being so restricted with the fat, sugar and salt whereby enjoyment diminishes – but keep the animal out.

We don’t want your eggs and dairy in every single product we consume. It’s overkill. You’re ruining the planet for profit.

Your ruining our health. Now the planet will ruin you for holding out so long. Fix it. Pronto.




Shoprite: Africa’s biggest supermarket considers pulling out of Nigeria

  • 3 August 2020 

Africa’s biggest supermarket chain, South African-owned Shoprite, says it is considering pulling out of Nigeria.

It said it was looking at selling all “or a majority stake” of its operations in Africa’s most-populous country.

Shoprite is the latest South African retailer to look at leaving Nigeria – clothing firm Mr Price announced its exit in June, and Woolworths in 2014.

Shoprite’s decision comes at a time when Nigeria’s economy is struggling amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Economists from the World Bank have warned that the oil-rich country could be on the brink of its worst recession since the 1980s because of “the collapse in oil prices coupled with the Covid-19 pandemic”.

Shoprite said lockdown restrictions because of coronavirus had affected its operations in 14 African countries, with sales declining by 1.4% in those markets. Its South African operations on the other hand witnessed “significant growth”.

The retailer has also been battling currency-induced inflation surges – especially in Nigeria, where it has been hit hardest.

Shoprite employs at least 2,000 people in Nigeria.

The retailer’s stores in the capital, Abuja, and the commercial hub, Lagos, became a flashpoint for outrage in 2019, following violent attacks in South Africa on other migrants from elsewhere in the continent.

The National Association of Nigerian Students (Nans) – which represents university students at campuses across the country – picketed branches of Shoprite and South African telecoms giant MTN, turning away staff and customers.

The student body demanded that all South African-owned businesses leave the West African state.

Why Shoprite has struggled in Nigeria

Analysis by Nduka Orjinmo, BBC News, Lagos

Shoprite’s failure in Nigeria is not surprising, the shiny shopping malls with escalators where its outlets are located are more popular for taking pictures than actual shopping.

Though it is regarded as a working-class supermarket in South Africa, most here consider it as catering to the upper classes.

Tens of millions of Nigerians are poor or unemployed – and the minority who have the spending power to shop at Shoprite have seen their finances take a battering because of the coronavirus pandemic.

These are hard times for businesses, but the slow growth at Shoprite Nigeria predates the pandemic.

Consumers here want quality services, but they want it on the cheap.

Source: Shoprite: Africa’s biggest supermarket considers pulling out of Nigeria – BBC News


New TV show “Tough As Nails” celebrates everyday Americans

TA-FC ClipBoard: Let’s make it clear here that the agriculture they’re talking about is the ‘raising for slaughter industry’, and making the cattle industry cool and sexy once again.

“Witnessing first hand how food is grown? Well, animals aren’t food and they’re not plants, so they’re not grown like the cattle industry wants the world to once again believe. They’re raised from before birth to slaughter maturity.

Once that genie got out of the bottle and once slaughterhouse observational tours were banned, everybody knew that what went on inside was anything but cool and sexy – except if you’re a pervert and get off on watching animals get dismembered while listening to their screams.

And once rogue undercover reporters took the videos and circulated them, the world knew for sure that there was no love happening behind those doors in those stalls.

“…toilet paper, hand sanitizer, meats, dairy, eggs and other products we can’t live without come from…” No mention of plants here.

“Raising the livestock you love”? Who said anything about loving livestock? Isn’t it deadstock that people love? If they loved livestock they wouldn’t be able to kill the babies they raised for your plate.

So now “hard-working Americans” can be equated with slavery, sordid and deadly. No slave leaves alive. The reason these slave masters and killers keep the country running is because we built our economy on the slavery and slaughtering of innocent animals.

“Callouses on the hands, and tough as nails”, but you left out the horror. You left out the holocaust.

They say they don’t do it for the money. Geez. Serial killers don’t kill for the money either.

I’m all for country. Just minus the slaughter part. Grow plants. There’s no good coming from raising animals for slaughter. It’s not cool, sexy or worthy work.

“…this country’s essential workers: real people in real life who are real tough…”. Yeah, it takes a real person who has a real life who is real tough to raise and kill an innocent cow.

This all-new reality competition squares off everyday Americans who get their hands dirty while working long, hard hours to keep the country running.

Amanda Radke | Jul 31, 2020

Does agriculture have a public relations problem?

Perception of who we are in agriculture has been a constant struggle we have faced as more consumers move away from rural communities in favor of urban life.

This problem has escalated in recent years for a multitude of reasons — one, greater efficiencies in the industry have resulted in fewer hands involved in the work of putting food on the table; two, an abundance of food at the grocery stores means people never have to worry about where their next meal will come from; and three, instead of people being able to witness first-hand how food is grown, information derived from social media, activists, politicians and Hollywood has resulted in more confusion than ever before.

As a result, it’s been difficult to find our common ground and our shared values. I’ve always believed, however, if we could sit down with our counterparts, we would find we care about the same things when it comes to purchasing food at the grocery store to feed our families — safety, nutrition, taste, affordability, environment and animal welfare.

Even knowing we share these commonalities, there’s still a great deal of work to be done to make agriculture cool and sexy once again.

The one silver lining of the pandemic has been the “essential workers,” those who provide the goods and services we need to function in our everyday lives, are in the spotlight. All of a sudden, we care more about where our toilet paper, hand sanitizer, meats, dairy, eggs and other products we can’t live without come from. There’s a stronger push to get to know the people behind the products, and the opportunities are great if we can take advantage of this open window to share our stories.

However, in the current political climate, you may want to simply go off the grid, ignore the craziness of the outside world, shut off the mainstream media and just keep working the land and raising the livestock you love.

I totally get it, and I go back and forth from feeling like I need to reach out to our consumers to thinking it’s time for me to shut down and hide away from the world for a bit.

If you need a distraction for a moment, may I suggest a television show that celebrates the hard-working Americans who provide the food, fiber and energy to support our country and the world.

CBS has a new show called, “Tough As Nails,” and a friend alerted me to this really awesome series. This all-new reality competition squares off everyday Americans who get their hands dirty while working long, hard hours to keep the country running. In season one, we get to meet a welder, firefighter, farmer, roofer and Marine Corps veteran, just to name a few.

According to CBS, “These competitors, who consider the calluses on their hands a badge of honor, will be tested for their strength, endurance, life skills, and, most importantly, mental toughness in challenges that take place at real-world job sites.

“One competitor will be crowned champion, but nobody will go home. Even after they “punch out” of the individual competition, they will have the opportunity to win additional prizes in the team competitions that continue throughout the season,” CBS said.

“‘I was inspired to create this show almost a decade ago because of my working-class family of farmers, gold miners, builders and coal miners,” said host Phil Keoghan. ‘I’m proud of my family and wanted to shine a light on people who are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty to do a hard day’s work. Now, more than ever, it is important for all of us to recognize this country’s essential workers: real people in real life who are real tough.’”

Ohio farmer, Melissa Burns, represents agriculture well in the series.

She describes her typical day on the farm, “Every day is different. My day starts anywhere between 3:00 – 4:00 AM. House chores get completed, then depending on weather and the season you will find me in the fields or at the feed mill. We work before the sun comes up and will not stop until after dark or all the work is complete for that day.”

When asked what makes her tough as nails, Burns said, “Getting up every day and putting in the work. We don’t do it for the money. We don’t do it for anyone but ourselves. I am a tough farmer, a tough female farmer!”

It’s shows like this that are a win-win because it brings rural America and those who work in these important fields to the forefront. When it comes to a public relations campaign for the food, fiber and energy industries, this one gets the job done. Check it out and let me know what you think!

The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of or Farm Progress.

Source: New TV show “Tough As Nails” celebrates everyday Americans


Business Burning Is Becoming An Industry

Minneapolis Manufacturing Company Will Leave City after Plant Burned in Riots


AFC ClipBoard: Maybe that’s the plan: For black lives to drive white lives out of cities, so black lives can control the city centers. First you occupy the police department, then city council, then out of fear, people move out when the protestors weaponize fire to destroy their businesses.

African blacks throughout Africa are demanding blacks do business with only black owned companies worldwide. Sounds like prejudice toward white people that’s leading to discrimination in the market place against anything white made or white owned or sold by whites. 

Nobody wants to do business with people who advocate violence in the work place. Business Burning is about as violent as you can get. Yet, I’ve heard nothing about any arrests or charges made against the criminals who committed the violent acts. 

Savage acts against people and property are not welcome as motivational tools to force white people into compliance with black people demands. 

Black lives make it look like that’s all they have to offer the world, their violent behavior used to make white people do what they want them to do. Maybe it’s a good advertisement for hit men, but not for getting along in the world.


The ethics of outsourcing our risks to Instacart 

TA-FC ClipBoard: I’m all for better work conditions for all people, no matter their economic status. I live in a senior residence that recently was converted to public housing to justify, in part, all the non-seniors living here. That being said, I am a senior in the lower economic group, told to shelter in place, yet I still need groceries.

If I thought a delivery person was risking their life by shopping for me (as indicated in this article), I would have found another way – and I did by doing my own local shopping – at risk to me, not everybody else. I wore protective gear, everybody else didn’t.

Seniors, the most at risk during the coronavirus crisis, were not handed our sanitizer and face masks – the government via management of this facility just told us to stay home and NO ONLINE SHOPPING, since they didn’t want delivery people in the building who could be carrying coronavirus with them in addition to our packages. All essential packages were to be funneled through the office.

  • By the way, I found my own hand sanitizer and used a scarf for a face mask and I already had disposable gloves on hand, which I also used.

There’s a wholesale/retail food store a couple blocks away. I went to their website and saw they delivered. Free delivery. So why not, since I was purchasing large cans (106 oz.) and wouldn’t be able to carry them home.

I placed my order. I gave my phone number, since the pass card mechanism in the front of the building was dismantled not allowing anyone to use the front entrance. The delivery person texted me when they were approaching.

I met the delivery person at the side entrance. If I hadn’t been there, they would have left, since we discovered that many people didn’t know how to use the buzzer system, so didn’t. Maybe they couldn’t read English. Steve even said it was confusing.

Two boxes were brought in. I was given a receipt that was from the store. Around $88.00. The standard tip was almost $5.00. I didn’t add to it. I took the cans out of the box, put them in a cart and took them upstairs.

When I placed the order, I was asked whether I wanted substitutions if the store was out of a particular product. It gave boxes for me to check if I did. There were no boxes to check if I didn’t, so I left them blank. The reason I didn’t want substitutions is that I don’t eat animal products and I didn’t want to risk a substitution that may contain animal.

Well, they substituted. Luckily the subs didn’t contain animal products, but still, they shouldn’t have subbed.

I ordered a large (106 oz.) can of Bush’s Vegetarian Bean Pot. It wasn’t in the box, yet online it claimed I received it. The receipt claimed I received a store brand of baked beans, which I didn’t.

When I compared the store receipt the delivery person handed me, to the receipt sent to me by the delivery person via email, there was an increase from 50 cents to a dollar plus over the store receipt price.

In addition to the automatic tip (I always tip and always tip well, no matter my personal financial circumstance), there was a service fee and a delivery fee – each was in the close to 5 dollar range.

As it turns out free delivery was only for specific brand items if I bought that particular brand in bulk – so the advertising was misleading. Also, when I went to the store’s website that said they delivered, I had no idea that INSTACART wasn’t them.

Each time I went back to the website to try to chat with someone or to ask questions there was no means, except to rate by stars my experience. I didn’t do that. I wanted to tell someone I was charged for two items I didn’t receive and that some items were subbed when I didn’t check the sub boxes.

In their policy section it explained the part of the uptick in individual items. Okay, now that’s explained. I had to do a lot of reading. They should tell you up front that they’re essentially acting as a convenience store – they buy items at grocery stores then resell them to the public at higher prices.

Their policy explains how to contact them with concerns, yet every time I clicked the link, the delivery person’s face would pop up for me to pick a ratings star. It was like Facebook, when you have an issue, they don’t get back, but claim your input will help them to provide better service. But even Facebook allows you to write your concern, not just rate by stars.

I finally gave up on it – decided to absorb the twenty or so dollars I was overcharged – and decided never to use INSTACART again.

Richard Zitrin, a lecturer on ethics at UC Hastings law school in San Francisco, told me [David Lazarus] it’s neither unethical nor immoral to hire others to perform tasks we may view as unpleasant or even dangerous.

“But it’s important to recognize the lack of equality among members of society,” he said, noting that the people who can afford to use delivery services may enjoy economic advantages that delivery workers do not share.“

I take issue with Richard Zitrin who would even raise the questions of morality and ethics of ordering groceries from a store that says they deliver.

I further take issue with Richard Zitrin’s elitist attitude toward people who order groceries from stores that deliver – saying that we can afford to use delivery services and enjoy economic advantages that delivery people don’t share. That sounded like he was shaming people who use delivery services, because they in his view have economic advantages the delivery people don’t have.

I wonder if that includes stealing – is it morally and ethically acceptable to steal a few items from each customer, as long as the delivery people don’t speak much English or are assumed to be in a low income bracket because they’re delivering groceries? Does that apply to pizza delivery people too? How about restaurant delivery people? Do they work just for tips? The article didn’t address the service fee and delivery fee, nor the convenience store status.

Is INSTACART licensed as a convenience store? Because that’s what they are.

So, to get my order delivered I paid close to $15.00 for someone to drive a block and drop them at the side entrance. Still, I’m not complaining about that. What they should do is be up front about the costs and how they’re calculated. Seniors are easy targets for fraud. And for sure they should have a link on their website to contact someone when the order delivered isn’t accurate.

There were two delivery people in the car. The woman got out and carried the boxes one at a time to the door. The man stayed in the car.

When I started emptying the boxes, all of a sudden I looked up and the man was there close – staring at me straight in the eyes with a scorn – as he asked if I wanted to tip them. I explained that I already tipped on the website when I ordered.

Like I said, I support worker rights – across the board, but this pity article was over-the-top.

Back to Richard Zitrin. If I have to take into consideration all the social issues of the day every time I shop for something, I’ll stop shopping. My life is already over-run and over-worked with social issues.

Maybe Richard should have included all low income people, including seniors who basically were required to get their groceries via delivery, rather than go out and risk getting coronavirus from people who didn’t take seriously their vulnerability. The delivery people could have worn a scarf over their mouths; they didn’t. They could have kept at a distance; they didn’t. Instead, especially the man, got in very close – too close for my comfort.

To David Lazarus: Outsourcing my coronavirus risk? Okay, I get it. That’s a catchy title. But what does it mean? I hire someone to get my groceries for me. Well, not really. Many stores before the virus crisis hit already delivered. Dropping goods off at the door isn’t much of a risk. These same delivery people of whom you speak shop for themselves in these same stores without any thought to risk – otherwise they’d be wearing protection.

There aren’t many old-timer delivery people – though I have seen a few UBER drivers of senior age or near senior age, who were either retired or supplementing income. It’s unfortunate that this article without anybody even saying it, made a comparison between delivery people and fruit/vegetable/tobacco pickers/slaughterhouse workers as “jobs nobody else wants”.

So what the essay is really saying is that immigrants, especially recent immigrants who may not have the skills nor the fluency in English to obtain a job that required skill and fluency to perform it well, should be subsided by privileged people who can afford to have their groceries delivered. How so? With large tips? How large? The people I know who work at taverns, restaurants and bars in Cleveland get a fairly low base pay, because they get tips.

