第 203 期·中文精讀

安雅·費納爾德:再生農業與烹飪肉類的藝術

Anya Fernald: Regenerative Farming and the Art of Cooking Meat

農場主與肉食企業家談再生農業如何管理土地與飼養動物,以及如何理解、挑選和烹飪一塊好肉。

官方音訊00:00 / --:--
中文精讀由 AI 基於原始訪談改寫,非官方翻譯,可能存在偏差或錯誤;表述以原音訊與官方文稿為準。說明

在美國,能在完整供應鏈裡把動物從出生養到屠宰、再自己開餐廳賣肉的農場,佔比不到 1%。剩下 99% 是工業化養殖。安雅·費納爾德(Anya Fernald)的 Belcampo 農場就在那 1% 裡。她在這期訪談裡聊的,表面上是怎麼把一塊肉烤好,往深了說,是一個現代人怎麼重新理解吃飯這件事。

廚藝是藝術,支點在服務

雷克斯一開始就問她,烹飪是科學還是藝術。安雅的回答是藝術,但加了定語:藝術與服務在一起。

烹飪有個很強的服務屬性。這個服務不一定是服務某個人,也可能是服務健康、服務環境。我做菜的時候,食物在支撐著什麼,這個念頭一直在。(安雅·費納爾德)

她把整條鏈路都算進烹飪裡:食材怎麼被帶到一起、誰有能力做出這頓飯、最後誰吃到嘴裡。多數人聊烹飪,聊的是鍋裡的化學反應。安雅聊的是鍋外面整個系統。

她沒有否認科學那一面。食物是人和環境互動最顯眼的一條通道。皮膚上塗的東西、衣服面料、空氣、水,這些都在進入身體,食物是生理上影響最大的那一條。人體從環境裡提取卡路里和營養來維持自身,身體也在讀這些訊號,免疫反應、警覺度、健康狀態都跟著變。她舉了母乳的例子:嬰兒有感染風險時,母親的乳汁會幫孩子建立抵抗力。身體能讀到食物裡的資訊,這個能力比我們意識到的強得多。

那藝術落在哪裡?

藝術在於製造誘惑和沉溺,讓人停下來。做出那種感官體驗。我做一個特別簡單、好看又好吃的東西,桌上會出現一瞬間的安靜。對我來說,那個安靜就是藝術發生的時刻。(安雅·費納爾德)

最好吃的那一段,發生在動筷子之前

雷克斯做過一次 72 小時禁食。結束後他去超市,連最難吃的東西看著都好吃。回家做飯,整個過程花了兩三個小時,那兩三個小時反而是最美味的部分。真正吃完之後有一點失落,因為結束了。

安雅接過這個話題,講了一件大多數人沒想過的事:我們記憶裡關於食物的畫面,很多是氣味,味道反而退到後面。小時候家裡做飯,印象最深的是廚房飄出來的味道。

為什麼氣味記得那麼牢?因為它是食物的前置部分。你記住的是那種甜蜜的期待,知道接下來會有一個很棒的感官體驗。(安雅·費納爾德)

外賣文化把這一段抹掉了。開啟袋子可能聞到一點味道,但等待、準備、氣味逐漸累積的過程沒了。安雅說她不評判這個,她自己也會點外賣,但這確實拿掉了一整塊驚喜和愉悅。更實際的損失在身體那頭:它失去了為進食做準備的機會。

她還講了一件自己觀察出來的現象:一邊做飯一邊餓著,做完之後飢餓感會下降大約 40%。做感恩節大餐的人最懂這個,忙活一下午,最後反而不太想吃。氣味、觸控、試吃,這些感官輸入會改變飽腹閾值。想控制體重的人幾乎不用花任何成本就能用上這一條。而且做飯的時候,你餓的物件會變,你可能餓的是某種氣味,卡路里只是其中一個維度。

重新學會餓,才重新學會吃

雷克斯提到,禁食這幾年變流行,一部分原因是人們在重新學習飢餓的價值。

安雅說這件事有歷史背景。對飢餓的恐懼在進化上是有功能的,但美國經驗的一大特點就是食物永遠在那兒,而且便宜,幾代人沒有真正餓過。她自己是離開美國之後才第一次經常體驗飢餓,在義大利,兩餐之間隔得很長,午飯前會餓兩個小時,所有人都這樣,沒有人隨時抓零食。

間歇性禁食流行,我相信代謝層面有很多好處。但也許還有一層:人們真的在期待食物、享受食物了。飢餓感被重新找回來了。(安雅·費納爾德)

做飯是她解決家庭問題的方式

聊到怎麼愛上烹飪,安雅給了一個不太浪漫但很真實的答案:解決家裡的問題。

她媽媽對做飯很焦慮,一到飯點就壓力很大。安雅天生擅長同時處理很多事,就鑽進去幫忙,也幫了她父親。她說那是一種功能性的角色,小時候看到飯點前焦慮逐漸升溫,她有能力跳進去把事情擺平。

另一個影響來自她父親的母親,一位很會做飯的老人。她小時候問奶奶為什麼去教堂,奶奶說主要是為了給教會聚餐做飯。

我看到生命裡的女性用食物表達溫柔和愛,同時我又能在我自己家裡搭把手、創造價值、幫我媽我爸。那讓我覺得自己有超能力。天哪,我把一件讓人壓力很大的事弄沒了。(安雅·費納爾德)

雷克斯從這裡延伸出一個更沉的問題。他提到在俄羅斯長大,很多文化裡都一樣:母親做的飯是愛的源頭,是把家庭綁在一起的東西,是一家人少有的聚在一起的場合。他自己在嚴格控體重、備賽減重的時候,會有一種感覺,像失去了和親友連線的通道。

安雅承認這個矛盾是真的。她做過肉食飲食,也試過一些極端方案,一樣感受過孤立,因為沒法跟孩子吃一樣的東西。她覺得這類方案有價值:先用排除法找到什麼對自己好,再往更直覺的飲食演化。她也坦白,做飯對她來說是非常情緒化的事,是最純粹的表達愛的方式,只給愛的人做。壓力大的時候,這一塊會最先掉線。

一個食材就夠

雷克斯說自己做飯大多隻為自己,笑稱這是自愛的一種形式。他喜歡單一食材,最多兩三種。原因是他容易分心,像聽音樂一樣,真正會聽的人能從一首曲子裡拆出貝斯、鼓、鋼琴、節拍,反覆聽。他對食物的注意力也是這個結構,超過三樣就進入混沌,享受不了。所以一塊烤肉或者一個蔬菜,不加醬,就是他最大的快樂。這份快樂他一般不太公開說,因為很多人覺得這太無聊。

安雅給了他一個技術層面的解釋:單一食材允許你控制完美。她還補了一個常見的初學者錯誤,做菜時一次放太多東西。她前一晚給他們烤了一份沙拉,每一樣都單獨處理。

做一道有四五個蔬菜的菜,正確做法是把每一個都做到它自己的最佳狀態,然後再組合。太多時候我們把四五樣東西疊在一起同時加熱,然後奇怪為什麼不好吃。你沒法同時最佳化多個變數還達到巔峰。(安雅·費納爾德)

她舉了烤整雞的例子。雞胸肉塊大,熟得快;雞腿雞翅塊小,熟得慢。同一只雞身上要解決不同的目標,就得分開處理,就得有注意力。多食材之所以常常不好吃,根子上沒人能同時照顧好每一樣東西的終點。

雷克斯提到紀錄片《壽司之神》(Jiro Dreams of Sushi),問她對那種幾十年重複做同一件事、追求極致的手藝怎麼看。安雅的回答是,你得先選一塊畫布。

這是藝術層面的問題:你是雕塑家還是畫家?壽司那個體系是一塊非常非常小的畫布。那是一條美的路,有一種完美在裡面。但如果你想在食物上達到精通,你大機率沒辦法常用超過 20 種食材還真正理解它們。(安雅·費納爾德)

她說美國人的廚房裡堆滿了醬料、香料、混合香料,實際上常用的就那幾樣。今晚做韓餐明晚做墨西哥捲餅當然可以,要達到精通,你需要一個固定的、反覆使用的食材庫。她自己的酸味底子是檸檬和雪莉醋,油脂底子是黃油、牛油和橄欖油。橄欖油是收尾用的,她喜歡那點苦味,苦和酸能給肉和蔬菜提味。椰子油她也用,更多當成一種零食,覺得它的甜香在菜裡太搶。她給了一個挑選思路:美國市面上很多黃油是甜奶油黃油,沒經過發酵,換成發酵的、草飼的版本,複雜度立刻上一個臺階。同理,把常用的油脂換成風味更飽滿的版本,是提升家常菜最便宜的手段。

在西西里當乳酪師,順便學會讀懂暗示

安雅二十出頭去了歐洲,做乳酪師,住在鄉下的小農場,早起擠奶做乳酪。她說那段經歷塑造了她作為廚師的路子:接觸到極好的食材,學會把簡單的東西做好。她本來想當一個"廚師式的廚師",可在農場和農戶一起吃午飯晚飯,那種傳統的、簡單的吃法讓她更興奮。一餐飯就是一塊里科塔乳酪淋點橄欖油、幾片面包、一碗蠶豆,她也由此鬆開了"晚餐必須有蛋白質有蔬菜"的假設。

還有一層身體上的變化。她說自己是九十年代長大的孩子,整個童年泡在低脂觀念裡。到了義大利,大量吃高脂肪食物,橄欖油到處潑,厚片面包配薩拉米,結果人變得更有活力,更瘦,心情更穩,連指甲都不再起皮分層。她承認那段時間生活方式也在變,住在農場、跟著太陽起床,不能全歸功於飲食。但那個反差讓她確認了一件事:真實的食物越簡單越好,健康食品很少長成小包裝、長標籤、一堆粉末的樣子。

她還講了西西里那段有點傳奇色彩的經歷。她二十一歲,被一個集團僱去做乳酪,因為要在義大利拿工作許可,必須證明自己有義大利沒人具備的技能。她當時的技能是乳酪專家。她進那家機構之前就知道組織有點不對勁,多年後她的前老闆因貪腐進了聯邦監獄,主要是挪用公款。

那是我能想到的、理解世界怎麼運轉的最好課堂。我這個人特別直接,不擅長微妙。在那個世界裡,所有人都在多個層面上溝通。(安雅·費納爾德)

她講了那個著名的例子:跟老闆去見一個要談生意的人,點酒的時候對方點了一杯葡萄酒,這一杯酒本身就在表達不滿,因為釀造那款酒的人的父親得罪過他。安雅當時完全沒看懂,飯後追問發生了什麼。這種環境教她理解不同的溝通方式,也讓她看清一件事:她後來反覆在做的事業,結構上是同一個。當時那個專案是把西西里東南部拉古薩地區一種叫 Ragusano 的傳統小規模乳酪做成能出口的規模,歐盟資金在裡面,她老闆也把錢用在別處。難點是食品安全、農戶之間的協作、把散戶組織起來做規模。

西西里也是她第一次經常採集野食的地方。去朋友家,出門摘蕁麻,摘野蘆筍,每個季節都有可以採的東西,這是生活方式的一部分,也是健康的一部分。她說那是她第一次吃到食材品質那麼好的東西,時令到了,街上有人騎著腳踏車賣剛摘的洋薊,就那一樣,你就吃那一樣。

怎麼判斷一頓飯好不好

安雅當過好幾次《鐵廚》(Iron Chef)的評委。雷克斯問她評判標準。

她說她看的是體驗。人一生裡最難忘的那些飯,很少是米其林三星。更多是關於放慢速度、你和誰在一起。她提到自己人生最難忘的幾頓飯之一,是當乳酪學徒時在希臘吃到的一碗冷羊奶酸奶,表面結了一層冷掉的脂肪,澆上新鮮蜂蜜。羊奶的脂肪含量是牛奶的兩倍,那層脂肪結在表面,蜂蜜倒下去,一碗東西,她說能進人生前五。

那碗酸奶裝在陶碗裡,我那天過得很好,所有這些加在一起,但我至今記得那個感受。我們大多數人對食物最好的感官記憶,很少來自某家浮誇的餐廳,多半來自享受它的整體語境。(安雅·費納爾德)

《鐵廚》那種比賽很有意思,但大量使用低溫慢煮、醬汁、粉末,像魔術食物。從科學角度看很驚人,可那類作品很少進她自己最難忘的名單。

雷克斯問了一個更私人的問題:你這輩子吃過最好的一頓是什麼?或者最後一餐想吃什麼?

