Journal articles on the topic 'Kosher food industry'

As America's food system became increasingly industrialized in the twentieth century, it became increasingly difficult for the Jewish community to regulate the foods it ate to comply with kosher law. As American Jews strayed from religious lives, major Orthodox Jewish organizations sought to win back adherents by adapting the ancient ritual of Jewish dietary law to the most complex, modern processing techniques. The result was an elaborate third-party certification system, the first of its kind, which is now the backbone of a billion-dollar industry that thrives today. Within a short span of time, major food corporations were printing kosher certification labels on their packages. Today, two-fifths of food sold in the supermarket come kosher certified. How Jews eat—purchasing packaged products with kosher seals of approval—has fundamentally transformed from the immigrant days on the Lower East Side and the shtetls of Eastern Europe. Consequently, kosher food has become overly reliant on large-scale food production. Small efforts to further adapt the kosher industry to small-scale production and fair-labor rights are underway, though a long way off.

Halal and kosher foods are a growing sector in the food processing industry (Maddock, 2014). While halal and kosher labels primarily target Muslim and Jewish consumers adhering to laws that govern the production of “pure, safe, acceptable foods, consumers who do not follow either religion are increasingly showing a preference for foods with a halal or kosher label” (Maddock, 2014). This study attempts to assess whether consumers in the United States who do not follow either religion may perceive halal or kosher labels to signal a higher quality product. The study explores consumers’ understanding of the halal and kosher process, and attempts to identify the determinants of their assessments. Keywords: faith branding, kosher, halal, Islamic law, Jewish law, food marketing. JEL Classification: M31, K00

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate if religious food laws can provide answers to current issues with the food systems. Design/methodology/approach – This paper provides a discussion of the dietary and food system principles from a Judaism, Christianity and Islamic perspective for the design of a more sustainable and healthy food system. Findings – The commercialisation of the natural resources, industrial food production approach and consumerism is endangering the food security, health and environment. Current industry practices are not sustainable and do not comply with Jewish, Christian and Islamic scriptures. Kosher, Christian and halal food laws share common principles in prohibition of certain animals (like pig), prohibition of blood, role of fasting and animal welfare. As a change in the diet is the solution, there is a key role for the food industry to comply and for religious leaders to radically reduce meat consumption and food waste of its followers. Research limitations/implications – This viewpoint paper shows that religious food laws provide answers to current problems with the industrialised food production approach and consumerism. Practical implications – New food industry directives should convert meat-based to plant-based ingredients and additives; replace porcine by bovine sources; and emphasise on animal welfare to better serve the Jewish, Christian and Muslim consumer. Religious logos (kosher and halal) should incorporate nutrient profiling through a traffic light system to promote healthy food choice. Originality/value – Religious food laws are important for a big part of the world population (Jews, Christians and Muslims), which share many common principles. This study contributes to a better understanding of the commonalities and differences in these religious food laws.

Cows' milk is a commonly allergenic food. Cross-contamination of milk proteins into nondairy, kosher-pareve foods prepared on shared processing equipment can cause severe, life-threatening reactions in milk-allergic individuals. A sandwich-type enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; 96-well plate format) was developed for the detection of undeclared casein in foods. Rabbit anti-casein antibodies were used as the capture reagent. Food samples and standards were ground, extracted in 0.01 M phosphate-buffered saline, clarified by centrifugation, and added to the wells. Goat anti-casein antibodies were employed as the detector antibody, and the amount of antibody bound was determined with a commercial rabbit anti-goat immunoglobulin conjugated to alkaline phosphatase, with subsequent substrate reaction. Antibodies developed were specific to casein, with no cross-reaction observed with 30 foods and food ingredients. Non–milk-containing products such as fruit juices, fruit juice bars, sorbets, and dark and pareve-labeled chocolate were purchased from June 2002 through June 2003. In addition, samples allegedly causing eight milk-allergic consumer complaints were analyzed. The ELISA had a detection limit of less than 0.5 ppm of casein. The casein content in the analyzed foods ranged from less than 0.5 ppm to more than 40,000 ppm casein; undeclared casein residues were found in all of the samples implicated in allergic reactions. The levels of milk contamination in some of the other surveyed products could also be hazardous for milk-allergic consumers. This ELISA method provides a useful quality control tool for the food industry and could also be used as a validation of kosher-pareve status.

Nowadays, consumers are aware of the necessity of following a healthy diet and there is demand for natural and nutritious food products, especially for children. Consequently, new trends in the food industry are focused on the development of foods with low levels of sucrose and artificial additives (e.g., flavors and colorants), as well as high antioxidant, protein, and fiber content. On the other hand, some consumers demand vegan, halal, and kosher-certified food products. In this regard, conventional confectionary products such as gummy candies (GCs) are increasingly losing their popularity. Therefore, the development of plant-based and functional GCs has gained the attention of researchers and manufacturers. This review highlights recent innovations in the development of GCs with alternative gelling agents and sweeteners, natural flavors and colorants, and the incorporation of medicines, fiber, protein and antioxidants into GCs. Additionally, it summarizes their effects on the techno-functional, sensory, and nutritional properties of GCs.

Halal and kosher slaughter have given the utmost importance to the sharpness of knives during the slaughter of animals. A sharp knife of appropriate dimension (blade length) makes slaughter less painful during neck severance and facilitates desirable bleeding. The role of knife sharpness has not been given due credit from an animal welfare perspective and is likely ignored by the people involved in slaughterhouses. A neat, clean, and efficient neck cut by an extremely sharp knife reduces the pain. It improves the bleeding out, thus making animals unconscious early without undergoing unnecessary pain and stress. It also helps in improving meat quality and food safety. A slight incremental improvement in knife sharpness could significantly improve the animal welfare, productivity, efficiency, and safety of meat plant workers. The present review critically analyzed the significance of knife sharpness in religious slaughter by reducing stress and pain and improving meat quality and food safety. The objective quantification of knife sharpness, proper regular training of slaughterers, and slow slaughter rate are the challenges faced by the meat industry.

Blockchain technology has emerged as a promising technology with far-reaching implications for the food industry. The combination of immutability, enhanced visibility, transparency and data integrity provides numerous benefits that improve trust in extended food supply chains (FSCs). Blockchain can enhance traceability, enable more efficient recall and aids in risk reduction of counterfeits and other forms of illicit trade. Moreover, blockchain can enhance the integrity of credence claims such as sustainably sourced, organic or faith-based claims such as kosher or halal by integrating the authoritative source of the claim (e.g., the certification body or certification owner) into the blockchain to verify the claim integrity and reassure business customers and end consumers. Despite the promises and market hype, a comprehensive overview of the potential benefits and challenges of blockchain in FSCs is still missing. To bridge this knowledge gap, we present the findings from a systematic review and bibliometric analysis of sixty-one (61) journal articles and synthesize existing research. The main benefits of blockchain technology in FCSs are improved food traceability, enhanced collaboration, operational efficiencies and streamlined food trading processes. Potential challenges include technical, organizational and regulatory issues. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our research and present several ideas for future research.