The minimum tip at least for me was near $5.00. That’s automatic without having to give good service. Even if I had given a $20.00 tip in addition to the $15.00 service/delivery/tip fees, how much money can this delivery person make a day? The article didn’t speak to wage. So I don’t know what the wage is. But, say the delivery person delivers to ten people a day, that’s $25.00 x 10 = $250.00 a day plus wages.

If they get $5.00 per person (meaning no added tip) that = $50.00 a day plus wages.

Who, on an $88.00 order plus $15.00 of fees, is going to give in addition $20.00? Once maybe. But not on a regular basis.

If the point of this article was to make people think of inequality by shaming them, thus making them feel badly, don’t you think people have enough to feel badly about, without you seeking to make people feel even more uncomfortable?

Frankly, I choose not to stay around people who intentionally seek to make others feel uncomfortable. It’s a sadistic strategy.

At this point you’re probably thinking maybe this article reached the wrong person – 1 in how many even read it? But I had already had the experience with INSTACART before I saw the article in my email inbox.

Perhaps you could have stuck with employee conditions, rather than dump it all on the shoulders of people you wrongly assumed to be privileged.

Yeah, I’m outsourcing my coronavirus risks. Sounds like I’m a company unto myself making executive decisions on who gets sick and/or dies and who doesn’t.

Way over the top. It’s too easy to shame the fruit-eater instead going after the companies that employ the fruit-pickers.

It’s like shaming the drug-users rather than going after the drug cartels.

Los Angeles Times

April 6, 2020

I’m Business columnist David Lazarus, with a look today at the way consumers are outsourcing their coronavirus risk.

These are boom times for delivery services. Amazon, FedEx, UPS — they’re all reporting huge increases in deliveries as consumers navigate the stay-at-home pandemic with online orders for everything from food and household staples to upgrades for home-entertainment systems.Amazon says it’s hiring 100,000 more workers to keep up with demand. Record downloads are being logged for grocery-delivery apps.

And that brings us to an intriguing moral and economic issue. Just as many consumers have outsourced their driving to Uber and Lyft, and their pickup of to-go restaurant orders to Grubhub, DoorDash and Postmates, they’re outsourcing the risk of venturing to the supermarket to Instacart and similar services that fill shopping carts on customers’ behalf. Instacart said last month that its sales growth rate had increased by as much as 20 times in California and other hard-hit states as a result of the pandemic.

The company’s founder and chief executive, Apoorva Mehta, said Instacart plans to hire 300,000 more shoppers to prowl supermarket aisles as proxies for anxious consumers.

“The last few weeks have been the busiest in Instacart’s history,” he said. “Today, the role we play and the responsibility we have takes on an entirely new meaning.”

Richard Zitrin, a lecturer on ethics at UC Hastings law school in San Francisco, told me it’s neither unethical nor immoral to hire others to perform tasks we may view as unpleasant or even dangerous.

“But it’s important to recognize the lack of equality among members of society,” he said, noting that the people who can afford to use delivery services may enjoy economic advantages that delivery workers do not share.“

Anyone who doesn’t recognize that reality is kidding themselves,” Zitrin said.

To be sure, the history of capitalism is the history of paying people to do tasks others don’t want to do. It can be argued that as long as people take on such work willingly, and are treated well and compensated fairly, there’s nothing inherently wrong with this.

That matter of fair compensation, though, is a topic for debate. How much of a premium should be charged when people literally may be putting their life on the line to get you groceries and toilet paper?

Some Instacart workers went on strike last week to seek improved conditions. Among other things, they’re asking for protective supplies such as hand sanitizer and disinfectant wipes, higher default tips and hazard pay.

The advocacy group Gig Workers Rising is seeking signatures for a petition calling on California policymakers to protect drivers and delivery folk. “By signing, you help to ensure workers have access to benefits like paid sick leave, disability, family leave and unemployment insurance,” the group says.

My wife and I have received one big delivery from Instacart since the pandemic erupted and we were very pleased with the service. We got most of what we wanted, and the woman who dropped our groceries at the front door couldn’t have been nicer.We thanked her profusely. And we tipped generously.

When you’re outsourcing risk, that’s the least you can do.

Source: The ethics of outsourcing our risks to Instacart – – Gmail


The Paper Bag Dilemma

Cuyahoga County, Ohio which includes Cleveland, banned single use plastic bags on 1 January 2020. Businesses that give customers plastic bags have until July 2020 to comply without consequences.

Grocery stores where I shop are now using paper bags. Walgreen’s uses paper bags. Everybody has until July to use up their plastic bag inventory. I haven’t seen anything in the news about adjusting to paper. Given the degree of adjustment needed it’s surprising the lack of instruction to the people who use them.

Apartment buildings in particular have unique situations regarding trash. Our lease states that all trash must be in plastic bags and tightly-tied before putting it down the shoot. Every floor of course has a trash room with a trash shoot in it.

Our apartment complex has a huge trash bin in the building on the ground floor – which presents its own challenges with cockroaches. It took a long time for people to stop dumping everything including garbage down the trash shoot, unwrapped.

Most people who became compliant, used store plastic bags as their trash bags – small enough to get down the shoot and easy to tie tightly.

Since the ban on plastic bags which everybody used to wrap their trash, nobody has said anything about alternative wraps. Try to put trash and garbage in a paper bag with no tie and put it down the trash shoot. If there is anything wet, it will fall right through the bag.

Although we all have garbage disposals, there’s not much these cheap disposals can handle without causing maintenance problems.

Food prep, for instance, causes wet-bag, yet the peelings are not suited for cheap garbage disposals. Onion, potato, banana, orange peels – anything with a peel. Watermelon, cantaloupe. Anything with a core – green and red peppers, tomatoes, corn on the cob – all wet and all unable to be put in the garbage disposal.

Coffee grounds and tea bags are wet. You can’t put them down the disposal either, so into the paper bag they go.

Opened and emptied cans, bottles, containers of food – all wet – even if you rinse them out, still wet. Nobody is going to wash their containers and dry them before putting them down the shoot.

It doesn’t take much wet to break a paper bag – and then on the way to the shoot, the bottom falls out and there’s a mess all over the hallway.

The result is going to be a smelly nightmare in the summer months and cockroach infestations will bloom out of control.

So what’s the solution? A while back I bought a bunch of wide packing tape in the dollar bin at the grocery store. Now, I line the paper bag with the store flyer – but those run out. I fill the bag two-thirds full. I push the top down over the garbage/trash then tape the bag – around top to bottom like a cross, two ways, like you wrap a gift package with ribbon – sometimes more than once.

I wonder though if the tape is safe for the environment? I got this tape cheap. People on fixed incomes in these apartment complexes are not going to spend money on tape to wrap their paper bags.

I’m beginning to wonder about the silence of Cuyahoga County regarding alternative ways to secure the trash in high rise apartment buildings.

In addition, plastic grocery bags were used to pick up dog poo, twist it, tie it and dump it in the trash. Nobody told people who have dogs what to do. So, when the last of the small dog poo bags I found somewhere is gone, I’ll use paper towels to pick up the poo, fold it, then place it in a lunch size paper bag and twist it or roll the top down. Still, it won’t be secure. These small paper bags also aren’t cheap. But with no one instructing the populace I have to figure it out myself.

Most people won’t do that. The trash shoots will be one huge mess. There will be trash all over the place. Living near Lake Erie, the rats will be the only benefactors. Then the rats will come into the units within the building looking for more.

July isn’t that far away. Do you think it’s time to instruct on wrapping trash in paper bags absent the use of plastic in high rise apartment buildings?

So, where are all the environmentalists who fought for the plastic bag ban? I agree with the ban. But why aren’t they participating in the instructional process? Their solution seems to focus only on carrying groceries from checkout to car to house and we can all find non-plastic bags with which to do that. They fall short, however, in their assessment of the switch from plastic to paper if they think that carrying groceries is the only concern.


Steve accidentally dropped his keys down the shoot when opening the door to drop the trash. He opened the door with one hand and had the trash and his keys in the other hand.

It was a week-end, meaning no staff on duty, so we went downstairs to where the dumpster is located inside the building to see if we could retrieve them. Of course we couldn’t, the dumpster being so big.

What I did notice however, was that just about all the bags in the dumpster were huge black plastic bags filled with trash and garbage, some not tied, others half-tied.

I immediately surmised, that due to the small plastic grocery bags no longer being offered at the stores, people switched to the extra- large bags. That means that to fill one of those bags, the tenant has to keep it in their apartment for at least a week, maybe longer.

That of course is going to increase the cockroach population building-wide by leaving garbage and trash in one’s apartment for so long. I empty trash everyday by the end of the day, so nothing is left overnight. It’s not as if our kitchen waste baskets are hermetically sealed. They’re not, which makes easy pickings for cockroaches.

Well, Steve left a message for maintenance and they were kind enough, when emptying the dumpster, to look and sure enough they were there.

But I see a big pest problem brewing unless someone can come up with a better way to dispose of trash from apartments, other than once a week.


China Will No Longer Classify Dogs as Livestock, Marking Push Toward Dog Meat Ban

Benjamin VanHoose
China is inching closer to the end of the legal human consumption of dog meat, multiple outlets report.

On Wednesday, the country’s Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Affairs announced that it would no longer classify dogs as livestock, meaning the animal can’t be bred for food, milk or fur, according to Reuters.

“As far as dogs are concerned, along with the progress of human civilization and the public concern and love for animal protection, dogs have been ‘specialized’ to become companion animals, and internationally are not considered to be livestock, and they will not be regulated as livestock in China,” read the notice, per the outlet.

Humane Society International estimates that some 10 million dogs and 4 million cats are killed in China every year for meat. A spokesperson for HSI told The Guardian that the policy is a potential “game-changer moment for animal welfare in China.”

“That signals a major shift, recognizing that most people in China don’t eat dogs and cats and want an end to the theft of their companion animals for a meat trade that only a small percentage of the population indulge in,” said the spokesperson.

RELATED: New Law ‘Finally’ Makes Animal Cruelty a Federal Crime: ‘America’s Beloved Pets Are Safer’

Earlier this month, Shenzhen officially became the first city in China to ban the consumption of cat and dog meat, with the new law going into effect on May 1.

A recent ban on the consumption of specific wildlife meat in China is a response to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic after some of the earliest infections were found in individuals who visited a wildlife market in Wuhan, China, according to The New York Times.

The Shenzhen government decided to extend the ban to cats and dogs as these pets “have established a much closer relationship with humans than all other animals,” according to BBC News. Additionally, “banning the consumption of dogs and cats and other pets is a common practice in developed countries and in Hong Kong and Taiwan.”

RELATED: Proposed Law Could Ban Sales of Dogs, Cats, Bunnies in New York Pet Stores

The proposed change will also fine Shenzhen restaurants found serving dog and cat meat.

Dog and cat meat consumption is not prevalent in many areas of China but is the most common in Shenzhen’s province of Guangdong and the neighboring province of Guangxi, which is home to the controversial Yulin Dog Meat Festival.

Source: China Will No Longer Classify Dogs as Livestock, Marking Push Toward Dog Meat Ban: Reports


The consolidated US meat industry has major Covid-19 weak spots

Covid-19 has shut down parts of the hyper-consolidated US meat industry

By Chase Purdy

Food Reporter

Future of Food

How to feed everyone, without hurting the planet.

A Tyson-owned meat processing plant that churns out 2% of the US pork supply ground to a halt this week as workers became infected with Covid-19.

And that wasn’t the only meatpacking plant impacted by the spread of the novel coronavirus. JBS USA on March 31 said it hit pause on much of its work at a beef facility in Souderton, Pennsylvania and wouldn’t have it back online until mid-April. National Beef Packing on April 2 temporarily stopped slaughtering cattle at one of its plants in Tama, Iowa after a worker tested positive for the virus.

Plant closures are emblematic of a larger issue across the US food system, as farms and companies work to weather the storm of Covid-19. The health and safety of workers is paramount if food chains are to continue running smoothly—and workers’ perceived safety appears to vary across the industry.

In Greeley, Colorado, at least 830 JBS employees didn’t show up for work on March 30 after several employees tested positive for the virus. And in California, the United Farm Workers union has said that 77% of produce pickers in an informal poll reported daily routines hadn’t changed as a result of the virus.

Tyson claims that, in light of 24 positive cases for Covid-19 in its Columbus Junction, Iowa plant, it is being proactive about protecting workers before infections become apparent. That includes shutting the plant down for a full week. In a statement, the company said it is taking its employees’ temperatures every day. It says it has also increased cleaning and sanitizing at its plants, sometimes at the expense of a day’s work. At some plant locations it has set up tents as outdoor break rooms to allow for more effective social distancing.

Still, the stakes are high. The way the US meat industry is set up, with just a handful of plants churning out an outsized amount of the meat supply, disruption at a single plant can have a big ripple effect.

It wasn’t always like this. In 1967 there were 9,627 slaughterhouses in the US. Today there are just 1,100, reflective of massive consolidation across the meat industry. Of those, 215 large-scale operations run by a handful of multi-national companies supply the US with some 85% of its meat, according to Bloomberg.

For now, the supply of meat is steady. In fact, the biggest meatpackers have experienced substantial sales growth in retail because of the virus, as consumers rushed to stock up on food in preparation for prolonged periods at home. For pork and turkey, grocery sales in the middle of March more than doubled compared to the same period last year.

Still, industry analysts say the numbers in grocery stores won’t make up for substantial losses incurred by restaurant closures and hobbled food service companies. They point to chicken, the most popular animal protein product among US consumers, as a bellwether.

“Now that consumers and grocers have filled their freezers with chicken, the spike in demand from the grocery channel is starting to fade and is no longer sufficient to offset the 50% decline in demand in the restaurant channel,” Credit Suisse analysts wrote in a report this week. “This is a big change from the optimistic tone that we had heard from Sanderson and Tyson as recently as a week ago.”

On a global scale, economic weakness in nations around the world is contributing to a slump in US exports of meat—just as with dairy exports. Some financial analysts had expected chicken exports to grow by 20% in 2020, but because of economic problems in Vietnam, Philippines, and Kazakhstan, that growth hovered at about 3% by the end of January, according to Credit Suisse.

The message is clear whether you look at US meat through a global or national lens: If workers don’t feel safe, or aren’t protected from the virus, the food system won’t run smoothly. And since the US meat industry is so consolidated, problems at even a single plant can create big headaches.

Source: The consolidated US meat industry has major Covid-19 weak spots — Quartz


Coronavirus: UK thinks COVID-19 may have started in Chinese laboratory 

TA-FC ClipBoard: Alright, so there are two experimental labs in Wuhan, China, a few miles from the diseased markets, that experiment with viruses, evidently the COVID-19 virus being one of them.

It is assumed that because the virus wasn’t altered in these labs that it leaked by accident aka poor safety procedures into a lab worker and then that lab worker, unwittingly infected other people.

The article doesn’t say from where or what source the lab retrieved the virus with the intent of studying/researching it.

Since Wuhan market sells warm/wet animals who have this virus, can it be assumed that the lab used said animals to procure the virus?

If the lab knew in advance of the infected animals at Wuhan market, why did the Chinese government allow these animals to be sold?

Once the lab is finished testing on the animal(s) who have deadly viruses or any other type of virus that the lab considers test-worthy, where do these animals get deposited? Back to the market? To be sold as food?

“Virus collection, culture, isolation, or animal infection at BSL-2 [moderate biosafety level] with a virus having the transmission characteristics of the outbreak virus would pose substantial risk of infection of a lab worker, and from the lab worker, the public,” he said.

Again, where, when, how do the labs dispose of the animals infected?

It doesn’t appear to this writer to be coincidental, that these two labs researching viruses just happen to be within close proximity to where the viruses thrive in animals sold for food.

