Utah's Nebo School District seeks to "prepare students to succeed in school and life." Apparently, that preparation now involves eating bugs and developing a dislike of beef.
Fox News Digital reported that a middle school in the district recently provided sixth-grade students with bugs to eat as part of an English assignment concerning the specter of anthropogenic climate change.
Students were instructed to write an essay on March 7 arguing in support of the consumption of insects rather than cows. The assignment's baked-in presumption was that the mass production and consumption of insect-based foods contra beef will impact weather patterns to a lesser extent.
Children involved in this interactive agitprop were reportedly barred from disagreeing with the premise in their essays. Some students were even given extra credit to consume bugs, which the district admitted to sourcing from a commercial site.
Amanda Wright, a mother of one of the students in the class, challenged the school's principal over the assignment, noting it had made her daughter feel uncomfortable.
Wright suggested that the assignment was tantamount to "indoctrination" and part of a concerted effort to evangelize on behalf of a "dark climate change religion."
Following her initial complaint, Wright met with school administrators and recorded the conversation. Alison Hansen, the principal, was recorded saying "the assignment was about finding facts to support" the climate alarmist premise.
"All the evidence has suggested ... that we probably should be eating bugs – it's good for the environment, etc. But I didn't know that that was an offensive topic," said Kim Cutler, a teacher at Spring Canyon Middle School not presently listed on its faculty page.
Wright's daughter similarly captured evidence of climate dogmatism in the classroom.
"How come we can't state our opinion and write that we shouldn't be eating bugs?" asked the sixth-grader.
"Because we don't have any evidence to support it," said Cutler.
In 2019, Swedish researchers warned in the journal Trends in Ecology & Evolution that by rushing into the mass production and consumption of insects, "we risk creating an industry that replaces one environmental problem with another."
Whereas Cutler told Wright's daughter there was no evidence to support not eating bugs, experts at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences suggested there is similarly little evidence to suggest that the mass rearing of insects won't turn out to be calamitous.
"The emerging insects-as-food industry is increasingly promoted as a sustainable alternative to other animal protein production systems. However, the exact nature of its environmental benefits are uncertain because of the overwhelming lack of knowledge concerning almost every aspect of production: from suitable species, their housing and feed requirements, and potential for accidental release," said the researchers.
The researchers added, "If ecological sustainability is to be a hallmark of mass insect rearing for consumption, ecologists need to engage in research related to sustainability criteria that are directly linked to key elements of the development of the industry."
Cutler told the younger Wright, "It's kind of weird that I gave you a topic where there is only one right answer. We don't want to eat bugs and it's gross. But should we be eating bugs? Yeah, because we're killing the world by raising cows and animals. So we need to, not get rid of cows, but like, try to balance our diet so that not so much of our land is being used to raise cows, 'cause it's killing the ozone layer."
When the younger Wright attempted to raise an objection, Cutler said, "There's only one right answer to this essay. And it's that Americans should be eating bugs. Everyone in the world is eating them, it's healthy for the environment and there's just, there's only one right answer."
Fox News Digital indicated that Cutler later explained that the district had pushed bug-eating advocacy in its training.
The district admitted in a statement that extra credit had been offered in exchange for kids eating bugs and noted that upon Wright expressing concern, 'The student was offered another topic of the student’s choice. Remember this particular assignment is about finding facts versus opinions to support writing an argumentative essay."
TheBlaze has previously reported on the joint effort by climate alarmists and technocrats to preclude the masses from consuming real meat as part of a broader campaign to combat the specter of climate change.
The Guardian ran an op-ed in 2018 claiming, "Reducing our meat intake is crucial to avoiding climate breakdown, since food production accounts for about a quarter of all human-related greenhouse gas emissions, and is predicted to rise. In western countries, this means eating 90% less beef and five times as many beans and pulses."
A 2017 review published in the journal Agronomy for Sustainable Development suggested that rather than meat, humans could instead try eating weeds, micro-algae, and bugs.