The modern food industry is increasingly using the tools of genetic engineering in the production and sale of food products. One of the most important recent technological innovations is lab-grown meat (or "synthetic" meat). The lab-grown meat industry is based on the genetic duplication of animal cells under laboratory conditions in order to attempt to produce a product with the nutritional and culinary value of animal meat. Some predict that this industry will play an important role in the human diet of the future. The beginning of this process is based on cells taken from live animals. In recent years, new methods of laboratory meat production based on non-meat cells have begun to develop. For example, in one of them, the cells are taken from a pre-embryo found in a fertilized egg (blastula). Otherwise, the cells are taken from a pre-embryo taken from a cow (blastocyst). This topic raises various questions and many challenges in the fields of health, ecology, ethics and, of course, religion. How should we treat such meat? Is meat produced in a laboratory kosher? Is it Halal? Is the product meaty or synthetic? Do the initial stem cells determine the definition of the final product, and, further on, what is the status of such a product when it is produced from pig stem cells? On the ethical level, a general question is posed on the subject of genetic engineering. Is it permissible to intervene so blatantly in the nature that God created? This article will focus on the various challenges that this industry raises from the Jewish ethical and kashrut aspects, and address some questions.

The addition or exchange of cheaper fish species instead of more expensive fish species is a known form of fraud in the food industry. This can take place accidentally due to the lack of expertise or act as a fraud. The interest in detecting animal species in meat products is based on religious demands (halal and kosher) as well as on product adulterations. Authentication of fish and meat products is critical in the food industry. Meat and fish adulteration, mainly for economic pursuit, is widespread and leads to serious public health risks, religious violations, and moral loss. Economically motivated adulteration of food is estimated to create damage of around € 8 to 12 billion per year. Rapid, effective, accurate, and reliable detection technologies are keys to effectively supervising meat and fish adulteration. Various analytical methods often based on protein or DNA measurements are utilized to identify fish and meat species. Although many strategies have been adopted to assure the authenticity of fish and meat and meat a fish products, such as the protected designation of origin, protected geographical indication, certificate of specific characteristics, and so on, the coverage is too small, and it is unrealistic to certify all meat products for protection from adulteration. Therefore, effective supervision is very important for ensuring the suitable development of the meat industry, and rapid, effective, accurate, and reliable detection technologies are fundamental technical support for this goal. Recently, several methods, including DNA analysis, protein analysis, and fat-based analysis, have been effectively employed for the identification of meat and fish species.

Sugar beet fibre (fibrex) is an abundant side-stream from the sugar refining industry. A self-produced laccase from Funalia trogii (LccFtr) (0.05 U/µg FA) successfully cross-linked fibrex to an edible gel. Dynamic oscillation measurements of the 10% fibrex gels showed a storage modulus of 5.52 kPa and loss factors ≤ 0.36 in the range from 20 to 80 Hz. Comparing storage stability of sweetened 10% fibrex gels with sweetened commercial 6% gelatin gels (10% and 30% d-sucrose) indicated a constant storage modulus and loss factors ≤ 0.7 during four weeks of storage in fibrex gels. Loss factors of sweetened gelatin gels were ≤0.2, and their storage modulus decreased from 9 to 7 kPa after adding d-sucrose and remained steady for four weeks of storage. Fibrex gel characteristics, including high water holding capacity, swelling ratio in saliva, and heat resistance are attributed to a covalently cross-linked network. Vanillin, as a mediator, and citrus pectin did not enhance covalent cross-links and elastic properties of the fibrex gels. Thus, laccase as an oxidative agent provided gels with a solid and stable texture. Fibrex gels may find uses in pharmaceutical and other industrial applications, which require a heat-resistant gel that forms easily at room temperature. They also represent an ethical alternative for manufacturing vegan, halal, and kosher food.

Gelatine is widely used in pharmaceutical and food ingredient that is crucial in most Halal research. Non-halal gelatine accounts for 90% of the world's supply, which is typically taken from animals (bovine and porcine). The expanding and profitable halal, kosher and vegetarian markets (including Hindu) represent a substantial interest in gelatine substitution. Gelatine (G), a versatile hydrocolloid, is a significant ingredient in the confectionary industry due to its gel formation, high water-binding capacity, thickening, colloidal function, and adhesion/cohesion. Gum arabic (GA), a key hydrocolloid used in pastille manufacture, works as a stabilizer and fat emulsifier. The main objective of this study was to ascertain the effect of gum arabic and gelatine substitution on the physicochemical properties, antioxidant activity and sensory acceptability of halal watermelon (Citrullus lanatus) pastille. pH analysis, total soluble solid (TSS), texture profile analysis (TPA), colour, water activity (aw), melting point, calorie content, antioxidant activity by 2,2- diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), mineral content, proximate composition as well as sensory acceptability test were conducted on five different samples {A (0%GA:16%G); B (4%GA:12%G); C (8%GA:8%G); D (12%GA:4%G); and E (16%GA:0%G), respectively. The ideal formulation in terms of physicochemical qualities, antioxidant activity, and sensory acceptance was a sample with 12% gum arabic and 4% gelatine. Also, high antioxidant activity (44.72±3.76), low fat content (0.44 ± 0.27%) and calories (3054.23 ± 6.55cal/g) compared to other samples. The crude fibre and carbohydrate, which were (1.14 ± 0.08%) and (70.68%) were an advantage of this sample as both nutrients are essential in food due to their role to absorb water, assist in intestinal transit and provide roughage for the bowel. The sensory test that the 12% gum arabic and 4% of gelatine sample was most accepted compared to other samples. Gum arabic is a halal substance that can be recommended to produce gelatine alternatives in the pharmaceutical and food industries.

AbstractThe United States has traditionally lagged behind Europe in the adoption of voluntary or legislated standards for the care and treatment of animals on farms. US federal legislation of farm animal practices is minimal, confined to aspects of livestock transport and slaughter. Although some of the livestock and poultry producer (commodity) groups wrote guidelines, codes of practice, or statements regarding the humane treatment of animals in the 1980s, these were usually very general statements of current industry practice, developed with little consultation with independent experts and involving no mechanism for encouraging or ensuring compliance by producers. However, this has changed dramatically in the last few years, with an increasing trend among US retailers to require their suppliers to adopt minimum animal welfare standards. The major chain restaurants and supermarkets are working through their trade organisations, the National Council of Chain Restaurants and the Food Marketing Institute respectively, and with the commodity groups, to develop a uniform set of standards and a national auditing program. Standards and auditing programs have already been approved for dairy cattle, laying hens and meat chickens, and for slaughter, including ritual slaughter (kosher and halal). The process of setting auditable standards is complicated by the lack of legislative underpinning, the scope of the auditing that will be required because of US farm sizes and the large distances between farms, and the varying levels of expertise of potential auditors. For these reasons, ‘engineering-based’ auditing criteria that are relatively easy to measure and to standardise are more common. There are both strengths and potential weaknesses of retail-driven rather than legislatively driven animal welfare standards. Regardless, the recent changes in the US possibly pave the way for increasing dialogue between Europe and the US on farm animal welfare issues.