Where do they get the infected animals and where do they deposit them when finished? Answer those questions. The world deserves to know. I want to know.

My recommendation is to remove all living beings including humans from those market places and burn the markets to the ground. Make a big display of it so the world can see it. Otherwise, the world, including me, will stop purchasing any product that is Made In China. China’s economy will collapse.

There needs to be an end to markets that cause pandemics, wherever they are located. Are there wet/warm markets in the USA? In New York? How many Chinese or other Asian groups have contracted the coronavirus in New York City? Shut them down now, and don’t let them reopen.

It’s customary for Asian vendors and restaurants in the USA to purchase their products from Asian companies. Chinese and other Asian restaurants will go out of business.

No one will ever trust their product again. Even if it’s only plain rice they sell, that death connection will be hard to break in the psyche of future customers.

And who will trust the government, any government, when they say all food is safe coming from Asia?

No one, not even Asians. I won’t.

Why spend all that money on sanitizing product before it enters the USA? Go to the source and destroy it before it does any more harm.

Stop eating animals is the only long-term cure.

Boris Johnson’s government has considered the possibility that the coronavirus may have accidentally leaked from a Chinese lab

Adam Payne Apr 6, 2020, 7:50 AM

The UK government reportedly believes the coronavirus outbreak may have started in a Chinese laboratory.

Most experts believe the outbreak began when animals passed the virus to humans in China, specifically in or near a market in the city of Wuhan where live animals were sold.Some scientists, however, believe an accidental leak is a plausible alternative theory — and the Mail on Sunday said UK officials were not ruling it out.

A UK parliamentary committee last week accused the Chinese government of spreading disinformation about the origins of the virus.

“Perhaps it is no coincidence that there is that laboratory in Wuhan,” one UK government official told the Mail on Sunday.

Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

The UK government believes the novel coronavirus may have accidentally leaked from a laboratory in the Chinese city of Wuhan where scientists were researching viruses, according to a Mail on Sunday newspaper report.

Most experts believe the outbreak of the virus began with animals passing the disease to humans in or near a market in the Chinese city of Wuhan where live animals were sold.

The Mail on Sunday report, however, says that while officials in Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government believe this is still the most likely explanation, it is “no longer being discounted” that a leak from a nearby laboratory actually caused the outbreak.

“There is a credible alternative view [to the zoonotic theory] based on the nature of the virus,” a member of the UK government’s emergency committee of senior officials, Cobra, told the newspaper. “Perhaps it is no coincidence that there is that laboratory in Wuhan. It is not discounted.”

There are two scientific labs close to Wuhan where scientists are believed to have been carrying out tests on viruses: the Institute of Virology and the Wuhan Center for Disease Control.

Both are within 10 miles of the animal market where the outbreak is widely believed to have started late last year.

Some scientists in the US believe an accidental laboratory leak is a plausible theory, The Washington Post columnist David Ignatius said last week.

One biologist Ignatius pointed to was Richard Ebright, a professor at Rutgers University’s Waksman Institute of Microbiology.

Ebright was quoted in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists as saying many of the scientists in Wuhan who had been researching viruses had only “minimal protections” against infection.

“Virus collection, culture, isolation, or animal infection at BSL-2 [moderate biosafety level] with a virus having the transmission characteristics of the outbreak virus would pose substantial risk of infection of a lab worker, and from the lab worker, the public,” he said.

He went on to say the evidence available left “a basis to rule out a lab construct, but no basis to rule out a lab accident.”

In other words, while the virus was not believed to have been created in a lab, it could have been studied in one and released in an accident.

Pippa Fowles/10 Downing Street/HandoutJohnson’s government has reportedly started to question the veracity of China’s statements regarding the coronavirus.

Last week it was reported that UK officials were furious with the Chinese state.

On March 29, the senior UK lawmaker Michael Gove told the BBC he was skeptical of China’s official virus numbers.

“The first case of coronavirus in China was established in December of last year, but it was also the case that some of the reporting from China was not clear about the scale, the nature, the infectiousness of this,” he said.

A report by the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee last week accused the Chinese government of spreading disinformation about the spread of the virus.

“Disinformation about COVID-19 has already cost lives,” the committee said.

“It is essential that the Government issues clear and transparent messages at home to confront and rebut disinformation spread by foreign powers.”

As China lifts its coronavirus lockdowns, authorities are using a color-coded health system to dictate where citizens can go.

Workers at essential businesses say they’re insulted by ‘pathetic’ rewards of pizza, free lunches, and candy, as they beg for sick leave and hazard pay.

The UK health system is so overwhelmed that a hospital is converting all its theaters for coronavirus patients, and nurses have panic attacks because they can’t cope with the stress.

Boris Johnson is in a ‘stable’ condition in intensive care and is not being treated with a ventilator.

A sailor onboard USNS Comfort, the Navy hospital ship in New York City, tested positive for the coronavirus.

More: coronavirus wuhan UK Pandemic 

Source: Coronavirus: UK thinks COVID-19 may have started in Chinese laboratory – Business Insider


These 25 Black-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food

Let’s look at the title:

“These 25 Black-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

Let’s change it to:

“These 25 White-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Yellow-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Red-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Half-Breed-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Brown-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Albino-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Mick-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Christian-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Catholic-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Hindu-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Paki-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Kike-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Mormon-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Atheist-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Midget-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Senior-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Young-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Women-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Men-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Gay-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Straight-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

“These 25 Trans-Owned Restaurants Are Redefining Vegan Food”

The FOOD INDUSTRY has yet to stop using prejudicial terms when describing food establishments and companies.

Let’s take that first sentence:

“The culinary scene in communities of color is inherently vibrant, undoubtedly distinct, and unapologetically Afrocentric.”

Let’s change it to:

“The culinary scene in white communities is inherently vibrant, undoubtedly distinct, and unapologetically Western European”.

Living in Cleveland, Ohio, and living in multi-ethnic neighborhoods, so-called black communities are not presently thriving. They’re like ghost communities. The advertising aka review is based on a lie right out of the gate.

By calling a restaurant by the color of the people who own it, draws in that color. It does not create an image of welcoming all people, no more than saying a white-owned restaurant will draw in black people, or a gay-owned restaurant will draw in straight people.

Calling restaurants by their color sets up a condition of division by color.

In Cleveland, if you hire all white people, the feds come after you for it, calling it discrimination and force you to hire blacks. Yet, hire all or mostly all black people and the Feds let it slide.

A business owned by women, or blacks or any other demographic is not run better or does not serve better food because of it. It’s the individual and collective talent responsible for that, regardless of the demographics.

When people see a specific demographic running a business their brains immediately start wondering what makes that business different from any other business, which in itself greases the wheel of prejudice. Rather than inclusive, it becomes exclusive.

Advertising matters. When advertising prejudice for sale, everybody loses. They claim to be making millions of dollars, which only proves that prejudice pays – well.


The latest Impossible ‘meat’ has pork farmers questioning the name

TA-FC ClipBoard: Nobody is making the claim that it’s made from a pig. Maybe we should take issue with the pig farmers calling their product pork, so the children who were born and bred on family farms wouldn’t think they were eating their friends. The farmers should have called their animal meat what it was, pig meat or hog meat. If the world came to think pig was synonymous with pork, then people have a right to make an imitation product out of plants.

It’s imitation pork. Impossible is synonymous with imitation. Yes, most farmers would think it was impossible to do. But guess what? Somebody did it.

Does anybody think it strange that the pig/hog/pork farmers are now poking their noses into the plant meat industry’s business and trying to make policy for them? The animal meat industries do not control the plant meat industries. 

Alexandria Burris, Indianapolis Star
A few months ago John Hardin stopped by a Burger King to try the Impossible Whopper for the first time. The plant-based burger patty on the Whopper sandwich had been lab engineered to mimic the taste and appearance of beef, and its soaring popularity last year created a national shortage.

“I wanted to taste it for myself,” the Danville, Indiana, resident said. “I wanted to see how close it was.”

Hardin had another reason for wanting to try the Impossible Burger: He wanted to understand what he saw as his future competition.

“This is going to have an impact on what I do, and I realized it was only one data point,” said the 75-year-old patriarch of a family of Hoosier pork producers. “This is the very, very early days in how this will evolve.”

About a year after Redwood, California-based Impossible Foods rolled out the Impossible Burger 2.0 in January 2019, the company introduced its newest plant-based product, Impossible Pork, at the international Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

Like its predecessor, Impossible Pork is engineered to replicate meat, and has some Indiana farmers bracing for what could possibly be a disruption to their business. The National Pork Producers Council, meanwhile, is objecting to the company’s use of “pork” — a word that means flesh of a pig used for food — to describe a product derived from plants.

The food fight has begun.

Is pork still pork if it’s not from a pig?

Your tenderloin or pork chop may well have come from an Indiana farm.

With roughly 2,800 farms raising hogs, Indiana is the fifth largest exporter of pork in the U.S. About 66% of Hoosier production takes place on farms that have more than 5,000 heads of hogs, said Josh Trenary, executive director of the Indiana Pork Producers Association.

Those hogs can end up at processing plants in Kentucky, Michigan and elsewhere, where they are made into chops, ham and bacon later stacked on grocery store shelves.

Impossible Foods aims to disrupt that process. The company’s mission minces no words: eliminate the use of animals as a food source by 2035. In the place of animals, the company wants to see meat derived from alternative sources such as plants via processes that have less of an environmental impact.

Rachel Konrad, Impossible Foods spokeswoman, said the company is a long way from reaching that goal. To do that, the startup would have to double its growth, revenue and “everything else” every year for at least the next 15 years — an ambitious feat, Konrad admits.

For now, Impossible Foods just wants to get its plant-based, gluten-free meat in front of omnivores.

The company says its scientists have created what it views as a more sustainable, affordable way to make “meat” to feed a growing population.

Similar to the Impossible Burger, the company’s plant-based pork contains soy leghemoglobin, a heme protein produced when scientists genetically engineer and ferment yeast. Heme is found in living plants and animals, and Impossible Foods says its version of heme is similar to what carnivores consume in meat. The molecule gives cooked meat its flavors and aromas, the company says.

Pork producers and the national council that represents them say they aren’t afraid of competition, but they object to the usage of a specific term associated with animals being used to describe plant-based substitutes.

There’s no pork in Impossible Pork, they say.

“They’re taking our name,” said Dan Kovich, director of science and technology for the National Pork Producers Council. “You can’t make pork from plants unless you feed it to a pig.”

Kovich and Hardin, the Indiana pork farmer, said consumers will decide whether Impossible Pork is a menu option they want to eat, but they are concerned about consumer confusion.

“I don’t want them to think they’re eating pork,” said Hardin, whose farm operation has 500 mother pigs. “They’re eating something that’s meant to look like it.”

He also questions whether its nutritional value is the same or less than lean meats. According to Impossible Foods, Impossible Pork has 16 grams of protein, 3 milligrams of iron, 13 grams of total fat and 7 grams of saturated fat in a 4 ounce serving.

Similarly, every 4 ounce Impossible Burger has 370 milligrams of sodium, 14 grams of fat, 19 grams of protein and 9 grams of carbs. Chipotle Mexican Grill and Whole Foods executives have criticized plant-based products from Impossible Foods and rival Beyond Meat as being too processed.

Pork producers aren’t the only industry to challenge how companies label the packaging of imitations products. Cattle and dairy farmers have sought to codify, via federal regulations, what can be called “beef” and “milk.”

Lawmakers across the country have moved to enact such labeling laws in their states. Missouri was the first to do so. The state’s law requires that only products from slaughtered animals can be labeled as meat.

In Indiana, State Rep. Terry Goodin, D-Indianapolis, introduced House Bill 1350 at the General Assembly this session, but the bill is no longer being considered.

A Republican-backed bill moving through the Maryland General Assembly also died in a committee this year. The American Civil Liberties Union, Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit the Good Food Institute and the Animal Legal Defense Fund challenged the constitutionality of an Arkansas law to keep words like “burger” off the packaging on vegan and vegetarian food products. A federal court blocked that law in December.

During the same month, the Plant Based Foods Association, a trade organization, released a set of voluntary labeling standards for plant-based meat alternatives. Under the standards, packaging could have references to animal meat as well as qualifiers that indicate the product is not derived from an animal.

Trenary said the Indiana Pork has not taken a position publicly. He said the issue is better addressed by the federal government since the product is federally regulated.

“The fact that states are weighing in certainly demonstrates that there’s concern out there overall,” he said. “Indiana Pork is certainly supportive of the efforts nationally to make sure the naming conventions that are being used are clear.”

Konrad of Impossible Foods downplays the potential for consumer confusion.

“We bend over backwards to emphasize that our product is made from plants,” she said, adding that Impossible Burger labels state the product is plant-based. “In fact, the reason that our product is enjoying skyrocketing growth is precisely because there are no animals in it.”

A growing market

Vegans and vegetarians are not the consumers Impossible Foods aims to attract.

“They’re already doing the right thing for the environment because they’re not eating,— you know, quite literally — high on the hog,” Konrad said. “They are eating in a way that is sustainable and scalable for the planet. So we don’t want them to eat our product at all. Save our product for the true carnivores.”

The target market, she said, is the same market the pork industry seeks.

“Our goal is to take an increasing percentage of their customers and get the meat out of their diet and make it Impossible,” she said.

There is a market for both plant-based and pig-based pork, Konrad said, adding that 95% of Impossible Foods consumers regularly eat animals.

Impossible Foods is expected to make Impossible Pork, which can be charbroiled, sauteed, baked and grilled, available to consumers later this year. The company also unveiled Impossible Sausage at CES, a version of the pork with a bit of spice. That product has debuted exclusively at Burger King.

Besides Impossible Foods, companies such as Tyson, Perdue Farms, Beyond Meat and Daily Harvest also are vying to fill consumers growing appetite for meat alternatives.

Grocery sales of plant-based foods that directly replace animal products have grown to $5 billion in 2019, a 29% increase over the prior two years, said The Good Foods Institute, citing SPINS retail data released March 3. Plant-based milk accounted for about $2 billion of those sales. Plant-based meat generated about $939 million in sales.

Brian Martin is a fifth generation farmer in western Indiana. He raises hogs for consumption and medical uses like in hernia bandages.

The rising popularity of meat alternatives hasn’t affected his day-to-day operations, but a growing public interest in animal welfare and the environment has led to changes in how some pork producers raise their livestock, he said.

“A lot of our culture today is becoming more and more interested in where food comes from and its carbon footprint on our planet, and I think that’s an awesome thing,” Martin said.

Concerns about the environment and climate change are driving some people to reduce the amount of animal meat in their diets, according to Euromonitor International, a business intelligence and market analysis firm based in the United Kingdom. Still, the consumption of meat is expected to outpace its substitutes through 2022 in the United States.

“There’s no question that domestically in the U.S. we will continue to see an increase in the consumption of an all-plant diet,” Martin said. “But I believe that in a world that continues to need more food, there will continue to be lots of people that like to eat bacon.”

From suppliers to producers, pork supports more than 14,000 jobs in Indiana and $633.1 million in personal income based on 2016 production levels, according to Indiana Pork Producers Association.

Hogs are the state’s third most valuable agricultural commodity, accounting for 11.4% of 2018 farm receipts, according to the latest data from the United State Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service. The state’s pork exports generated $364 million that year.

The livelihoods of livestock farmers are intertwined with soybean and corn farmers who provide feed for pigs and cattle. So Hardin says what happens on one end of the market could affect the other.

He views the rise of Impossible Foods and similar companies as another disruption for the pork industry which he survived others before.

