This year’s Nobel Peace Prize has been  awarded to the World Food Programme (WFP), “for its efforts to combat hunger, for its contribution to bettering conditions for peace in conflict-affected areas and for acting as a driving force in efforts to prevent the use of hunger as a weapon of war and conflict.”

The WFP is the United Nations agency that distributes international food aid.

Why do I think this is good news?  This prize recognizes:

• The importance of food in maintaining a peaceful world.
• The importance of functioning food systems during the coronavirus pandemic.
• The value of United Nations agencies in maintaining peace and food security.

Why do I even ask this question? 

I am well aware of the inadequacies of food charity as a means to ensure nutrition, health and world peace.  All too often, international food aid:

• Does not reach the people who most need it
• Is siphoned off to benefit corrupt intermediaries
• Undermines local food economies
• Benefits donors more than recipients
• Is used more as a political than a humanitarian tool
• Causes more harm than good

I want to see anti-hunger policies institutionalized, not left as voluntary.

Food matters to world peace more than most people recognize.  If the prize raises recognition of the importance of food in society, it will have done good work.

Thanks to Jerry Hagstrom’s Hagstrom Report for most of these links

• Announcement of the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize (video)
• World Food Program USA 
• United Nations World Food Programme — Statement by WFP Executive Director David Beasley
• WFP History 
• Associated Press — World Food Program wins Nobel Peace Prize as hunger surges 
• WFP fights hunger in food-deprived places, crises, war zones 
• The New York Times — World Food Program Awarded Nobel Peace Prize for Work During Pandemic
• The Washington Post — Nobel Peace Prize goes to World Food Program for efforts to combat hunger 
• CNN — Nobel Peace Prize awarded to World Food Programme

Readers have written me to point out that my posts rarely cover good news, and that they badly need to hear some.

Point taken: I devote this week’s blog to good news items.

Let’s start with Friday’s announcement that the USDA will extend universal school meals through June 30, 2021 (you can read the entire announcement here).

Is this an election-year ploy?  Maybe, but it’s the first thing Trump’s USDA has done that I think is worth doing.

It must have happened as a result of strong advocacy pressure.  I say this because, as The Counter’s Jessica Fu reported in August, the USDA was determined not to extend free meals to school children, arguing that it did not have the authority to do so.

“While we want to provide as much flexibility as local school districts need during this pandemic, the scope of this request is beyond what USDA currently has the authority to implement and would be closer to a universal school meals program which Congress has not authorized or funded,” Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue wrote in a letter last Thursday explaining the decision.

But a week later, the USDA did extend the universal meals program through the end of December this year.

Now it has extended that extension through the end of this school year.

Yes!

This means, as the announcement says, USDA will:

• Allow…meals to be served in all areas and at no cost;
• Permit meals to be served outside of the typically required group settings and meal times;
• Waive meal pattern requirements, as necessary; and
• Allow parents and guardians to pick-up meals for their children.

Universal school meals:

• Ensure food justice for children
• Make sure all children are fed
• Avoid stigma
• Avoid expensive and cumbersome exclusionary paperwork

So this is good news, but there’s more work yet to do.

• Make sure those meals are healthy and do adhere to nutrition standards.
• Make universal school meals permanent.

My go-to reference on this topic:

State voter registration deadlines are here.

Today is the last possible day in New York.  Don’t miss this one.

The cartoon, by the way, was a last-mnute addition to my 2013 book, Eat, Drink, Vote: An Illustrated Guide to Food Politics.  

The story about how the cartoon came to be is here.

Plant-based is big business.  Want to find out just how big?

One week to go: FREE plant-based meat webinar with Impossible Foods, Beyond Meat, Meati Foods, Planterra Foods, GFI: Where is the plant-based meat category heading, and how reliable are some of the predictions out there about how much this market could be worth over the next 10-15 years?… Read more

Two food business newsletters featured these products recently.  Here are a few selections (for the complete lcollections, click on the heading links).