安雅反過來問他想去哪兒找世界上最好的那一餐。她的建議是,最好的飯需要前面的鋪墊。

如果那是最好的一餐,它應該出現在你剛完成一次禁食或者一場比賽之後。你是帶著剝奪感走進來的,你餓的不只是肚子,是靈魂層面的深層營養。(安雅·費納爾德)

她建議雷克斯去一個有極端環境的地方,比如在日本徒步幾天,最後走進一個小館子;或者去蒙古待三四天,回來坐在一個農場裡,桌上出現意想不到的東西,人又餓著,那才是味覺升級的時刻。她說羅馬尼亞、越南、寮國這類地方,沒有精緻餐廳,但有小乳酪、醃肉,一盤上就四樣東西,每一樣都讓你震驚。

雷克斯講了自己的答案:他做不到在一盤菜裡放很多東西,會分心。他喜歡那種"就這些"的稀缺感,一種食材,完整地去欣賞。他承認這不健康,安雅說他的方式反而更健康。

她自己的答案方向完全相反。她要的是十幾樣她愛的東西擺在一起:剛出爐的、帶熱氣的、抹了厚黃油撒了鹽的麵包,好吃三文魚或者魚籽,剛摘的漿果,一塊牛排或者豬排,各種乳酪。她說那不是一道菜,桌上是一堆慾望的集合。酒她喝得不多,喜歡紅酒配好食物,還聯合創辦過一個有機朗姆酒品牌。

一塊肉怎麼做,答案在解剖學裡

整期訪談裡資訊密度最高的一段在這裡。安雅把烹飪肉類拆成兩個變數。

第一個變數:這塊肌肉在動物身體裡是幹什麼的。

脊椎旁邊的肌肉,比如肋眼、紐約客,平時不大運動,脊椎承擔主要工作,它們只是穩定結構。這類肉嫩,可以高溫快煎。橫膈膜附近的肌肉,比如平鐵牛排、裙邊牛排,是真正在大量工作的功能性肌肉,運動多,就長了很多肌束和膠原結締組織。牛頰肉裡的纖維肉眼可見。

結締組織是肉類烹飪裡最關鍵的東西。肌肉遇到高溫會變嫩,你可以煎出焦殼,切開就吃。膠原組織相反,遇到高溫會收縮、變硬。你要麼用低溫慢煮加水分把它化開,要麼幾乎不加熱。(安雅·費納爾德)

所以牛腩不能直接上烤架大火烤,跟脂肪沒多少關係。就算把脂肪剔掉,那塊肉裡有太多膠原和筋膜,高溫快烤永遠做不嫩。決定這塊肉怎麼加熱的是膠原,脂肪負責另一件事:讓風味更好,帶來豐腴感和口感。而膠原一旦被低溫慢慢化開,會變成那種膠質般的順滑口感,骨湯的濃稠、慢燉豬肩的迷人,很大一部分來自溶解的膠原。

第二個變數:表面積和體積的比。

熱量是透過肉的表面進入內部的。三英寸厚的牛排和半英寸厚的牛排,做法完全不同。整塊豬肩和切成方塊的豬肩,同樣是這塊肉,做法也要變。紅酒燉牛肉和燉鍋烤肉可以是同一個部位,但表面積體積比不一樣,加熱方式就得跟著換,因為熱量和水分要走進肉的內部,走進多深、走多快,取決於表面接觸面積。

間接火、直接火,以及燒烤為什麼讓人上頭

雷克斯問熱源有沒有講究。安雅的回答很清楚:先分間接和直接。

間接加熱的特點是溫度低、時間長,肉的中心和外表同時升溫,裡外一起變嫩,煙也能在表面停留很久,形成風味。煙本身滲不深,最多進到表面半英寸左右,慢烤時間特別長會稍微深一點。

直接加熱又分木頭、木炭、燃氣。木頭和木炭差別不大,更多是詩意和風味的區別。燃氣和炭火差別明顯,一是氣味,二是熱量分佈的均勻度。再好的燃氣烤爐也有熱點和冷點,所以燃氣最適合高溫快烤,牛排、漢堡,快速上色出脆殼,完美。做低溫慢烤的東西,比如整條牛裡脊或者雞腿,燃氣就沒那麼優雅,炭火和木頭的層次感更好。

安雅還講了用木柴做飯的一個常識:你不會在明火正旺的時候把牛排丟上去,那樣只會吃到一層碳。用木柴做飯,第一步是把木頭燒成炭基,然後在炭上烤。她前一晚就是這麼做的:搭火,等它燒塌,加新柴補充新炭,然後在餘燼上烤。木炭的出現讓人類跳過了自己造炭這一步,效率提高了,代價是失去了整個燒炭的過程,而那個過程正是氣味積累的過程。

她用的那個烤爐叫 Sea Island Forge,南美風格的木火烤爐,帶搖柄可以控制食物和火焰的距離。她說自己最喜歡的時間就是這樣度過:生火,進屋準備肉,端出來烤,從頭到尾。為什麼燒烤讓人上頭?因為氣味。

你走進去,聞起來太棒了。聞起來像天堂,油脂的香氣到處都是,所有人聞到的是同一種味道。這是一種集體體驗。(安雅·費納爾德)

草飼牛肉,一個被濫用的詞

聊到草飼,安雅先給了一個選購要點:看"100% 草飼"或者"草飼並谷飼育肥"(grass fed and finished)。

讓牛一輩子吃草,問題是長肉慢。牛沒有進化出吃玉米的能力,但它能吃,吃了之後長得快,同時身體出現類似炎症的反應。剖開胃看,谷飼牛的瘤胃內部發黑髮亮,草飼牛的是綠色,聞起來像堆肥。動物的整個生理都被這種食物損傷了,可體重漲得快,脂肪堆得多。她打了個比方:你和我天天吃加工食品和天天吃綠葉菜,道理一樣,人會吹起來。

草飼牛的另一面是運動量大、吃得乾淨、情緒放鬆,和圈養動物完全相反。圈養動物不動,吃高營養密度的飼料,承受巨大壓力。

那草飼和草飼之間有區別嗎?有,主要在動物的飼養時長。Belcampo 的牛養到 24 到 26 個月,常規是 18 個月左右。養得久,風味更好,脂肪多一點,omega 比例也差很多。她見過自家農場的 omega-3 比 omega-6 從 1:3 到 1:1,理想值是 1:1,野生獵物通常在 1:1 到 1:2。沒有全年牧草的地方就麻煩,要喂乾草,比例就變了。乾旱的時候他們也做過乾草育肥,那已經偏離了最優解。

但她說,草飼內部的差異,仍然遠小於草飼和谷飼之間的差異。

還有一個坑:"草飼"在美國不是一個受監管的詞。它只意味著這頭牛生命中的某個時刻吃過草。美國肉牛產業是分段的:母牛帶犢階段、育肥前期階段、集中育肥階段。第一階段永遠是草,因為母牛帶犢都在條件一般的牧場上,你在路邊看到的那種長滿灌木、一群母牛帶小牛的場地,就是第一階段。所以有漏洞:有些產品標草飼,指的是很久以前吃過草。要認"草飼並谷飼育肥"或者"100% 草飼"。

比例變化有多快?安雅說,吃穀物一週,omega-3 和 omega-6 的比例就會徹底改變。她拿人做類比:你乾淨飲食一個月,亂吃三天,人就廢了,沒有緩衝區。

這塊肉對吃它的人好在哪

雷克斯問,再生農業養的肉,對人到底有什麼好處。安雅先把那套"快樂的牛在做瑜伽"的營銷話術放到一邊,直接講指標:脂肪比例更好,更不容易引發炎症,蛋白質更高。牛肉脂肪更低且質量更好,禽肉和豬肉蛋白質更高,維生素密度更高,礦物質密度更高。

沒有任何一項是黑白分明的顛覆性差別,但每一項指標都朝正確的方向有實質性的移動。所以你為什麼不選它呢?(安雅·費納爾德)

雷克斯說自己的體感是,吃 Belcampo 的肉身體反應更輕,不那麼脹,不像某些超市買的肉那樣讓身體"更費勁"。他承認可能有心理因素,知道自己吃的東西來自好地方,壓力會下降。他感覺肉本身確實不一樣。

安雅說 omega-6 是主要原因。常規牛肉的 omega-3 和 omega-6 比例可能是 1:20 甚至 1:30,方向完全反了。她家的能做到 1:1。

她還講了一件容易被想反的事:動物是極強的過濾器。草甘膦這類東西不會留在肉裡,抗生素也不會。吃雞肉不用擔心四環素轉移到你身上,真正的問題是工人接觸四環素、雞長得太快、肉質變柴。所以看肉的時候,別把它想成"農場用的垃圾會不會進到我嘴裡",真正要看的是那些微妙的東西:脂肪比例、蛋白密度、風味複雜度。她提到一個被科學支援的點,風味更復雜的食物更容易讓人達到飽腹感,想控制熱量的人可以靠它少走一段路。

一個女性 CEO 在肉類行業裡

雷克斯問得直接:在一個肉類公司當女性 CEO,是什麼體驗。

安雅的回答是孤獨。很長時間裡,她感覺所有人都在等她失敗,或者預設她只是擅長營銷。

我花了一段時間才不把那些東西內化。我能走到今天,唯一的原因是我們從供應鏈到屠宰環節都是自己的。如果我當初真的在更大的肉類行業裡競爭,這段路會短得多。(安雅·費納爾德)

她說使命是她的畢生事業:更乾淨的食材,好吃到你不需要對它做太多處理,支援健康,其次對環境好。在一個被普遍認為腐敗的行業裡,建一個透明的、人們願意相信的品牌。她為這些感到驕傲。

讓她撐下來的是那些能餵養自己熱情的部分。她在農場辦"肉類營"(Meat Camps),教人做菜、品味道、聊風味。卸任 CEO 之後,她做全部的產品研發,拍內容,試產品,開發新品,推出了肉丸,馬上要推雞肉丸,還有高蛋白骨湯。她說這才是她當初做這件事的原因。她承認這條路比她預想的更長,她挑了能想象到的最複雜的問題,用的還是最老派的方式。

再生農業到底是什麼

訪談裡安雅給了一個非常乾淨的定義。

再生農業是一套傳統的農業系統。它就是過去人們種地的方式。你種地的時候想著長遠,你可能想著五代之後的繼承人還在這塊地上種,你會把這塊地的營養榨乾嗎?不會。傳統農業也沒有那些方便的投入品,你可以撒雞糞,但你不能噴一種東西,讓土地的產出瞬間暴漲,那種東西過去六十年才有。(安雅·費納爾德)

核心機制是透過耕作本身提高土壤肥力。土壤靠碳來餵養,這也是再生農業對環境友好的原因:它把碳固定進土壤。

植物生理在這裡有個轉折。一片隨風擺動、長得漂漂亮亮的草地,固碳量並不是最高的。真正固碳多的是被啃食過、正在重新生長的植物。植物受損後要修復,修復需要養分,其中就包括向下汲取的碳。

用再生放牧的方式,我們就是在有效地損傷植物。牛或者羊把草吃到一定程度,觸發再生迴圈,這個迴圈會固碳。(安雅·費納爾德)

但這裡有條邊界。啃得太狠,植物沒法恢復,土地就變成一塊裸土,一點碳也固不了。所以關鍵是頻率和強度的平衡,而這需要人去看、去記、去判斷:草還剩多少,去年這塊地發生了什麼。

這就引出了規模化的真正瓶頸。再生農業需要大量的人類智力投入。她想不出怎麼運營一個 20 萬英畝的再生農場,因為需要的注意力太密集了。工業化農業乾的恰恰是把農業"去技能化":把一門藝術加科學,變成了入門級的工作。

雷克斯提到自己在波士頓動力公司見過一些機器人,問人工智慧能不能幫上忙。安雅說完全可以。用資料採集、自動化決策點、輔助農戶判斷地塊表現,現在有一些航拍測繪在做這件事,還遠遠不夠。她給了一個數字:如果全球退化和未被充分利用的牧場轉成再生農業,大概能固存全球 20% 到 40% 的碳。

真正的障礙在文化層面。兩代人沒有這樣種過地,知識的代際鏈條斷了。再生農業的科研資料也受限於規模和時間,都是小農場在做,一邊做一邊摸索,沒有長期記錄。Belcampo 的 2.5 萬英畝加合作農場,已經透過第三方驗證做到碳影響為負,包括郵購運輸的碳排都被放牧固碳抵消了。但這畢竟是一套來自單一體系的資料。

人道養殖的標準,以及那個繞不過去的問題

安雅說人道的標準要看生命週期的幾個關鍵點:受孕、出生和撫育、飲食、戶外活動、密度、與同伴和幼崽的社互動動。進化飲食排第一,看動物生理結構就知道它該吃什麼。反芻動物有多個胃,進化出來就是吃低熱量、高纖維的東西,你和我吃草一週就死了,它們的系統就是為這個建的。把牛放到玉米上,和它們的進化飲食正相反,身體會很吃力。豬和雞是單胃的雜食動物,需要更高密度的營養,所以"草飼雞"這個東西不存在。

她給了一個歷史對比:1950 年代商業雞長到出欄重量要 54 周,現在圈養是兩個半星期,Belcampo 的系統是 8 到 10 周。

雷克斯在這裡插了一個尖銳的問題。他兩天前讀了一篇論文,論證殺死動物這件事本身就不可能人道。他說我們可以先把這個問題懸置,假設存在倫理上可行的宰殺方式,然後問:什麼才算人道?