“We’ve had these disruptions all across our economy and for at least the last 30-40 years, and we’ll see how this one goes,” he said, adding that some consumes may want real meat.

“If they’re not concerned about, you know, how foods are manipulated and manufactured then the other products might hold hosts sway,” he said.

Follow IndyStar reporter Alexandria Burris on Twitter: @allyburris.

This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Impossible Pork: Why Indiana hog farmers aren’t pleased

Source: The latest Impossible ‘meat’ has pork farmers questioning the name


Stop Making Ritualistic Slaughter Part Of Your Religions



TA-FC Clipboard: The reason Jews give for not stunning an animal before slaughter is that the stun gun produces fear, and that fear releases ‘poisons’ into the animal’s bloodstream (chemicals and hormones not wanted by orthodox Muslims and Jews in the animals they’re about to eat).

These religious peoples think fear-releasing chemicals and hormones produced by stunning animals prior to slaughter ‘poison’ the human eating the animal whom they are about to consume. In other words, they don’t want to ‘eat their fear’.

Muslims and Jews evidently don’t think that rounding animals up, pushing them into massive cages, dragging them through the mud, forcing them into tanks that hold them still, while they wrangle to be free, or hanging them by their legs, as they violently thrash to be free before the actual slaughter by throat-slitting, doesn’t produce a fear response.

The resistance itself proves the fear.

Nervous systems are designed to protect animals from predators via the ‘fight or flight’ response.

Once in cages they can’t fight or flee, nor are they fast enough on the ground to flee from humans with an arrow or a gun. Traps are often set where targeted animals roam close to home to catch them unawares.

So yes, the Jews and Muslims who demand non-stun slaughter, out of fear that they would be eating the ‘poisons’ generated by the ‘fear response’ of another animal, were ‘eating their fear’ all along.

Hmm. So they do believe animals have a fear response of fight or flight in response to a threat and in response to pain.

So why does the world keep appeasing the human predator? Because humans more powerful and cunning than the other animals on the planet. Humans drive without a conscience, because the entire world,  engages in some form of enslavement, torture and slaughter.

THE RSPCA is calling for a ban on non-stun slaughter to prevent “unnecessary suffering” for millions of animals.

Source: RSPCA calls for BAN on non-stun slaughter – ‘It causes UNNECESSARY SUFFERING’ | UK | News |


Colgate toothpaste goes vegan, organic and all-natural

TA-FC ClipBoard: Only one line of toothpaste went vegan. The ambiguous title to this article suggests all of Colgate went vegan.

I’ve been using Tom’s of Maine. However Walgreens where I shop, right across the street from where I live, is often out of it. So then I have to shop at places not as convenient to get to.

Hopefully, now that Colgate markets a vegan toothpaste, they will do the right thing and make it available in mainstream markets, instead of only in high-end, pricey markets that are out of reach for the average consumer.

Colgate toothpaste goes vegan, organic and all-natural


China Bans Trade, Consumption of Wild Animals to Counter Virus

China Bans Trade, Consumption of Wild Animals to Counter Virus

Bloomberg News

February 24, 2020, 4:52 AM EST

China’s top legislature imposed a total ban on trade and consumption of wild animals, according to state-run China Central Television, a move that aims to curb activities that scientists say may have caused the deadly coronavirus to jump from animals to humans.

The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress took the decision at a meeting on Monday. The move should restrict trade and protect biodiversity, said Li Shuo, a senior global policy adviser at Greenpeace in Beijing

What You Need to Know About the Spreading Coronavirus: QuickTake

The coronavirus is proliferating globally, roiling markets and business, after originating in China where more than 77,000 people have been infected and over 2,500 have died. 

The virus emerged in early December in Wuhan, an industrial city of 11 million in Hubei province, and early attention focused on a seafood market where live animals were sold, even though a third of the first 40 cases or so were found to have no link to it.

The process of ending trade and consumption “will be a challenging exercise,” said Li. Defining what wildlife is, whether Chinese medicines are included and what counts as illegal are some of the issues that need to be tackled, he said.

Seized pangolin scales in Hong Kong on Feb. 1.

Photographer: Anthony Wallace/AFP via Getty Images

Coronavirus Likely Began With Bats, an Omen for Next Epidemic

According to the People’s Daily, wild animals covered by the ban include those that the Wildlife Protection Law and other laws prohibit people from eating, terrestrial wild animals that China protects as they have “important ecological, scientific and social value” as well as other terrestrial wild animals including those bred in captivity.

China issued a temporary ban on trading in wild animals shortly after the outbreak of the virus, and pressure has been mounting to make the prohibition permanent. 

The existing Wildlife Protection Law bans the sale of food from endangered species, but doesn’t cover all wild animals. International animal rights groups have criticized the use of exotic animal parts such as tiger bones, bear gall and pangolin scales in traditional Chinese medicine.

— With assistance by James Poole

Source: China Bans Trade, Consumption of Wild Animals to Counter Virus – Bloomberg


UN Blacklist 112 Companies – Questions Need Answers

Questions Need Answers So The World Can Understand The Enormity Of The Oppression

AirBNB, TripAdvisor, Expedia? Are Jewish run businesses operating in the occupied territories of Palestine? American companies setting up business in the disputed territories? To whom do they pay rent? In Palestine it would be the Palestinian landholder.

Do the Palestinians travel outside of Palestine? Hanan Ashrawi tried and couldn’t, since she was denied a USA visa to visit her daughter in the USA. So what’s the point of setting up businesses that the Palestinians can’t use?

Because all these businesses are for the Jews, not the Palestinians. On Palestinian land, no less. Any Palestinian CEOs or COOs? Probably not. Any management personnel? Probably not. So they get the low end poverty line jobs? Probably. “Work Shall Set You Free”, the Jews tell the Palestinians.

Any labor unions set up for the Palestinian slaves? Don’t know? Safe, unsafe working conditions? How many Arabs working Adolf Hitler’s Ghost Factories. How many Palestinians? How many Jews?

What’s the pay per hour? Do they get health insurance, family policies too, life insurance, worker’s compensation for injuries, paid vacations, pensions?

Do the Jews pay rent to the government of Palestine for leasing the land, that then they lease to Jewish and international companies?

Are Palestinian workers required to be interrogated as a condition of employment, do they have to pledge allegiance to Israel? Are they required to spy on their families and report back to the Jews?

None of these questions are answered, and they’re all valid inquiries. Were any questions asked? The world deserves to know the conditions of employment and who profits from leasing the land to these 122 companies working for Adolf Hitler’s Ghost.

So all this illegal settlement activity was actually a guise for planting Jewish businesses in the occupied territories – to profit off the suffering of Palestinians, then turn them into Adolf Hitler’s Ghost Factory Workers.

Where are the Palestinian businesses?

UN Blacklist: The 112 Companies Operating in Palestine’s Israeli Settlements


AP – Times of Israel

Overwhelming majority of firms on UN Human Rights Council list are Israeli, 6 are based in US, including Airbnb, Expedia, TripAdvisor, Motorola.

A Rami Levy supermarket in Gush Etzion, August 3, 2010. The company is listed in a UN database of 112 companies operating in the West Bank.  (Nati Shohat/Flash90)

12 Feb 2020 – The UN Human Rights Council today published a database of 112 companies that are conducting business in West Bank settlements.

In the report the council said the companies’ activities “raised particular human rights concerns.”

The list is dominated by Israeli companies, including banks and construction firms. But it also lists a number of international firms, including travel companies Airbnb, Expedia and TripAdvisor, tech giant Motorola and construction and infrastructure companies including France’s Egis Rail and British company JC Bamford Excavators.

Six of the companies listed are based in the US, four in the Netherlands, three in the UK, three in France, and one each in Luxembourg and Thailand.

Israeli authorities reacted with fury to the report, which they described as a “blacklist,” while the Palestinians lauded the list as “a victory for international law.”

The list includes companies that are directly engaged in the West Bank, parent companies that own a majority share in firms operating in the West Bank, and companies granting franchises or licenses to West Bank businesses.

The 112 companies listed in the report and their home countries:

1. Afikim Public Transportation Ltd., Israel
2. Airbnb Inc., United States
3. American Israeli Gas Corporation Ltd., Israel
4. Amir Marketing and Investments in Agriculture Ltd., Israel
5. Amos Hadar Properties and Investments Ltd., Israel
6. Angel Bakeries, Israel
7. Archivists Ltd., Israel
8. Ariel Properties Group, Israel
9. Ashtrom Industries Ltd., Israel
10. Ashtrom Properties Ltd., Israel
11. Avgol Industries 1953 Ltd., Israel
12. Bank Hapoalim B.M., Israel
13. Bank Leumi Le-Israel B.M., Israel
14. Bank of Jerusalem Ltd., Israel
15. Beit Haarchiv Ltd., Israel
16. Bezeq, the Israel Telecommunication Corp Ltd., Israel
17. B.V., Netherlands
18. C Mer Industries Ltd., Israel
19. Café Café Israel Ltd., Israel
20. Caliber 3, Israel
21. Cellcom Israel Ltd., Israel
22. Cherriessa Ltd., Israel
23. Chish Nofei Israel Ltd., Israel
24. Citadis Israel Ltd., Israel
25. Comasco Ltd., Israel
26. Darban Investments Ltd., Israel
27. Delek Group Ltd., Israel
28. Delta Israel, Israel
29. Dor Alon Energy in Israel 1988 Ltd., Israel
30. Egis Rail, France
31. Egged, Israel Transportation Cooperative Society Ltd., Israel
32. Energix Renewable Energies Ltd., Israel
33. EPR Systems Ltd., Israel
34. Extal Ltd., Israel
35. Expedia Group Inc., United States
36. Field Produce Ltd., Israel
37. Field Produce Marketing Ltd., Israel
38. First International Bank of Israel Ltd., Israel
39. Galshan Shvakim Ltd., Israel
40. General Mills Israel Ltd., Israel
41. Hadiklaim Israel Date Growers Cooperative Ltd., Israel
42. Hot Mobile Ltd., Israel
43. Hot Telecommunications Systems Ltd., Israel
44. Industrial Buildings Corporation Ltd., Israel
45. Israel Discount Bank Ltd., Israel
46. Israel Railways Corporation Ltd., Israel
47. Italek Ltd., Israel
48. JC Bamford Excavators Ltd., United Kingdom
49. Jerusalem Economy Ltd., Israel
50. Kavim Public Transportation Ltd., Israel
51. Lipski Installation and Sanitation Ltd., Israel
52. Matrix IT Ltd., Israel
53. Mayer Davidov Garages Ltd., Israel
54. Mekorot Water Company Ltd., Israel
55. Mercantile Discount Bank Ltd., Israel
56. Merkavim Transportation Technologies Ltd., Israel
57. Mizrahi Tefahot Bank Ltd., Israel
58. Modi’in Ezrachi Group Ltd., Israel
59. Mordechai Aviv Taasiot Beniyah 1973 Ltd., Israel
60. Motorola Solutions Israel Ltd., Israel
61. Municipal Bank Ltd., Israel
62. Naaman Group Ltd., Israel
63. Nof Yam Security Ltd., Israel
64. Ofertex Industries 1997 Ltd., Israel
65. Opodo Ltd., United Kingdom
66. Bank Otsar Ha-Hayal Ltd., Israel
67. Partner Communications Company Ltd., Israel
68. Paz Oil Company Ltd., Israel
69. Pelegas Ltd., Israel
70. Pelephone Communications Ltd., Israel
71. Proffimat S.R. Ltd., Israel
72. Rami Levy Chain Stores Hashikma Marketing 2006 Ltd., Israel
73. Rami Levy Hashikma Marketing Communication Ltd., Israel
74. Re/Max Israel, Israel
75. Shalgal Food Ltd., Israel
76. Shapir Engineering and Industry Ltd., Israel
77. Shufersal Ltd., Israel
78. Sonol Israel Ltd., Israel
79. Superbus Ltd., Israel
80. Supergum Industries 1969 Ltd., Israel
81. Tahal Group International B.V., Netherlands
82. TripAdvisor Inc., United States
83. Twitoplast Ltd., Israel
84. Unikowsky Maoz Ltd., Israel
85. YES, Israel
86. Zakai Agricultural Know-how and inputs Ltd., Israel
87. ZF Development and Construction, Israel
88. ZMH Hammermand Ltd., Israel
89. Zorganika Ltd., Israel
90. Zriha Hlavin Industries Ltd., Israel
91. Alon Blue Square Israel Ltd., Israel
92. Alstom S.A., France
93. Altice Europe N.V., Netherlands
94. Amnon Mesilot Ltd., Israel
95. Ashtrom Group Ltd., Israel
96. Booking Holdings Inc., United States
97. Brand Industries Ltd., Israel
98. Delta Galil Industries Ltd., Israel
99. eDreams ODIGEO S.A., Luxembourg
100. Egis S.A., France
101. Electra Ltd., Israel
102. Export Investment Company Ltd., Israel
103. General Mills Inc., United States
104. Hadar Group, Israel
105. Hamat Group Ltd., Israel
106. Indorama Ventures P.C.L., Thailand
107. Kardan N.V., Netherlands
108. Mayer’s Cars and Trucks Co. Ltd., Israel
109. Motorola Solutions Inc., United States
110. Natoon Group, Israel
111. Villar International Ltd., Israel
112. Greenkote P.L.C., United Kingdom

Go to Original –

Source: TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE » UN Blacklist: The 112 Companies Operating in Palestine’s Israeli Settlements


Coronavirus and the future of ‘warm meat’

Walk into a North American supermarket, and there are rows upon rows of frozen meat to choose from. In China, however, there’s a preference for freshly slaughtered pig, chicken and beef. And that desire for ‘warm meat’ is at the heart of a growing concern.

The recent Wuhan virus outbreak in China has been linked to a wet market in the eastern region of the country. The respiratory disease was transmitted from an animal to a human, but is now being passed between people.

But that’s just one virus spread through animals. And diseases such as avian flu in poultry and African Swine Flu (ASF) have been difficult to eradicate, as chickens and pigs are shipped from farmhouse to market on a daily basis.

Despite the risks, markets are central to Chinese life. While there are supermarkets stocked with frozen meat (which staff say is the same meat provided to vendors elsewhere), the customer flow is a trickle compared to the hustle and bustle of the so-called “wet markets.”

That’s partly because widespread refrigeration has only recently come to China. In some rural and lower income areas, fridges are still rare. Among older consumers who have grown up buying perishable food for daily use, shoppers say they can tell the quality of fresh meat by its smell, colour and texture.

Dirk Pfeiffer, a professor of veterinary medicine at City University in Hong Kong, says while trust is high for shoppers at wet markets, many customers still see supermarkets as alien and suspect.

Socializing is also part of the market experience.“I actually believe that it is an important thing for the older generation to go to the wet market and have a chat,” said Pfeiffer.

As fresh meat continues to be associated with viral outbreaks, though, how sustainable the appetite for wet markets may be is unclear.

Source: Coronavirus and the future of ‘warm meat’ | Windsor Star


Are insects the food of the future?

Are insects the food of the future?

“Advocates argue that the aversion to consuming bugs is largely cultural, since about 2 billion people worldwide eat them regularly. Offering insects in more appealing forms, such as bars or powders, could be a way to overcome the “ick factor.” “

  • The real reason these stories are popping up in news feeds of Americans is that countries, specifically in Africa, want to sell their products to countries who don’t eat insects. So the USA government is going to force-feed them to Americans unbeknownst to them, then say aha, you’ve been eating them all along.