Drought is caused by a long period of lack of rainfall and water resources, and has a great impact on the life and ecosystem of both humans and animals. It is particularly important for the agricultural sector, which is closely related to food security. Global warming, urbanization, and industrialization have led to a gradually increasing demand for agricultural water. In response, Korea has steadily developed its agricultural water sources to reduce rising damage to the agricultural sector due to climate change. The severity of drought is evaluated by using meteorological, agricultural, hydrological, and socioeconomic drought indexes. The agricultural drought index is evaluated using soil moisture and crop dryness, and the hydrological drought index is evaluated based on water shortage by comparing demands with water resources available for supply, such as rivers and groundwater, reservoirs and dams. However, these methods were found to over- or under-estimate the relatively low sensitivity of agricultural water as they assess the shortage of water for life, industry, and agriculture. Therefore, in this study, we developed the Agricultural Water Demand and Supply Drought Index (AWDSDI), which evaluates agricultural drought by analyzing water supply systems such as agricultural reservoirs, pumping stations and drainage, groundwater systems, and demands for agricultural water. In order to review the applicability of the developed drought index, AWDSDI was applied to 32 Eps and Myuns in three cities, including Jincheongun, Changnyeonggun, and Jangseonggun in the period June-August 2017, when drought damage was significant. It was found that AWDSDI reproduced the daily agricultural drought well in small administrative districts such as Eps and Myuns. In addition, in order to verify the developed drought index, the evaluation results of AWDSDI, the previously developed agricultural drought index and the hydrological drought index were compared together. The comparison found that the AWDSDI reproduced the drought period and drought depth in 32 Eps and Myuns in three cities better than previously developed drought indices.

This study aims to demonstrate the potential use of reusable electrochemical sensor for detecting pork DNA in solution. The approach was based on electrochemical principle in which the electrostatic interaction between DNA and redox species will generate detectable signal upon introduction of electrical charge. In this study, Ruthenium Hexaamine (RuHex) was used as the redox species and result was based on the output current. Coupled with highly specific Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) primers designed for pork DNA, this study has successfully demonstrated the reliability of proposed novel detection approach that utilized reusable electrochemical sensor and can potentially be developed into a rapid detection tool for halal and kosher food industry.

There has been an increasing consumer demand for cheese along with a search for products with new organoleptic parameters, which has resulted in extensive research on alternative milk coagulants. The ratio of proteolytic activity to milk-clotting activity determines the requirements for proteases used in the cheese making process. To date, plant enzymes have largely been used for this purpose, along with traditional enzymes of animal origin, chymosin and pepsin. The most popular types of proteases used in the food industry, especially in cheese making, are plant proteases belonging to the cysteine (papain, bromelain, ficin), aspartate (cinarase, cardosin), and serine (kukumizin, leucine) group of proteases. The aspartate proteases of microbial origin mucorpepsin and endotyapepsin have found wide application in cheese production due to low production costs and high organoleptic characteristics of the final product. The use of plant and microbial milk-clotting enzymes as an alternative to animal-derived enzymes allows not only to diversify the assortment of cheeses on the market but also to solve ethical and economic issues. In addition, vegetable and microbial preparations meet the requirements of vegetarianism, halal, and kosher food, thus further opening the market.

The value chain concept is often used in the analysis of agricultural competitiveness. Its application seeks ways and activities that add value to products. The focus is on finding opportunities for efficient monitoring of modern trends, challenges and business risk assessment in order to sustainably produce processing and marketing of agri-food products. The production of fruits and vegetables by small producers is characterized by short chains from production to product placement, without adding value. There are numerous critical points in the analyzed chains, such as quality of input, processing, drying and storage of products, lack of training and financial resources for storage and preservation of products after harvest. The link between primary production and the processing industry should ensure stability for primary producers in terms of the market, and entities in the processing industry for continuity in the supply of raw materials of domestic origin. In order to improve product value chains, and thus the competitiveness of the national agri-food sector, it is necessary to improve productivity in primary production, horizontal and vertical integration, as well as additional investments in processing capacities. The key areas in the legislation and its implementation in order to improve the value chain of livestock products are: animal husbandry, hygiene on farms and in meat processing plants, as well as environmental protection. These are some of the priorities that should create the conditions for the possibility of exporting live animals, meat and meat products to the EU. Improving the milk value chain would contribute to better efficiency, competitiveness and sustainability of production, milk quality, especially in microbiological terms (reduction of the number of bacteria and somatic cells). Conditions should be created for the adoption of good agricultural practice, adaptation to market requirements, reaching standards in the field of animal welfare and health, improving the genetic potential of animals for milk production, hygiene and environmental protection. Quality is an important factor in competitiveness and sustainable agricultural production. As the main elements of the quality management system and adding value to products, the appropriate standards are applied: ISO 9000, HACCP, GMP, ISO 22000, ISO 14000, HALAL standard, Kosher standard, BRC standard, GOST-R standard, Demeter, GLOBAL GAP, IFS standard . In order to overcome and solve environmental problems of agricultural development, more and more importance is attached to the application of animal protection policy measures. Domestic and international standards and regulations for environmental management ISO 14001 are applied, including the EU Environmental Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). Genetic potentials and biological diversification are important for the development and sustainability of agricultural production. The richness of flora and fauna, genetic resources and great biological diversity constitute natural comparative advantages in every respect, especially for sustainable agricultural production and environmental protection.