安雅接得很坦誠。她說第一件要能坦然面對的事,就是把動物變成肉這件事本身。人道認證一直管到動物的死亡,包括在加工環節怎麼被處理。她說她能理解有人在這裡過不去,這個決定很複雜,她有共情。也正因為如此,必須在一開始就承認:這是一頭會為了餵飽人而死的動物。

她順帶提到,豬和雞是雜食動物,她家的豬會在農場裡捕殺響尾蛇吃掉,它們享受這個過程。

還有一層她覺得有意思:進化飲食和人類健康是對齊的。她看過自家所有產品的營養分析,在進化飲食下,牛羊肉的 omega-3 和 omega-6 比例和野生獵物一樣。一頭吃對了的牛,營養剖面和一頭麋鹿沒有本質區別。

打獵,以及它為什麼讓人回不去

雷克斯問她對打獵作為肉食來源的看法。她回答得很乾脆:100% 支援。

很多人被狩獵徹底改變,原因是他們人生中第一次吃到乾淨的肉。99% 的美國肉是按一種特定方式生產的,那種方式容易引發炎症,也不算好吃。當你從那個極端跳到完全不同的產品,身體的感受差別巨大,當然會說我再也回不去了。(安雅·費納爾德)

她說商業農場永遠做不到野生動物那種生物多樣性,一頭在野外遊蕩的麋鹿吃到的東西,農場複製不了,多出來的那 5% 到 10% 就在這裡。野生動物還有更長的禁食期,肌肉生長更慢,風味更獨特。再生農業能把差距縮得很小,比任何其他養殖方式都更接近。

她還講了一個更根本的取捨:如果一樣食材必須靠醬汁才吃得下去,問題出在食材本身。現在很多食物的基底平淡無奇,於是加糖加鹽加工業化風味,把人哄過去。這條路很短,也是很多健康問題的來源。人們被訓練成用本能去對抗食物,而不是享受食物。獵物和再生的肉,風味天生就在,不需要遮掩。

雷克斯說打獵不可規模化,安雅同意,但她說打獵的價值在於它啟發世界:這是對的吃法。野生動物是進化潛能完全展開的動物,在生態系統裡扮演了自己的角色,活出了自己生命的意義。如果養殖能儘量接近野生,就已經走了很多步。

意義這件事

雷克斯問了一個很大的問題:你說動物在野外最快樂,那找到了它們生命的意義。我們人類呢?意義在哪?

安雅的回答很短。

繁榮、減少痛苦、創造善。這些是我在動物行為裡看到的東西。它們主要在意的是減少痛苦和養育後代,這是進化層面的。人只是更聰明,想把這個事做得規模更大。儘可能減少世界上的痛苦,而這件事某種程度上減輕了我們自己的痛苦。(安雅·費納爾德)

雷克斯把它接成了俄羅斯式的命題:生活是苦的,幫助別人能減輕它,所以要創造性地想出辦法。他說這像是一個反饋迴路:意識產生了痛苦,也產生了減輕痛苦的願望。

訪談最後,雷克斯問她給年輕人的建議,怎麼活出一個同樣非線性、同樣有成就的人生。她的答案和她做菜的方式一樣:好奇心,加上不舒服。

我得到的最好的禮物都來自追隨好奇心。社會想要什麼不重要,重要的是你自己,就你自己,為做過這件事而高興。我偏離這條線的那些時候,生活都更難。(安雅·費納爾德)

她說要挑那些複雜、當時看起來不酷的事。她入行做畜牧的時候,在農場工作完全不酷,現在酷了。她說你要去一個能教你東西的地方,讓自己被教,也要準備好被揍。她在西西里那段時間很孤獨,哭了很多次,壓力很大,不知道會不會有結果,也問過自己為什麼不和朋友一樣找個普通工作,語言還不通。

你在裡面的時候,不知道會怎麼收場。但 resilience 就是從那兒長出來的。成長來自被砍倒、被打趴、然後重新長出來。人以為順利的環境裡會長,實際上是痛苦裡長。(安雅·費納爾德)

她說如果處境很糟,某種程度上說明你可能走在正確的路上,只要允許自己在裡面成長,而不是抵抗它。

人道的邊界,和一個繞不開的分歧

雷克斯還提了一條他自己都沒想清楚的線。他在節目開場說,這趟拜訪讓他意識到,自己對人痛苦的關注遠多於對動物痛苦的關注,他為此感到不安,也許有一天會覺得這條界線是錯的。

安雅沒有替他把這個問題解決掉。她只是把養殖這件事的核心擺到桌面上:願意吃,就得願意面對動物為這件事而死。人道認證能管到加工環節怎麼處理,管不到"應不應該"這個前提。她說她理解有人在這裡過不去,也承認這個決定本身很複雜。她自己的選擇是把標準儘量做高,把過程做透明,然後把選擇權交給吃的人。

這也是整期訪談裡最誠實的一段。她沒有把再生農業包裝成道德上的勝利,只把它說成一條更難走、但更值得走的路。這條路要付出代價:吃得少一點,付得多一點,系統更復雜一點。

這一期真正在說的東西

把整期訪談串起來看,安雅反覆在講同一件事:好東西都是慢出來的,而且慢的背後是注意力。

一塊牛腩要化開膠原,需要幾個小時的低溫和水分。一頭牛的風味,需要 24 到 26 個月而不是 18 個月。一片草地的碳,需要牛羊恰到好處地啃食一輪再退出去。一頓讓人記住的飯,需要生火、等待、氣味慢慢堆起來。一個農場的土壤肥力,需要想著五代之後的繼承人。

這些事全都沒法加速。而它們之所以正在消失,共同原因也只有一個:加速這件事本身在擠壓注意力。工業化農業把種地變成入門級工作,外賣把氣味從吃飯這件事裡切掉,超加工的調味把食材本身的味道蓋住,快餐式的旅行把等待抹平。省下來的注意力去了哪裡,她自己也沒說清,但代價是清楚的:肉變得平庸,土地變得貧瘠,吃飯變成補充卡路里。

安雅給出的路徑沒有一條是革命性的。她創業走的是最老派的路,自己在供應鏈和屠宰環節建起來,慢慢開到餐廳,再慢慢做零售。她說這是她能想象到的最複雜的問題,用了最笨的方法,很亂,還會繼續難下去。但她為挑難的問題而驕傲。

訪談的結尾,雷克斯坐在北加州的農場上,背後是山,頭頂是星星,說這一週情緒上很難,來了之後很多東西被卸下了。他前一天吃了安雅做的飯,乳酪、魚籽、火上的肉。片尾他引了老子的一句話:自然從不匆忙,卻無所不成。

這句話和整期訪談是同一個意思。繞遠路、被揍、慢下來,反而是唯一快的路。

  • 下次吃東西之前,給自己留出等待的時間。哪怕只是提前半小時開始準備,讓氣味先充滿房間,吃飯的滿足感會明顯不同。
  • 如果你在控制體重,試試在做飯

    的時候忍一會兒餓。安雅說她觀察到烹飪過程本身能把飢餓感降低大約 40%,靠的是氣味、觸控和試吃的感官輸入。

  • 做多食材的菜時,儘量把每一樣單獨做到最佳狀態再組合。同一個鍋裡同時加熱四五樣東西,你沒法同時最佳化所有變數。烤整雞這種"最簡單也最難"的菜就是例子:胸肉塊大熟得快,腿翅塊小熟得慢,得分開對待。
  • 買牛肉時看包裝上的字:"100% 草飼"或"草飼並谷飼育肥"(grass fed and finished)。只寫 grass fed 的不算數,這個詞在美國不受監管,可能指這頭牛很久以前吃過草,那段經歷早就在後視鏡裡了。
  • 想判斷一塊肉該怎麼下鍋,先問兩個問題:這塊肌肉在動物身上是幹什麼用的,以及這塊肉的表面積和體積比是多少。運動多的部位,牛頰、牛腩、裙邊,膠原結締組織多,必須低溫慢煮或者幾乎不加熱;運動少的部位,肋眼、紐約客,可以高溫快煎。厚切與薄切、整塊與切塊,做法要整套換掉。
  • 用木柴做飯,別在明火正旺時把肉丟上去。先把木頭燒塌成炭基,再在餘燼上烤,中間補充新柴維持新的炭。這一步沒辦法省,省掉的就是氣味。
  • 如果你必須給食材澆上醬汁才吃得下去,先別急著加調料,換一個來源更好的食材試試。風味天生足夠的東西,不需要遮掩。
  • 把常用的油脂升一檔。市面上很多黃油是甜奶油黃油,換成發酵的、草飼的版本,複雜度立刻不同;橄欖油同理,挑一瓶能直接舀一勺吃的。她說自己會拿一塊黃油抹點鹽當零食。
  • 想練出做飯的手感,先建立一個固定的食材庫。酸味選一兩樣,她用的是檸檬和雪莉醋;油脂選兩三樣,她用的是黃油、牛油、橄欖油。常用食材不超過二十種,反覆用透,比每晚換一個國家菜系更容易進步。
  • 判斷養殖是否人道,別停在"人道"這個詞上爭論。去看具體指標:吃的是不是它進化出來該吃的東西、一生有多少時間在戶外、飼養密度多大、能不能和幼崽及同伴互動。這些能查、能比較。豬比狗聰明,有情緒,會社交,這一條本身就該納入判斷。
  • 如果你對再生農業感興趣,別隻把它當成買肉時的選擇。它真正的瓶頸是人力:需要有人天天去看草被吃到什麼程度、記得去年這塊地發生過什麼、判斷什麼時候該把牲畜挪走。AI 和遙感在這裡有真正的用武之地,這是技術背景的人可以切入的具體位置。
  • 找一頓"這輩子最好的飯",別隻盯著餐廳名單。把它設計成一個有鋪墊的行程:一段徒步、幾天極端環境、一次 24 小時以上的禁食,然後是農場或小鎮上一張簡單的桌子。安雅給雷克斯開的方子是日本、蒙古、羅馬尼亞、越南、寮國這類有真食材但沒什麼精緻餐廳的地方。
  • 如果你在飲食上有嚴格的方案,留意它切斷了什麼。安雅自己做過肉食飲食,也體會過沒法跟孩子吃一樣東西的孤立。她認可排除法的價值,但認為它該是個起點,之後要往更直覺、更能和人對坐吃飯的方向演化。

最後一條其實是最重要的。這一期訪談裡所有具體的技術細節,怎麼選肉、怎麼控火、怎麼看 omega 比例,都能查、能學。安雅真正給出的東西是另一件事:她做的每一個選擇,背後都有一句"我為什麼願意為這件事付出代價"。她願意在肉類行業裡孤獨很多年,願意用最老派的方式建供應鏈,願意承認自己挑的是能想象到的最複雜的問題。

雷克斯在節目開場寫了一段話,說自己這趟拜訪沒能解決那個問題:他還是更被人類的痛苦牽動,還是不知道自己有沒有資格在人和動物之間畫那條線。他把這份不確定原樣留在了節目裡。

這也解釋了這期節目為什麼值得聽兩遍。第一遍你會記住草飼的定義、膠原和脂肪的分工、煎牛排為什麼要看表面積體積比。第二遍你會注意到,安雅從頭到尾沒有一次試圖讓聽眾相信她做的是唯一正確的選擇。她只是把自己那一套邏輯攤開:這是我相信的東西,這是我為它付出的代價,你自己決定。