The World Economic Forum ran an article in February 2022 touting bugs as "an excellent alternative source of protein" and a way to "significantly reduce our carbon footprint." The WEF author went so far as to suggest that insects are "part of a virtuous eco-cycle."
When speaking recently at the WEF, Siemens AG chairman Jim Hagemann similarly called on people to stop eating meat to curb the specter of anthropogenic climate change.
"If a billion people stop eating meat, I tell you, it has a big impact. Not only does it have a big impact on the current food system, but it will also inspire innovation of food systems," Hagemann told a crowd of technocrats in Davos, Switzerland.
Extra to foisting a bug diet on the population, alarmists have recommended lab-grown cancer-based synthetic meat as an alternative to eating real beef.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Beef prices are likely to continue rising as U.S. based cattle ranchers continue to shrink the size of their herds.
This move is expected to further constrain U.S. beef production in the coming months, the Wall Street Journal reported. Data from the federal government confirms that rising costs for feed and other expenses are encouraging ranchers to sell to sell calves into feedlots around the country at a faster rate which leaves fewer cattle available for slaughter. It is expected that this will become more pronounced later this year and into 2023.
Persistent drought conditions throughout the Western U.S. have decimated grazing pastures which causes cattle farmers to spend more money on supplemental feed which presents another major problem for the beef industry.
By 2023, beef production is expected to decline by 7% and cattle prices are expected to increase to record highs. These increased costs and shrinking supply pose serious problems for meatpackers like Tyson Foods Inc., JBS USA holdings Inc., Cargill Inc., and National Beef Packing Co. It is likely that the increased cost of beef production is already being passed onto consumers. The more expensive it is to raise and maintain cows, and as fewer cows are raised for slaughter, the more expensive beef products will eventually cost. Ground beef and chicken prices have already reached all-time highs.
Jeanie Alderson, a fourth-generation rancher in Birney, Montana, said that she sold about 75 aging mother cows from her heard of around 250 in recent months. Typically, Alderson would buy new cows in the spring to replace the ones she sold off but she said that it has been too expensive for her to take any more into her herd this year.
Alderson indicated that wildfires in the southeastern portion of Montana are burning up the pastures where her cattle typically feed and that some of her fellow Montana ranchers have had to spend more money on expensive livestock feeds. These additional expenses and hardships are causing ranchers to reduce the size of the herds.
Alderson said, “It’s really stressful. A lot of ranchers are in deep, deep debt and if they have to go more in debt, some people will go out of business in the next few years.”
Drought conditions and higher operating costs encouraged ranchers to rapidly cull beef cows in the first quarter of 2022, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Iowa State University estimates that American cattle producers have lost money five of the past eight months.
Glenn Beck predicts average Americans will not be eating beef in the future, thanks to America's current monopoly on meat processing that is all but destroying the small farmer.
There's already talk of switching to lab-engineered or plant-based "meat" and severely limiting how much land is used for cattle grazing. One of the strongest voices in Congress pushing back against these plans is Congressman Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
Rep. Massie joined Glenn on the radio program to explain how farmers are being demolished by big-market regulations, but also to share some ways Congress can fight back. He gives an update on his efforts to pass the PRIME Act and solve the looming meat crises, without getting the government too involved.
Watch the video clip below for more details:
To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
The world's largest meatpacker, JBS SA, was reportedly hit by a cyberattack over the weekend, forcing the firm to halt production in all its U.S. beef plants and sparking fears of meat shortages in multiple countries.
Bloomberg reported that the Brazilian company has not yet released details itself, but that an official with the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union said JBS has shut down its beef processing facilities in America following a ransomware attack.
Fox News reported that the shutdowns impacted all nine JBS beef plants in the U.S., with locations in Arizona, Texas, Nebraska, Colorado, Wisconsin, Utah, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
JBS did confirm that it suspended its North American and Australian computer systems following the Sunday attack, but remains mum on how operational its plants are globally. The Wall Street Journal reported that JBS produces one quarter of the United States' beef and one-fifth of the country's pork. The company's pork plants in the U.S. appear to remain operational.