As the name suggests, the humanities is largely a study of the human condition, in which history sits as a discipline concerned with the past. Environmental history is a new field that brings together scholars from a range of disciplines to consider the changing relationships between humans and the environment over time. Critiques of anthropocentrism that place humans at the centre of the universe or make assessments through an exclusive human perspective provide a challenge to scholars to rethink our traditional biases against the nonhuman world. The movement towards nonhumanism or posthumanism, however, does not seem to have had much of an impression on history as a discipline. What would a nonhumanist history look like if we re-centred the historical narrative around pigs? There are histories of pigs as food (see for example, The Cambridge History of Food which has a chapter on “Hogs”). There are food histories that feature pork in terms of its relationship to multiethnic identity (such as Donna Gabaccia’s We Are What We Eat) and examples made of pigs to promote ethical eating (Singer). Pigs are central to arguments about dietary rules and what motivates them (Soler; Dolander). Ancient pig DNA has also been employed in studies on human migration and colonisation (Larson et al.; Durham University). Pigs are also widely used in a range of products that would surprise many of us. In 2008, Christien Meindertsma spent three years researching the products made from a single pig. Among some of the more unexpected results were: ammunition, medicine, photographic paper, heart valves, brakes, chewing gum, porcelain, cosmetics, cigarettes, hair conditioner and even bio diesel. Likewise, Fergus Henderson, who coined the term ‘nose to tail eating’, uses a pig on the front cover of the book of that name to suggest the extraordinary and numerous potential of pigs’ bodies. However, my intention here is not to pursue a discussion of how parts of their bodies are used, rather to consider a reorientation of the historical narrative to place pigs at the centre of stories of our co-evolution, in order to see what their history might say about humans and our relationships with them. This is underpinned by recognition of the inter-relationality of humans and animals. The relationships between wild boar and pigs with humans has been long and diverse. In a book exploring 10,000 years of interaction, Anton Ervynck and Peter Rowley-Conwy argue that pigs have been central to complex cultural developments in human societies and they played an important role in human migration patterns. The book is firmly grounded within the disciplines of zoology, anthropology and archaeology and contributes to an understanding of the complex and changing relationship humans have historically shared with wild boar and domestic pigs. Naturalist Lyall Watson also explores human/pig relationships in The Whole Hog. The insights these approaches offer for the discipline of history are valuable (although overlooked) but, more importantly, such scholarship also challenges a humanist perspective that credits humans exclusively with historical change and suggests, moreover, that we did it alone. Pigs occupy a special place in this history because of their likeness to humans, revealed in their use in transplant technology, as well as because of the iconic and paradoxical status they occupy in our lives. As Ervynck and Rowley-Conwy explain, “On the one hand, they are praised for their fecundity, their intelligence, and their ability to eat almost anything, but on the other hand, they are unfairly derided for their apparent slovenliness, unclean ways, and gluttonous behaviour” (1). Scientist Niamh O’Connell was struck by the human parallels in the complex social structures which rule the lives of pigs and people when she began a research project on pig behaviour at the Agricultural Research Institute at Hillsborough in County Down (Cassidy). According to O’Connell, pigs adopt different philosophies and lifestyle strategies to get the most out of their life. “What is interesting from a human perspective is that low-ranking animals tend to adopt one of two strategies,” she says. “You have got the animals who accept their station in life and then you have got the other ones that are continually trying to climb, and as a consequence, their life is very stressed” (qtd. in Cassidy). The closeness of pigs to humans is the justification for their use in numerous experiments. In the so-called ‘pig test’, code named ‘Priscilla’, for instance, over 700 pigs dressed in military uniforms were used to study the effects of nuclear testing at the Nevada (USA) test site in the 1950s. In When Species Meet, Donna Haraway draws attention to the ambiguities and contradictions promoted by the divide between animals and humans, and between nature and culture. There is an ethical and critical dimension to this critique of human exceptionalism—the view that “humanity alone is not [connected to the] spatial and temporal web of interspecies dependencies” (11). There is also that danger that any examination of our interdependencies may just satisfy a humanist preoccupation with self-reflection and self-reproduction. Given that pigs cannot speak, will they just become the raw material to reproduce the world in human’s own image? As Haraway explains: “Productionism is about man the tool-maker and -user, whose highest technical production is himself […] Blinded by the sun, in thrall to the father, reproduced in the sacred image of the same, his rewards is that he is self-born, an auto telic copy. That is the mythos of enlightenment and transcendence” (67). Jared Diamond acknowledges the mutualistic relationship between pigs and humans in Guns, Germs and Steel and the complex co-evolutionary path between humans and domesticated animals but his account is human-centric. Human’s relationships with pigs helped to shape human history and power relations and they spread across the world with human expansion. But questioning their utility as food and their enslavement to this cause was not part of the account. Pigs have no voice in the histories we write of them and so they can appear as passive objects in their own pasts. Traces of their pasts are available in humanity’s use of them in, for example, the sties built for them and the cooking implements used to prepare meals from them. Relics include bones and viruses, DNA sequences and land use patterns. Historians are used to dealing with subjects that cannot speak back, but they have usually left ample evidence of what they have said. In the process of writing, historians attempt to perform the miracle, as Curthoys and Docker have suggested, of restoration; bringing the people and places that existed in the past back to life (7). Writing about pigs should also attempt to bring the animal to life, to understand not just their past but also our own culture. In putting forward the idea of an alternative history that starts with pigs, I am aware of both the limits to such a proposal, and that most people’s only contact with pigs is through the meat they buy at the supermarket. Calls for a ban on intensive pig farming (RSPCA, ABC, AACT) might indeed have shocked people who imagine their dinner comes from the type of family farm featured in the movie Babe. Baby pigs in factory farms would have been killed a long time before the film’s sheep dog show (usually at 3 to 4 months of age). In fact, because baby pigs do grow so fast, 48 different pigs were used to film the role of the central character in Babe. While Babe himself may not have been aware of the relationship pigs generally have to humans, the other animals were very cognisant of their function. People eat pigs, even if they change the name of the form it takes in order to do so:Cat: You know, I probably shouldn’t say this, but I’m not sure if you realize how much the other animals are laughing at you for