James E. McWilliams, “Free-Range Trichinosis,” The New York Times, April 10, 2009
“Free range is not necessarily natural. In fact, free-range is like piggy day care, a thoughtfully arranged system designed to meet the needs of consumers who despise industrial agriculture and adore the idea of wildness,” writes James McWilliams in this op-ed article questioning claims that free-range products confer “indisputable” health benefits. According to McWilliams, a recent study published in Foodborne Pathogens and Disease found that free-range pigs had higher rates of Salmonella and Toxoplasmosis than conventional livestock and that two specimens carried the parasite responsible for Trichinosis, a potentially fatal infection all but eliminated in the commercial pork supply. McWilliams notes that a desire for the “superior taste” of free-range pork has led many connoisseurs to conflate “the highly controlled grazing of pigs” with “wild animals in a state of nature,” an assumption that obfuscates the “arbitrary point between the wild and the domesticate.” “Even if the texture conferred on pork by this choice does lead to improved tenderloin, the enhanced taste must be weighed against the increased health risks,” McWilliams concludes. “If we have learned anything from our sustained critique of industrial agriculture, it is that eating well should not require making such calculations.”
Meanwhile, several consumer advocates have criticized McWilliams for failing to disclose that the National Pork Board funded the study of free-range pigs, an omission later rectified by a New York Times editorial note. One Ethicurean contributor also responded that “pastured-pork fans” are not motivated by the “naïve idea of ‘happy’ pigs,” but refuse to support “the industrial meat system, which is titanically destructive to any nearby land, water and air; to the people with the misfortune to work in it; and to the sentient animals it turns into protein widgets.” In addition, the Agricultural Law blog argued that large confined hog operations have purportedly led to (i) “serious health problems,” including respiratory illness, among farm workers; (ii) an increase in antibiotic resistant infections such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA); and (iii) the “contamination of groundwater with nitrate.” “Contrary to the tone of McWilliams’ analysis, today’s free range production is not a new system that was invented by chefs who seek the taste of wild game,” opines the blog author. “Rather, [free-range] is a system of production that has been used by farmers worldwide for generations.” See Agricultural Law, April 11, 2009; Ethicurean.com, April 14, 2009.
