

Freakonomics: A Myth of Grass-Fed Beef - cwan
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/a-myth-of-grass-fed-beef/

======
whyenot
Whether it's sawdust, walnut husks, corn, grains, lard, or even other cows,
someone in the past 100 years has probably advocated feeding it to cows.
That's at least what I remember as one of the takeaway messages when I took
ruminant nutrition and digestion.

So, I'm not at all surprised that he can comb through the literature and find
people suggesting that cows be fed corn a very long time ago. But it seems
like a bit of a logical leap to use a few examples in the literature to refute
claims like this:

“Before WW II, most Americans had never eaten corn-fed beef.”

------
nfnaaron
"Once again, I’m not arguing that the grass-fed alternative isn’t a viable
response to the problems of factory farming grain-fed cows. I’m only
suggesting to advocates of the grass-fed option that, if they feel so
compelled to draw on the past to support the present, they should start by
providing some footnotes."

McWilliams would be advised to do the same. All he listed were people
_advocating_ the use of corn to feed cows. He gave no evidence that cows
actually _were_ being fed grain at those time. In fact he's doing exactly what
he accuses grass advocates of doing, just the opposite argument.

~~~
travisp
Actually, you're incorrect. He did not just list people only _advocating_ the
use of corn. The titles were advocating the use of corn, but if you actually
look at some the references you can see that cows were not being grass fed.

Quote from the 1911 book that he cites: "Corn Grain This grain is used very
extensively in American dairy rations because it may be successfully grown in
sections of the United States. It is relished by cattle. It high in
carbohydrates and when supplemented feed to complete the ration the latter
must roughage and be nitrogenous in character. When grain is fed some of it
passes through the animal for this reason it is well to grind it and feed it
as corn meal.

For the cattle that are eaten (non-dairy), Snapped Corn is the "most popular
feed in the west" and "Corn meal seems to be favored by Eastern feeders"

~~~
nfnaaron
You're correct, I read the reference excerpts and took their literal
implications.

------
blahedo
Also pointed out in the comments is the fact that "fodder corn" or "stalks of
Indian corn" (from two of the cited quoted) actually refer to the entire corn
plant, i.e. a grass.

~~~
travisp
The 1911 book quotes "corn (grain)" as being "used very extensively" for dairy
cows, and lists it separately from "corn and cob meal" and "ground corn, cob,
and shuck meal"? This does not sound like the grass.

However, it does say that the "unhusked ear" broken from the stalk is the most
popular feed in the West for fattening cattle (those that are eaten) and "Corn
Meal" is favored in the East.

~~~
whyenot
The 1886 and 1822 quotes look like they are talking about using the whole
plant, not just feeding animals the ears or grain.

Not really related to your comment, but corn is actually a grass (grasses are
a taxonomic group within the plants), so it would be technically accurate
(albeit misleading) to say that a cow fed nothing but corn is also "grass
fed."

~~~
travisp
You make some good points, and it's probably around the late 1800s that the
move to corn grain became more common. I should note also that studies clearly
show health benefits of "grass"-fed corn (higher Omega 3s for example).

It's true corn is a grass. Actually, all true grains are grasses, I believe,
and farmers are allowed to feed a percentage of grain crops and still call
their animals "grass fed" _if_ they feed the young sprouts (pre-seed), but the
FDA (or USDA?) doesn't allow them to call it grass-fed otherwise.

I wonder what term could be used to replace "grass-fed" that would more
specifically define what is meant.

------
jswinghammer
The author misses the point. The problem isn't the corn but rather the
quantity of corn that's fed to cows. There weren't antibiotics to give cows to
deal with the side effects of too much corn so they didn't give it to them in
the quantities they do today.

I'm fine with giving cows some corn because well it does taste better but
their feed really shouldn't contain so much corn. Most of the small ranchers I
know give their cows some corn but not a huge amount or anything.

~~~
klipt
Perhaps you miss the author's point: he doesn't say corn fed beef is better,
only that the claim that no cows were fed corn until 60 years ago is a lie.

Pointing out a hole in X's argument _doesn't mean you disagree with X_. You
could well agree with X, but prefer that it be supported by non-fallacious
arguments.

~~~
jswinghammer
Or maybe everyone is just using imprecise language here. When I think of corn
fed beef I think of cows being fed feed that's 60-80% corn. When I think of
grass fed beef I think of cows that eat enough grass that they at least don't
need antibiotics to live longer to go to slaughter.

