>> Friday, November 14, 2008
I know I have posted different articles about corn in the past, but corn seems to be in the news a bit lately. As a fresh piece of produce, no one is denying the nutrition I have mentioned earlier, however (love that word), that does not mean I want it snuck (sneaken/sneaked?) into my diet at every opportunity just so corn farmers can make more money and deplete soil and pollute with pesticides even further (somehow, I have the feeling this is going to have negative repercussions). I love corn. I love corn grown on small farmsteads fresh from the fields. I do not want a CORN BURGER when I crave grease, though. Is real beef too much to ask? Apparently it is.
A recent study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences (PNAS) showed that the burgers we order at random fast food joints are mostly corn. I don't eat at these places often but about twice a year, I will admit, I do get a craving for all things artery clogging. The scientists discovered this by doing a chemical analysis in burgers, chicken, and french fries from certain fanchises. The sample size was quite large (more than 480). The study found that you could actually determine chemically how much corn was in the diet of the animals... and french fries. Of the meat tested, only 12 samples showed that the animal may have been fed less corn than other animals.
Strange how what we feed the animals comes back to haunt us, but there you have it. The beef tested actually contained more corn-like values than you would expect. People on the West Coast, rejoice, though, beef there was found to have less of a "C-value," C for carbon, not corn, than the beef served on the East Coast. Middle America was a toss up. What does this mean for Average Consumer Person? So far, nothing yet. There are still tests being done determining the affects of corn byproducts on the human body at John Hopkins. Until the the results are in though, buy grass-fed beef or bison and make your own.