FoodNavigator-USA’s Special Edition: Plant-based protein trends

From pea, soy and wheat to canola, which plant-based proteins have the potential to move from niche to the mainstream, and what factors are motivating purchasing decisions, from price and consistency of supply, to amino acid profiles, taste, functionality, sustainability credentials, to non-GMO claims? Where is the plant-based meat category heading next and how are the dynamics of the plant-based milk segment changing?

• DSM gears up for 2022 launch of canola protein isolate:  Canola is the third largest oilseed crop after soybeans and cottonseed, with an established supply chain (for oil crushing) featuring protein with a highly attractive nutritional profile and great functional properties. So why has taken so long for canola protein to be commercialized?.. Read  
• Oatmilk edges past soymilk for #2 slot in US plant-based milk retail market:  US retail sales of plant-based milk rose 17% to $2.362bn in measured channels in the year to September 6, 2020, according to new data from SPINS, which shows oatmilk – a relative newcomer – edging past soymilk to take the #2 spot in the category behind market leader almondmilk… Read
• Study: Plant-based meat alternatives improve cardiovascular risk factors compared with animal meat:  Adults who swapped out animal protein for plant-based protein saw lower levels of LDL cholesterol, moderate weight loss, and similar sodium intake and blood pressure levels (compared to animal protein consumption) after eight weeks, revealed a two-phase study conducted by researchers at Stanford Medicine and funded by Beyond Meat… Read
• Tofu’s time has come, says Nasoya: ‘It’s the simplest form of plant-based protein on the market’  US retail sales of tofu – which for years occupied a solid, but sleepy, niche in a plant-based meat category increasingly propelled by brands seeking to precisely match the taste and texture of conventional meat – have caught fire in recent weeks, says the firm behind America’s #1 tofu brand… Read
• Hannaford amps up plant-based offerings, enjoys triple digit growth in fresh plant-based meat  Hannaford has significantly expanded distribution of plant-based items across the store, adding signage to make it easier for shoppers to identify plant-based products, and introduced long-term price promotions and marketing efforts including digital offers with unusually high redemption rates as part of an ongoing collaboration with the Plant Based Foods Association… Read
• Impossible Foods hits back at ‘disingenuous, desperate disinformation campaign’ as Lightlife attacks ‘hyperprocessed’ ingredients:  In an open letter slammed by Impossible Foods as cynical and disingenuous and dismissed by one commentator as a “PR stunt,” Lightlife Foods has attempted to distinguish itself from ‘food tech’ rivals in the plant-based meat arena by positioning itself as “a real food company,” with products “developed in a kitchen, not a lab.”.. Read

Special Edition: Plant-based innovation in APAC  [Asia-Pacific region]

The meat substitute market in APAC is expected to reach US$17.1bn in 2020, from US$15.3bn last year according to Euromonitor International. The ongoing pandemic is set to accelerate this growth alongside health, safety and environmental factors from consumers. In this special edition, we bring you the firms developing plant-based meat, egg and beverages, all this to meet APAC’s soaring protein needs.

• Liquid gold: India’s EVO Foods to launch plant-based liquid egg this year and eyes US expansion:  Mumbai-based EVO Foods is set to launch its first product in India, a plant-based liquid egg made from legumes by the end of the year with plans to enter the US market next year… Read
• One step further: Australia’s Fenn Foods set to launch ‘world’s first carbon neutral’ minced meat in APAC:  Brisbane plant-based company Fenn Foods is set to release three new products early next year under its vEEF brand, one of which will be the ‘world’s first carbon neutral’ plant-based meat… Read
• Multi-meat mimicry: Japan’s DAIZ develops new soy-processing tech to ape conventional meats:  Japan-based DAIZ has developed a new form of soybean processing technology that is able to mimic multiple types of conventional meats such as chicken, pork and fish, opening up a new avenue of additive-free plant-based creations for food manufacturers… Read  
• Affordability key in Asia: Thai plant-based meat firm pitches price point at half of Beyond Burger:  Thai plant-based meat firm Let’s Plant Meat jumped from conceptualisation to commercialisation in just 12 months for its plant-based burger patty – and is now determined to make the product ‘affordable for the masses’ in Asia… Read
• India’s Imagine Meats to roll out plant-based kebab, biryani and curry products in Mumbai:  India’s newest plant-based food start-up, Imagine Meats is set to launch a meat alternative range comprising kebabs, biryani and curry at the end of this year… Read