自然從不匆忙,卻無所不成。這句話放在一塊牛腩上成立,放在一個人的職業選擇上也成立。

文稿來自公開 Kaggle 資料集(rajneesh231/lex-fridman-podcast-transcript),為早期自動轉錄存檔,可能存在識別錯誤。
The following is a conversation with Anya Fernald, cofounder of Belcampo Farms, that was founded with the purpose to create meat that's good for people, the planet, and the animals, specifically treating their animals as ethically as possible. In this, she sought to revolutionize the meat industry from the inside out. She's also a scholar and practitioner of regenerative agriculture, and she's a chef who has appeared many times as a judge on Iron Chef. Plus, she has one of my favorite food related Instagrams. On top of that, she's also a longtime friend of Andrew Huberman, which is how we first got connected. Quick mention of our sponsors, Gala Games, Athletic Greens, Four Sigmatic, and Fundrise. Check them out in the description to support this podcast. As a side note, let me say that I got the chance to visit and spend a few days with Anya at Belcampo Farms in Northern California. I met many animals there, from cows to pigs, and saw the amazing land on which they grazed. I butchered meat, I watched Anya cook many amazing meals, I ate raw meat and cooked meat, and spent long hours at the bonfire talking with friends and listening to the sounds of nature. I hiked, swam in a cold mountain lake, and slept in a tent underneath the stars. It was an amazing eye opening experience, especially in my first ever visit to a slaughterhouse. The term slaughterhouse is haunting in itself. The animals I met lived a great life, but in the end, they were slaughtered, in the most ethical way possible, but slaughtered nevertheless. Seeing animals with whom just the day before I made a connection be converted to meat that I then consumed was deeply honest to me. This ethical farm, Belcampo, represents less than 1% of animals raised in the United States. The rest is factory farmed. I could not escape the thought of the 40 to 50 billion animals worldwide raised in terrible conditions on these factory farms. I've spent most of my life thinking about and being in contact with human suffering, but the landscape of suffering in the minds of conscious beings is much larger than humans. I must admit that I still am haunted by human suffering more than animal suffering. Perhaps I will one day see the wrong in me drawing such a line. Either way, the visit to Belcampo Farms made me realize that I have not thought deeply enough about the ethics of my choices and the choices of human civilization with respect to animals. And more importantly, I have not thought or learned enough about large scale solutions to alleviate animal suffering. Belcampo is paving the way on this and is the reason I wanted to show my support for their and Anya's efforts in regenerative farming and ethical treatment of animals. This is the Lex Friedman podcast and here is my conversation with Anya Fernald. If you're watching the video version of this and are asking yourself why we're in nature right now, there's actually a beautiful mountain in the background. There's an incredible vast landscape. There's a farm. We're sitting behind a table and nevertheless, I'm wearing a suit and tie amidst nature. We're at the beautiful Belcampo Farms. We're going to talk about that, this incredible place you have here, but you cooked some meat yesterday. It tasted delicious. So I'd love to talk about just the science and art of cooking first. You as a chef, when you think of cooking, is it a science or is it an art? Art and service together, probably. Art to me because it's about creating something of beauty and being responsive and creating something that's expression of creativity and love. Cooking also has a very strong element of service and it doesn't mean necessarily service to another person, but like service to health, wellness, environment. There's an element of supporting through food in how I approach cooking. So it's bigger than just like how the ingredients come together to form a taste. It's the whole pipeline. Like the fact that there's a lot of work that went into bringing the ingredients together and then giving you the ability to make the meal and then who gets to consume the meal and the whole thing. And you see that as service as opposed to just the taste. Yeah, I also think of food as one of the key ways that we interact with our environment, right? It's the part of our environment that goes inside us most visibly, right? Of course, we interact with our environment. We could have skin creams that have certain things in them or our clothes can then be absorbed. There's things in the air. There's our water and there's food, right? It's like how we're engaging in the world. Physiologically, it's the most significant way we engage in our environment. We're extracting resources, calories, energy from the environment in various ways in order to preserve our bodies. There's also so many feedback loops that I don't think we know the beginning of that our bodies are picking up on around nutrients, available nutrients, immune response. Like there's deep levels of sensory evaluation that lead to health and alertness and wellness. You hear about this a lot with babies that, you know, if there's a risk of an infection that a mom's breast milk will help the baby develop a resistance, like there's this way that our bodies can tune into health and can't extrapolate from that in any specific way, but think about that as an example of the many ways in which our bodies are reading available nutrients and food to signal other aspects of wellness and health. That said, the final product of cooking is, when done well, is really delicious. And what we ate yesterday was really delicious. So that aspect of it, bringing the ingredients together in a way that tastes delicious, do you see that as a science or art? That's the art of it. I mean, the art is like creating temptation and indulgence and giving people pause, you know, like creating experience that's like so sensual. And like, I love that about when I make something really simple and beautiful and delicious the way that, like there's that moment of silence at the table. And that to me is the moment of art, like appreciation. What about the buildup? I mean, we got to watch you make the stuff over a fire. So the calmness of the air, I mean, that's an experience. We don't often get to see that experience of the preparation. It's the anticipation, like you said. Maybe that's the most delicious part of a meal is the anticipation of it. That's something that I'm glad you bring up because it's an element that with eating so many of our meals, like out of a bag and you know, the instance where you start to eat the meals when the delivery shows up and you might smell something when you open the bag, right? And no judgment on that. That's something I do too, right? But that does take away a whole element of surprise and delight. And also I think of your body's ability to prepare for it. You know, you think about our most common memories of childhood for those of us who grew up in homes with parents who cooked is smell of things cooking. And it's not the eating of it. It's the smell of things cooking. So why is that so memorable? It's an anticipatory piece of food. That's what you remember about your experiences of food is the moment of like sweet anticipation of this great sensual experience. It's gonna be really gratifying on these emotional and physical levels. So I think we're also resonating on those memories because it's like, it's an experience of food where the sensuality of it is kind of extended. So it's a long kind of arc of buildup and then you're eating it and it's amazing. Then you're enjoying it and your body feels good. So all those pieces together, it's a much more memorable experience than just grabbing the cookie out of a bag, right? So look at our own and just revisit in your mind like the memories of food, the most compelling ones. It's the smell and then the experience and then sometimes how one felt, right? Yeah, and the people involved with the smell. So like somehow it's all tied in together whether it's family or people close to you or even if it's just chefs. There's something about the personality of the human involved in making the food that kind of sticks with you in the memory. And for me, I recently did a 72 hour fast and there's a kind of sadness after you eat that it's over. I think the most delicious part was the, I went to the grocery store and just actually walking around and looking at food with like everything looked delicious. Even like the crappiest stuff looked delicious and I missed that. I really enjoyed that anticipation and then I picked out the meal. I went home and I cooked it and the whole thing took, I don't know, maybe two, three hours, like the whole process. And that was the most delicious part and the first taste of course. And then after it was over, there's a bit of a sadness because the part I remember is the buildup, the anticipation and then once you eat, it's over. We kind of focus on the destination but it's the whole journey. The whole like, even if you go to a restaurant, it's the conversations leading up to the meal and the first taste of the meal. That's where the joy is. And if you get to watch the making of that meal, that's incredible. That's where the smell, the visual, how the ingredients come together and especially as we were looking over the fire, like watching it, the fire play with the raw meat and over time bring out the colors, bring out the, I don't know, like you can visually associate the flavor, you know, how it becomes a little bit burnt on the outside, you know, it has a crispiness to it, it starts to gain that crispiness and immediately your past memories of the delicious crispiness of various foods you've eaten are somehow mapped into your, immediately you start to taste it visually. I don't know, yeah, that experience is magical. It's, and of course, maybe it's the Russian thing but I'm almost like saddened when it's over. I think fasting is gaining in popularity because we're having to relearn the importance of being hungry in anticipation and delight. Yeah. We have such a fear of hunger and that's really functional in evolution, right? But we have this deep fear of hunger and part of the great American experience has been that we don't have to be afraid of hunger at all because there's food everywhere and it's really cheap. In all that abundance, we've lost this edge of hunger and we don't let ourselves get hungry. And that's one thing that I learned in part of my journey as a cook and chef has been, you know, moving abroad was the first time when I lived out of the US, was the first time that I regularly experienced hunger because the time between meals was really long and that was just what everybody did. And so I was hungry for two hours before lunch. And that was the first time in my life that there hadn't just been readily available snacks. So I wonder if the intermittent fasting and part of the popularity around it, I'm sure there's all these amazing metabolic things that are happening, but also people might also feel better because they're really anticipating and enjoying food. And then if you look at the feelings of fullness, there's a really interesting thing that happens when you cook and your sense of fullness, which is if you cook and you're hungry, the experience of being around the food, smelling it, touching it, sampling it, you'll take your hunger down by 40%. And this is my own observation. But as, I mean, we've all had the experience of cooking Thanksgiving and the cook never kind of wants to eat that much Thanksgiving. That's an extreme experience. But when you really dive in and you're cooking for a few hours and you're smelling and smelling and smelling, it totally changes your threshold of satiety and fullness because of other sensory things that are happening. And for those of us looking to maintain weight and something to consider in this is that cooking is also part of what your appetite, when you're hungry, what are you hungry for, right? So we tend to think about calories, but when you're hungry, you might also be hungrier for a wider range of things. And it might be smells, it might be stopping. There's other elements and that's something, I think as a cook, that it's powerful to explore and be with and observe how your hunger changes when you're cooking. Well, let me ask the romantic question. When did you first fall in love with cooking? Me falling in love with cooking was about solving a problem in my family. And it had to do with my mom feeling very anxious about cooking and overwhelmed frequently when it came to meals. And I'm naturally very good at juggling a lot of things. And it was just something I could dive in and help and help my dad, who I'm very, very close to. So it was a very functional role where I would see this kind of crescendo of anxiety around meal times as a kid and would be able to dive in and solve things. And I also loved women who cooked. Like my father's mother was a great cook. She was, I remember her telling me as a kid, I was asking her about church and why she went to church. And she's like, I mostly go to church because I get to cook for the potlucks. And so there was an openness around that, but she just loved to cook for people and there was this real tenderness and expression of that love. So seeing women in my life who had this real tenderness and love that they shared through food and then also being able in my own home to kind of pitch in and add value and help my mom and dad was really powerful for me. Cause I felt like I had a superpower. I felt like, oh man, I just made this stressful thing go away. That was huge. It's kind of interesting. I don't know if you can comment on, especially for me growing up in Russia, it's probably true in a lot of cultures, maybe every culture. That food, and especially like in a family, the mother that cooks is the source of love and like ties the family together. It creates events where everyone comes together. It's one of the only chances of togetherness. The thing that bonds a family is like dinner or food, eating together. And I don't know what to do with that. It ties up with like dieting and so on. When I was on stricter diets, especially competing and cutting weight and stuff, it felt like I was almost like losing opportunity to connect with friends and family. It's interesting. It's almost like cultures, we cannot fully experience love and family without eating. And on the flip side of that, eating enables us to experience love and family. I don't know what to do with that. It's a tough one. Cause there's lots of layers around kind of gender roles and families changing and things. I'd say I agree around the alienation and I've done carnivore diet and I've tried some of these extreme protocols. And I too, I suffered from loneliness. It was like doing carnivore and not being able to eat what my kids ate and talk about it at the same time. Those pieces are real. And I wonder with all of these diets, if that structure is actually helping or just taking away from people's kind of sensual understanding. But I think that there's some rigor around that that helps people discover what's good for them by eliminating and then growing towards more intuitive food is a good evolution from that base. I love to cook for people. I love to pay attention to their way of being and read what they'd like to eat. And it's my purest way of love. And that's for everybody in my life. I actually love to cook for people I love. I would struggle to be putting out food all the time. It's like something for me, it's a real act of caretaking. So I definitely have that in my makeup. And I definitely notice in times of real stress, that's the piece that drops off. And it's like, if I'm unable to care for myself, I have a hard time cooking. So for me, it's very emotional. It's very connected to love. And individualistic. So like focused on the particular individual. It's almost like a journey of understanding what that person is excited about in the landscape of flavors. Like figuring that person out, what they like, what they love to eat. Yeah, I see cooking from, I mostly cook for myself. So I see that as almost, this is gonna be like the worst term, but like an act of self love. Uh huh. This is gonna be clipped out. But that like, it's almost an exploration of like what brings me joy. And it's surprising, because I usually don't share, because the things that bring me joy are the simplest ingredients. Like I'm one of those people, I don't know if you can psychoanalyze me, because you also like basic ingredients. I like a single ingredient to ingredients, because I feel like I can deeply appreciate the particular ingredient then. I get easily distracted. You know, people who are really good listening to music, they can hear a piece of music, and in their mind, extract the different layers, and enjoy different layers at a time. Like the bass, the drums, the different layering of the piano, the beats, and all that kind of stuff. That's what it means to truly enjoy music, to listen to a piece over and over. Like almost like as a scholar. In that same way for food, I just can't do more than like three, because then it's just, I have to give in to the chaos of it, I guess. But when it's just a basic ingredient, like just meat, or just a vegetable, like basic grilled without sauces, without any of that, that I've discovered is what brings me a lot of joy. But that's boring to a lot of people. So I usually have to be kind of private about that joy. So, but that's mine, so yeah, I figured that out. I guess as a chef, you have to figure that out about everybody that you care for. Well, also for you, you're very interested in things, and interested in things being done well and appreciating them. So the single ingredient also allows you to control for perfection in cooking that, which is probably really appealing to you. And I think sometimes I see people also in the beginning of their journey of culinary trying to do too many things. So there's another piece too, that you'll notice, if you recall last night, I grilled us a salad, and then I did all those pieces separately. And that's something in general to be really attentive of when you're building flavor, to make sure you pay attention to every piece separately. The idea that you can, okay, with a soup or something or a stew, there's workarounds, but like to make a great dish that's got four or five vegetables in it, cook them all separately to their optimal deliciousness and then combine them. So that's another way to approach that, is that you may also be able to look at the different ingredients separately and still have that sense of understanding of it. But there's