African countries need money, so why not sell insects? That’s all you’ve got to offer the world to build your economies – insects? A continent overflowing with natural resources gives the world insects? We’ve got our own insects. We don’t need yours.

Don’t we have enough food allergens to worry about? Now we introduce hard shell insects to the mix?

I say, make something of value. Something we like. We don’t want to return to the cave. Why should you want to stay in it while we pay the price?

I guarantee that the politicians making these trade deals won’t be eating insects for breakfast, lunch or dinner.

So, the logic here is that 2 billion people in the world eat them, so we should too? Yeah, maybe that’s why 2 billion people in the world are always sick. What ever happened to progress?

They say, you sell us cows, we sell you insects in return. That’s the trade deal I’m only imagining is true. Sounds like a con to me. Live exports of cows. I wonder if they’ll live-export insects in return?

Just because some insects show up in our food while processing it, doesn’t mean we should start factory farming insects. Rat hairs can be found in peanut butter; does that mean other countries with huge rat populations should be live-exporting rats to us, because we already technically eat them, because a few hairs end up in the food?

NO. Find a better way to feed the planet.

To argue that American’s negative view of eating insects is cultural-based is to imply that those who consume insects do so because their culture, and not their circumstance, dictates it.

So keep your culture to yourself and stop imposing it on those who do not agree nor want to participate.

I’ll bet in the poor regions where these 2 billion people can be found, that they would prefer plant food to insects any day of the week.

For the writer of that article, or whoever contributed to it, to suggest treating Americans or any other country that doesn’t trade in insects, like children by disguising the insects in other more appealing foods, that the “ick” factor could be overcome doesn’t understand what freedom to choose means.

Anyone or entity, who knowingly and willingly hides ingredients in any food product for the purposes of appeasing foreign governments or for any other reason, at the expense of unknowing citizens should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for tampering with the food supply.

It’s time don’t you think, to legislate laws to protect the American consumer against lies, omissions and unclean products entering our food supply.

These alarmists making people think we need to go back to the Dark Ages to survive in the present age have only money from American pockets on their minds, otherwise they would produce a product of value that Americans will gladly purchase without having to be tricked into buying it by disguising it.

It’s strange that these are the very people who go hysterical and burn villages if you try to change their cultural habits, but are all too ready to change the cultural habits of everybody else on the planet to suit their demands.

Clean up your countries and grow plants like everybody else and feed your own people. But no. Everybody is a king or a queen or a tribal lord on the take on the make, scheming 24/7 how to steal money and treasure rather than working for a better life – like everybody else had to do.

Bed bugs too? Are bed bugs being factory-farmed or is the government going to tell those who have them in high rise public housing just to eat them, so they don’t have to issue them food stamps? Eat the blood? how will you advertise them? Get your vitamin B12 the natural way, from humans via bed bugs?

NO TO INSECTS IN MY FOOD hidden from view or not.

SOURCE: Are insects the food of the future?


US states join global push to ban animal-tested cosmetics

US states join global push to ban animal-tested cosmetics

LAS VEGAS (AP) — A growing number of U.S. states are considering a ban on the sale or import of cosmetics that have been tested on animals, as advocates argue testing products such as lotions, shampoos and makeup on rabbits, mice and rats is cruel and outdated.

The cause has gained support from consumers and many cosmetics companies, but the biggest hurdle is China, which requires that cosmetics sold in its large, lucrative market undergo testing on animals.

California, Nevada and Illinois all saw new laws take effect this year that ban the sale or import of animal-tested cosmetics. The laws, which apply to tests performed after Jan. 1, aren’t expected to cause much disruption for the industry because many companies already use non-animal testing. Instead, they draw a line in the sand that puts pressure on the U.S. government to pass a nationwide ban and help end China’s requirement that most cosmetics sold in that nation of more than 1.4 billion people undergo testing on animals by Chinese regulators.

China’s policy applies to all imported cosmetics, including makeup, perfume and hair care products, along with some “special use” goods produced in China, such as hair dye, sunscreen and whitening products that make functional claims.

Animal-tested cosmetics already are banned in Europe, India and elsewhere. A ban in the United States, one of the world’s largest economies, would put further global pressure on China to end its policy and push Chinese cosmetics companies to rely on non-animal tests if they want to sell their products in the U.S.

“We’re not trying to create an island out here in Nevada,” said state Sen. Melanie Scheible, who sponsored Nevada’s law. “We are trying to join a group of other communities that have stood up and said, ‘We don’t support animal testing.’”

Animal-rights groups like Cruelty Free International and the Humane Society of the United States hope to get more states to pass bans this year. Legislation has been introduced or will soon be made public in Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York and Virginia, according to Cruelty Free International, and a national ban has been introduced in Congress since 2014, though the bipartisan measure has been slow to advance. The most recent version introduced in November marks the first time the country’s leading cosmetics trade group, the Personal Care Products Council, has become a vocal backer of the ban, support that should ease lawmaker concerns about business opposition.

The California, Nevada and Illinois laws create exemptions for any cosmetics that were tested on animals to comply with regulations of a foreign government — an exception that acknowledges the reality that most companies will see their products tested on animals if they sell in China.

China is a “big complicating factor,” said Monica Engebretson, who leads public affairs for Cruelty Free International in North America. “That’s put companies that want to enter that Chinese market in a real bind.”

Scheible said her aim in Nevada was not to punish those multinational corporations but to raise awareness and put pressure on other governments, like China, to act. “A lot of people thought that we no longer tested on animals at all,” she said. “They thought that this was already a thing of the past.”

The bans in all three states require cosmetics sellers to use non-animal tests to prove their products are safe. Many international companies are already doing that after the European Union passed a series of similar bans on animal testing, culminating with a 2013 ban on the sale of animal-tested products.

Supporters note that science has advanced, allowing companies in most cases to use non-animal alternatives — such as human cell cultures or lab-grown human skin and eye tissue — to test whether a product or ingredient is safe.

For example, EpiDerm, a synthetic skin tissue made by Massachusetts-based MatTek Corp., is created from cells taken from skin donated during procedures such as breast reduction surgery, circumcision and tummy tuck procedures.

Products can be applied to synthetic tissue to determine whether they cause skin irritation, damage, sensitivity or other issues. That can be used in place of a testing a product on the back of a shaved rabbit, animal rights supporters say.

Some of the biggest names in personal care and beauty, including Avon, Unilever and Procter & Gamble, have used MatTek’s tissues for testing. Carl Westmoreland, a safety scientist with Unilever, said the European Union ban drove more innovation in non-animal testing. Companies like Unilever, trade groups and advocates are among those working with Chinese regulators and scientists to push for new rules, helping to familiarize them with procedures and results from non-animal tests.

“They have been changing and are continuing to change,” he said, noting China in recent years has allowed some cosmetics produced within the country to avoid animal testing. Francine Lamoriello, executive vice president for global strategies at the Personal Care Products Council said it’s a slow process, but Chinese regulators are working to accept non-animal tests.

“They’re having conferences. They really seem to be quite motivated to do as best as they can to accept and validate certain methods,” she said. The Personal Care Products Council supports most of the state legislation but is pushing for a nationwide law instead of a patchwork of rules across the country.

Similar to the state laws, the proposed ban before Congress would exempt cosmetics required to undergo testing in China. It would allow those products to be sold in the U.S. as long as sellers relied on additional, non-animal tests to show they are safe.

California was first to pass the legislation in 2018, a move that’s part of the state’s pattern of wielding its status as the world’s fifth-largest economy to push change. “That’s the beauty of doing things in California,” said Judie Mancuso with the group Social Compassion in Legislation who pressed for that state’s ban. “You set the stage, you set the standard, and others grab it and grow.”

Associated Press researcher Shanshan Wang in Beijing contributed to this report.

Source: US states join global push to ban animal-tested cosmetics


New York Becomes First State to Ban Sale of Giraffe Products

NEW YORK BECOMES FIRST STATE TO BAN SALE OF GIRAFFE PRODUCTSThe new legislation designates the giraffe as a vulnerable species and prohibits the sale of articles made from them.


DECEMBER 27, 2019

New York has become the first state to ban the sale of giraffe products. Assembly Bill A06606 and Senate Bill 5098, introduced by Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee Chair Steve Englebright (D-Setauket) and State Senator Monica Martinez (D-Suffolk), respectively, requires the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to designate certain species as vulnerable and prohibits the sale of articles made from any part of a vulnerable species.

The legislation also requires the department to designate the giraffe as a vulnerable species. “This is a historic day for animal protection, and we applaud Governor [Andrew] Cuomo for signing this groundbreaking legislation to prohibit the sale of giraffe parts and products,” Brian Shapiro, New York senior state director for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), said.

“New York will now lead the way for other states to follow in protecting this iconic species. This bill was introduced last year after our undercover investigation revealed the abundant trade in giraffe products thriving in the Empire State.”

In 2018, HSUS’ undercover investigation found giraffe parts and products sold online and in stores by at least 51 dealers across the United States, including in New York. Giraffe bones used in knife handles and giraffe skins custom-made into jackets, boots, pillows, and even Bible covers, among other items, were being sold by New York-based businesses.

New York has also implemented legislation banning the sale and purchase of elephant ivory and rhino horns in 2014 and the sale of shark fins in 2013.

Source: New York Becomes First State to Ban Sale of Giraffe Products | VegNews


Plant-Based Food Tech Company Good Catch® Secures Over $32M In Series B Financing Round


Plant-Based Food Tech Company Good Catch® Secures Over $32M In Series B Financing Round

Rising global interest fuels robust investment in alternative protein products, highlighting significant shift in consumer behavior and mindset


Good Catch 

Jan 15, 2020, 09:55 ETNEW YORK, Jan. 15, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Gathered Foods, makers of Good Catch® plant-based seafood products, today announced the closing of an oversubscribed Series B funding round, which includes two key strategic industry investors: Greenleaf Foods and 301 INC, the venture arm of General Mills.

Gathered Foods, makers of Good Catch® plant-based seafood products, today announced the closing of an oversubscribed Series B funding round, which includes two key strategic industry investors: Greenleaf Foods and 301 INC, the venture arm of General Mills.

Led by Stray Dog Capital and Rocana Ventures and including several prominent impact investors such as Almanac InvestmentsCPT Capital and New Crop Capital, the net proceeds from the investment, totaling over $32 million, will be used for significant expansion in distribution across North America, Europe and into Asia, the opening of its state-of-the-art manufacturing facility, and new product and food service channel launches in early 2020.

Valued at $4.5 billion, the U.S. plant-based foods retail market grew five times faster than the total U.S. retail food sales over the past year.

“Consumer demand of trailblazing plant-based alternatives is nearly insatiable, and this trend is led by taste and availability. This next phase for Good Catch is laser focused on meeting consumer desires with culinary applications across all channels,” said Chris Kerr, CEO and Co-Founder of Gathered Foods. “This round of investment emphasizes the food industry’s recognition of our strategy, our reception by consumers, and anticipation for more innovation to come.”

“When we met the Good Catch team, we were immediately captivated with their mission to develop more sustainable plant-based seafood products that taste as delicious as traditional seafood,” said John Haugen, Managing Director of 301 INC.

“Good Catch stands out as a strong, expandable brand with passionate leadership, and we’re excited to partner to grow.”

Behind the success of Good Catch are founding chef partners and brothers, Chad and Derek Sarno. They have worked tirelessly to help create the company’s proprietary six-legume blend (peas, chickpeas, lentils, soy, fava beans and navy beans), utilized as the base of these inaugural Good Catch products.

The added superior umami flavor from seaweed and algae extracts creates that real seafood flavor. All Good Catch products are free of dairy, GMOs, mercury, toxins, microplastics, microfibers and are safe and enjoyable for those with shellfish allergies. These products exhibit the same texture, flavor, and nutritional value as conventional seafood, without harming the environment.

“Good Catch is pioneering a new, promising sector of the fast-growing plant-based protein category and we’re thrilled to support their continued growth and progress as they deliver consumers great-tasting plant-based seafood products that support their brand mission—and ours, as well,” said Dan Curtin, President and CEO of Greenleaf Foods, SPC.

According to the United Nations, nearly 90% of the world’s marine fish stocks are now fully exploited, overexploited or depleted, with fisheries subsidies playing an integral part. Keeping startling statistics such as this in mind, Good Catch believes that the only truly sustainable seafood is one that allows fish to remain in the ocean, undisturbed.

Seafood is consumed globally and found within myriad culinary applications. From an environmental standpoint, Good Catch is hopeful that by creating delicious seafood alternatives, they’ll be able to make a real environmental impact.

“On the heels of widespread adoption of plant-based meat and increasing consumer concern about the environmental impacts of food production, the market is ripe for Good Catch’s next-generation plant-based seafood,” said Caroline Bushnell from the Good Food Institute, “Plant-based seafood provides a host of environmental benefits, including alleviating pressures on rapidly depleting fisheries, providing relief to fragile ocean ecosystems, reducing the impact of fishing nets on the ocean plastic problem, and reducing production-related GHG emissions.”

As the appetite for plant-based seafood continues to grow, the goal is to make Good Catch accessible and available for everyone. Good Catch products are now available in over 4,500 retail outlets across the United States, and will be launching in the UK in the coming weeks.

About Good Catch

Good Catch is a chef-driven revolutionary food company developing flavorful, 100% plant-based seafood alternatives. Founded by pioneering chefs Chad and Derek Sarno, Good Catch products offer the taste, texture, nutrition, and experience of seafood without harming the environment.

United by love of good food, plant-based eating, and animal welfare, Good Catch is on a mission to raise consciousness, reduce harm, and preserve environmental resources, all while delivering a great culinary experience. The team is dedicated to creating great tasting plant-based foods for everyone, from vegan to omnivore and everything in between.

Good Catch Plant Based Fish-Free Tuna is available nationwide in three versatile flavor offerings including Naked in Water, Mediterranean, and Oil & Herbs, with new products coming to market in Spring 2020.

The Good Food Institute (July 16, 2019) Plant-Based Food Retail Sales Are Growing 5x Total Food Sales. Retrieved from

United Nations (July 13, 2018) 90% of fish stocks are used up – fisheries subsidies must stop. Retrieved from

SOURCE Good Catch

Related Links


Are lupini beans set to conquer the plant-based protein market?

Are lupini beans set to conquer the plant-based protein market?

The nutrition-packed beans are a hit in Europe, but not well known in the U.S.

Leaders of Brami and Lupii tell Food Dive why the ingredient is important and where there is room for growth.


Megan Poinski@meganpoinski


Jan. 16, 2020

When Isabelle Steichen moved to the United States from Europe in 2013, people didn’t think it was so strange that she was a vegan.What they cared about, she told Food Dive, was where she was getting her protein. And now, Steichen and Alexandra Dempster are starting a brand that answers that very American question with a very European solution.

Steichen and Dempster’s new company, Lupii, makes protein bars from the lupini bean, which is traditionally grown and eaten in the Mediterranean basin. The ingredient is not well known outside that region of Europe, where it is commonly a pickled snack and flour ingredient to enrich baked goods. Steichen joked the bean seems to have been “born in the wrong place,” since Americans tend to be more concerned about getting a full nutritional experience when eating plant-based food.

A big year for flavor innovation

“It’s higher in protein than soy, which is generally considered the highest source of plant protein,” Steichen said. “… It’s low in carbohydrates, packed with fiber, all the minerals. And then in terms of an ingredient, it’s also super sustainable to grow … And so, from so many angles, it’s just an incredible ingredient.”

Aaron Gatti, founder and CEO of Brami Snacks, has made the nutritional value of the lupini bean a vital part of his company’s story. Brami, which launched in 2016, makes snackable lupini beans in pouches. The company soaks and brines them so they can be eaten whole, a sort of al dente large bean.