I cannot believe there is anything further to say about the Farmers to Families food boxes, the $4 billion USDA program that pays distributors to pick up dairy, meat, and produce, put it in boxes, and deliver the boxes to food banks, which then hand them out to people who need food.  My most recent post on the inclusion of a personal letter from President Trump in the boxes is here.

The USDA now says it has distributed 100 million of these boxes.

Politico’s Helena Bottemiller Evich reports  that the USDA now requires the private companies that collect, pack, and deliver the boxes “to also stuff the Trump letters into the package — an expansion of the controversial letter policy with just…days until the presidential election.”

The Counter’s Jessica Fu (to whom I owe an apology for spelling her name incorrectly the last time I quoted her) writes that “Religious groups distributing Covid hunger-relief boxes are praying with recipients, taping Bible verses onto flaps, and soliciting donations. Some of these practices may violate federal regulations.”

The Hunger Task Force says that the program is discriminatory: “Wisconsin has been underrepresented in all rounds of the program while Wisconsin’s hungry line up by the carload for assistance that has now been completely severed.”

New York legislators are also complaining.  They wrote a letter to USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue:

in the transition between the CFAP vendors selected for rounds two and three, miscommunication from USDA has left many food pantries in New York City suddenly without food, causing upheaval in the lives of those families who were relying on their local pantries for meals.  We understand that the new vendors selected for round three of this program were required to specify the counties or boroughs to which they would provide food. However, this has forced many nonprofits and food pantries who had relationships with vendors no longer serving their county or borough to scramble to find new partnerships, with no guidance from USDA, no overlap in service
provision, and nowhere to turn for help.

On the saga goes.  It would have made so much more sense—financially, logistically, and humanely—for the USDA to strengthen SNAP enrollments and benefits.  Some of this is happening anyway, but the long history of food banks tells us that they can never meet needs on an ongoing basis.  SNAP, imperfect as it is, still is a demonstrably better means of relieving food insecurity.

I’m trying to figure out how much money—over and above what’s appropriated through the farm bill—is going to Big Ag.  I wish someone would add it up for me.

Here’s what I know so far:

The USDA has given producers more than $10 billion in Coronavirus assistance.  This includes nearly $1 billion to Iowa farmers.  Lesser amounts went to producers in Nebraska, California, Texas, Minnesota and Wisconsin.  Overall, about half went to livestock producers.

According to the Environmental Working Group,

The largest and wealthiest U.S. farm businesses received the biggest share of almost $33 billion in payments from two subsidy programs – one created by the Trump administration to respond to the president’s trade war and the other by Congress in response to the coronavirus pandemic.  The Market Facilitation Program, or MFP, was intended to offset the perceived damage done by the administration’s trade war, which reduced many farmers’ access to lucrative Chinese markets. Payments for the 2018 and 2019 crop years were just over $23 billion – more than $8.5 billion for 2018 and $14.5 billion for 2019.

Chuck Abbott of the Food and Environment Reporting Network (FERN) says:

With its new offer of $14 billion in coronavirus relief, the Trump administration could spend $50 billion — quadruple the cost of the auto industry bailout — in less than three years to buffer the impact of trade war and pandemic on agriculture. Farm groups welcomed the second round of coronavirus assistance while critics said it was “old-fashioned vote-buying” ahead of the Nov. 3 presidential election.

And the largesse does not stop.  The House has proposed a $120 billion rescue fund that includes relief programs for livestock and dairy farmers and food processors, such as “$1.25 billion to assist contract growers of poultry and livestock growers who face revenue losses due to reduced placements related to COVID-19”

This money goes to Big Ag—Soybeans, Corn, Meat—mainly in mid-West Trump country.