too often that we're layering together like four or five things and then cooking them all at once and then surprise that it's not delicious. Cause you can't really optimize on multiple variables at the same time for peak awesomeness. And that's actually, the number one way you see this that lead to improved scaling of regenerative agriculture. That'd be interesting. But you're saying you should be open to all those possibilities. I don't think, I don't know the landscape to know what. But my sense is that it's very hard. It's very hard. And our farming operation to scale, it's been incredibly complex and challenging. We now work with partner farms. I see their operations, they're incredibly complex. You know, it just seems like there's got to be a way to make some of these things simpler and easier to share information. Yeah. I don't know what that answer is. You know what would be cool is if we can understand deeper ways to measure the happiness of an animal. Because then we can optimize, like certified humane could be literally an optimization problem. Just make sure, as opposed to kind of using our, projecting our own human values, actually measuring what the animal is happy doing. That could be, so understanding the pig brain might help us understand pig happiness and reframe what it means for a happy animal. And then maybe it's a lot easier to make a happy animal, to make the animal happy than we think. And it might have to do with a variety of delicious food in the case of the pig. Is there something you could say about grass fed meat? Is it all, just out of my own sort of curiosity, whenever people say sort of grass fed meat is better for you, are all grass fed meat made the same? Is there different like, it's like the word organic. Is there a lot of variety within that? Like the way Belcampo does it, will the others do it? Just more color if you could add to this whole word and what it means. Grass fed beef has been on grass its entire life. And you wanna look for the words 100% grass fed or grass fed and finished. Now, the challenge with feeding beef grass its whole life is that it gains weight more slowly. Although beef didn't evolve, eating corn and things, it can eat them. And in eating them, it gains weight more rapidly and has like a version of like an inflammatory response. If you actually look inside the rumen of the animal inside the stomach, it's like black and shiny inside compared to grass fed animals like greens, smells like compost. So the animals themselves, their whole physiology is damaged by that food, but they also gain weight really quickly and they put on a lot of fats. Like if you or me were to eat a bunch of processed food compared to eating a bunch of greens, it's the same impact, you're gonna blow up. So the problem for grass fed is getting the animals to gain weight. They're getting a ton of exercise, they're eating really clean, right? And they're super chill. So that's different from the animals that are kept still eating really nutrient dense foods and under a ton of stress, which is a confinement animal. So are all grass fed meats created the same? The diet, yeah, nutritional profile broadly, but the length of time that the animal lives is extremely important for the flavor of the meat. We're taking our beef to 24 to 26 months, conventional is around 18 months. So I'm always looking, and if you're evaluating grass fed animals, you wanna get animals that are typically allowed to live for longer because their flavor is gonna be better, there's gonna be a bit more fat and their omega ratios also vary very differently. And I've seen omega ratios, in our firm everywhere from one to three to one to one, ideal is one to one game is typically one to one or one to two omega three to sixes. But in operations where you don't have year round grass, it's more complicated, you know, you're feeding hay and you don't get that three to six ratio. Omega threes come from green grass, they're the fat in greens. And so they're scarce and costly, right? So you can have grass fed and finished animals that don't have that perfect ratio because maybe they're in a climate or for whatever reasons, we've had to do it too, during the droughts do hay finishing, it's not optimal, it changes the ratio a bit. So there's a little bit of variance within it. I'd say though, the variance is a little bit higher the variance within grass fed is still small compared to the variance between conventional and grass fed, right? So there's definitely things to look for within it, but the real difference is between those two. Also thing to notice is that it's not a verified word, okay? So grass fed means animals that have been on grass at some point in their life. The way the cattle industry is in the US, there's segmentation. So there's cow calf operations, then those calves get sold to stocker operations which raised animals in their teens basically, and then those get sold to feed lots. And so those three phases, that first phase of the cow calf is always on grass. It's mother cows and mom cows are amazing. They can thrive on anything and still put all their nutrients into their baby and their babies will be healthy. So you never are putting mother cows on really premium pasture. So it's usually just kind of like okay pasture, dirty lot, if you ever see kind of like, scrubly lots with lots of cows and calves on, that's a cow calf operation. So there's also a loophole, unfortunately, where people use the term grass fed, and they're actually referring to animals that at some point in their life had grass, but that might be pretty far in the rear view mirror. So you need to look at that grass fed and finished or grass fed 100%. That ratio of omega three to sixes, it changes in like a week on grain. So it's radically different. Unfortunately, it's the same thing for you and me. You can eat clean for a month, you eat junk for three days, you're garbage, right? It's not like you can just like coast on that, right? We know what that's like. Same thing for animals, our physiology changes. Food's the number one way we interact with our environment. And our body changes really rapidly and dramatically. So we know Belcampo and just the way sort of this regenerative farming approach of Belcampo and the sort of high humane is good for the land, is good for the animal. Can you comment on ways it's good for the human that eats the meat? Is this meat better for you? Yes, and this is where they kind of focus on the joy and animals doing yoga and all this sort of like cynical stuff about this type of agriculture. So just like set that aside, it really is better for your health. It's got a better fat ratio, it's less inflammatory, it's got higher protein, it's just better product. In the case of beef, it's lower in fat and that fat has a better quality and it's higher in poultry and pork, it's also higher in protein. So all the nutritionals are better. It's got higher density of vitamins, it's got higher density of minerals. And none of this stuff is radically different than, it's not like the product is black and white, but every metric meaningfully is better in the right direction across the board. So why wouldn't you? I hesitate to take anecdotal evidence as like final scientific conclusions, but it does seem I've eaten quite a bit of belcampo meat, for example, and it's just my body seems to respond, like it's less bothered by it. Meaning like less inflamed, I just feel better. Because I mostly eat a meat diet and it does seem to be a little bit of a difference what kind of meat I eat, where it comes from. I don't know if that's my own psychology also. I mean, there is an aspect to like, when you know that the meat came from a good place and all the ways we've defined good, you feel better about it. And that has an effect, like decreased stress. So I'm a huge believer in that, like outside of just nutrition, how you feel about the whole experience is a huge impact. But it does feel like the meat itself is actually just leading to less inflammation for me or like less, like the bloated feeling and all those negative effects that could come with meat versus like certain other ground beef that I eat, like store bought chicken breast or steak, all those kinds of things. My body's a little bit more, works a little bit harder to process that food, it feels like. I don't know if there's science to that, but sort of anecdotally, that seems to be the case. Omega sixes are a big part of that, for in the case of the beef. You eat a lot of beef, you love beef. And so in a conventional beef product, it's a one to 30 ratio of omega threes to sixes. And sometimes one to 20, one to 30, but that's the wrong direction. In our beef, it's as low as one to one. So that and the omega sixes are what's part of inflammation. Now, the magic in animals is that they're incredibly efficient processors. And in the same way that the body can process and take out tons of things that are toxic out of the environment, I mean, animals bodies can do that too. So the beauty of meat is that it can be pretty clean. Things like Roundup and stuff don't end up in the meat. When we have antibiotics in our meat, we're not worried about getting like tetracycline from the chicken breast. What we're worried about is the workers getting tetracycline, the chicken growing faster than it should, the meat being chewier and not as high quality. But the actual antibiotics don't, the animals great at filtering that, right? They get that out. So you have to think about meat not as like contamination of like, oh, there's gonna be some of that garbage they used in the farming in my meat, but it's the more subtle things. It's the fat ratio, it's the protein density. And there's also just, I think in my experience, there's just more complex flavor and things that taste more complex. This is, science backs this up, they fill you up faster. So if you're looking to limit, to eat for fullness and, but not eat as many calories, more complex foods are the way to do that. And that hit, you hit your satiety, help you hit that satiety. So things like, I mean, all the key amino acids that help you feel full, mostly from meat, right? So those are, that's part of it, like it, but all meats have those. Then there's other kind of micronutrients and things around that complex flavor that help you feel full faster. Forgive me for this question, but it is kind of an interesting one that people are curious about. What does it feel like to be a, or what does it take to be a woman CEO of a meat company? I mean, you're no longer CEO of Belcampo, but you did, you ran, you cofounded Belcampo, you ran it for many, many years. Is there something that you could say in terms of challenges associated with that? And how did you personally overcome it? So to be a female running a meat and livestock operation, it felt very alone, a lot, you know, for a long time. I felt very, like everybody waiting for me to fail or watching and assuming that I was like, just good at marketing or whatever else. And so it's taken me a while to not internalize that. I think the only reason I'm here is we have our own supply chain in Slaughterhouse. And I think had I really been playing in the broader meat industry, it would have been a shorter journey. You know, it would have been very hard to make it even get to this phase. But I do, you know, I think the mission is my life's work. The mission of cleaner ingredients that tastes so amazing. You don't need to do too much to them. You know, I like creating food that's in support of good health. And then secondary to that, it's the environment, but I want healthy food to be a joy to eat, right? And that's, you know, creating innovation in the space for this company has been about building a brand that people understand and is transparent and that people believe in in an industry that's broadly perceived of as pretty corrupt. So those are things I feel enormously proud of. So you focused on the mission and the pushback, all the mess of the industry. You try not to internalize it, trying not to let it affect you and focus on the mission. You know, and it's in the joy of it and the part where it's gotten fun for me has been returning to what I love about it. And I've only had the privilege of doing that pretty recently. So I think for me personally, you know, starting, I host these events on the farm called Meat Camps, where I cook and teach people to cook and, you know, taste and talk about flavor and all the like sensual aspects of it that are my fire. Like, thank goodness I did that stuff because otherwise it was just such a beating. You know, so there were parts of it where I got to feed my fire. And then now in the, you know, the past year, since resigning, I've been, I do all the recipe development. I shoot all the content. I, you know, taste product. I'm developing all of our new products. I launched our meatballs. I'm just about to launch our chicken meatballs, doing a high protein bone broth. Like those are, that's why I did this was to be able to build this great product that I could build on. So I'm kind of at that place now, but it's taken a lot longer. And I think, you know, looking at the landscape of what to do in food, this is definitely, we tackled the most complicated problem. That I can imagine, you know, I did it like in the most old fashioned way, right? So it's been super complex. And then I also look at it and I'm like, yeah, and it's been messy and it's gonna continue to be hard, but I'm proud of having tackled the hard problems. So the hard problem here is not in the space of technologies. It's in the space of bringing something that we've done for a long, long time in our human history and scaling it in the face of all the other economic pressures. Like doing so successfully, also communicating to the rest of the world that this is a powerful solution. So inspiring the rest of the world that regenerative farming, like running a company in this kind of way that's humane for animals, good for the land, good for people, even if it costs, like if there's an increased cost to the meat, even if that, if you have a broader vision that means eating less meat overall, that that is like inspiring the world that this is a future we want. And just taking that on and getting that done. Got a chance to eat a little bit of cheese, which is a good opportunity to talk about your experience in Italy. You spent some time, or as south of Europe, I'm not sure if it was Italy. Yeah, I lived in Italy, but. And there's cheese involved, right? Like what did you take away from that experience, both as a chef and as a human being? I moved to Europe right after my early 20s and I worked as a cheese maker. And I lived in really small rural farms in the countryside. And I got up early and milked animals, made cheese. And I got to live in a traditional agricultural society and learn how they ate. So it shaped me as a cook because it was a chance to have incredible ingredients, learn how to cook very simple food. I had been immersed in thought that I wanted to be like a chefy chef, right? Because I love food and I love cooking and I was just drawn to that world. But I don't like the experience of that sort of like fancy food experience is not what is exciting for me about it. So I loved working in that environment because I got to eat lunches and dinners and everything with the farm that I lived in. The farm that I lived on and just very traditional, simple way to eat. The other piece of it is I went to high school in the 90s, child of like the low fat generation, right? And it was just really liberating and amazing to eat tons of super fatty foods and olive oil all over the place and bleak slabs of bread and salami and being this like vibrant health, like be leaner, you know, happy, no skin stuff, you know, stop getting split ends. Like I stopped having flaky nails, like just stuff that had bothered me my whole life, including like just moodiness. And that all just changed. And granted, I was also like living on a farm in Italy and getting up with the sunlight. And like there were lots of great aspects of my life as well that happened in that time. But I was just immersed in this diet that I realized like, man, this is so simple. And I also loved that I had like, you know, you'd have dinner and it was just like some ricotta cheese with some olive oil, some bread and like a bowl of fava beans. It's like, that's dinner. And it kind of broke down my assumptions too about like dinner always has to be this, you know, a protein and a vegetable and, you know, being more fluid and more seasonal was exciting for me. So I just learned kind of a lot about paying attention to food, simple preparation and the vibrancy of health that I personally experienced kind of made me double down on that. Our mutual friend, Andrew Huberman, mentioned something offline to me about something involving the mob. Oh yeah. Is there something you could share or is this, or are people going to hurt if you share this? It's far enough in the rear view mirror. I mean, I was hired by this group in Sicily on, and this is, you know, I was all of like 21 years old and to get a permit to work there, you have to show that you have a competency that nobody else in Italy has. And that competency for Anya Fernald at the time was cheese expert. So it was like, stupid American girl being like, going to the consulate. So I already knew that it was like, there was something wobbly about this organization, but I wanted to work for them. And my boss from that time did end up in federal prison for corruption many years later, embezzlement primarily. But, so I was definitely in an environment that was answering to multiple masters. That's a nice way to put it. It was, I couldn't have asked for a better way to kind of get with life and understand how things happen in the world though. You know, of learning as somebody who tends to be super direct and not very subtle, it was amazing to be in this world where like everybody communicates in multiple levels. Like we're going to lunch with my boss, with somebody we're gonna do a business deal with and by the, they ordered a glass of wine and with that order communicated like, disappointment. Because that, the father of the person who had made that wine had offended that other guys. I like that level of stuff, like nothing happened directly. I'm like, what are we talking about afterwards? I'm like, what happened that lunch? It's like, oh, I just, you know, I told him this by ordering that, whatever. You know, that kind of thing. So understand that there's different ways of communicating. But it was also, you know, it was interesting to see. And I think I, you know, it's kind of the struggle that I've lived again and again in my life. Fundamentally, what we were doing in that operation was there's a very traditional cheese called the Raguzano cheese in Southeastern Sicily where I lived, Ragusa. And it was about scaling that operation. So it was European Union money that my boss was also unfortunately using for other things. But fundamentally it was to take that, this type of very small scale cheese, get them exported, help them scale. And we did it. And it was really challenging. And I learned a lot about the safety issues and collaboration issues and creating groups of farmers for scale. So it's kind of been doing the same thing again and again. But Sicily, it, you know, it was also just the first place where I would regularly forage for food. Yeah. You know, like there I'd go to friends houses and we'd like go out and pick nettles or go out and pick wild asparagus. So every season there were stuff that you'd be gathering. And that was just part of how you lived. And it was part of your health. So that was, I just learned a ton in that time about like simple eating and really that healthy food, the simpler it is, the better, right? Like this sort of sense that healthy food isn't in a tiny package, granola bar, lots of labels, lots of powders. It's like the more simple, essential, closer to the land can actually lead to optimal health. You've learned to appreciate the simplicity of food, the beauty within the simplicity. I think it's because it was the first time that I had amazing food quality. Okay. Cause in the, where I grew up, there wasn't that food quality. Like I had some stuff from my garden and things that were great, but that's the kind of place where when artichokes in season, all of a sudden there's guys selling artichokes on their bicycles in the street and they're just fresh picked and you'd get that one thing or the torpedo onions or they like, so there's a seasonality and celebration of things in their peak moment. And you would just have that one thing. And that was the first time I'd ever eaten in that way. You were a judge several times on Iron Chef. How do you judge a good meal, like what your own, other people's, like what rating system is good? I mean, I go on experience and think about how many of your like most memorable, fantastic meals are like three star Michelin meals. It's more about the experience, right? It's more about that slow down, who are you with? And some of our best meals are like the most simple things. So Iron Chef, those were fun experiences. It's a lot of sous vide though. It's a lot of sauces. It's a lot of powders. I mean, it's kind of like magic food. So that's not, I mean, it's incredible to watch it as science, but I don't know if those are my most memorable meals. So the experience is how you judge a good meal. For you personally, if you were a judge of the entirety of the human experience in terms of the culinary journey, that would be like the people you're eating with, the environment, like how you feel, the journey, the building up to that meal, the whole thing. You can't separate it out. When I was learning as an apprentice cheese maker in Greece, one of the best meals of my life is like a bowl of cold sheep milk yogurt with like a crust of cold fat on top. So like the way that these fatty, sheep milk can have double the percentage of fat than cow milk. So like there's the yogurt and then there's this crust of fat and then they pour the fresh honey over the top and you just eat like this bowl of probably top five meals of my life, right? I mean, that's the simplicity, it's just the best thing. And it was the fact that it's in Terracotta and I'd had this amazing day and all of these things come together, but I still remember that feeling. And I think most of us have those like really great sensual memories of food and they're not about necessarily that one fancy over the top restaurant or something. It's really about the cold context of enjoyment. Maybe you can help me with something. So I think Offline said that we're both introverts a bit, but I certainly find joy in repetition. So I kind of hide away as an introvert and eat the same thing over and over and over again. But at the same time, I had this conversation with Tyler Cohen, who's an economist, but he's also a food critic. He writes these incredible posts about different foods. And we had this conversation about what his last meal would be. If he had to choose, like what is the best meal he's ever eaten that he would want to eat? And he had a good answer about it. It had to do with experience, I think. For him, it was a particular Mexican restaurant and it had in Mexico because of the ingredients, because of the experience, because of the work it took to get there and all those kinds of things. But it also made me realize, like when I was going home after that conversation, that I couldn't answer that question myself, like what is the best meal I've ever eaten? Because I really haven't experienced much. And so it almost was like a challenge to myself. Like I feel like I should journey out a little bit more in this life and try stuff. And to try to see like what is the best meal for me in the world? You know, like both the experience and the taste, right? So I was kind of wondering, first I'd love to ask you like what your last meal would be or what is the greatest meal you've ever eaten? But also, and you're still very young, and so there's still more experiences to be had, right? And for me, like how do you go about finding the best meal in the world? Is there a device you could give essentially? There's that sense of anticipation, right? So if it's the best meal, I'd say for you, it would need to be on the heels of something where you'd pushed yourself with a fast or with an athletic event, right? Or something like you would be coming into it with a sense of anticipation because of deprivation. You'd be hungry for it in a bigger sense of the word, like hungry for deep nutrition on your soul level as well as your belly. So I'd say that you'd have to think about it as a phase of things, like multiple things. And then I also think, you love meat, you love cheese. You have to have some things that come together, right? Like there's gotta be some specific elements of just your favorite flavors in that. But there could be flavors yet to be discovered. That's a whole other thing because I just emotionally and physically feel good on meat, but that doesn't mean like maybe like a rice based dish, like sushi or something like that, or Indian cuisine where it's like sauces and the breads and whatever. I love that stuff too. So we're not talking about like a meal is an experience that could be like a one night stand, but with a piece of food, right? It could be a totally different than what actually makes you feel good when you eat it every day. Yeah, absolutely. Completely, completely analogous. I get that. I mean, you also though, there's elements of comfort and love and those different pieces for you. But I think you gotta look at like, where would you go somewhere? Like would you go to a place where you could hike in Japan and then end up in a little place where you eat something? That's where I would think you were gonna have that magic moment. Maybe someplace you go to Mongolia and you're in a really extreme environment for three or four days, and then you come back and you're in a farm and you get something on the table that's a surprise and you're hungry. Like that's gonna be the moment where you're gonna explode in the instance of like the culinary level for Alexa levels up, right? That's the journey for you. But it has to be, I think from understanding you, like a combination of that pushing yourself anticipation and something about the, exactly, and the environment. Well, I definitely, definitely, like some fasting is part of a great meal for me. So like 24 hours is like the minimum. You're more sensitive to the richness of any experience for me when I fast 24 hours. And so that's a requirement. For a good meal is 24 hour fast, I think. It's just like you're able to taste, I don't know, maybe it's psychological, but you're able to disassemble the various flavors in a meal as simple as like even a chicken breast. There's all kinds of flavors going on. Because like when you cook a chicken breast, there's like the outside, the inside. I mean, the volume of the meat tastes different as you eat like the different fibers. And you can like tell all those differences as you're eating when you're fasting, and you can appreciate that. And of course, you're right, part of the journey is important. It makes me think like whether restaurants is the right place to explore or what. I'm envisioning it on a farm for you. And I'm envisioning it in a place that's like really into ag and food. You know, like even a place like Romania. You know, like they have incredible farms, right? Where it's not gonna get any like fancy restaurants there, but you're probably gonna have some amazing little cheeses and cured meats, and you might go to some, you know, have some experience and end up in a place with like four things on the plate and each of them blows your mind. You know, like, or Japan is another place like that. I think Vietnam, Laos, like, I mean, those are countries where there's like these incredible niche ingredients and this essentialism around food. That's fascinating. Or maybe it's in Russia with Putin. That might be the best meal in the world. With him on the farm. Yeah, that'd be, it's hard to reproduce that. If that is in fact a good meal, it'd be, you know, it's hard to get them out to the farm, but maybe one time they'd be the best meal. What about you? For me, like it's the ingredients that I associate with like indulgence, like be fresh bread with like my favorite cultured butter on it, be food of my childhood. I grew up in Oregon. We always had salmon and I smoked salmon or salmon eggs, like really good salmon eggs. I love cheese. I love goat cheese. I love all kinds of cheese. There'd be cheese. I love meat, obviously. I'm imagining it's sort of like an abundance of like 10 things I love. It's not a dish. You know, it's like all the yummy things. All of your indulgences on the same plate, yeah. And there isn't like, for me, there's not like a big cake or something super like that. It's like really yummy things that I love, like really fresh, crusty, delicious bread that's warm and it's got a bunch of butter on it and I can put some salt on it and eat a big slab of that. That's just, that's where I'm at. That's funny. And so meat to you is not like one of those indulgences? Oh, definitely. There'd definitely be steak there too. I'm just imagining not like there isn't a specific dish. It's like eight or 10 things, right? It's the fresh bread. It's something like fishy, yummy, probably be really good fresh berries too. There'd be a steak or a pork chop or something like meaty and delicious and savory. There'd be some cheese, just a bunch of different things that I love to eat that like all kind of check boxes for me is probably what would make me happiest. I'm afraid of variety. I like the focus when you can just, this is all you have, the scarcity of just this is the one ingredient and really appreciating it or maybe one thing, like one full complex flavor, whatever the heck that is. It's like the distraction, the serial dating nature of having a bunch of things on a plate is, yeah, for some reason that prevents me from fully enjoying any one of them. I don't know why that is. The more healthy way to do it is the variety. Your way is the healthier way to do it. Is alcohol involved? I don't drink very much. I like red wine, but I just don't really, I love red wine with good food. I also cofounded a rum business that's an organic rum, so I love that product, but that's not, for me, it's like I'm more interested in the food, I'd say. Is there some connection between your chef life, cooking and music? Does this music have a role in the experience? I love artistic expression, and that's always had a role in my life in the same way I love to paint and draw and all the different things. I was a professional musician when I lived in Sicily, by definition, technicality, because I played in the municipal band. So I would march around the town with all the funerals. I get like 50 euro every time I'd march in a funeral playing my oboe, so it's given me, I like that because I like to, like you were talking about going to farms, like what I quested for was experience and connection, in places where I could learn things. That's been the through line of my learning journey. I've learned things and sought knowledge that I can't get in any conventional learning environment, and so what are the tools that let me do that? It was like being adaptable and comfortable in different cultures, but also having common ground points that allow you to connect with people, so music's one of those things. So I love music, but I also, there's any number of enjoy of food, being able to pitch in and help in the kitchen, you know, like cards, like those are when you're dealing with getting into like farming communities and stuff, that stuff really helps, right? So I basically have cultivated tools that let me drop into places where I can learn, and so those are all kind of a piece. Those are just tools to get in there. That said, we did listen to Justin Bieber earlier today. I need to get more into him. I need to understand the full complexity of the Biebs. You're trying to achieve what hunting stands for, but at a much larger scale, which is what kind of Belcampo stands for, but what are your thoughts on hunting as a source of meat? It's amazing, 100% pro hunting. I think the reason that hunting flips the switch for so many people is because it's the first thing they've had clean meat in their lives. Okay, so I think that the hunter's journey, when people get so turned on by hunting, they're just like, oh my God, I'm never going back. I'm saying that's great if you've got access to that, or if you know the guy who'll give you the backstrap, awesome, but that's not achievable for most of us, and I do think that talking to hunters about their experiences, what they love about it, many of them are just outdoors, and I say that because most of them are men, but most of them love the outdoors aspect of it and being out in the wild, but a lot of them, it's because of how they feel when they eat the meat, and it's because they're eating, I mean, 99% of meat in America is made a very specific way, and it's in a way that is pretty inflammatory, not incredibly delicious, and when you're on that extreme, and then you toggle to having this totally different style of product, it feels radically different in your body, so of course you're like, I'll never go back. So when I talk about us being on that spectrum, it's like, well, it's, hunted meat's, I mean, I can never on any commercial operation create the variety of the biodiversity of species that an elk gets when it's wandering around of its own, I mean, there's no way you can do that on a farm, so there's always gonna be that extra five or 10% that those wild animals are gonna have, and those wild animals also fast for longer, so they go through periods of starvation, and that creates an even slower growth for musculature that's gonna create even more unique flavor and characteristics, so that's why there's that extra in the hunted meat, but you can come a lot closer with regenerative traditional farming to that flavor and health than with any other type of farming I know, so that's where I see it on the spectrum. I love that people are getting excited about game, because it's better for your health, it's got all the same characteristics as regenerative farmed meat, and it gets people turned on to simple, delicious food. You know, you shouldn't have to cover food with sauce that's got corn syrup and soy, a bunch of junk in it to make it palatable. If you gotta put sauce on your food, you need to look at your ingredients. You need to revisit what you're starting from, because if you have to put a bunch of things to mask flavor onto anything you're eating, you're trying to basically fool your palate into doing what's not best for your body. We're trying to tell our palates, like, just make it through this plate so you can get the calories in, and we're masking the fact that we don't actually find it very appetizing. So we're kind of teaching ourselves to overcome our instinct with food. We're saying, here's this kind of bland base substrate, not very interesting, I'm not like sparking to it. Awesome, put sugar and salt on it. This up the hyperprocess flavor profile. Great, done. And then you're sparked to it. That's a very short road, and that's, I think, a lot of the health problems we have now is because we're masking flavors and basically trying to get ourselves to move down this path of the same way we behave around all hyperprocess foods. And that gets us into a mess with our health. So if we can get things like game where people love the flavor out of the gate, but it's natural, simple, mentally processed, that's a win. Yeah, it reverses that hyperprocessing trend that we're on as a human species. And that's the promise of regenerative farming, that's the promise of hunting. Obviously, the former can be scaled, the hunting, I think, cannot be scaled, right? But in many ways, the hunting inspires the world that this is the right way to eat. Yes. And that naturally leads to then the humane farming, regenerative farming idea, which is this idea that hunting represents. How do you scale that? Well, if you look at, we're talking about people use this sort of marketing language of happy cows or that kind of thing. You're talking about the happiest animals, it's wild animals, right? So if you wonder why these practices are good, talk to hunters. You're talking about animals that have lived in their evolutionary capacity, right? Who have played their role in the ecosystem, who've lived their meaning of life, right? And that's a very powerfully different kind of role than livestock production. So I think if we can make our livestock production as similar to wild as possible, then we're a lot of steps closer. So you said the animals are happiest in the wild and that's where they find meaning. What about us, the human animal? What's the meaning for us, do you think? You've monitored the life cycle of a lot of living beings. You ever look in the mirror and think like, why the hell are we humans here? I mean, thriving, reducing suffering, creating goodness. I mean, those are the things I see in animals behavior. They're mostly interested in reducing suffering and nurturing, right? Those are the things that I think evolutionarily. And we humans are just clever and we wanna be able to try to do that at a bigger and bigger scale. As