Brami’s packaging features a cartoon bean. On the Garlic and Rosemary variety, it has the sword, shield and helmet of a Roman soldier, which was once featured on every package as a hat tip to the ingredient’s history.

“It’s actually said by some to be the most ancient legume known to humankind,” Gatti told Food Dive. “[It] dates back to ancient Egypt, and the ancient Romans used them as portable protein for their warriors, hence our ‘Bramus Romanus’ little bean character and our positioning as to this being the answer to the modern-day warrior. And they lived on since the Roman times in the Mediterranean as a fresh bean aperitif snack, like edamame in Japan. In fact, you could say that they are the Mediterranean answer to edamame.”

As more food makers bring international influences to products, and more consumers look for plant-based protein that tastes good and packs in nutritional value, lupini beans are getting more notice. Lupii and Brami are two companies on top of this trend, which could spread to many other applications because of the bean’s versatility.

Gatti told Food Dive he grew up practically addicted to snacking on lupini beans, which were always available in Italy, where he often visited family. As a child, he didn’t know much about their health benefits. He just knew that they tasted good and were fun to eat.

It was only as an adult — after his wife who was on a plant-based diet sampled the beans herself in Italy and pushed Gatti to start Brami — that he learned just how good lupini beans were from a nutritional standpoint. According to information compiled by Superfoodly, lupini beans have more protein in a 100-calorie serving than other popular legumes including chickpeas and soybeans. They are complete proteins and are high in fiber.

“And so that was kind of the ‘a-ha’ moment,” Gatti said. “…I personally faced this daily snack challenge when I worked in the office grind. At 4 p.m., I would be like, ‘What the heck can I snack on that’s really going to satisfy my hunger without ruining my diet?’ You have carrots and celery on one hand that are boring and don’t have protein. And now you have a lot of better-for-you snacks, but they’re better in the sense of the better ingredient deck, which is great, but they’re still loaded with calories, carbs, fat or sugar. And so unless you’re going to modify your meal plan, you’re kind of risking going over your normal caloric intake.”

As Brami prepares the beans, they are minimally processed with few ingredients and additives. Gatti touted the clean label on his snacks, saying he’d always wanted to bring some of the “magic” of fresh food like he’d enjoyed in Italy back to the United States.”

We think real food that hasn’t been engineered is always going to be better for you, and it’s really like a Mediterranean slow food that we have made ready to eat for everyday purposes,” he said.

Lupii: A new plant-based protein comes to vegan bars

Steichen, a well-known vegan blogger and podcast host behind The Plantiful and online meal planning company Buddhalicious, met Dempster last year. Dempster has a background in Big Food, having worked for PepsiCo as senior global marketing manager and prior to that doing marketing and sales work for Carlsberg Group. They described their meeting to Food Dive as “love at first sight,” where they bonded over the need to make highly nutritious plant-based food more available to people.

They united behind this idea to create Lupii, a lupini bean snack company that officially launched this month. Lupii bars, which can be purchased online or at a handful of stores in New York, are clean-label nutrient packed snacks. There are three flavors: Tahini Lemon Cranberry, Almond Butter Cinnamon Raisin and Peanut Butter Cacao Nib. Each bar has nine to 10 grams of protein and eight or nine grams of fiber. They also are non-GMO and made with minimal ingredients. And the beans used in these bars, Steichen said, are smaller “sweet lupini,” which have less natural bitterness.

Dempster told Food Dive the nutritional profile of the lupini bean makes Lupii’s bars stand out in the marketplace, occupying a place where very few vegan bars can be. Protein bars often rely on whey or egg whites for some of their nutrients. When they are plant-based, they often contain heavily processed protein isolates, which Dempster said can be difficult to digest.

“You’re stripping a macronutrient away from the whole food source, and we really believe in trying to get as much nutrition as possible from real whole foods that are minimally adulterated,” Dempster said.

“It’s higher in protein than soy, which is generally considered the highest source of plant protein. … It’s low in carbohydrates, packed with fiber, all the minerals. And then in terms of an ingredient, it’s also super sustainable to grow … And so, from so many angles, it’s just an incredible ingredient.”

Isabelle Steichen

Founder and CEO, Lupii

Steichen said that many other plant-based food products with protein are highly processed and full of extruded proteins and sugary syrups. Plant-based protein ingredients are often dried, pulverized and bleached, and don’t look or taste anything like the plant from which they came. Lupini beans don’t need to have many other ingredients added to be able to work with them, and they also don’t need any more nutrients to enhance their health profile. Lupii also only uses dates to sweeten its products, which Steichen and Dempster touted as more natural than competitors’ sweeteners.

Right now, Lupii is only making bars. Steichen and Dempster said they have many more plans for lupini bean products, especially since the bean has myriad common uses in Europe. It’s often turned into flakes or flour and added to baked goods to make them more nutritious. Lupini has been made into a dairy alternative and ice cream, Steichen said. It’s also been used as an ingredient in veggie burgers and to make tempeh.

While Steichen and Dempster wouldn’t talk yet about their plans for future Lupii products, they said lupini is the answer to what many consumers are looking for, especially when trying to have a less animal-based diet.

“You’re eating an ingredient that is very sustainable and a lot of consumers care about that, too,” Steichen said. “When they eat plant based, health is a first motivator. But then environment is a second. As I mentioned, lupini is a wonderful crop that is good for their health, and so a lot of consumers are looking to think a little bit more about supporting biodiversity, and that’s definitely something that we can support with our product as well.”

Follow Megan Poinski on Twitter

Source: Are lupini beans set to conquer the plant-based protein market? | Food Dive


Disease that killed millions of China’s pigs poses global threat

CNAP ClipBoard: Another compelling reason to stop raising pigs and eating them. Although reportedly humans cannot contract AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, it is my position that “they can’t until they can”.

By Tom Polansek

CHICAGO (Reuters) – Bettie the beagle, a detector dog for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, picked up the scent of pork on a woman arriving from China at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport.

Soon the dog’s handler discovered and confiscated a ham sandwich in the purse of a passenger who had flown on a China Eastern Airlines flight from Shanghai.

The danger? That the food might be contaminated with African swine fever and spread the disease to the United States. China has lost millions of pigs in outbreaks of the disease, pushing its pork prices to record highs, forcing purchases of costly imports and roiling global meat markets.

“It’s very likely it may come here if we aren’t more vigilant,” said Jessica Anderson, the handler for the pork-sniffing dog and an agricultural specialist for the border protection agency.

Bettie is among an expanded team of specially trained beagles at U.S. airports, part of a larger effort to protect the nation’s $23 billion pork industry from a disease that has decimated China’s hog herd, the world’s largest. Governments worldwide are scrambling to shore up their defenses as the disease spills over China’s borders, according to Reuters reporting from nine countries. The efforts underscore the grave threat to global agriculture.

African swine fever has spread to Southeast Asia and eastern Europe, with cases found in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Korea, Myanmar, the Philippines, Poland, Belgium and Bulgaria. Around the globe, those countries and others that have so far sidestepped the epidemic are cracking down on travelers, increasing cargo screenings and banning meat imports.

Pork-producing countries stand to lose billions of dollars if the disease infects their industries because outbreaks devastate farms and shut export markets. African swine fever does not threaten humans but there’s no vaccine or cure for infected pigs.

If the disease enters the United States, the top pork-exporting nation with 77.3 million hogs, the government would struggle to protect the industry, participants in a four-day drill in September told Reuters.

“If this gets in, it will destroy our industry as we know it,” said Dave Pyburn, the National Pork Board’s senior vice president of science and technology.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) simulated an outbreak in Mississippi that spread to the nation’s top pig-producing states, including North Carolina, Iowa and Minnesota. Veterinarians, farmers and government officials gathered at command centers where they tested their capacity to swiftly detect, control and clean up after an outbreak.

The experience showed the U.S. needs to increase its capacity to quickly test pigs for the disease and to dispose of the animals without spreading it, said Pyburn, who participated in the drill.

In China, the top global pork consumer, the disease has been devastating. The exact number of hog deaths is not known. Rabobank estimated the country lost up to 55% of its pig herd last year. But the Chinese government has reported smaller losses in the country’s $1 trillion hog sector since the first case in August 2018.


The U.S. government is fielding dogs at airports and seaports, conducting outbreak-response drills and adding capacity to test pigs. France and Germany are killing hundreds of thousands of wild boar that might carry the disease. France also erected 132 kilometers (82 miles) of fencing to keep out wild boar and is planning stricter sanitary rules for pig farming, including requirements to disinfect trucks that transport swine.

Thailand culled pigs in a province close to Myanmar, where the disease has been found. South Korea ordered soldiers on its border with North Korea to capture wild boar, while Vietnam used troops to ensure infected pigs were culled.

Australia expelled travelers from Vietnam for smuggling pork and banned imports of pork products. Australia also deployed advisors to Pacific islands in an attempt to protect its closest neighbors from African swine fever. If such efforts fail, it could cost the country more than 2 billion Australian dollars ($1.4 billion) over five years, according to Australian Pork Limited, an industry group.

“It is certainly the biggest threat to commercial raising that we have ever seen, and arguably the biggest threat to any commercial livestock species we’ve seen,” said Mark Schipp, Australia’s chief veterinary officer.

U.S. officials plan to suspend domestic shipments of pigs among farms and to slaughterhouses if African swine fever is detected. The USDA and states could issue orders halting the movement of livestock in certain areas as a way to contain the disease.

The USDA said in a statement to Reuters that the September drill highlighted shortcomings in its guidance to states detailing when and how to limit the movement of pigs. The government is also increasing the number of laboratories it uses to test for African swine fever.

“We have identified some gaps,” said Amanda Luitjens, who took part in the drill and is animal welfare auditor for Minnesota-based pork producer Christensen Farms. “The thought of it making it to the United States is scary.”


Travelers transporting meat represent the biggest risk for African swine fever to spread to the United States because the disease can live for weeks in pork products, Pyburn said.

Contaminated food can be fed to feral pigs or livestock in a practice known as garbage feeding, which the USDA says has caused outbreaks of swine diseases around the world. U.S. farmers are supposed to obtain a license to feed pigs with food waste that contains meat and cook it to kill disease organisms.

African swine fever can also spread from pig to pig, from bites by infectious ticks and through objects such as trucks, clothing and shoes that have come into contact with the virus.

China banned the transportation of live pigs from infected provinces and neighboring regions in an unsuccessful bid to contain its outbreaks. It also culled pigs and outlawed the use of kitchen waste for swine feed.

The disease has been detected in food products seized at airports in South Korea, Japan, Australia, the Philippines and northern Ireland.

African swine fever is thought to have arrived in the Philippines through contaminated pork smuggled from China. The Philippines is now conducting mandatory checks on carry-on luggage of passengers from countries with outbreaks.

The government of the province of Cebu in central Philippines banned imported products and those from the main Philippine island of Luzon to avoid swine fever. More than 60,000 pigs have died or been culled in Luzon because of the disease. The Philippines Department of Agriculture also banned garbage feeding that included leftover food from airports, airlines and seaports.

In the United States, low inspection rates at ports of entry increase the likelihood for illegal pork to enter the country undetected, the USDA said in a report assessing the risk from African swine fever. The agency works with Customs and Border Protection to alert all U.S. ports each time a new country is confirmed to have the disease, requesting increased scrutiny on travelers and shipments.

But Customs and Border Protection estimates it needs 3,148 people to specialize in agricultural inspections at entry points like airports and only has about 2,500.

The U.S. Senate last year authorized the annual hiring of 240 agricultural specialists a year until the workforce shortage is filled, and the training and assignment of 20 new canine teams a year. The government approved 60 new beagle teams to work at airports and seaports last year, for a total of 179 teams, according to USDA.

Those teams face a daunting challenge, said Senator Gary Peters, a Michigan Democrat who introduced the legislation with other lawmakers.

“Every day, millions of passengers and tens of thousands of shipping containers carrying food products cross our nation’s borders,” he said, “any one of which could do significant damage to America’s food supply and agricultural industries.”

(Reporting by Tom Polansek in Chicago, Enrico Dela Cruz in Manila, Colin Packham and John Mair in Sydney, Nigel Hunt in London, Gus Trompiz in Paris; Editing by Caroline Stauffer and Brian Thevenot)

African swine fever in other countries

African swine fever is very contagious and is killing pigs and wild boars in Africa, Asia and parts of Europe.

African swine fever has never been detected in Canada, but it’s present in:

  • China
  • Vietnam
  • African countries
  • Georgia
  • Armenia
  • Russia
  • Azerbaijan
  • Ukraine
  • Belarus
  • Lithuania
  • Poland
  • Latvia
  • Estonia
  • Romania
  • Czech Republic
  • Belgium
  • Laos
  • Myanmar (Burma)
  • Cambodia
  • Mongolia
  • North Korea
  • Philippines


You Don’t Need to Fear the Estrogen Content In Impossible Burgers

CNAP ClipBoard: Tiffany Stevens the author of this article states, “So if you’re worried an occasionally meatless meal will turn you into a woman, don’t be. Instead, prove your masculinity by taming your fear of new foods.”

  • If men are worried about being turned into a woman, what do the women have to fear, being turned into a man?
  • An “occasional” meatless meal will give you a sex change? Who said anything about occasional? Meat at every meal is the deal, has been for decades. If not meat, then some animal product – milk and/or eggs are in just about everything. It’s almost like once they started using the fluids and eggs of the animals, they put them in everything. Can you imagine the obsessive compulsions directed at finding uses for animal products? Looking back it all seems pathological.
  • When you have to read a label to see if there are any animal products in the product you want to buy, that tells you that nearly everything contains animals of some sort. Otherwise you wouldn’t have to look.
  • Most of the men I see in Cleveland are fat and they all have man boobs and none of them are vegetarian or vegan. I mean, why do men have breasts in the first place? Or hadn’t anybody noticed?
  • The rapid growth hormones they get from eating animals designed to grow fast and fat is what’s responsible for their breasts being kicked into milk producing gear!!
  • Hey, if this keeps going and men keep overloading their systems with rapid growth hormones, the men will develop the capacity to become milk producing machines and be able to feed the planet! You know, how they expect the cows to give them milk? Well, now the human male with be the number one supplier. Nobody will want human female milk. MALE MILK will be in HIGH DEMAND. WE’VE GOT MALE BOOBS. Who WANTS cows when we’ve got HUMANS?
  • But wait, it’s happening to women too. Ever see so many women with super huge boobs walking around all over the planet – almost like they’re being HAND-BRED for factory farming of milk? They’re almost half their body size. And their bodies are huge too. Where did they come from? Cows, Chickens, Pigs, Lambs…that’s where. It’s because of the animals they eat, not because of plant estrogen.
  • The Republicans in the USA had nothing to do with people’s soy fears that began a long time ago. This is nothing new and the discovery was made by Asians who eat a lot of it and written up by the British. The story wasn’t about boobs. It was about decreased libido – in both men and women after they consumed tofu. It “cools the cockles”, they say – but only temporarily.
  • Cockles refers to the testicles in men – maybe women will be growing cockles too – not impossible through the evolutionary process that lots of people claim doesn’t exist. Cockles are in the mollusk family and the shape resembles testicles.
  • I never thought it a good idea to have sex after a meal. We’d have sex first, then go out to wine and dine. Much more fun and relaxing that way, rather than hardly enjoying the meal with sex on our minds – this way we had the best of both worlds.

