【Native Speaker每日综合训练—32系列】【32-13】经管-Food in U.S.A.

AceJ

Official Weibo: http://weibo.com/u/3476904471


我们始终坚信，每一次阅读，都应是一次美妙的旅程
而工作组的使命就是带领大家领略阅读中的极致美景
欢迎来到本期小分队 – Food story in U.S.
由于晚上有点事，所以提前发出今天的作业，一起来聊聊美帝关于食物的那点事

Part I: Speaker

Article 1

Making Food from Scratch

[Rephrase 1]

[Speech, 15:47]



Transcript

Ann: I’m so excited to have the entire family coming for a visit. For our first family dinner next Friday, I’m making everything from scratch. I’m pulling out all the stops.

Walt: But have you ever made anything from scratch?

Ann: Sure I have, plenty of times.

Walt: If you say so, but our pantry is full of canned foods and jars, and nearly everything we’ve cooked in the past year has been premixed. Are you sure you’re up to cooking a dinner for 12 from scratch?

Ann: How hard could it be? I just need to make sure that the ingredients I buy are fresh, follow the recipes closely, add plenty of fresh herbs and spices, and multitask.

Walt: You mean do a juggling act. It’ll take a lot of work and organization to pull this off.

Ann: I’m up to the challenge. And I have a backup plan.

Walt: And that is?

Ann: Have you ever heard of the raw food movement?


Script by Dr. Lucy Tse

Source: ESLPOD
http://www.eslpod.com/website/show_podcast.php?issue_id=14775500

AceJ

Part II: Speed

Article 2

How 4 companies control almost all the meat you eat

By Bernice Napach

[Time 2]
If you're a meat eater you've probably noticed a bigger food shopping bill lately.  The price of lean ground beef and bacon is about 20% higher than a year ago while the price of chicken breast is almost 6% higher--all well above the 1.5% increase in the CPI.

Meat prices have been rising steadily since 2006 because of the power of a few companies, according to Christopher Leonard, author of the new book The Meat Racket: The Secret Takeover of America's Food Business. He defines meat, by the way, as beef, chicken and pork.

Four companies produce 85% of all the beef in the United States: Tyson Foods (TSN), JBS (JBSAY), Cargill and Smithfield Foods, Leonard tells The Daily Ticker. These companies have the "market power to depress what they pay farmers while at the same time keeping prices higher...for consumers," Leonard explains in the video above.

And that's not the only way consumers pay for this "monopolistic situation," says Leonard.

When farms that provide animals to the big four producers go bankrupt -- which they often do, says Leonard, because producers like Tyson put the squeeze on them -- U.S. taxpayers pay that bill too. An "obscure loan program bails out banks for about 90% of the lost loan value," says Leonard.
[214 words]

[Time 3]
The American Meat Institute had this to say about "The Meat Racket":
"Mr. Leonard’s criticisms of the meat and poultry industry should be examined against its results. If a competitive industry that operates under the most intensive regulatory and inspection regime in America and still produces the safest, most varied, most abundant and most affordable food supply in the world isn’t good enough for Mr. Leonard, then we challenge him to point to a nation with a better system. While waiting for that answer, we’ll keep on providing meat and poultry to the 95 percent of Americans who routinely make our products part of their diets."

The former AP reporter hopes that his book raises awareness of these food power structures that have been "hidden for a long time." He also hopes that Washington legislators use anti-trust regulations to limit the power of the top four meat producers and increase the power of farmers.

What are the odds of that happening? Almost nil, according to Leonard. "In 2010 and 2011 when there was a really ambitious reform agenda proposed by President Barack Obama, it was absolutely dismantled, pushed back and defeated by the meat industry lobbyists” and probably "did more damage than if they had not proposed to do anything" at all.
[212 Words]

Source: Yahoo Finance
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/how-four-companies-control-the-supply-and-price-of-beef--pork-and-chicken-in-the-u-s-eat-prices-224406080.html

Article 3

Food Labeling Laws: It’s a matter of ‘When’ Not ‘If’

By Morgan Korn

[Time 4]
Starting Saturday, U.S. consumers will know exactly how the cow, pig, chicken or lamb they're eating was slaughtered, raised and even where it was born.