this sheep dog business. Babe: Why would they do that? Cat: Well, they say that you’ve forgotten that you’re a pig. Isn't that silly? Babe: What do you mean? Cat: You know, why pigs are here. Babe: Why are any of us here? Cat: Well, the cow’s here to be milked, the dogs are here to help the Boss's husband with the sheep, and I’m here to be beautiful and affectionate to the boss. Babe: Yes? Cat: [sighs softly] The fact is that pigs don’t have a purpose, just like ducks don’t have a purpose. Babe: [confused] Uh, I—I don’t, uh ... Cat: Alright, for your own sake, I’ll be blunt. Why do the Bosses keep ducks? To eat them. So why do the Bosses keep a pig? The fact is that animals don’t seem to have a purpose really do have a purpose. The Bosses have to eat. It’s probably the most noble purpose of all, when you come to think about it. Babe: They eat pigs? Cat: Pork, they call it—or bacon. They only call them pigs when they’re alive (Noonan). Babe’s transformation into a working pig to round up the sheep makes him more useful. Ferdinand the duck tried to do the same thing by crowing but was replaced by an alarm clock. This is a common theme in children’s stories, recalling Charlotte’s campaign to praise Wilbur the pig in order to persuade the farmer to let him live in E. B. White’s much loved children’s novel, Charlotte’s Web. Wilbur is “some pig”, “terrific”, “radiant” and “humble”. In 1948, four years before Charlotte’s Web, White had published an essay “Death of a Pig”, in which he fails to save a sick pig that he had bought in order to fatten up and butcher. Babe tried to present an alternative reality from a pig’s perspective, but the little pig was only spared because he was more useful alive than dead. We could all ask the question why are any of us here, but humans do not have to contemplate being eaten to justify their existence. The reputation pigs have for being filthy animals encourages distaste. In another movie, Pulp Fiction, Vincent opts for flavour, but Jules’ denial of pig’s personalities condemns them to insignificance:Vincent: Want some bacon? Jules: No man, I don’t eat pork. Vincent: Are you Jewish? Jules: Nah, I ain’t Jewish, I just don’t dig on swine, that’s all. Vincent: Why not? Jules: Pigs are filthy animals. I don’t eat filthy animals. Vincent: Bacon tastes gooood. Pork chops taste gooood. Jules: Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I’d never know ’cause I wouldn’t eat the filthy motherfucker. Pigs sleep and root in shit. That’s a filthy animal. I ain’t eat nothin’ that ain’t got sense enough to disregard its own feces [sic]. Vincent: How about a dog? Dogs eats its own feces. Jules: I don’t eat dog either. Vincent: Yeah, but do you consider a dog to be a filthy animal? Jules: I wouldn’t go so far as to call a dog filthy but they’re definitely dirty. But, a dog’s got personality. Personality goes a long way. Vincent: Ah, so by that rationale, if a pig had a better personality, he would cease to be a filthy animal. Is that true? Jules: Well we’d have to be talkin’ about one charming motherfuckin’ pig. I mean he’d have to be ten times more charmin’ than that Arnold on Green Acres, you know what I’m sayin’? In the 1960s television show Green Acres, Arnold was an exceptional pig who was allowed to do whatever he wanted. He was talented enough to write his own name and play the piano and his attempts at painting earned him the nickname “Porky Picasso”. These talents reflected values that are appreciated, and so he was. The term “pig” is, however, chiefly used a term of abuse, however, embodying traits we abhor—gluttony, obstinence, squealing, foraging, rooting, wallowing. Making a pig of yourself is rarely honoured. Making a pig of the humanities, however, could be a different story. As a historian I love to forage, although I use white gloves rather than a snout. I have rubbed my face and body on tree trunks in the service of forestry history and when the temperature rises I also enjoy wallowing, rolling from side to side rather than drawing a conclusion. More than this, however, pigs provide a valid means of understanding key historical transitions that define modern society. Significant themes in modern history—production, religion, the body, science, power, the national state, colonialism, gender, consumption, migration, memory—can all be understood through a history of our relationships with pigs. Pigs play an important role in everyday life, but their relationship to the economic, social, political and cultural matters discussed in general history texts—industrialisation, the growth of nation states, colonialism, feminism and so on—are generally ignored. However “natural” this place of pigs may seem, culture and tradition profoundly shape their history and their own contribution to those forces has been largely absent in history. What, then, would the contours of such a history that considered the intermeshing of humans and pigs look like? The intermeshing of pigs in early human history Agricultural economies based on domestic animals began independently in different parts of the world, facilitating increases in population and migration. Evidence for long-term genetic continuity between modern and ancient Chinese domestic pigs has been established by DNA sequences. Larson et al. have made an argument for five additional independent domestications of indigenous wild boar populations: in India, South East Asia and Taiwan, which they use to develop a picture of both pig evolution and the development and spread of early farmers in the Far East. Domestication itself involves transformation into something useful to animals. In the process, humans became transformed. The importance of the Fertile Crescent in human history has been well established. The area is attributed as the site for a series of developments that have defined human history—urbanisation, writing, empires, and civilisation. Those developments have been supported by innovations in food production and animal husbandry. Pig, goats, sheep and cows were all domesticated very early in the Fertile Crescent and remain four of the world’s most important domesticated mammals (Diamond 141). Another study of ancient pig DNA has concluded that the earliest domesticated pigs in Europe, believed to be descended from European wild boar, were introduced from the Middle East. The research, by archaeologists at Durham University, sheds new light on the colonisation of Europe by early farmers, who brought their animals with them. Keith Dobney explains:Many archaeologists believe that farming spread through the diffusion of ideas and cultural exchange, not with the direct migration of people. However, the discovery and analysis of ancient Middle Eastern pig remains across Europe reveals that although cultural exchange did happen, Europe was definitely colonised by Middle Eastern farmers. A combination of rising population and possible climate change in the ‘fertile crescent’, which put pressure on land and resources, made them look for new places to settle, plant their crops and breed their animals and so they rapidly spread west into Europe (ctd in ScienceDaily). Middle Eastern farmers colonised Europe with pigs and in the process transformed human history. Identity as a porcine theme Religious restrictions on the consumption of pigs come from the same area. Such restrictions exist in Jewish dietary laws (Kashrut) and in Muslim dietary laws (Halal). The basis of dietary laws has been the subject of much scholarship (Soler). Economic and health and hygiene factors have been used to explain the development of dietary laws historically. The significance of dietary laws, however, and the importance attached to them can be related to other purposes in defining and expressing religious and cultural identity. Dietary laws and their observance may have been an important factor in sustaining Jewish identity despite the dispersal of Jews in foreign lands