Tiffany Stevens

MyRecipes January 15, 2020

Between Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods, and other emerging plant-based meat companies, it’s never been a better time to be a vegetarian or vegan. Nor has it ever been easier to cut back on meat consumption in general, for the sake of your health and for the sake of the planet. Diners who want to occasionally sub an Angus patty for a plant-based one can now find those options in a number of restaurants, including Burger King, which added the Impossible Whopper to its menu in the fall of 2019.

New food technology can sometimes spark unnecessary fears among eaters, however, especially when a new food product is seen as unnatural or weird. Take, for example, the recent rumors warning consumers to beware the estrogen content in Impossible Whoppers and other Impossible Food products, lest the delicious, meat-free burgers cause men eating them to grow breasts.

Fears about soy products feminizing men have existed for quite a while. The Impossible Burger fear mongering, however, is a bit more recent. It stems from a 2019 story published by Tri-State Livestock News, a trade publication covering livestock agriculture.

Written by James Stangle, who specializes in veterinary medicine, the story claims that four Impossible Whoppers a day contain “enough estrogen to grow boobs on a male.” That story was then picked up by conversative pundits such as Michael Savage, according to The Washington Post.

It seems silly to point out that few people, if any, are buying and consuming four Impossible Whoppers daily. But even if a man did decide to eat Impossible Whoppers for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a snack between, he needn’t worry about developing feminine secondary sex characteristics.

For starters, the compound contained in Impossible Burgers isn’t human estrogen at all—it’s phytoestrogen, a plant isoflavone that acts similarly to human estrogen, but doesn’t have nearly the same strength, according to Insider.

Phytoestrogen, which is often found in soy, can promote the effects of naturally occurring estrogen, which exists in all humans. But it can also suppress it, since it has both estrogenic and anti-estrogenic effects. How phytoestrogen affects you depends on what your existing estrogen levels are as well as other individual biological factors.

Regardless of whether it promotes or decreases the effects of naturally occurring estrogen, however, it still doesn’t have the strength to grow breasts in men.

Although Stangle didn’t include this citation in his piece, it seems his claims may have stemmed from a single case in which a Texas man in 2008 developed “breasts and breast soreness” from drinking three quarts of soy milk a day, according to Snopes. Those effects went away after he stopped ingesting that extreme amount of soy milk regularly. This isolated case from 12 years ago might be shocking, but it’s not enough evidence to sound the alarm on soy products in general.

The validity of the feminization fears surrounding soy products is also belied by the number of countries that rely on soy products; a plethora of Asian countries have been using soy beans for centuries without men in those societies suffering adverse or unexpected biological effects.

It’s worth pointing out that the feminization fears behind the Impossible Whopper estrogen rumors are inherently tied to sexism, homophobia and transphobia in some circles. Meat eating is also connected, in some men’s mind, to masculinity; the idea of eating a veggie burger amounts to an assault on their very identity. There’s nothing to fear from eating a plant-based burger, however; a bite of a charbroiled soy product won’t take away anyone’s man-card.

So if you’re worried an occasionally meatless meal will turn you into a woman, don’t be. Instead, prove your masculinity by taming your fear of new foods.

Source: You Don’t Need to Fear the Estrogen Content In Impossible Burgers


FSIS Issues Public Health Alert for Swedish Meatball Products Due to Misbranding and an Undeclared Allergen

CNAP ClipBoard: RE: “A recall was not requested because it is believed that the products are no longer available for consumers to purchase.”

  • A recall still should have been executed, so that those who still have the product stored in their pantries or stores can return it without incident. Many smaller markets purchase from other stores and then just raise the price for convenience purposes, rather than buying wholesale, so they don’t have to buy by the case.
  • Everyone who purchased the product, which could still be in play in some regions, must be considered when making general sweeping decisions, based on statistical probability rather than reality. Some people always get left out. No one, absent a recall, is going to know about this. Consumers don’t get updates from the USDA…I do, but I’m rare.
  • Now, if somebody gets sick and you didn’t recall the product, that makes the DOA, USDA and FSIS legally responsible.
  • One must begin to question why there are so maybe mislabeling mistakes on our food products. Who is doing the labeling? And why isn’t the labeling double checked? These labels need to be checked before they get to the USDA – at the manufacturing level. It seems like these companies are sidestepping their own verification process and making the USDA do it for them, hoping to slide by, to save themselves money. This is not acceptable.
  • Does that mean we really don’t know what goes into our food? And why not? Because people who don’t share our standards do whatever they want or whatever is cheapest for them? Many people won’t be comfortable going forward into this decade knowing people who don’t share our health and sanitation concerns are the ones feeding us. Scary.
  • Carso’s Pasta Company: I looked them up. It looks like they make pasta and sell all types of meats and cheeses in their pasta products. It looks like a small operation. How could they make such a mistake?
  • On further inspection, they don’t even have Swedish Meatballs in Sauce on their website menu of products they sell. In fact, there is no mention of the mislabeled product to alert customers who have already purchased it. Why is that? And who looks at websites after a product is purchased?
  • This is a small family-owned company. What happens in large companies halfway across the world, whose products end up in our pantries? Scary.
  • A recall is always needed when the product is still in play. That way it gets to the attention of news outlets, who will at least get the alerts out locally and/or nationally if products are shipped nationally.
  • It looks like the public isn’t being given the right information.
  • It’s a good idea for all media cable and network news outlets to have a ticker tape of recalled food products on 24/7. The public often times is unaware till it’s too late and too many people got sick and/or died. It’s time to protect the consumer and stop finding loopholes for the offenders.
  • How many people died because of bad product? There is no reliable figure, because other causes are always cited – to protect the offending parties from lawsuits. The government bends over backwards to provide this protection. What are we the Mafia? Yes.

FDA criticized for waiting 6 weeks to announce latest romaine lettuce E. coli outbreak

Romaine or cos lettuce is a variety of popular lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. longifolia)

CNAP ClipBoard: The problem with not announcing it because the lettuce was already past its shelf date and not available for sale, is that most grocers sell produce beyond its shelf date. When it’s too rotted to do that, then they put it in a greatly reduced price section of the produce for poor people to buy.

FDA criticized for waiting 6 weeks to announce latest romaine lettuce E. coli outbreak

Credit: Max Pixel


Cathy Siegner


Nov. 5, 2019

Dive Brief:

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Oct. 31 an E. coli outbreak associated with romaine lettuce sickened 23 people in 12 states between July 12 and Sept. 8. While 11 people were hospitalized, the agency said no deaths were reported, the active investigation has wrapped up and the outbreak appears to be over.

Romaine lettuce was identified as the likely source, but available data indicated the product eaten by sick people was past its shelf life and no longer available for sale, the FDA said. “We do not believe there is a current or ongoing risk to the public and we are not recommending the public avoid consuming romaine lettuce,” Frank Yiannas, FDA’s deputy commissioner for Food Policy and Response, said in the release.

Both the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention established romaine as the probable cause on Oct. 2, Brian Katzowitz, a CDC health communication specialist, told The Washington Post. He said the delay in sharing the news was due to a few variables and the CDC “generally posts outbreak warnings when there is something actionable for consumers to do.”

Dive Insight:

It’s not uncommon for food safety regulators to wait until more details are known about an outbreak before informing the public, but for six weeks to go by before saying anything about an E. coli outbreak can raise questions and cause consumer concern. The delay is even more puzzling since this outbreak was linked to romaine lettuce, which has been involved in three other major outbreaks during the past two years.

The FDA and the CDC may believe consumers couldn’t realistically do anything to protect themselves six weeks out, but telling people about the outbreak earlier may have helped them avoid contaminated romaine lettuce. The FDA’s assertion that any contaminated romaine lettuce would be past its shelf life and no longer available for sale may be true, but it’s not clear how the agency could know that for a fact.

Food safety activists have criticized the delay. Food safety lawyer Bill Marler wrote on his blog that he was disgusted that the government kept this outbreak “hidden from public view.”

“Although the consuming public was kept in the dark, it is without question that government, industry and academia knew that the outbreak happened, but they all chose to hide it until late this evening – so much for ‘transparency’ and so much for ‘food safety culture,’ ” he wrote. “We will not have a safe food supply when facts are hidden from consumers.”

Consumer Reports was also critical of the delay, writing in a post that while not all foodborne illness outbreaks are publicly announced, previous lettuce-related outbreaks were severe enough to warrant quicker action. The nonprofit also noted E. coli O157:H7 — the strain of the pathogen involved — produces a toxin that can lead to serious illness, kidney failure and death.

The leafy greens industry is well aware of pathogen problems and has recently taken steps to improve production processes. The industry has tightened up grower requirements and recently embarked on a multi-year food safety initiative involving government, academia and industry to better understand the impact of pathogens on leafy greens in areas including Yuma County, Arizona and the Imperial Valley in California.

In a statement, the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement trade group said it will use information from this latest outbreak investigation to enhance mandatory food safety practices. LGMA Chairman Dan Sutton said while FDA’s farm tests were negative for traces of E. coli, leafy greens growers will continue to work with public health agencies to improve their food safety practices.

According to a 2017 report from the Interagency Food Safety Analytics Collaboration, 51% of E. coli cases were linked to produce in 2013, along with 59% of listeria cases, 46% of salmonella ones and 33% of cambylobacter cases. Most E. coli outbreaks were linked to leafy greens and other vegetables — more than any other food category.

Waiting six weeks to reveal the E. coli outbreak linked to romaine lettuce could have been an effort to reduce panic, but that decision could lead to more consumers losing trust in the industry.

Transparency is critical to bolstering consumer confidence in the food supply — particularly items that have already had contamination problems.

In addition, any delay telling the public about an outbreak will likely increase suspicion that food safety agencies are not looking out for the public welfare, and that sentiment could lead to less romaine lettuce being consumed. The romaine industry, which was hit by decreased sales following…


    FDA criticized for waiting 6 weeks to announce latest romaine lettuce E. coli outbreak | Food Dive


Largest Comprehensive Study Of Nutrition Links Dairy And Disease

Largest Comprehensive Study Of Nutrition Links Dairy And Disease

‘While this extensive study found detrimental effects from all sources of animal proteins, dairy was of particular concern’

NOV 12, 2019

Dairy has been linked with a number of adverse health effects

More than 30 years ago, Dr. T. Colin Campbell and his team at Cornell University, in partnership with researchers at Oxford University and the Chinese Government, embarked upon one of the most comprehensive studies of nutrition and health ever conducted. Known as the China Project, this landmark study combined with laboratory findings conclusively demonstrated the dangers of a diet high in animal protein and the amazing health benefits of a whole food, plant-based diet. These findings were translated into the best-selling book – The China Study.

Concerns around dairy

While this extensive study found detrimental effects from all sources of animal proteins, dairy was of particular concern. The findings indicate that the lower the percentage of casein (a protein found in cows’ milk) a person consumes, the greater the health benefits. Even relatively small intakes of animal protein –  from dairy or meat – were associated with adverse effects. People who ate the most plant-based foods were the healthiest and tended to avoid chronic disease.

‘Even relatively small intakes of animal protein were associated with adverse effects’

Other key points include:

1. The casein protein in cows’ milk, which makes up 80 percent of its protein content, was found to be a relevant chemical carcinogen—meaning it can turn on our cancer-promoting genes.

2. Countries with the highest calcium intake, mostly from cows’ milk, have the highest rates of osteoporosis. Casein protein causes the calcium in our bones to be leached into the body, weakening the bones. This happens as a result of dairy creating an acidic environment within the body and the calcium from our bones is used to neutralize the body.

3. The casein protein increases the cholesterol in the blood, leading to atherosclerosis (plaque build-up inside the inner artery walls, which may ultimately constrict blood flow and cause a heart attack or stroke).

4. Dairy proteins have been linked to the development of autoimmune diseases—such as type 1 diabetes and multiple sclerosis—through a mechanism known as molecular mimicry.

5. In dozens of experiments conducted over 30 years, casein was found to be a powerful promoter of experimental cancer. Wheat and soy proteins, however, did not stimulate cancer development.

6. There is no one single component of dairy that connects it to chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, and osteoporosis; rather, the substance contains a host of problematic factors. According to Dr. Campbell’s work, these factors include, “the increased activity of growth factors and compensatory cell replication, metabolic acidosis and its impact on key enzyme reactions, hormonal imbalances, and adverse effects on immune system components.”

Not truly safe for humans

What this tells us is that milk taken from a cow cannot be altered to become truly safe for human consumption. While many companies have attempted to remove the lactose and cut down on the inherent saturated fat found in dairy, they cannot eliminate the natural hormones found in all dairy, nor can they cease the growth-promoting characteristics of what, truly, is infant food – cow infant food, that is.

Skeptics often say not all protein is created equal, and The China Study confirms this. Some proteins are downright dangerous.

This article was created with research collaboration from the T. Colin Campbell Center for Nutrition Studies.

Source: Largest Comprehensive Study Of Nutrition Links Dairy And Disease – Vegan News, Plant Based Living, Food, Health & more


Applied Food Sciences, Inc. | Organic Broad-Spectrum Hemp – AFS.Hemp™

AFS.Hemp™ Broad-Spectrum Hemp Extract

Finally, a hemp ingredient developed by a food company for a food company.

AFS.Hemp™ Summary

Applied Food Sciences is proud to announce the launch of their new hemp ingredient. Manufacturers can have confidence using AFS.Hemp™ thanks to the GRAS determination that allows for safe use in food and beverages.

AFS.Hemp™ is USDA Certified Organic, contains 0.0% THC, and boasts a broad-spectrum of cannabinoid content.

Applied Food Sciences (AFS) brings over 20 years of experience to the natural products industry. Now hemp is in good hands, allowing product makers to worry less about quality and regulatory matters while focusing more on formulating their best work. 

Quality is transparent from seed to label as AFS.Hemp™ is produced using authentic hemp strains sourced from EU-certified seed banks. Further, AFS uses a supercritical CO2 extraction for a clean ingredient that preserves the extensive range of phytocannabinoids, terpenes, & flavonoids found in the original plant without any residual solvents. AFS.Hemp™ ingredients are considered “broad-spectrum,” meaning they contain 0.0% THC for added confidence in any product. 

Key Confidence Building Factors for AFS.Hemp™

•    0.0% THC [Known as “Broad-Spectrum”]

•    GRAS For Use in Food & Beverages

•    USDA Certified Organic

•    Reliable Supply Chain of Certified Hemp From EU Seed Banks 

•    CO2 Extract – No Residual Solvents

•    And AFS Has Over 20 Years Experience Making Food Ingredients

Inquire about Hemp*Applied Food Sciences, Inc. does not sell products direct to consumers. This product is not to be consumed in this format but is intended for further processing or manufacturing.

Ingredient Offerings

AFS.Hemp™ comes in three unique delivery systems all standardized to CBD content. While the cost per serving of active CBD is the same across all three products, each ingredient has its own advantages for any desired formulation.    

6% water-soluble oil

The 6% water-soluble oil is ideal for all liquid applications. Depending on the customer’s desired formulation targets, this ingredient can be paired with AFS’ proprietary herb-emulsification technology for maximum flavor masking and a clear beverage.   

10% water-soluble powder

The 10% water-soluble powder is ideal for applications that include any still (not sparkling) beverage and powdered formulation – i.e. stick packs, bulk powder, sachets, drink mixes, etc. The full solubility and effortless mixability allow for a very clean application in beverages.

20% high-performance oil

The 20% high-performance oil is ideal for supplements, tinctures, soft gels, topicals, and other nutritional products that require more potency.

*The cost per serving of active CBD is the same across all three ingredients.

Source: Applied Food Sciences, Inc. | Organic Broad-Spectrum Hemp – AFS.Hemp™ | Applied Food Sciences, Inc.