The Daily Mail noted that "JBS sells meat under 52 different brand names in the US, including Certified Angus Beef, 5 Star Reserve, Blue Ribbon Angus Beef and Pilgrim's."
According to Bloomberg, "The prospect of more extensive shutdowns worldwide is already upending agricultural markets and raising concerns about food security as hackers increasingly target critical infrastructure. Livestock futures slumped, while pork prices rose."
White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday that the Biden administration "has offered assistance to JBS" following the attack, and disclosed during a media briefing that JBS told the White House that they received a ransom demand from a criminal organization "likely based in Russia," CNN reported.
The attack comes off the heels of a cyberattack on the U.S. Colonial Pipeline Co. last month, which forced the company that supplies nearly half the fuel to the Eastern Seaboard to shut down and purportedly pay millions in ransom to a Russian criminal group to regain operations.
The attack on Colonial sparked fears of shortages and caused a run on gas stations in the southeastern U.S., driving up prices regionally and pushing the national price of gasoline upwards of $3.00 per gallon. The Daily Caller pointed out that at least four governors declared states of emergency during the ordeal.
Condé Nast's culinary magazine Epicurious announced Monday that it will no longer publish beef recipes, saying it no longer wants to give "airtime to one of the world's worst climate offenders."
Epicurious tweeted, "Today we announced that Epicurious is cutting out beef. It won't appear in new Epi recipes, articles, newsletters, or on social. This isn't a vendetta against cows or people who eat them. It's a shift about sustainability; not anti-beef but pro-planet."
Today we announced that Epicurious is cutting out beef. It won't appear in new Epi recipes, articles, newsletters,… https://t.co/t2fxB6SfVM— epicurious (@epicurious)1619450573.0
The magazine explained in its full statement that its "shift is solely about sustainability, about not giving airtime to one of the world's worst climate offenders."
The outlet also acknowledged that "there are problems with chicken, seafood, soy, and almost every other ingredient," adding that "in a food system so broken, almost no choice is perfect."
However, the magazine wrote, "we know that home cooks want to do better."
Epicurious said it made the decision now because while beef consumption in America "is significantly down from where it was 30 years ago, it has been slowly creeping up in the past few years."
The Hill reported that "the brand acknowledged that products made from cow's milk are 'almost as destructive to the environment as beef' but it has not said if it will stop publishing recipes requiring dairy."
While beef recipes and the mention of the meat will be completely scrapped from the Epicurious social media feeds, homepage, articles and newsletters, beef recipes previously published by the magazine will remain available on its website.
For years, cattle production has become a target of environmental activists who argue that methane from cow farts is a leading contributor to climate change.
Beef consumption has been in the news in recent days following President Joe Biden's vow to cut America's greenhouse gas emissions by 50% over the next nine years — an ambitious goal that could mean a monumental overhaul of the U.S. economy.
Since the Biden administration has not yet released the details, outlets such as The New York Times and The Daily Mail pulled research from experts to show possible changes that would be needed in order for the U.S. to reach the president's goal.
But the Mail drew backlash from left-leaning outlets such as The Washington Post, who criticized the outlet for pointing to University of Michigan study "on the impact of limiting meat consumption — including some extreme scenario examining the impact of Americans eating just four pounds of red meat per person annually."
Several conservative lawmakers and commentators pushed back on the prospect of red meat becoming a target, according to Politico, leading the Biden administration to vow that cutting out beef was not on the table.
"There is no effort designed to limit people's intake of beef coming out of President Biden's White House or USDA," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said during a virtual briefing hosted by the North American Agricultural Journalists.
He reiterated, "There's no desire, no effort, no press release, no policy paper — none of that — that would support the notion that the Biden administration is going to suggest that people eat less meat, or that USDA has some program designed to reduce meat consumption. It's simply not the case."
Nothing appears on your plate appears without agriculture. The next USDA secretary will navigate complex issues to keep the food system sustainable.
Regardless of one’s station in life, we must turn to God to find true peace.
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com
Change your DNA if You Love the Planet