since biblical times. In those situations, where a person eats in the home of someone who does not keep kosher, the lack of knowledge about your host’s ingredients and the food preparation techniques make it very difficult to keep kosher. Dietary laws require a certain amount of discipline and self-control, and the ability to make distinctions between right and wrong, good and evil, pure and defiled, the sacred and the profane, in everyday life, thus elevating eating into a religious act. Alternatively, people who eat anything are often subject to moral judgments that may also lead to social stigmatisation and discrimination. One of the most powerful and persuasive discourses influencing current thinking about health and bodies is the construction of an ‘obesity epidemic’, critiqued by a range of authors (see for example, Wright & Harwood). As omnivores who appear indiscriminate when it comes to food, pigs provide an image of uncontrolled eating, made visible by the body as a “virtual confessor”, to use Elizabeth Grosz’s term. In Fat Pig, a production by the Sydney Theatre Company in 2006, women are reduced to being either fat pigs or shrieking shallow women. Fatuosity, a blog by PhD student Jackie Wykes drawing on her research on fat and sexual subjectivity, provides a review of the play to describe the misogyny involved: “It leaves no options for women—you can either be a lovely person but a fat pig who will end up alone; or you can be a shrill bitch but beautiful, and end up with an equally obnoxious and shallow male counterpart”. The elision of the divide between women and pigs enacted by such imagery also creates openings for new modes of analysis and new practices of intervention that further challenge humanist histories. Such interventions need to make visible other power relations embedded in assumptions about identity politics. Following the lead of feminists and postcolonial theorists who have challenged the binary oppositions central to western ideology and hierarchical power relations, critical animal theorists have also called into question the essentialist and dualist assumptions underpinning our views of animals (Best). A pig history of the humanities might restore the central role that pigs have played in human history and evolution, beyond their exploitation as food. Humans have constructed their story of the nature of pigs to suit themselves in terms that are specieist, racist, patriarchal and colonialist, and failed to grasp the connections between the oppression of humans and other animals. The past and the ways it is constructed through history reflect and shape contemporary conditions. In this sense, the past has a powerful impact on the present, and the way this is re-told, therefore, also needs to be situated, historicised and problematicised. The examination of history and society from the standpoint of (nonhuman) animals offers new insights on our relationships in the past, but it might also provide an alternative history that restores their agency and contributes to a different kind of future. As the editor of Critical Animals Studies, Steve Best describes it: “This approach, as I define it, considers the interaction between human and nonhuman animals—past, present, and future—and the need for profound changes in the way humans define themselves and relate to other sentient species and to the natural world as a whole.” References ABC. “Changes to Pig Farming Proposed.” ABC News Online 22 May 2010. 10 Aug. 2010 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/22/2906519.htm Against Animal Cruelty Tasmania. “Australia’s Intensive Pig Industry: The Intensive Pig Industry in Australia Has Much to Hide.” 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.aact.org.au/pig_industry.htm Babe. Dir. Chris Noonan. Universal Pictures, 1995. Best, Steven. “The Rise of Critical Animal Studies: Putting Theory into Action and Animal Liberation into Higher Education.” Journal for Critical Animal Studies 7.1 (2009): 9-53. Cassidy, Martin. “How Close are Pushy Pigs to Humans?”. BBC News Online 2005. 10 Sep. 2010 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/4482674.stmCurthoys, A., and Docker, J. “Time Eternity, Truth, and Death: History as Allegory.” Humanities Research 1 (1999) 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.anu.edu.au/hrc/publications/hr/hr_1_1999.phpDiamond, Jared. Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999. Dolader, Miguel-Àngel Motis. “Mediterranean Jewish Diet and Traditions in the Middle Ages”. Food: A Culinary History. Eds. Jean-Louis Flandrin and Massimo Montanari. Trans. Clarissa Botsford, Arthus Golhammer, Charles Lambert, Frances M. López-Morillas and Sylvia Stevens. New York: Columbia UP, 1999. 224-44. Durham University. “Chinese Pigs ‘Direct Descendants’ of First Domesticated Breeds.” ScienceDaily 20 Apr. 2010. 29 Aug. 2010 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100419150947.htm Gabaccia, Donna R. We Are What We Eat: Ethnic Food and the Making of Americans. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. Grosz, Elizabeth. Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism. St Leonards: Allen & Unwin, 1994. Haraway, D. “The Promises of Monsters: A Regenerative Politics for Inappropriate/d Others.” The Haraway Reader. New York: Routledge, 2005. 63-124. Haraway, D. When Species Meet: Posthumanities. 3rd ed. London: University of Minnesota Press, 2008. Henderson, Fergus. Nose to Tail Eating: A Kind of British Cooking. London: Bloomsbury, 2004. Kiple, Kenneth F., Kriemhild Coneè Ornelas. Cambridge History of Food. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Larson, G., Ranran Liu, Xingbo Zhao, Jing Yuan, Dorian Fuller, Loukas Barton, Keith Dobney, Qipeng Fan, Zhiliang Gu, Xiao-Hui Liu, Yunbing Luo, Peng Lv, Leif Andersson, and Ning Li. “Patterns of East Asian Pig Domestication, Migration, and Turnover Revealed by Modern and Ancient DNA.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, United States 19 Apr. 2010. 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/0912264107/DCSupplemental Meindertsma, Christien. “PIG 05049. Kunsthal in Rotterdam.” 2008. 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.christienmeindertsma.com/index.php?/books/pig-05049Naess, A. “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement.” Inquiry 16 (1973): 95-100. Needman, T. Fat Pig. Sydney Theatre Company. Oct. 2006. Noonan, Chris [director]. “Babe (1995) Memorable Quotes”. 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112431/quotes Plumwood, V. Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. London: Routledge, 1993. Pulp Fiction. Dir. Quentin Tarantino. Miramax, 1994. RSPCA Tasmania. “RSPCA Calls for Ban on Intensive Pig Farming.” 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.rspcatas.org.au/press-centre/rspca-calls-for-a-ban-on-intensive-pig-farming ScienceDaily. “Ancient Pig DNA Study Sheds New Light on Colonization of Europe by Early Farmers” 4 Sep. 2007. 10 Sep. 2010 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070903204822.htm Singer, Peter. “Down on the Family Farm ... or What Happened to Your Dinner When it was Still an Animal.” Animal Liberation 2nd ed. London: Jonathan Cape, 1990. 95-158. Soler, Jean. “Biblical Reasons: The Dietary Rules of the Ancient Hebrews.” Food: A Culinary History. Eds. Jean-Louis Flandrin and Massimo Montanari. Trans. Clarissa Botsford, Arthus Golhammer, Charles Lambert, Frances M. López-Morillas and Sylvia Stevens. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. 46-54. Watson, Lyall. The Whole Hog: Exploring the Extraordinary Potential of Pigs. London: Profile, 2004. White, E. B. Essays of E. B. White. London: HarperCollins, 1979. White, E. B. Charlotte’s Web. London: HarperCollins, 2004. Wright, J., and V. Harwood. Eds. Biopolitics and the ‘Obesity Epidemic’. New York: Routledge, 2009. Wykes, J. Fatuosity 2010. 29 Aug. 2010 http://www.fatuosity.net

According to The Betoota Advocate (Parker), a CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) paper has recently established that “it takes roughly seven minutes on average for a vegan to tell you that they’re vegan” (qtd. in Harrington et al. 135). For such a statement to have currency as a joke means that it is grounded in a shared experience of being vegan on the one hand, and of encountering vegans on the other. Why should vegans feel such a need to justify themselves? I recognise the observation as being true of me, and this article is one way to explore this perspective: writing to find out what I currently only intuit. As Richardson notes (516), writing is “a way of ‘knowing’—a method of discovery and analysis. By writing in different ways, we discover new aspects of our topic and our relationship to it. Form and content are inseparable” (qtd. in Wall 151).Autoethnography, the qualitative research methodology used for this article, is etymologically derived from Greek to indicate a process for exploring the self (autos) and the cultural (“ethno” from ethnos—nation, tribe, people, class) using a shared, understood, approach (“graphy” from graphia, writing). It relies upon critical engagement with and synthesising of the personal. In Wall’s words, this methodological analysis of human experience “says that what I know matters” (148). The autoethnographic investigation (Riggins; Sparkes) reported here interrogates the experience of “being judged” as a vegan: firstly, by myself; secondly, by other vegans; and ultimately by the wider society. As Ellis notes, autoethnography is “research, writing, story and method that connect the autobiographical and personal to the cultural, social and political. Autoethnographic forms feature concrete action, emotion, embodiment, self-consciousness, and introspection” (xix).Introspection is important because researchers’ stories of their observations are interwoven with self-reflexive critique and analysis: “illustrative materials are meant to give a sense of what the observed world is really like, while the researcher’s interpretations are meant to represent a more detached conceptualization of that reality” (Strauss and Corbin 22). Leaving aside Gans’s view that this form of enquiry represents the “climax of the preoccupation with self […] an autobiography written by sociologists” (542), an autoethnography generally has the added advantage of protecting against Glendon and Stanton’s concern that interpretive studies “are often of too short a duration to be able to provide sufficiently large samples of behaviour” (209). In my case, I have twelve years of experience of identifying as a vegan to draw upon.My experience is that being vegan is a contested activity with a significant range of variation that partly reflects the different initial motivations for adopting this increasingly mainstream identity. Greenebaum notes that “ethical vegans differentiate between those who ‘eat’ vegan (health vegans) and those who ‘live’ vegan (ethical vegans)”, going on to suggest that these differences create “hierarchies and boundaries between vegans” (131). As Greenebaum acknowledges, there is sometimes a need to balance competing priorities: “an environmental vegan […] may purchase leather products over polyvinyl chloride (PVC), thinking that leather is a better choice for the environment” (130). Harrington et al. similarly critique vegan motivations as encompassing “a selfless pursuit for those who cared for other beings (animals)” to “a concern about impacts that affect all humans (environment), and an interest mostly in the self (individual health …)” (144). Wright identifies a fourth group of vegans: those searching for a means of dietary inclusivity (2). I have known Orthodox Jewish households that have adopted veganism because it is compatible with keeping Kosher, while many strict Hindus are vegan and some observant Muslims may also follow suit, to avoid meat that is not Halal certified.The Challenge of the EverydayAlthough my initial vegan promptings were firmly at the selfish end of an altruism spectrum, my experience is that motivation is not static. Being a vegan for any reason increasingly primes awareness of more altruistic motivations “at the intersection of a diversity of concerns [… promoting] a spread and expansion of meaning to view food choices holistically” (Harrington et al. 144). Even so, everyday life offers a range of temptations and challenges that require constant juggling and, sometimes, a string of justifications: to oneself, and to others. I identify as a bit of a bad vegan, and not simply because I embrace the possibility that “honey is a gray area” (Greenebaum, quoting her participant Jason, 139). I’m also flexible around wine, for example, and don’t ask too many questions about whether the wine I drink is refined using milk, or egg-shells or even (yuk!) fish bladders. The point is, there are an infinite number of acid tests as to what constitutes “a real vegan”, encouraging inter-vegan judgmentality. Some slight definitional slippage aligns with Singer and Mason’s argument, however, that vegans should avoid worrying about “trivial infractions of the ethical guidelines […] Personal purity isn’t really the issue. Not supporting animal abuse – and persuading others not to support it – is. Giving people the impression that it is virtually impossible to be vegan doesn’t help animals at all” (Singer and Mason 258–9).If I were to accept a definition of non-vegan, possibly because I have a leather handbag among other infractions, that would feel inauthentic. The term “vegan” helpfully labels my approach to food and drink. Others also find it useful as a shorthand for dietary preferences (except for the small but significant minority who muddle veganism with being gluten free). From the point of view of dietary prohibitions I’m a particularly strict vegan, apart from honey. I know people who make exceptions for line-caught fish, or the eggs from garden-roaming happy chooks, but I don’t. I increasingly understand the perspectives of those who have a more radical conception of veganism than I do, however: whose vision and understanding is that “behind every meal of meat is an absence: the death of the animal whose place the meat takes. The ‘absent referent’ is that which separates the meat eater from the animal and the animal from the end product [… keeping] something from being seen as having been someone” (Adams 14). The concept of the global suffering of animals inherent in the figures: “31.1 billion each year, 85.2 million each day, 3.5 million each hour, 59,170 each minute” (Adams dedication) is appalling; as well as being an under-representation of the current situation since the globe has had almost two further decades of population growth and rising “living standards”.Whatever the motivations, it’s easy to imagine that the different branches of veganism have more in common than divides them. Being a vegan of any kind helps someone identify with other variations upon the theme. For example, even though my views on animal rights did not motivate my choice to become vegan, once I stopped seeing other sentient creatures as a handy food source I began to construct them differently. I gradually realised that, as a species, we were committing the most extraordinary atrocities on a global scale in treating animals as disposable commodities without rights or feelings. The large-scale production of what we like to term “meat and poultry” is almost unadulterated animal suffering, whereas the by-catch (“waste products”) of commercial fishing represents an extraordinary disregard of the rights to life of other creatures and, as Cole and Morgan note, “The number of aquatic animals slaughtered is not recorded, their individual deaths being subsumed by aggregate weight statistics” (135). Even if we did accept that humans have the right to consume some animals some of the time, should the netting of a given weight of edible fish really entail the death of many, many time more weight of living creatures that will be “wasted”: the so-called by-catch? Such wanton destruction has increasingly visible impacts upon complex food chains, and the ecosystems that sustain us all.The Vegan Threat to the Status QuoExamining the evidence for the broader community being biased against vegetarians and vegans, MacInnis and Hodson identify that these groups are “clear targets of relatively more negative attitudes” (727) towards them than other minority groups. Indeed, “only drug addicts were evaluated more negatively than vegetarians and vegans” (726). While “vegans were evaluated more negatively than vegetarians” (732), there was a hierarchy in negative evaluations according to the underlying motivation for someone adopting veganism or vegetarianism. People motivated by personal health received the least negative evaluations from the general population followed by those who were motivated by the environment. The greatest opprobrium was reserved for vegans who were motivated by animal rights (732). MacInnis and Hodson reason that this antipathy is because “vegetarians and vegans represent strong threats to the status quo, given that prevailing cultural norms favour meat-eating” (722). Also implied here is that fact that eating meat is itself a cultural norm associated with masculinity (Rothgerber).Adams’s work links the unthinking, normative exploitation of animals to the unthinking, normative exploitation of women, a situation so aligned that it is often expressed through the use of a common metaphor: “‘meat’ becomes a term to express women’s oppression, used equally by patriarchy and feminists, who say that women are ‘pieces of meat’” (2002, 59). Rothberger further interrogates the relationship between masculinity and meat by exploring gender in relation to strategies for “meat eating justification”, reflecting a 1992 United States study that showed, of all people reporting that they were vegetarian, 68% were women and 32% men (Smart, 1995). Rothberger’s argument is that:Following a vegetarian diet or deliberately reducing meat intake violates the spirit of Western hegemonic masculinity, with its socially prescribed norms of stoicism, practicality, seeking dominance, and being powerful, strong, tough, robust and invulnerable […] Such individuals have basically cast aside a relatively hidden male privilege—the freedom and ability to eat without criticism and scrutiny, something that studies have shown women lack. (371)Noting that “to raise concerns about the injustices of factory farming and to feel compelled by them would seem emotional, weak and sensitive—feminine characteristics” (366), Rothberger sets the scene for me to note two items of popular culture which achieved cut-through in my personal life. The evidence for this is, in terms of all the pro-vegan materials I encounter, these were two of a small number that I shared on social media. In line with Rothberger’s observations, both are oppositional to hegemonic masculinity:one represents a feminised, mother and child exchange that captures the moment when a child realises the “absent referent” of the dead animal in the octopus on his plate—https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrU03da2arE;while the other is a sentimentalised and sympathetic recording of cattle luxuriating in their first taste of pastureland after a long period of confinement—https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huT5__BqY_U.Seeing cows behaving like pets does call attention to the artificial distinction between “companion animals” and other animals. As Cole and Stewart note, “the naming of other animals is useful for human beings, while it is dangerous, and frequently lethal, for other animals. This is because the words we use to name other animals are saturated with common sense knowledge claims about those animals that legitimate their habitual use for humans” (13). Thus a cat, in Western culture, has a very different life trajectory to a cow. Adams notes the contrary case where the companion animal is used as a referent for a threatened human:Child sexual abusers often use threats and/or violence against companion animals to achieve compliance from their victims. Batterers harm or kill a companion animal as a warning to their partner that she could be next; as a way of further separating her from meaningful relationships; to demonstrate his power and her powerlessness. (Adams 57)For children who are still at a stage where animals are creatures of fascination and potential friends, who may be growing up with Charlotte’s Web (White) or Peter Rabbit (Potter), the mental gymnastics of suspending identification with these fellow creatures are harder because empathy and imagination are more active and the ingrained habit of eating without thinking has not had so long to develop. Indeed, children often understand domestic animals as “members of the family”, as illustrated by an interview with Kani, a 10-year old participant in one of my research projects. “In the absence of her extended family overseas, Kani adds her pets to [the list of] those with whom she shares her family life: ‘And my mum and my uncle and then our cat Dobby. I named it [for Harry Potter’s house elf] ...and the goldfish. The goldfish are Twinkle, Glitter, Glow and Bobby’” (Green and Stevenson). Such perceptions may well filter through to children having a different understanding of animals-as-food, even though Cole and Stewart note that “children enter into an adult culture habituated to [the] banal conceptualization of other animals according to their (dis)utilities” (21).Evidence-Based VeganismThose M/C Journal readers who know me personally will understand that one reason why I embrace the “bad vegan” label, is that I’m no more obviously a pin-up for healthy veganism than I am for ethical or environmental veganism. In particular, my BMI (Body Mass Index) is significantly outside the “healthy” range. Even so, I attribute a dramatic change in my capacity for stamina-based activity to my embrace of veganism. A high-speed recap of the evidence would include: in 2009 I embarked on a week-long 500km Great Vic bike ride; in 2012 I successfully completed a Machu Picchu trek at high altitude; by 2013 I was ready for my first half marathon (reprised in 2014, and 2017); in 2014 I cycled from Surfers’ Paradise to Noosa—somewhat less successfully than in my 2009 venture, but even so; in 2016 I completed the Oxfam 50km in 24 hours (plus a half hour, if I’m honest); and in 2017 I completed the 227km Portuguese Camino; in 2018 I jogged an average of over 3km per day, every day, up until 20 September... Apart from indicating that I live an extremely fortunate life, these activities seem to me to demonstrate that becoming vegan in 2007 has conferred a huge health benefit. In particular, I cannot identify similar metamorphoses in the lives of my 50-to-60-something year-old empty-nester friends. My most notable physical feat pre-veganism was the irregular completion of Perth’s annual 12km City-to-Surf fun run.Although I’m a vegan for health reasons, I didn’t suddenly wake up one day and decide that this was now my future: I had to be coaxed and cajoled into looking at my food preferences very differently. This process entailed my enrolling in a night school-type evening course, the Coronary Health Improvement Program: 16 x 3 hour sessions over eight weeks. Its sibling course is now available online as the Complete Health Improvement Program. The first lesson of the eight weeks convincingly demonstrated that what is good for coronary health is also good for health in general, which I found persuasive and reassuring given the propensity to cancer evident in my family tree. In the generation above me, my parents each had three siblings so I have a sample of eight immediate family to draw upon. Six of these either have cancer at the moment, or have died from cancer, with the cancers concerned including breast (1), prostate (2), lung (1), pancreas (1) and brain (1). A seventh close relative passed away before her health service could deliver a diagnosis for her extraordinarily elevated eosinophil levels (100x normal rates of that particular kind of white blood cell: potentially a blood cancer, I think). The eighth relative in that generation is my “bad vegan” uncle who has been mainly plant-based in his dietary choices since 2004. At 73, he is still working three days per week as a dentist and planning a 240 km trek in Italy as his main 2019 holiday. That’s the kind of future I’m hoping for too, when I grow up.And yet, one can read volumes of health literature without stumbling upon Professor T. Colin Campbell’s early research findings via his work on rodents and rodent cells that: “nutrition [was] far more important in controlling cancer promotion than the dose of the initiating carcinogen” and that “nutrients from animal-based foods increased tumor development while nutrients from plant-based foods decreased tumor development” (66, italics in original). Plant was already an eminent scientist at the point where she developed breast cancer, but she noted her amazement at learning “precisely how much has been discovered already [that] has not filtered through to the public” (18). The reason for the lack of visible research in this area is not so much its absence, but more likely its political sensitivity in an era of Big Food. As Harrington et al.’s respondent Samantha noted, “I think the meat lobby’s much bigger than the vegetable lobby” (147). These arguments are addressed in greater depth in Green et al.My initiating research question—Why do I feel the need to justify being vegan?—can clearly be answered in a wide variety of ways. Veganism disrupts the status quo: it questions both the appropriateness of humanity’s systematic torturing of other species for food, and the risks that those animal-based foods pose for the long-term health of human populations. It offends many vested interests from Big Food to accepted notions of animal welfare to the conventional teachings of the health industry. Identifying as a vegan represents an outcome of one or more of a wide range of motivations, some of which are more clearly self-serving (read “bad”); while others are more easily identified as altruistic (read “good”). After a decade or more of personal experimentation in this space, I’m proud to identify as a “bad vegan”. It’s been a great choice personally and, I hope, for some other creatures whose planet I share.ReferencesAdams, Carol. The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. New York: Continuum, 1990.Campbell, T. Colin, and Thomas M. Cambell. The China Study: Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-Term Health. Dallas: BenBella Books, 2005.Cole, Matthew, and Karen Morgan. “Vegaphobia: Derogatory Discourses of Veganism and the Reproduction of Speciesism in UK National Newspaper.” British Journal of Sociology 62 (2011): 134–53.———, and Kate Stewart. Our Children and Other Animals: The Cultural Construction of Human-Animal Relations in Childhood. Farnham: Ashgate, 2014.Ellis, Carolyn. The Ethnographic I: A Methodological Novel about Autoethnography. Oxford: Altamira Press, 2004.Gans, Herbert J. “Participant Observation in the Era of ‘Ethnography’.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 28.5 (1999): 540–48.Glendon, A. Ian, and Neville Stanton. “Perspectives on Safety Culture.” Safety Science 34.1-3 (2000): 193–214.Green, Lelia, Leesa Costello, and Julie Dare. “Veganism, Health Expectancy, and the Communication of Sustainability.” Australian Journal of Communication 37.3 (2010): 87–102.———, and Kylie Stevenson. “A Ten-Year-Old’s Use of Creative Content to Construct an Alternative Future for Herself.” M/C Journal 20.1 (2017). 13 Apr. 2019 <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/view/1211>.Greenebaum, Jessica. (2012). “Veganism, Identity and the Quest for Authenticity.” Food, Culture and Society 15.1 (2012): 129–44.Harrington, Stephen, Christie Collis, and OzgurDedehayir. “It’s Not (Just) about the F-ckin’ Animals: Why Veganism Is Changing, and Why That Matters.” Alternative Food Politics: From the Margins to the Mainstream. Eds. Michelle Phillipov and Katherine Kirkwood. New York: Routledge, 2019. 135–50.MacInnes, Cara. C., and Gordon Hodson. “It Ain’t Easy Eating Greens: Evidence of Bias Toward Vegetarians and Vegans from Both Source and Target.” Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 20.6 (2015): 721–44.Parker, Errol. “Study Finds the Easiest Way to Tell If Someone Is Vegan Is to Wait until They Inevitably Tell You.” The Betoota Advocate 2017. 10 Apr. 2019 <https://www.betootaadvocate.com/humans-of-betoota/study-finds-easiest-way-tell-someone-vegan-wait-inevitably-tell/>.Plant, Jane A. Your Life in Your Hands: Understand, Prevent and Overcome Breast Cancer and Ovarian Cancer. 4th ed. London: Virgin Books, 2007.Potter, Beatrix. The Tale of Peter Rabbit. London: Frederick Warne and Co, 1902.Richardson, Laurel. “Writing: A Method of Inquiry.” Handbook of Qualitative Research. Eds. Norman K. Denzon and Yvonne S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994. 516–29.Riggins, Stephen Harold. “Fieldwork in the Living Room: An Autoethnographic Essay.” The Socialness of Things: Essays on the Socio-Semiotics of Objects. Ed. Stephen Harold Riggins. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1994. 101–50.Rothgerber, Hank. “Real Men Don’t Eat (Vegetable) Quiche: Masculinity and the Justification of Meat Consumption.” Psychology of Men and Masculinity 14 (1994): 363–75.Singer, Peter, and Jim Mason. The Ethics of What We Eat. Melbourne: Text Publishing Company.Smart, Joanne. “The Gender Gap.” Vegetarian Times 210 (1995): 74–81.Sparkes, Andrew C. “Autoethnography: ‘Self-Indulgence or Something More?’” Ethnographically Speaking: Auto-Ethnography, Literature and Aesthetics. Eds. Arthur P. Bochner and Carolyn C. Ellis. Oxford: Altamira Press, 2002. 209–32.Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet Corbin. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. London: Sage, 1990.Wall, Sarah. “An Autoethnography on Learning about Autoethnography.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5 (2006): 146–60.White, Elwyn B. Charlotte’s Web. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1952.Wright, Laura. The Vegan Studies Project: Food, Animals and Gender in the Age of Terror. Athens: U of Georgia Press, 2015.