Talk about pigs: Americans ate 1.1 billion bacon servings during the 12-month period ending April 2014, about six percent more than the previous year, according to market research firm the NPD Group.

We’re not just eating more bacon, we’re also making…

With all the flurry surrounding gluten-free diets, it’s hard to figure out what you can and can’t eat if you do decide to go down that breadless road.

So what can you eat on a gluten-free diet? Well, that’s the tricky part. While ordinary breads and pastas are avoided as a general rule of thumb, a lot of our favorite desserts have gluten. Luckily, there are a few brands out there that offer gluten-free options, like Breyers Natural Vanilla. Yet, no ice cream is complete without an ample amount of toppings for that extra oomph. Naturally, Foodbeast found 16 ice cream toppings that you would have never guessed to be gluten-free to go with your gluten-free ice cream. Of course, always ensure you check for a GF label before digging in. You’re welcome:

_______________

Plain M&Ms

_______________

Pop Rocks

_______________

Kool-Aid

_______________

Sriracha

_______________

Fruit by the Foot

_______________

Marshmallow Fluff

_______________

Coffee Grounds

_______________

Jiffy Pop Popcorn

_______________

Ore Ida French Fries

_______________

Welch’s Fruit Snacks

_______________

Raisinets

_______________

York Peppermint Patties

_______________

Haribo Gummy Bears

_______________

Jif Peanut Butter

_______________

Martinelli’s Apple Cider

_______________

Fruity Pebbles

Photography by Dominique Zamora

While beer and ramen may seem like a staple of American college campuses, a hearty bowl of the hot stuff paired with the right brew has always been a part Japanese culture, according to Dave Coleman of 3 Stars Brewing Company. Daikaya ramen shop will debut its first house beer, the Sansho Panza, on Thursday, […]

There’s absolutely no heat required with these recipes, and all of the dishes look much more involved than they really are.

By Lynn Andriani

Like Us On Facebook |
Follow Us On Twitter

Rarely, as in recent months, has the European Union been so unpopular among its citizens. In May 2014, the elections for the European Parliament, its legislative body, saw the success of political parties whose admitted goal is to reduce the meddling of the Union in the daily activities of those living across its 28 Member States. In fact, the EU is often perceived as another layer of wasteful, inefficient, and unbending bureaucracy that weighs on the already weak economic recovery of the continent.

Most Europeans have a clear sense of how much the EU regulations have influenced their food system, from safety to trade, from GMO crops to product traceability. Standardization has been a hotly debated issue. The Slow Food movement lobbied very effectively against a blind application of the HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points) system, introduced in 1994 to ensure safety in food production. The organization pointed out that not all manufacturers — and especially small, artisanal ones — are well suited to adopt the same criteria as industrial enterprises. On the other hand, Europeans do appreciate interventions in the case of emergencies. The European Food Safety Authority was established as the most appropriate response to guarantee a high level of food safety.

This time, the EU is weighing in on issues of sustainability and waste. On July 2nd, the Commission approved a set of proposals to increase the recycling rate in the Union and facilitate the transition to a “circular economy,” a system where no products go to waste and materials are constantly renewed. In a Q&A memo, the Commission explained: “a circular economy preserves the value added in products for as long as possible and virtually eliminates waste. It retains the resources within the economy when a product has reached the end of its life, so that they remain in productive use and create further value … The circular economy differs from the prevailing linear ‘take-make-consume and dispose’ model, which is based on the assumption that resources are abundant, available and cheap to dispose of.” In this economic model, biological materials should always reenter the biosphere safely, while technological materials should circulate without entering the biosphere at all.

The potential impact of these theories and practices, which systemic design has embraced as its guiding principles, is enormous, including its possible influence on food systems. Some of the Commission’s proposals would have a direct influence on the way food is produced, packaged, distributed, and consumed. By 2030, the Union should reach the goal of recycling 70 percent of municipal waste and 80 per cent of packaging waste (glass, paper, plastic, etc.). From 2025, recyclable and biodegradable waste should not be allowed in landfills, to be eliminated completely within the following five years. A section of the document deals explicitly with food, highlighting record-keeping and traceability as tools to limit hazardous waste, invoking limits on the use of plastic bags, and demanding the restriction of illegal waste shipments.

Furthermore, the Commission proposed that “Member States develop national food-waste prevention strategies and endeavor to ensure that food waste in the manufacturing, retail/distribution, food service/hospitality sectors and households is reduced by at least 30 percent by 2025.” A very tall order which seems to focus mostly on the distribution and consumption side of the food system. The only explicit proposal that would directly affect production is the development of “a policy framework on phosphorus to enhance its recycling, foster innovation, improve market conditions and mainstream its sustainable use in EU legislation on fertilizers, food, water and waste.”

It is unclear to what extent the Commission will be able to bring these propositions to fruition in the present political climate, at a time when Union interventions are often met with suspicion if not outright criticism. The realization of these proposals may be perceived as entailing additional costs to producers and consumers at a time when Europe is recovering from a recession. Moreover, each Member State has a different degree of sensibility towards environmental and food production matters. However, the emergence of circular economic values in the language and perspectives of an important executive body is a feat of relevance in and of itself. It remains to be seen whether the general public, and national governments will embrace these ideas, and what policies will be adopted to make them accessible and understandable.

Quinoa is the perfect example of the insane journey food trends travel. Someone catches wind of a great ingredient — like quinoa, which has been a Peruvian staple for centuries before making its way into our health food stores — markets it heavily, t…