What about food for people?  Well, we have the $4 billion Farmers to Families food boxes, although how much of that goes to farmers as opposed to distributors is unknown.

The Peanut Institute is working overtime to convince you to eat more peanuts.

Disclaimer: I love peanuts and think they are great to cook with and make an excellent snack—peanut butter too—but I see no need to overhype them, as this press release does.

Research Reveals Daily Dose of Peanuts Delivers Body and Mind Benefits: Americans Encouraged to Pause for Peanuts…Peanuts are a superfood so just a small amount can fend off mid-morning hunger, help eliminate the afternoon slump and deliver much-needed brainpower.

“Superfood,” I must remind you, is a marketing term.  It has no nutritional meaning.  All fruits, vegetables, grains, beans, and, yes, nuts, have nutritional value.  On that basis, all plant foods are “superfoods.”

The press release makes these claims, and provides references for most of them:

• Regular peanut consumption has been associated with a reduced risk of heart disease, diabetes and numerous kinds of cancer.
• An ounce of peanuts packs more protein than any other nut.
• Peanuts stimulate peptide YY, a hormone that decreases appetite.
• Peanuts also have a low glycemic index that helps stabilize blood sugar to prevent the feeling of ‘crashing’ in the afternoon.
•  A single serving of peanuts is packed with 19 vitamins and minerals, including the antioxidant resveratrol, which has been shown to increase blood flow to the brain.
• Peanuts also contain high levels of niacin and are a good source of vitamin E – two nutrients that support brain health and have long been known to protect against Alzheimer’s disease and age-related cognitive decline
• Eating peanuts twice a week can reduce the risk of premature death by 12% and reduce the risk for certain cancers, including colorectal, gastric, pancreatic and lung cancers.
• Regular consumption can also reduce the risk of death due to heart disease by 24%, respiratory disease by 16%, infections by 32% and kidney disease by 48%.

As I read the research on peanuts, it associates eating nuts of all types with good health.   Is there something distinctive about peanuts as compared to other kinds of nuts?

I doubt it—all nuts are worth eating.

A basic prinicple of nutrition is to vary food intake.  You love peanuts (as I do)?  Eat them, but go easy on the salt.

Craig B. Upright.  Grocery Activism: The Radical History of Food Cooperatives in Minnesota.  University of Minnesota Press, 2020.

I was interested to read this book because I was a member of the Berkeley Co-op grocery store on Shattuck Avenue back in the day and am a member of the Ithaca Co-op now.  Co-ops are member-owned.

Upright based this book on his doctoral thesis about the history of the co-op movement in Minnesota, which aimed to promote production and sales of organic foods.

It is important to study these stores and their stories because it is difficult to understand what “organic” means today without knowing what it could have been, without exploring how this new product, sold in these unconventional settings, attracted the passions of those who wanted to make their world a better place (p. 5).

The difficulty, as Upright puts it, was in trying to run a business and a social movement in one space.

A co-op will cease to exist if it continually operates at a loss.  But co-ops are generally not oriented toward generating a profit.  In fact, state laws often dictate that surplus revenues must be reinvested in the organization or returned to its members…Remaining true to their social values helps maintain the patronage and support of the members who consciously choose to participate, thus keeping the business viable (p. 79).

Upright explains the social-movement origins:

Between 1971 and 1975, co-ops promoted ideologies of opposition to larger capitalistic structures.  Particularly in the Twin Cities, new-wave co-ops opened primarily in areas characterized by institutions of higher learning and strong leftist political leanings.  They formed as art of a larger rejection of mainstream economic policies, attempting to place more power in the hands of lower-income consumers; the array of foods they sold reflected a liberal cultural and political agenda, balanced by the need to sell enough product of any kind to stay in business (p. 125).

This movement was important because in many ways, it succeeded.

The goal so many worked toward…has been achieved; organic food has now achieved mainstream acceptance.  Even so, cooperatives thrive…The social change many championed when this movement began more than forty years ago—the hope that they could challenge the dominance of prevailing agricultural paradigms—has been realized without leading to the irrelevance of co-ops (p. 210).