No, this is not an episode of Portlandia. These new labeling laws, referred to as country-of-origin labeling (COOL), were first approved by Congress in 2002. Major U.S. meat processors like Tyson (TSN) and Cargill have been fighting to reverse or amend the rules, arguing that they impose excessive costs on the industry and will reduce the demand for imported meat. More than 2.2 billion pounds of beef -- or 7.7% of the total supply -- was imported into the U.S. in 2012, according to the USDA. Americans consumed 37.3 billion pounds of chicken and 24.6 billion pounds of pork last year that were produced in foreign facilities. Opponents of COOL also include Canada and Mexico, who say the rules unfairly discriminate against their products and will lead to weaker meat exports.

"The costs associated with this new inefficient process will drive some processors dependent on imports out of business and destroy the market for meat from imported livestock," the American Meat Institute said in a complaint to the USDA.

The meat industry has been "willing to fight tooth and nail from allowing COOL on the books," says Colin O'Neil of the Center for Food Safety, one of the groups supporting new labeling laws. "There has been overwhelming support from U.S. businesses but [COOL] was fraught with legal challenges from beginning. Opposition lies in the hands of a small but very powerful group of people."
[259 words]

[Time 5]
The fight over meat labeling laws closely mirrors the battles proponents of genetically modified (GMO) foods have experienced in recent years.

The majority of Americans support more food transparency -- over 90% of respondents in a Consumers Union survey were in favor of country-of-origin labeling and 93% of Americans support labeling foods that have been genetically engineered according to a recent New York Times poll. Yet efforts to make food products more transparent have been met with steep opposition from some of the nation’s biggest food and seed companies. Measures that would have required genetically modified foods to be labeled in Washington and California were both defeated after opponents such as the National Grocers Association, Monsanto (MON), DuPont (DD) and General Mills (GIS), spent more than $60 million to fight the initiatives.

Pro-labeling groups are deciding whether to include a GMO labeling proposal on the Oregon election ballot next year. O'Neil says the recent setbacks have not stopped consumer groups from pursuing these laws at the state and federal levels.

“Consumers want more information, not less, about the products they’re buying and feeding their families,” he points out. “Labeling is not a matter of ‘if’ but a matter of ‘when’.”
[201 words]

Source: Yahoo Finance
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/food-labeling-laws-matter-not-142514754.html

Article 4

Whole Foods CEO: Organic Foods Are Worth the Cost

By Bernice Napach

[Time6]
Consumers are buying more organic food than ever before, spending the extra dollars to eat healthy. According to The Organic Trade Association, sales of organic food totaled $29.3 billion in 2011. But a recent report from Stanford University found that organic food may not be worth the extra cost.

The Stanford scientists studied 40 years’ worth of research comparing organic and conventional foods and found that organic fruits and vegetables on average were not more nutritious.

The researchers did find, however, that organic foods reduced consumers' exposure to pesticides and antibiotics. Organic foods are grown without pesticides and organic poultry and beef are not fed antibiotics.

Walter Robb, co-CEO of Whole Foods (which sells lots of organic food), disagrees with the Stanford study, and not just because of his job. He tells The Daily Ticker, "I've been an organic gardener all my life…and I can see..the vitality of the food from my own experience of raising vegetables."

Robb also says the authors of the Stanford study did not include more recent original research that found "the nutrient intensity of organic food was 20% to 50% greater" than that of conventional foods. He says over time scientists will conclude that organic food is a better choice nutritionally.

There are other benefits that draw customers to organic foods, including the treatment of the environment, animals and farmworkers, says Robb. "Our customers value those things."

The organic food market is growing three to four times the rate of the overall food market, says Robb. As it grows, prices at the super market will decline, he notes.

Currently those prices range from parity with conventional foods to 25% higher, depending on the crop and the time of year, says Robb.

That price premium doesn't seem to be hurting Whole Foods stock. It's rallied 40.6% year-to-date, almost three times the gain in the S&P 500.
[310 words]

Source: Yahoo Finance
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/organic-foods-worth-cost-whole-foods-ceo-123551230.html

AceJ

Part III: Obstacle

Article 5

Genetically Modified Foods Offer Consumers “Nothing”

[Paraphrase 7]
Few Americans were aware of the dangers of industrial farming and processed food before Michael Pollan published his best-selling books “In Defense of Food” and the “Omnivore’s Dilemma.”

A hero to the locavore and organic movements, Pollan has never shied away from expressing his opinions on what to eat, where to eat and the proper way to raise and harvest what we eat.

In his new book “Cooked," Pollan urges more Americans to home-cook their meals. Cooking, he says, will lower obesity rates and re-connect individuals with “the material world.”

Eating the right foods are as important as eating foods that are not genetically modified, Pollan argues in the accompanying clip. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are “plants or animals created through the gene splicing techniques of biotechnology, or genetic engineering,” according to The Non-GMO Project, a nonprofit organization that tests food products for GMOs.

"This experimental technology merges DNA from different species, creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacterial and viral genes that cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding," it says.

Soybeans, corn, cotton, canola, zucchini, summer squash and sugar beets are high-risk of being GMO. Dairy and animal products also expose consumers to GMO crops because animals are fed a diet rich in corn and grains. About 70% to 80% of processed foods sold in the U.S. are made with genetically engineered ingredients.

Sixty-four countries around the world, including Japan, South Korea, China, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Russia and European Union member states, have significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs.

Last November California voters rejected a ballot initiative that would have required all food to be labeled as GMO or non-GMO. Opponents of the measure, including Monsanto (MON), Dupont (DD), Dow Chemical (DOW) and PepsiCo (PEP), raised more than $45 million to defeat the proposed labeling law.

Supporters of labeling say that GMO foods damage the environment and present serious health risks like organ failure. Genetically modified seeds have also become resistant to pests and invasive weeds. Last week Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) introduced a bill that would require the labeling of GMO ingredients.

The Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act would force food manufacturers to label fruits, vegetables, processed foods and seafood as genetically altered. The Food and Drug Administration has allowed genetically altered foods to be sold without labeling since 1992 and does not require safety studies of such foods.

Washington State has introduced a ballot initiative titled I-522 that seeks labeling and transparency of these foods. Whole Foods (WFM) announced in April that it would label all products containing GMOs in its U.S. and Canadian stores by 2018.

Pollan says there has been a lot of support in Washington by local farmers and residents to pass the state's GMO bill. Telling people where their food comes from should be a “fundamental right,” he argues.

“Many people are absolutely fine with genetically modified food,” he says. “This is not an argument that it’s dangerous. But the way food is produced is relevant to the consumer. There are people who care. Personal responsibility should rule. But personal responsibility depends on information.”

Consumers across the country are becoming more aware of the GMO labeling issue. The fastest-growing category in the super market today is products labeled GMO-free, Pollan notes. The organic food industry grew at 7.7% in 2010 and the organic industry is creating jobs at four times the national rate, according to the I-522 Web site.

Agribusiness giant Monsanto has been one of the most vocal opponents of GMO labeling. The company generates revenue from seed sales and the licensing of its genetic seed technology to other corporations. Monsanto has been spending millions of dollars fighting these labeling proposals because they could dramatically impact the company’s earnings and stock price.

“So far genetically modified products offer consumers nothing,” Pollan says. “That’s why [Monsanto] has to be so quiet about it. They love to talk to farmers and they love to talk to Wall Street but they don’t like to talk to consumers because they don’t have a story tell – yet. When they come up with products that are nutritionally enhanced, or save on calories, it’s another conversation.”
[703 words]

Source: Yahoo Finance
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/d ... hing-125539792.html

AceJ

默默的自沙一个

Making food from Scratch

makingeverything from scratch: start with basic ingredients and make everythingyourself

Pullingout all the stops: do something in the best way that you can, to do somethingfully

Pantry:small room that store the food that is not to be cold

How 4 companies control almost all the meat you eat

Time2:1'00" the 4 companies make a monopolistic situation in meat and poultryindustry in U.S.

Time3:1'10" criticism and supporters of Lenard

Food Labeling Laws: It’s a matter of 'When' not 'If'

Time4:1'13" COOL were first approved by Congress in 2002, major meat processershave been fighting the rules

Time5:1'21" The fight over meat labeling laws closelymirrors the battles proponents of genetically modified (GMO) foods haveexperienced in recent years

Whole Foods CEO: Organic Foods are Worth the Cost

Time6:2'07" Stanford found that organic fruits andvegetables on average were not more nutritious; butWalter thinks the nutrient intensity of organic foodwas 20% to 50% greater

Genetically Modified Foods Offer Consumers “Nothing”

Time7:6'25"

MichaelPollan published book "Cooked" to fight against genetically modifiedfood because So far genetically modified products offerconsumers nothing

xiaofan0205

Thanks

Time2: 1'37"
The price of meat increase steadily because there are four companies control it.

Time3: 1'38"
The four companies do a good job in this area and there is no other ways to do better, but someone still want to limit the power of the top four meat producers.

Time4: 2'12"
A new labeling law was approved by Congress and major meat processors fight to reverse or amend it.

Time5: 1'26"
Most people support the label law because they want more information, not less.

Time6: 2'17"
People consume more and more organic food and the price of organic food is much higher than that of conventional foods.

Paraphrase7: 5'49"
some people think GMO is bad for people, so they support the lable law to get the information whether the food they consume is GMO. Other company whose earning and stock price would be impacted fight these labeling proposals

jokerking

每次刷新都会有惊喜  哈哈   果断占之~
spk: woman want to making food from scratch, but the man doesn't believe it.      useful phrase~
spd: 1.03   1.09   1.40   1.10   1.51
OB:  4.15
famous author named Pollen proposed people to have a health diet, and he advocate people don't use GMO's. -- a lot of countries have the ban of GMO, but about 70-80% foods in us are made with genetically engineered ingredients.--California rejected a food labelling laws but many companies think GMO damage the environment and our health.--people have right to know the information of food , and some companies are acting to make their food transparent.--  on the contrary, companies like MONSANTO think people are fine with GMO. Pollen criticize they are only care about themselves.

苏错

明天就去哈尔滨，没法继续做了。。。走前占个坑~~
晚上填~~~
谢谢AceJ~~
-----------
为了不给主页菌填麻烦~走前赶紧补起~~See U~

Speed:
Time2:1'12
Time3:1'05
Time4:1'23
Time5:1'24
Time6:2'12
Obstacle:5'03

TaoRs92

首页！！！！！


啊发现居然是我明天要做的内容。哈哈于是今晚晚点或者明天来补。我说我怎么记得12我还没做><...



time:1:03.12
Four big companies control most of meat people eat in the U.S.
Consumers suffer from the monopolistic situation--squeeze prices for farmers,while increase prices for consumers.
When farms bankrupt,consuemrs also suffer.
____________
time:1:06.85
Two different opinions:
the meat produce structure works efficiently now.challenge the author to provide a better system.
lead people to focus the situation where top four meat producers control the market.
How did this debate come?The policy from President Obama.
___________
time:1:18.86
A new law--COOL.Amend rules from 2002 and reduce imported meat demand.In order to provide more transparent information for consumers.
Fact:America partly rely on imported meat.
Opposition from meat industry:bad influence on imported meat market.
Difficult to label:controled by a few powerful people.
_____________
time:0:57.23
Similar to GMO.
Consumer:welcome the law because they want more transparent information about what they eat and use.
Company:spend money and power to aviod the law,controled by severl big companies.
______________
time:1:30.53
Organic food are very popular this days.
The study from Stanford--organic food is not more nutrious than conventional food.But it reduce consumers' exposure to pesticides and antibiotics.
The oposite opinion from the CEO:
1 the vitality of organic food
2 Stanford didn't consider the recent research--organic food has 20%-50% higher nutrient intensity than conventional food.
3 other factors--friendly to environment..
The popularity of organic food and market.
_____________
time:4:05.75
Pollan's book and idea to tell American how to eat and eat healthy.His new book targets to GMO.
The introduction of GMO.The definition.
GMO market in the U.S.Sold without labels and special warning.
About labeling the law.Protested by big companies,but welcomed by consumers.
Several parts related to GMO and its law.
In Washington,people care more about GMO now.And may ask salers put tag into unGMO and GMO food.
Now,GMO food may be safe.But there are people who care.And law should give them the right to know the information.
The biggest protestant:M company--sell its tech of GMO to other companies and will be dramatically impacted if the law becomes labeled.

小蘑菇开始打怪

先占！话说今天还没弄完。。。

------------------------

谢谢楼主！谢谢您选了这么一个让人半夜饥饿的大主题！丧心病狂！（开玩笑的哈。。。）

speaker:

the women will prepare a big family dinner for the whole family. she choose to use scratch method. she is confident that she could handle these, however the man is worried about the dinner.

then the video explain some words in the dialog, following are some notes

pantry: a place to store food, it is dry and not cold

canned food-convenient

up to: 1.be ready to do sth. means you have the energy and knowledge

2.plan

3.someone do something wrong, illegal or even criminal

eg: what is my neighbor up to?

juggle: complex

recipe: a list of instruction

time2:1:05

the increase of price of meat is bigger than the increase of CPI

few company have the power of control the price of meat

time3:1:11

some criticism of the power company

the situation is morse after Obama proposed something

time4:1:35

a new food labeling laws is passed in US

some major meat processors against the law because it will do harm to import meat

there are still some groups of people in favor of the law and will protect it on the book

time5:1:10

the fight has met some against from big meat company

most of citizens are in favor of the labeling law

time6:1:24

Stanford study concluded that organic food is not worth the money

Robb disagreed with the study because organic food is more environmental friendly, no antibiotics and more nutritious

the price will fall in the future

time7:3:55

a proposal about mark the food is GMO or non-GMO

GMO may have high risk

some company against because the law will have bad impact on their stock price

the choice rely on the consumers but manufactures should provide with entire information

there is still a long way to fight for the law

疏离无罪

首页~~今天好早

Speaker: today's topic is about perparing a dinner for 12 people.  pulling out all the stops means try one's best  up tp means ready   juggling act=sth complex to do     pull sth off = to do sth very difficult.

01:25
The big four companies control 85% meat of the US market.They raise the meat price in several ways.The market power enables them to depress the pay and raise the price.And they squeeze farms.

01:11
The American Meat Institute argues against this idea and thinks that current system works well.Mr. Leonard wants the government to take action,but it seems that the action won't work from past experience.

01:34
The new labeling law,COOL,raised the cost of US meat companines and may reduce the demand for imported meat and the export of meat.

00:55
These companies tries to fight againt the meat labelling as well as GMO.

01:36
A research raised an idea that the organic food does not worth its extra cost.But the CEO of Whole food objected to it,and said that the organice food market is growing quickly.

04:21
Main Idea: GMO offers nothing to consumers
Few people are aware of the danger of industrial farming and processed food.And less home-cooking is also one reason lead to obesity.Since the material of fast food is not good one.
Eating right thing is as important as eating itself.The problem is that the market is full of GMOs,which have unstable genes.So they are banned and regulated in many countries.
So several states of the USA raise a bill about labelling GMOs.Whether the GMOs are dangerous or not,the pruchasing decision is made by consumers.And the personal responsibility depends on imformation.So the labelling is necessary.Some sellers also support this bill to make consumers rest assure the security of food.
But there still many opponents to this bill.And the supporter said that the GMOs offer nothing good to comsumers and this's why opponents do not want comsumers see the label.