Impossible Foods CEO slams ‘the most destructive technology on Earth by far’

Impossible Foods CEO slams ‘the most destructive technology on Earth by far’

Daniel Howley

Technology Editor

January 8, 2020, 1:27 PM EST

Impossible Foods unveils plant-based pork and sausage

Impossible Foods CEO Pat Brown is bringing the heat to CES 2020 in Las Vegas, America’s biggest consumer tech trade show. The head of the plant-based meat company not only debuted two new products, a ground pork and pork sausage alternative, but slammed the meat industry in an interview with Yahoo Finance, calling it “the most destructive technology on Earth by far.”

The company’s ultimate goal is to completely replace animals as a form of food by 2035.

Impossible Foods already offers a beef alternative in its Impossible Burger, which uses plants and includes a soy-based heme protein, which gives the burger the faux blood that makes it “bleed.”

The new sausage offering goes on sale in January at 139 Burger King locations in various test markets across the U.S. There’s no word on availability for the ground pork offering just yet.

Impossible’s latest move comes as the fake meat wars continue to heat up. The company’s biggest competitor, Beyond Meat (BYND), went public in 2019 and saw its stock skyrocket from its IPO price of $25 all the way to $234 in July, before settling back down to $83.89 on Tuesday.

On Tuesday, Impossible told Reuters it’s no longer seeking a deal to supply McDonald’s (MCD) with its Impossible burger due to supply constraints. Beyond Meat’s shares jumped on the news.

Holding the meat industry’s feet to the fire

With beef and pork alternatives already on the table, Brown says that chicken and turkey alternatives, as well as other plant-based meat options, are on the way.

Impossible Foods CEO Pat Brown holds up an Impossible Burger 2.0, the new and improved version of the company’s plant-based vegan burger that tastes like real beef, at a press event during CES 2019 in Las Vegas, Nevada on January 7, 2019. – (Photo by Robyn Beck / AFP)

“Again the thing that you just have to remember to anticipate everything Impossible is going to do is that our intention is to completely replace animals as a food production technology, the most destructive technology on Earth by far,” Brown said. “And that means that any product that we’re currently producing using animals, Impossible Foods is already working on, and will commercialize a plant-based, a better, more delicious, more affordable, vastly more sustainable version of that product.”

Brown’s claims of the impact of the meat industry on the environment aren’t unfounded. There have been several studies linking meat to everything from climate change to antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Which is why, he says, Impossible Foods is so important.

Beyond Meat offers a similar reason for its products’ existence, naming the meat industry’s impact on the environment as an example of why plant-based alternatives are necessary.

“It’s a very important problem to solve,” Brown said. “Pork production is actually a big public health issue, because there are actually more antibiotics fed to pork, to pigs, than to all humans. It’s a major source of antibiotic-resistant pathogens.”

While there’s been a lot of discussion about the meat industry’s impact on climate change through methane produced by farm animals, Brown says Impossible Foods is focusing on more than just how the climate itself is affected.

“Of course, it’s not just about climate, it’s about global biodiversity, it’s about water resources, water pollution, and so forth,” Brown said. The nutritional impact of plant-based meat alternatives has also been a major sticking point for the companies. And while they have a lower amount of saturated fat than their animal-based counterparts, plant-based burgers like Impossible’s do have more sodium than beef.

But Impossible’s pork products won’t help anyone if they don’t taste good. Fortunately, for Brown, after I tried a soft-shell corn taco with the company’s ground pork offering, I can report that the taste of Impossible Foods’ faux pork is as close to the real thing as you can get.

It’s not dry, and even browns similar to pork. If I didn’t know it was plant-based, I wouldn’t have been able to tell the difference. In our own Yahoo Finance taste test last fall, Impossible’s burger outshined Beyond’s by a slim margin.

As for the pork, we’ll just have to wait and see how the rest of the world feels…

Source: Impossible Foods CEO slams ‘the most destructive technology on Earth by far’


“Chopped” Chefs Cook Pig Rectums After Hours

It appears that those chefs who work for the FOOD CHANNEL like to cook rectums of pigs AFTER HOURS. Otherwise why would they do it, if they didn’t like it? Why would they demean themselves and the animals they are supposed to respect as they kill, dismember and cook, either DEAD OR ALIVE?

You see their faces here. They are ALL IN the ENSLAVEMENT, TORTURE AND SLAUGHTER for FOOD INDUSTRY. And they are ALL LAUGHING themselves all the way to the BANKS that bank them, that pays them and makes them all rich – the industries that torture for profit…

RESPECT THE ANIMAL IS THE IRON CHEF’S WAY. That in itself is a lie if you murder someone for profit or for any other reason. But still, that is the way of chefs – animal-abusing chefs. How is this, display of depravity, respecting any animal – dead or alive?


Lawsuit claims Burger King’s Impossible Whoppers are contaminated by meat

CNAP RESPONSE: Burger King’s claim that The Impossible Whopper is 100% Whopper and 0% beef is not true.

It can’t be both. A 100% beef whopper is not 100% Impossible Whopper.

A Whopper is defined as containing 100% animal product, namely beef.

In addition, nobody calls a Whopper, a Whopper Sandwich. I’ve never heard it, except when people are writing about it.

To America and the world a Whopper is a big burger on a big bun. Nobody says they’re going to have a burger sandwich – in real time. Burger King is a little late to the table in changing what they call their Whopper into a sandwich. It’s like a hot dog. Nobody calls a hot dog in a bun, a hot dog sandwich, unless it’s made on rectangular bread.

The lawyers and Madison Avenue are trying to trick people into believing they’re eating something they’re not, by the confusing, ambiguous language they use.

There’s no wonder the confusion regarding this product. There should have been none. When I say I develop animal-free recipes with the animal meat-eater in mind, it doesn’t mean I add animal meat. Burger King made a mistake by dividing people.

Why lie? Why deceive the public in what you’re selling and what they’re buying?

According to Burger King:

The WHOPPER = “Our beef patties are made with 100% beef with no fillers, no preservatives, no additives, no nonsense. We also make our flagship product, the WHOPPER® Sandwich, with 1/4 lb* of savory flame-grilled beef.”

IMPOSSIBLE WHOPPER = “100% Whopper, 0% beef.

Our Impossible™ WHOPPER® Sandwich features a savory flame-grilled patty made from plants topped with juicy tomatoes, fresh lettuce, creamy mayonnaise, ketchup, crunchy pickles, and sliced white onions on a soft sesame seed bun. 100% WHOPPER®, 0% Beef.”

The registered mark is the same on an Impossible Whopper and a Whopper description put out by Burger King advertisers. So, if an Impossible Whopper is made with a 100% WH0PPER® which is made with 100% beef, there is a conflict. It can’t be both.

The 100% WHOPPER = 100% BEEF, not 100% plant.

So, don’t call the plant version of the Whopper a Whopper that is 100% WHOPPER®. It isn’t.

  • Clear that up before you get sued for that too.

I’m not a friend of BURGER KING. But I am a friend of ANIMAL-FREE MEATS DAIRY & FOODS.

Get an animal-free mayonnaise and cheese. Something white for the cheese, so employees don’t mix up the orange dairy cheese with the plant white cheese.

It’s already available. daiya brand and Follow Your Heart brand make the best cheeses for burger purposes. They soften quickly against the heat of the burger – daiya quicker than Follow Your Heart.

daiya is round and FYH is square. I like the round version for shape on a burger; it still wraps down over the burger nicely.

Tofutti brand Inc. is a contender, but the cellophane wraps are cumbersome and it’s not as healthy – good though; it tastes good against any burger. It also melts quicker against the heat of the food than the others – sometimes too much.

The animal-free mayonnaise that holds up the best is JUST MAYO.

Vegenaise brand, although good, has a consistency problem as you approach the bottom of the jar. JUST MAYO doesn’t; it feels thicker, which is better for restaurants.




Lawsuit claims Burger King’s Impossible Whoppers are contaminated by meat

By Jonathan Stempel and Richa Naidu,

Reuters 18 November 2019

Plant-based alternatives health-craze is here to stay

By Jonathan Stempel and Richa Naidu

(Reuters) – Burger King was sued on Monday by a vegan customer who accused the fast-food chain of contaminating its meatless “Impossible” Whoppers by cooking them on the same grills as its traditional meat burgers.

In a proposed class action, Phillip Williams said he bought an Impossible Whopper, a plant-based alternative to Burger King’s regular Whopper, at an Atlanta drive-through, and would not have paid a premium price had he known the cooking would leave it “coated in meat by-products.

“The lawsuit filed in Miami federal court seeks damages for all U.S. purchasers of the Impossible Whopper, and an injunction requiring Burger King to “plainly disclose” that Impossible Whoppers and regular burgers are cooked on the same grills.

Burger King, a unit of Toronto-based Restaurant Brands International Inc, declined to comment, saying it does not discuss pending litigation.

Its website describes the Impossible Burger as “100% Whopper, 0% Beef,” and adds that “for guests looking for a meat-free option, a non-broiler method of preparation is available upon request.

“Williams’ lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the disclaimer or the available cooking options.Impossible Foods Inc, which helped create the Impossible Whopper, has said it designed the product for meat eaters who want to consume less animal protein, not for vegans or vegetarians.

“For people who are strictly vegan, there is a microwave prep procedure that they’re welcome to ask for in any store,” Dana Worth, Impossible Foods’ head of sales, said in a recent interview.

Burger King began selling the Impossible Whopper in August.

Restaurant Brands also owns the Canadian coffee and restaurant chain Tim Hortons, and is overseen by Brazilian private equity firm 3G Capital.

The case is Williams v Burger King Corp, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, No. 19-24755.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York and Richa Naidu in Chicago; Editing by Tom Brown)

Source: Lawsuit claims Burger King’s Impossible Whoppers are contaminated by meat



Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods have a new foe in the plant-based burger wars: the Ultimate Burger

Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods have a new foe in the plant-based burger wars: the Ultimate Burger

Brian Sozzi

It’s ultimately not meat. But the Conagra Brands-owned Gardein brand hopes its new plant-based Ultimate Burger wins over Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods loyalists in 2020.

Gardein, acquired in Conagra’s 2018 acquisition of Pinnacle Foods, will release the next iteration of the Ultimate Burger in January. The burger is a mixture of soy and pea protein, assorted spices and canola oil. It will join several other plant-based Gardein products currently on the market, such as fishless fish and meatless meatballs (using the same proteins). The “Ultimate” label will also be used on a line of spicy sausage and hot dogs.

Wrapped in sleek brown packaging, the Ultimate Burger scores big on overall value: a six-pack of burgers will go for $11.99. A two-pack of Beyond Meat burgers could set you back about $5.99.

The notorious five pound Impossible Foods “brick” can go for upwards of $250.

A Conagra spokesperson says the Ultimate Burger will quickly reach supermarkets and restaurants given its extensive network of ingredient suppliers.

Ultimate burgerIt’s not surprising to see Conagra go all-in on plant-based foods. Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods have created a surging market, fueled by great-tasting plant-based products and new deals at restaurant chains such as Burger King and McDonald’s.

The meat alternative category has hauled in $957 million in sales for the 52-weeks ended November 2, up 10% year-over-year, according to Nielsen. Within this category, the meatless burger business has seen $272 million in sales, up 11.4% from a year ago.

Brian Sozzi is an editor-at-large and co-anchor of The First Trade at Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Twitter @BrianSozzi

Source: Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods have a new foe in the plant-based burger wars: the Ultimate Burger



Here’s what the Uber Eats delivery drone looks like 

CNAP COMMENT: Well, I’m glad that was cleared up for me. All along I thought they’d be flying meals to homes and apartment buildings. Not so. They’ll fly them to a pick up and distribution location so the UBER drivers pick them up where it is communally safe to land. In the future they may land the small drones on tops of UBER cars predetermined to park and pick up in designated zones.

By: TechCrunch

October 28, 2019 at 12:13 PM EDT

Here’s what the Uber Eats delivery drone looks likeUber has unveiled more details about its plans for Eats delivery via drones. If all goes according to Uber’s plan, it will start flying its first drone model before the end of the year. Uber’s design, which it unveiled at the Forbes 30 under 30 Summit today, is made to carry up to one meal for two people.

Uber has unveiled more details about its plans for Eats delivery via drones. If all goes according to Uber’s plan, it will start flying its first drone model before the end of the year.

Uber’s design, which it unveiled at the Forbes 30 under 30 Summit today, is made to carry up to one meal for two people. Featuring rotating wings with six rotors, the vehicle can vertically take-off and land, and travel a maximum of eight minutes, including loading and unloading. The total flight range is 18 miles, with a round trip delivery range of 12 miles.

As Uber previously said, the plan is not to use the drones for full delivery, but rather a portion of it. Once a customer orders food, the restaurant will prepare the meal and then load it onto a drone. That drone will then take off, fly and land at a pre-determined drop-off location.

Behind the scenes, Uber’s Elevate Cloud Systems will track and guide the drone, as well as notify an Eats delivery driver when and where to pick up their food. Down the road, Uber envisions landing the drones on top of parked Uber vehicles located near the delivery locations. From there, the Eats delivery driver will complete the last mile to hand-deliver the food to the customer.

Beginning next summer, Uber wants to use this drone for meal deliveries in San Diego. That would come after Uber first tests deliveries in partnership with drone operators and manufacturers.

Source: Here’s what the Uber Eats delivery drone looks like | FinancialContent Business Page


US Gets Its First-Ever Vegan Fried Chicken Shop | VegNews


Latina-owned vegan company Eat Love will be the first in the United States to serve KFC-style buckets of vegan chicken.


On November 22, vegan food company Eat Love will open a brick-and-mortar location in the Fountain Valley area of Orange County, CA—becoming the first vegan fried chicken shop in the United States. Founded by second-generation immigrant Lynn Torres, the business previously operated as a catering company, food truck, and pop-up shop, and began shipping its vegan chicken nationwide in August. “I was born and raised in Orange County, one mile away from the brick-and mortar-location,” Torres told VegNews. “

‘My parents are immigrants and since I grew up in Orange County, I wanted our first location to be in the place where I grew up.” The menu at Eat Love’s new storefront will revolve around seitan-based fried chicken served in the form of sandwiches and bucket meals, reminiscent of those available at Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC). “We are better than KFC and Chick-fil-A because we want to share amazing and delicious food without harming animals and without harming our health,” Torres said.

“We actually really care about animals, the environment, social issues, your health, and the world.” In addition to chicken, the shop will serve Eat Love’s famed desserts such as chocolate-dipped ice cream sandwiches, fresh-baked cookies, and fudge brownies.

In 2015, Torres and her husband Enrique—who weighed a combined total of 610 pounds—transitioned to a plant-based diet after Enrique was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Enrique was able to reverse his diagnosis, while Lynn lost 153 pounds, inspiring her to create a vegan company that provides comfort food without hurting animals.

“I understand that food is the way we connect with one another. It’s the way we identify ourselves, our culture, and our history,” Torres said. “When we tell someone that the food they have been eating is wrong, because it’s harmful to animals, the environment, and health, we are not attacking their plate—we are attacking their roots, their sense of belonging, their grandmother who created a meal with so much love that they shared.”

Torres hopes that Eat Love’s food becomes a bridge between generations and cultures by bringing a vegan option, literally and figuratively, to the table.

“I believe that the way we can create change is by spreading love, and to me food is love,” Torres said. “I hope that people take our food and share it with their loved ones and that this action brings up a conversation about veganism.”

Source: US Gets Its First-Ever Vegan Fried Chicken Shop | VegNews

%d bloggers like this: