🎉 NEW soft, tangy, delicious corn & soy free goat chevre! BUY CHEVRE.

The pork dilemma of blood, sustainability, and health

written by

Marie Reedell

posted on

May 31, 2018

Pork is the most widely eaten meat, making up 38% of meat production worldwide.

Historically, pork has been a staple in traditional diets for thousands of years. Wild hogs were hunted in the wild and then eventually domesticated. Also historically, pork has been banned in cultures and religions for thousands of year. What’s the big deal? To eat pork or not to eat pork?

Blood: By reviewing live blood samples, the Weston A. Price Foundation determined that eating plain cooked pork has a negative effect on our blood. It causes clotting and biochemical inflammation and eventually chronic disease. These results brought shame to pigs.

On the other hand, Dr. Price observed many traditional people healthfully eating pork. It’s one of the oldest foods. What’s going on here?

The secret is that each traditional culture eats pork in a particular way – by marinating in vinegar or fermenting or curing or accompanying it with a fermented veggie. This counteracts the negative effects. Amazing!

Sustainability: Every farmer knows that a pig is a farm’s garbage disposal. They eat everything and love it! Our farmer feeds the pigs lots of skim milk. There is zero waste on our farm, largely due to the pigs.

Pigs also do amazing work with the soil. Their strong snouts uproot and turn the earth, gobbling roots and nuts. They clear the pasture forest floor, preparing it for new growth.

On the flip side, conventional pork farmers feed primarily corn and soy, which is incredibly taxing on the environment to produce. It consumes a ton of water, is likely GMO and covered in pesticides, and the fields are vast expanses of monoculture.

Health: There’s a lot of great stuff in pork that our body needs. It’s high in protein, B vitamins, zinc, and iron. Just three ounces of cooked lean pork covers you for more than a third of the daily requirement for thiamin, niacin, selenium, and vitamin B6. It’s a powerhouse.

On the other hand, pork has a reputation for being a “dirty meat”. Pigs digest food very quickly and do not sweat, so toxins build up in the fat. They also harbor many viruses and parasites, which can transfer to the meat. This is why it’s so important to source properly raised pork and cook it to 160 F.

I personally eat pork. Any problems mentioned above can be avoided, and, if raised properly, pork is darn delicious.

Right after college, I worked on a CSA veggie farm in NY, and the one animal they raised for meat was pigs. The farmer is a Harvard and Columbia grad and a sophisticated foodie. The reason he raised pork – it matters how it’s raised.

The food that our food eats matters. More so than with any other animal, the diet and lifestyle of a pig makes a huge difference in the taste and texture of the meat.

If a pig eats apples or whiskey mash or acorns, the meat will have a rich and distinctive flavor reminiscent of whatever it ate. If a pig eats a bland conventional diet of corn and soy, the meat won’t taste like much.

If a pig eats a diet high in polyunsaturated fat, the meat will be high in polyunsaturated fat, giving a very soft texture. Lowering the polyunsaturated fat leads to much firmer pork.

And, I can’t forget about lifestyle and health. A healthy animal gives healthy food. Pigs that live in a natural environment, with plenty of space to forage, dig, and wallow will be much less likely to have illnesses that can transfer into the meat.

Great news! At last, we have more pork in stock!

Here’s a pork recipe from the farmer’s wife – “Rebecca’s Delicious Pork Chops”:

  • -  1 Tbsp. salt
  • -  1 tsp black pepper
  • -  3 tsp sage
  • -  1 Tbsp. olive oil
  • -  2 pork chops
  • -  1⁄2 cup apple cider
  • -  1 tart, firm apple, cored and cut into thick slices
  • -  1 small onion, thinly sliced into rings
  • -  1⁄4 cup raisins
  • -  2 Tbsp. honey

Combine the salt, pepper, and sage and rub into the meat.

Pour the olive oil into a heated skillet and brown the chops over medium heat for 1 minute per side or until browned.

Remove from heat and place in a casserole. Add the cider, sliced apples, onions, and raisins. Drizzle with honey.

Cover and roast at 350 F for 1 1⁄2 hours or until fork tender.

When Pigs Fly

Pastured Meat

Cooking

Health and Nutrition

More from the blog

Raw milk or fermented dairy and lactose intolerance. Why might it help?

I was misinformed. At some point, I read that raw milk contains lactase. As it turns out, this is not true! It is true that raw milk contains many live enzymes that are inactivated during pasteurization. But, what about lactase? I’ve heard many anecdotal stories from people who are lactose intolerant... but can handle raw milk or fermented dairy. If raw milk, yogurt, kefir, or cheese doesn’t contain lactase, then why is that?

Our bone broth tested negative-ish for heavy metals 🥳 NATURAL AND CLEAN

Over the past few months a bunch of people asked us if we tested our bone broth for toxic heavy metals. When we get the same question a lot, we of course look into it. My first question was --- Is there an issue with toxic metals in bone broth? As it turns out, yes, there "can" be an issue! Heavy metals are naturally present in our environment. We need the "good" heavy metals to thrive: iron, zinc, magnesium, copper, etc. But, we can 100% do without the toxic heavy metals: arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, etc. Too many toxic heavy metals can lead to a host of pretty awful issues: nervous system damage, cardiovascular issues, cancer, endocrine disruption, kidney damage, and so on. Our body is designed to excrete heavy metals through urine (and a little bit through sweat, hair, and breastmilk too)... but only so much. There's a limit. If you're overloaded, your body will store those heavy metals in your bones, blood, tissues, and organs. Similarly, if an animal is exposed to heavy metals via food, water, air, dust, or soil, those heavy metals accumulate in the bones. Maybe the farm's soil or air is contaminated from a nearby factory. Maybe the pipes for the water has lead solder connecting them. Maybe the feed a farm is buying was grown on contaminated soil or processed on contaminated equipment.  And, of course, a main purpose of bone broth is drawing out as much as possible from the bones. If there are heavy metals in bones, they will make their way into the broth. This is especially true when you pre-soak with apple cider vinegar and simmer for 48 hours to make it thick and gelatinous (like our broth). And that led me to my second question --- Should I be concerned about every bone broth? Where is the fear coming from? Well... it seems it might be a little political. There was a study done in the UK in 2013 that scared a lot of people. It's titled "The Risk of Lead Contamination in Bone Broth Diets". This study found high levels of lead in organic chicken bone broth, which is quite concerning. And, in fact, this one study is still cited in articles written today! Let's dig a little deeper. Let's go farther than the short abstract. Here are the broths tested in the study and their test results for lead:  (9.5 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus skin and cartilage(7.01 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus bones(2.3 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus meat(0.89 parts per billion): Tap water alone cooked for the same amount of time as a control. But, they only used organic chicken from one farm. And, there's zero information about that farm, their practices, the feed, and the broth recipe. Did they use vinegar or wine in the broth? Was the chicken's water contaminated with lead? What was the quality of the feed and the soil? Were the chickens raised indoors or outdoors? So many unanswered questions! All we get is that it was one "organic chicken" that created a lead issue with broth. Another curious thing is that the broth with skin and cartilage contained more lead than the broth made with just bones. Bones are where lead is stored, so why wouldn't the broth made with bones only contain more lead? It's an odd result. Moreover, the abstract of the study specifically called out "bone broth diets" like GAPS and paleo. They even go so far as to write, "In view of the dangers of lead consumption to the human body, we recommend that doctors and nutritionists take the risk of lead contamination into consideration when advising patients about bone broth diets." That's quite curious. Why are they worried about these diets? Are the researchers anti healing through food? Who funded the research? Is it political? My opinion? This study is not comprehensive. It does not speak to all bone broths. But it does cover a potential issue if the water or animals are overloaded with heavy metals. What I glean from this study is that we need more research. We don't need fear to spread and people to stop drinking broth from this one study. Regardless of whether the fear was fabricated or legit, we tested our bone broth anyway. After all, it's always nice to validate that your food choices are as clean as you think. For Miller's, here were my concerns before testing: What if there's mercury in the fishmeal in our chicken feed?What if the soil that our animals live on is contaminated?What is the well water that the broth is made with is contaminated?What if the Celtic sea salt has lots of heavy metals? We got the test results back. I was super excited. But, I was also confused. At face value, it appeared that our bone broth tested NEGATIVE for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. You can find the test results right here! You'll notice that, for every sample, the results are "<0.01 mg/kg" and "<0.02 mg/kg".  I asked the lab what the "<" means. They said that it indicates their limit of quantitation (LOQ), the lowest concentration that can be accurately tested using the test procedure in that sample type. So the results simply report that none of the metals tested were found in the sample above the specific reporting LOQs. Whether or not they were present below this LOQ is information that is not provided by the test. When talking to the lab, I told them what we needed and assumed that this test would go below a 1 ppb. So, when the results came in, I assumed that a "mg/kg" was the same as a part per billion (ppb). Ummm... that math wasn't write! A "mg/kg" is actually a part per million (ppm). That means that the test we ran had results saying that the broth had less than 0.02 ppm (or 20 ppb) of arsenic and lead. And, it had less than 0.01 ppm (or 10 ppb) of cadmium and mercury. For some reference, the EPA says that less than 15 ppb of lead is safe in drinking water. Not saying that I agree, but it's a good reference point.  These results are good. It means the broth definitely isn't overloaded with toxic heavy metals. But, it's not good enough!!! We need to test again! We really need to a lower LOQ. We need to know the results with an accuracy of as low as 1 ppb. It looks like the lab we sent the original samples to doesn't have an LOQ that low. So here I am on the hunt for a lab to do it again. As soon as I can, I'll send samples in again and paying for more expensive testing to get the info you deserve. Stay tuned! I hope to have the new results in by the end of April 2025. Do you worry about toxic metals (or other junk) in your food? Where have your fears stemmed from? I'd love to hear from you. You can comment below (no account required) or contact us 😊 ----- Sources The risk of lead contamination in bone broth dietsBone Broth and Lead Toxicity: Should You Be Concerned?Bone Broth and Lead Contamination: A Very Flawed Study in Medical HypothesesBone Broth, Collagen, and Toxic Metals: A Research Review