much as possible, reduce the suffering in the world. And somehow that alleviates us of our own suffering. That's the Russian thing, life is suffering and somehow helping others alleviates it and come up with creative solutions to do that. That's really interesting. It's almost consciousness is the thing that led to suffering, but it also led to the desire to alleviate the suffering. It's a feedback loop. Consciousness creates suffering and the desire to alleviate it. Is there yet a pretty nonlinear life? Your parents were professors. You have done a lot of sort of incredible things that many would say kind of like, how the hell are you gonna get this done? Is there advice you can give to young people today, like high school, college, about how to do, how to live a similarly nonlinear crazy life and accomplish, be as successful as you have been about whether it's just their career or life in general? The greatest gifts I've been given have come from pursuing curiosity. Just trying to understand the thing you're curious about and allowing yourself to be curious about it and just going with it. And also pursuing things that are like deeply joyful for me. Not what society wants, but you just personally, just on your own, you're happy that you did it. And that's something that in the times when I strayed from that, my life has been harder. So it's fundamentally, what are we on earth to do? To live and thrive. And so pursuing things that are curious and satisfying and interesting and joyful and allow me to grow. So I made a number of choices to do things that were more complicated and not considered cool at the time. Although now it's cool to work on farms. It wasn't when I started my career in animal agriculture. And it was like, but just deeply interesting to me. And I felt like there was just lots to learn. And so that's been the path for me is like going for something that's curious and hard and sticking with it and being open to it. And growing elements that give me joy through that. So I also, for people who are starting out in their careers and want to do something different too, it's like, get out of your comfort. Go to a place that you've got something to learn from and let it teach you that. And you'll get beat up. Like I got beat up by that experience. Like it was really hard. I laugh about now working in Sicily for, and the funny experiences I had there, but it was hard. I was lonely and cried a lot. It was stressful. It was like, it was hard. It was really hard. And when you're inside of it, you didn't know how it's going to turn out. You didn't know it's going to turn out well. And I'm like, why didn't I get a job doing something that all my friends are doing? And I didn't speak the language yet. I had to learn foreign language and learn how to function. And it was very lonely and very challenging, but then that's where my resilience started to grow. So the things I learned, they helped me grow. So the things I learned there ended up just being about resilience and understanding the language of subtlety in meaning. So that's something that's carried me through my life. But it was a curiosity about cheese making and about like just living in a village that was there. I'm like, wouldn't it be amazing to just live in a really rural village. And you just went with it. And I just like, this seems incredible and have a place where you can, the people seem interesting, the food seems good. And let's just like try this and see what I can learn. And that like putting yourself out of your comfort zone in a place where you have a chance to learn and grow is the secret. Because it's, you grow through discomfort. People think that you grow when you get into this environment where everything's like kind of sailing along, but like growth actually comes through pain. It's like growth comes from being cut down and beat down and having to regrow and double down. And so that kind of opportunity, you have to seek it out. You have to put yourself in the line of fire a bit. If the situation sucks, it's a sign that you might be doing something right in the sense that you're on the path at the end of which you'll be a better person if you allow yourself to grow in that way. Like as opposed to resisting it, just going along with the journey and persevering. And that ended us up in this incredible place. This whole conversation, I'll probably overlay a video. I'm looking at a gorgeous mountain and it's an incredible farm. Thank you so much for a meal yesterday. That was incredible. The cheese, the fish eggs, just everything about this place. Looking up, you can see the stars. The stars at night are beautiful and there's a peacefulness to it. I had a pretty hard week actually, just emotionally in many ways. And just coming here, it's immediately, so much of it is lifted. So I really deeply appreciate Anya that you would invite me here and that you have this conversation. This was really awesome. So thank you so much. Thank you. Thanks for listening to this conversation with Anya Fernald and thank you to Gala Games, Athletic Greens, Four Sigmatic and Fundrise. Check them out in the description to support this podcast. And now let me leave you with some words from the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu. Nature does not hurry, yet everything is accomplished. Thank you for listening. I hope to see you next time. is roasting a whole chicken, which is a really difficult, it's the simplest dish, but it's very difficult because you have the breast meat, which is bigger chunks. They cook faster. You have the thighs and drums, which are smaller and they cook slower. To optimize that and pay attention to it and do it all right, you're actually solving for different outcomes. So there's one example, but oftentimes food is less delicious with multiple ingredients at the start because we're not able to pay attention to how each one needs to end up. So there's a way to parse that apart and achieve a better outcome. I don't know if you've seen Jiro Dreams of Sushi. It's a documentary about, yeah. So there's an obsession that that particular, first of all, set of humans, but also the particular cuisine that focused on the basics of the ingredients. What do you think of that kind of trying to achieve mastery through repeating the making of the same meal over and over and over for like decades? Like, do you find beauty in that journey towards mastery or do you think it should be always an exploration to where you're always trying things, you're always kind of injecting new flavors, new experiences, all that kind of stuff? I think you have to decide on a palette. You know, if we're talking about an art, it's equivalent to saying, am I a sculptor or a painter? That, the sushi lexicon thing, that's a very, very narrow, small canvas that you're painting on. And that is a beautiful road, right? There's a beauty and a perfection to that. It's like, I mean, there's many things culturally around that that you could extrapolate for specifically for Japan. But I encourage people on the journey in food to choose like kind of a language that they're working within. And if you wanna step out of that occasionally and have one or two dishes, but if you wanna get mastery with food, you probably aren't gonna be able to get more than say, 20 ingredients that you use regularly that you really understand. And so we often see, you know, I see the American pantry, it's got tons of sauces and tons of spices and tons of spice blends. And then really people only use just a couple of things. And the idea that you can sort of splash out and do Korean one night and then tacos the next night, you can absolutely, but to get in a regular cadence of specific ingredients, you're probably gonna get more mastery with that sooner. And I think as much as you can do to get an understanding of the basics around salt and acid and understand your palette, like for me, it's lemon and usually sherry vinegar, right? So that's my acid palette. And my fat palates, you know, suet and butter, olive oil. So you can sort of choose your language, what you're painting with, but I wouldn't splash out and say, do I use sesame oil? Yeah, every once in a while, but that's not part of my base palette, right? Can you say again what your fat palette is? It'd be butter, suet and olive oil. And olive oil, so not, why olive oil? Is it your roots in Italy? I like the flavor for finish because of the bitterness that it adds. So I like the bitter and acid contrast on meat and vegetables, which is mostly what I eat. And so I love that way that the bitterness and astringency complements and allows the flavors to come out. What do you think about coconut oil? I recently discovered that there's a, I don't know, there's a sweetness or there's something to it that I really enjoy, maybe because it's new. It's good with heat. And I really love it for some reason. As a chef, do you ever try it? What do you think about it? I like it in coffee. I like it as a treat a little bit. I find the flavor a little bit challenging in foods. I also find that it's difficult on the quality of that ingredient. So I've found often that I buy a high quality coconut oil and there's rancidity in it. And I don't totally know why. I think it's just the cold chain and how that product's packaged. So I've had some issues with product quality in that. But for me, it's a little bit too much sweetness in my foods, but then again, I don't cook in like a Southeast Asian palette. I try to not have much sweetness in my foods in general. So I, just because of the palette that I like to cook with. So for me, coconut's got a little bit too much of those high notes and earthiness, which is a nice combination, but it's more like a treat. Yeah, it is almost like a treat. It has a flavor of its own that almost stands on its own. Like I could probably just eat coconut. That's probably the only oil I could enjoy by itself. It sounds weird to say, but it feels like fat is often a thing that enriches the flavor of something else. Coconut can almost stand on its own. You might also be responding to that. It's a complex flavor. So there's also, there's an analogous, you know, if you look at butter, for example, a lot of the butter that we eat in the US is just sweet cream butter. It's not cultured. If you explore like a cultured fermented butter, maybe a grass milk, grass fed and finished butter, you're gonna get a ton more complexity. And so you may also just be responding to having fats with more flavor, which is the journey in the US has been towards refined foods that are very neutral. And then you have to combine more of them to make things taste like things. And so if you're coming from a background of using mostly just generic butter or let's say canola oil to cook with, those are very neutral oils. So you can also take some of your favorite fats and look for versions of them that are more flavorful. I mean, I love olive oil as a treat in a spoon. Really? Like a good California extra virgin olive oil. I'll just like have it as, I'll eat a piece of butter as a treat. Yeah. That's like, or butter with salt on it. Like good fats can, all of them can be, if they're minimally processed and they're fabulous and it's so delicious, right? But there are things that you have to like look for a version of them that's got that full palette of flavor. Well, for me also the flavors are inextricably tied to the memories I've had with those flavors. So for better or worse, back when I used to eat a lot of ice cream, I for some reason had a lot of pleasant experience with coconut ice cream. So that particular flavor just permeates throughout my life now. Like I'm stuck with it for better or worse as a flavor that brings up pleasant memories. And as I have a few such flavors, I have such relationship with all kinds of meat too. Like it's just so many pleasant memories and that's it. Like you're almost tasting the memories. And that there's no way to separate the flavor from the memories, I suppose. And that's a powerful thing. What's your favorite meal to cook? I'll roast a couple of chickens and then I'll poach them, like I'll boil them and let it cool down. It's a complicated one. I'll let them cool down. I'll pull all the meat off, put the bones back into the pot and then cook that for like three or four hours and then add in like shiitake mushrooms and all the chicken meat. And I'll throw in a bottle of white wine into the stock as well, a bunch of thyme and garlic. And I love it because it's the way the house smells. It's very laborious. It's soothing for me to spend time picking apart meat and chopping things up. There's like a lot of manuality around it. So I'd say from a personal, like, I mean, I love grilling a steak and doing those things as well, but there's something about making a stock from scratch and the way it smells, the way I feel, the time it takes, the kind of checking in on it that I really, really love. There's many things I love to make that I don't even love to eat. I think you see this a lot in like baking and bakers, people who bake a ton and they love the process of it, even if they don't eat that many baked goods. So anything for me that's really like enjoyable is typically things like making cinnamon buns. I don't eat very many cinnamon buns, but I love making them because it takes all the sort of like futzing around and taking your time and watching it and the way it smells, the way the house smells. All of that stuff is like, it's like almost like a meditative exercise for me. Is there a science, is there an art to cooking meat well and the different kinds of meats? Is there something you can convert it towards in to say ideas, how to bring out the best of it out of what particular meat, whatever steak we're talking about, whatever beef we're talking about? Is there something that can be said? The basic approach to cooking any type of meat beyond the artistry of it is pretty scientific. And it's what type of muscle is it in the animal and what's the surface area to volume ratio? Okay, so let's look at those two questions. So the first piece is what's the type of muscle in the animal? What's the functionality? You don't necessarily need to know that to evaluate it, but you need to understand, is it a tender muscle that's not used very frequently in the animal? Or is it a big load bearing muscle that gets a lot of action, like the cheek, right? Or the shin or those pieces? The muscles like those along the spinal cord that make up rib eyes and New York steaks and things, those aren't very exercised. They're right next to the spinal cord. Spinal cord's doing most of the work there. They're kind of like stabilizing muscles around this big functional piece of skeletal structure in the animal. Other muscles, like the ones around the diaphragm with the flat iron steaks and skirt steaks and things, those are really functional muscles that are doing a ton and moving. And if they're moving a lot, what happens? Well, functionally, they've got lots of muscle sheaths because muscles that move frequently have to do a lot of like complex contraction. That's why there's, in the cheek, for example, there's tons of visible fiber of like collagenous connective tissue. That connective tissue is everything in how the meat cooks because connective tissue doesn't respond to high heat with becoming more tender. Muscles do, right? They can get a sear on them. You can cut them and eat them. The collagenous tissue will glom up and get really tough. So you either have to liquefy it with really low, slow heat with moisture, right? Or you have to barely cook it. And so that's the major piece. So that's the question of like, why wouldn't you just throw a brisket on the grill? Okay? It's not about the fat. You can cut the fat out. The reason you're not gonna throw a brisket on the grill and cook it hot and fast is it's got too much collagenous connective tissue in it. Those are these giant muscles that have all this collagen and these fibers and tendons in them effectively. So you're never gonna be able to just cook that up hot and fast. So that's the first piece. It's like, where's this muscle in the architecture of the animal? And then what does that mean for what's going on in the muscle? And that's actually more important than fat content. We get really kind of, we pay a lot of attention to fat content in muscles. You can make a steak tender if it doesn't have a ton of fat in it. It actually has more to do if there's collagenous and connective tissue in it. That's fascinating. I never even thought about that. I just, I thought it kind of universal. I mean, it adds to the texture of the meat, the chewiness of the meat. But you're saying it's also adds to how the meat is cooked. How heat, how it reacts to heat, how the entirety of the meat reacts to heat. And the fat is not as important to that as the collagen. The fat will make the flavor more delicious, right? Like it'll add unctuousness and mouthfeel and things like that. But all the connective tissue in meat and in some of the cuts, like that we ate at a skirt steak last night, you could see a web of that collagen sheath on the outside. On a ribeye, that same collagen sheath is this big. There's only one. It goes around the outside, okay? Cause it's just that muscle, there's one large muscle fiber. So that specific, it's a myelin sheath, right? That material needs moisture and low and slow heat to become tender. The other side of that is that when it becomes tender, it liquefies and it adds all this beautiful gelatinous consistency. That's what bone broth is. That's why like a slow cooked pork shoulder is so delicious. It's not that it's full of all that fat. That fat's also great. But a lot of that mouthfeel comes from that really beautiful dissolved collagen. So when you're looking at like, how do I understand how I'm gonna cook a piece of meat? That first fork in the road is, how is this gonna respond to heat? And what's the appropriate cooking technique? Then the second piece is that surface area to volume ratio. And that's important because the heat is gonna impact the meat through the surfaces of the meat that are in contact with the heat. So if I have a steak that's three inches thick, I'm gonna cook it extremely differently from a steak that's a half inch thick or three quarters of an inch thick. And that's the major, and that's the truth. If I have a piece of pork shoulder that's cut into cubes versus having a whole pork shoulder, that surface area to volume ratio, that's gonna totally change how I cook it. And same things like pot roast and a beef stew would be the same cut of meat, right? But how I cook them is gonna change based on the surface area to volume. Because you've gotta let moisture and heat work its way into the center of the meat. And that's gonna be determined by the amount of surface of the meat that's in contact with whatever cooking liquid or heat you've got. Is there different sources of heat to play with? Like a big flame versus a small, or maybe even like almost no flame, like over coals, all that kind of stuff. Is there some science to the source of heat in how it plays with the meat? Well, there's indirect heat and direct heat. And that really is mostly about temperature in more than actual, I mean, smoke is important as well that can permeate, but really the smoke doesn't go into the center of most cuts that you barbecue. It'll come in like the smoke ring. It's a maximum like half an inch on the outside, maybe a little bit deeper on a really long, slow cook. So they, but the smoke, that does create a ton of flavor on the surface of the meat. But that's, so the indirect allows you to have smoke contacting it and then a very, very low and slow heat. And what that does is indirect heat will be low and slow enough that the center of the meat will get warm at the same time as the exterior of the meat. And it'll all cook equally and all get equally tender. If you go very hot and fast, you risk the interior of the meat not getting right. You kind of create a shell on the, on it. And you slow down the interior of the meat, which you actually want to do with something like a steak where you want to keep it rare on the inside. So it's really indirect versus direct. Then once you get into direct heat, right, look at in that category, there's wood, charcoal, gas, right, that's about it. And those are meaningfully different. They're meaningfully different. Charcoal and wood, that's more of, there's more poetry and wood. There's a little bit more flavor, not functionally very different, but gas versus charcoal wood is very different. And that's because of the actual scent of the, of the cook, right, the scent of the flavor. And then there's a, I think an evenness of heat distribution that comes off of charcoal that's different from gas, because no matter how awesome your gas grill is, you do have hotter and cooler spots. So gas grills are typically, you can kind of control for that if you just are going really hot and fast, which is why gas grills are fine if you're just like throwing that steak on, get a hard sear on it, those burgers put a crust on it. Gas is fabulous for that. It's perfect. When you're doing things that do better with a low and slow cook, like let's say a whole tenderloin or chicken thigh, that's going to be a little bit less elegant on gas than on charcoal versus wood. So when you have more, more kind of nuance in the low, slow cook over the natural fuels. Talking about like smoke and flame and charcoal versus gas, it also adds to the experience and the smell and the whole thing of the cooking, like versus just like the taste it creates. There's a certain experience too, like when there's a bit of smoke, maybe I don't know what the chemistry of it is, but I feel like with smoke, the smell is distributed more effectively. I don't know if that's true, but there's a smell and a visual aspect to the experience that's almost enriched with a bit of smoke or like an open flame. Like if you can see the flame, there's magic to that. And it goes to the experience piece that we were talking about before. We were talking exactly about that, like the nuance and the beauty of like that long, slow cook and your house smelling like something. Why do people freak out about barbecue? Yeah. Why? Because you go in and it smells bomb. It smells so good. It smells like heaven, right? It smells fatty and delicious and the smells everywhere and everyone's smelling the same smell. So there's like this collective experience. It's incredible. That's, I mean, I think that's why barbecue is so sticky for people. It's like so yummy and you get this huge like anticipatory thing about it. It's like, cause it smells incredible. What was that incredible grill that we used yesterday? What is that about? That's called a Sea Island Forge. It's a wood fire grill that's inspired by like a South American style of cooking. So it's like, it's big. It has also the things with the crank. It allows you to control the distance from the flame. It's awesome. It's really key with the wood fire. So when we evolved from cooking over wood to charcoal, right, when that became more popular, the reason that we did that is that allowed us to skip the whole part of making our own charcoal, right? So when you're cooking over wood, all you're doing is making your own charcoal. You don't ever cook over wood with the red fire. Like we don't like throw a steak on when the flames are orange and leaping up because you're just gonna get, you know, carbons like char all over your meat. So you're, when you're cooking over wood, you first cook down the wood, you create the coal base, the natural coal base, and then you cook over that. So you saw yesterday, I built my fire, I let it burn down, added some fresh wood so I could reinforce my coals with new coals coming in. But then I was actually cooking over the embers. You shorten that cycle with charcoal, it's more efficient. But what you lose is that whole cycle of, you know, that really beautiful experience of smelling. Now, if you're cooking on a Traeger, you're gonna get awesome smoke smell. You know, like there's plenty of ways to do this. It doesn't always have to be wood fire. And I love all the different ways, right? But I really like the experience of the campfire. And I love that kind of just like sitting by it, building it, having to take the time. I like building the fire, going inside, preparing all my meats, bringing them out, cooking them. That whole experience start to finish is really just like something that it's my favorite. It's my favorite way to spend time, you know? So I think, and why is that? Is the food that different than cooking it in a more conventional grill? Probably not, you know, like in a pure experience. But I think the actual experience is super memorable because you are outside, you are still in your role. You're enjoying this, you know, you're just taking in, you're watching, you're anticipating. I love that whole experience. Does the origin of the meat itself make a difference? So we're here at Belcampo Farms and we'll, maybe you could talk about what your vision, your dream is in terms of like food, in terms of where food comes from, where meat comes from, but food broadly, and how that affects the entirety of the culinary journey. On the question of where does it come from and does that matter, I'd say the way that meat is raised is massively important for flavor and for how it cooks. I think most cooks who try cooking grass fed versus corn fed, that's the first moment where they realize that, right? Where corn fed meat cooks much more slowly, it's got bigger veins of fat that slow the heat transfer throughout the muscle of the animal, compared to grass fed, which is leaner, heat moves through it more quickly, those steaks will cook much, much faster. So there's very kind of technical reasons why, how meat is raised that we're aware of. And there's other things that I've noticed, like that slower growing poultry has a very, very different musculature and fiber to it than fast growing poultry, that's confinement animals. It's just, it has to do with the way that the muscles are built. They tend to be finer and thinner and more tender and a little bit more susceptible to heat. So the character of the meat's radically different. It's also much more flavorful when it's grown more naturally. And I think some of the reliance in the US on like sugary sauces and lots of salts and flavors and things like that's actually based on having the broadly available meat out there is pretty low on flavor. And so we're adding in a lot to compensate for that. So to your point of like enjoying things very simply and with like salt and nothing else, like the more flavorful that product is, I think the more people will find that enjoyable. Let's paint a vision. I mean, you're a visionary. You have a vision to have basically meat in every store that comes from a farm like Belcampo that's basically doing regenerative farming. How do we get there? It's about a network of smaller producers working together with shared values. And it's true that there's a limit on regenerative farming in that it requires more human knowledge. So regenerative farming is more difficult to scale in a single operation. It'd be really challenging to have a regenerative farm that was like 200,000 acres because of the amount of manpower needed to pay attention. Can you first, and I apologize to interrupt, but can you say what is regenerative farming? Sure. So if you're looking at scaling regenerative farming, it's a traditional system of agriculture. Regenerative farming is how we used to farm. We used to farm with an eye towards the longterm. You might be on the Friedman farm thinking about your heirs five generations from now farming that same land. Are you gonna leave that land nutritionally empty? No, it's a longterm thinking. Also in traditional ag, you don't have inputs. That are very convenient. You can put some chicken manure on, but you can't spray or dump something that massively increases the growing potential of the land. That was not available until the past 60 years. So regenerative agriculture is an approach to farming where you're increasing soil fertility through your farming. You increase soil fertility by feeding the soil. You feed the soil through carbon. That's why regenerative farming is better for the environment. It sequesters carbon and puts carbon into the soil. Now it's interesting. Plants need carbon and put it into the soil when they're going through growth. So if you have a beautiful field of grass that's just waving in the wind, that's where you're gonna get the most of the carbon that's going into the soil. That's not sequestering as much carbon as plants that have been damaged and are regrowing. Plants that have been damaged and are regrowing are repairing and they're doing that by drawing down carbon as one of the nutrients that feeds them. To damage the plants effectively, that's what we're doing with regenerative grazing. So the cows or, you know, lambs or whatever out there, they're eating and taking the grass down and that then cause a regrowth cycle that sequesters carbon. Wow. There's a limit to it. There's an edge, because if those plants are so damaged that they can't regrow, then it turns into a dirt patch and that doesn't sequester any carbon. So it's a balance. How do you find that balance? That has to do with like the frequency and the scale of the grazing essentially? Exactly. And so you have to find the right balance and that connects to both the grass. I mean, is the ultimately the focus here is on the life cycle of whatever is grazing, whether it's cows or lambs or so on? That's why the scalability question. So all that stuff that I just talked about, like think about all the actions that that requires. Somebody's out there looking and paying attention and understanding how far the grass is, remembering what happened in that field last year. There's a huge human intelligence need and human kind of availability of attention. Now, industrial farming has done a great job at de skilling agriculture. Industrial farming has taken agriculture from being art science to being entry level employment. Yeah. So that's the limiting factor on regen and that's why I think... It's a human intelligence piece. Exactly. I gotta ask, I don't know if you think about this kind of stuff. I mentioned to you offline that I spent a bit of time with some robots and Boston Dynamics. Do you think there's a way to use artificial intelligence to help? So data collection, so automating some of the things that makes humans special, make some of that decision, some of that memory that's then utilized, converges to knowledge to make decisions about the crops and so on. Is there a way AI can help? Do you think? Totally. I mean, that would be incredible. That's one of the ingredients that could help with the regenerative farming. A number of discrete decision points that could completely be automated as well in order to supplement and work with somebody, like a farmer in managing it, about the performance on land. And a bit of that's being done right now with some aerial mapping, but that type of AI would be huge in this. I mean, there's estimates that if the damage and underutilized rangeland in the world was converted to regenerative agriculture somewhere between like 20 and 40% of the world's carbon could be sequestered. So there's a huge potential. The problem is cultural. We've like lost the generational thread of knowledge about how to do this. It's kind of been two generations that haven't farmed this way. Also the science around it is limited by the scale and longevity. So the data collection around regenerative farming is also limited by the fact it's kind of piecemeal. There's small operations that are doing it. They're learning and developing as they go, and they haven't been documenting it and doing it for too long. Is the ethical treatment of animals a part of regenerative farming? So in the way you do things at Belcampo, that's a huge part. Is that necessarily part of the life cycle? So like the things that you're trying to measure is like the way, like not damaging the land too much, make sure that the sort of the land is constantly healthy and is producing, and then the grazing process, and also the carbon piece, the fact that it's a carbon neutral or something like that. I mean, are all of those pieces of the regenerative farming or is this an extra part to your vision that you're thinking about? It's all implicit and regenerative. I call it out separately because we are certified humane, which is another layer of welfare that has to do with density and a couple other things. But regenerative, I mean, think about it. If you're a cow and you're in a regenerative operation where the whole life cycle of the pasture means that you only eat the top six inches of the grass, and then when there's whatever, a couple inches left, then that field is left dormant. That's a better experience, right? So just think about it kind of functionally that way. Well, grazing period is a better experience, right? And that's not what's done in, I mean, that's the grass fed piece, right? That's the other piece with certified organics, amazing. There's plenty of certifications that grass fed and finished is also great, but there are workarounds for those. You can have certified organic feedlots. You can have grass fed and finished, which is an animal fed a grass seed pellet. Those aren't things that we do here, right? And regenerative captures that. Because if you're, it's like anything, you're isolating these very specific certifications, it doesn't have a holistic approach. Regenerative though, unfortunately, isn't certified yet. We've gotten USDA approval to use that word based on our carbon sequestration data, but it's not a regulated term. So that's kind of the mix right now is to figure out how to document it. And it's not totally clear what it means like for pigs and chickens, which are omnivores. It's very clear for ruminants, which are animals that have a rumen that eat grass. For omnivores, which is like what we are, they eat primarily grain in farming operations, and that's a little bit more complex. So it's kind of a moving landscape, but regenerative as a word is the better definition of the whole life cycle approach of letting animals and nature work together. Is it true that it's possible to have a farm that doesn't produce, sort of is carbon neutral? We have been third party verified to be carbon impact negative. So Belcampo's 25,000 acres and the animals here, all of the carbon, including from our shipping on our mail order is all offset by the amount of grazing that's happening. Also that encompasses our partner farms. We buy a number of live animals in from other partner farms. That's their impacts also incorporated in that. I mean, first of all, that's incredible. And second of all, is that possible to scale? I don't see why it isn't. I mean, it's complex to scale, but I mean, we're putting people on the moon and you have a robotic dog. I mean. But that's less about scale, that's more about innovation. So like in many ways what Belcampo has done is innovative at a small scale. The question is whether that innovation can be scaled. That's where I feel like we in the industry need more help. You know, the AI piece, the intelligence, the thinking about ways to do things differently is where we need more support. And I think it's been a, you know, a kind of a swing in the past couple of years where it's like meat's a mess, it's terrible. So let's ditch meat and opt for these hyper process, you know, plant based solutions. And I am saying there's a way to make meat a part of the solution. And it's gonna mean eating less of it. It's gonna mean paying more for it. It's gonna mean that the farming systems are more complicated. It's not the easiest path, but I think in the long term it's the better path. And it's also better for human health. Can you comment on the certified humane piece? So how do you run a farm? Like what does it mean to raise an animal from the beginning of its life to the end of its life in a way that's ethical, that's humane? I think the first piece you need to just be comfortable with is that making an animal into meat, you know, is something that you're comfortable with. Cause I think that's the biggest question, right? And so certified humane actually goes all the way through the death of the animal, how it's killed and handled at processing. So I put that out there just to say, well, this is all about producing an animal to die for meat. And that's not necessarily, that's something people struggle with with the word humane. And I understand that. Like I have space and empathy for that. It's a complicated decision. And when you have to be comfortable with at the outset to say, this is an animal that's gonna die to feed me. Yeah, so we should pause on that cause I actually just the two days ago read a paper that argued that, you know, the killing of an animal period cannot be humane. So it's impossible. And so, and that's an argument just like you're saying we could make, but if we now on the table kind of take as a starting point, the idea that it's possible to kill an animal for food in an ethical way, if we take that as a starting point. So we won't argue about that. It is worth arguing about it elsewhere. And it probably will. I will probably talk to a few vegan folks and we'll talk about the vegan diet. I'm fascinated by it as well. So I'm torn in the whole thing. But if we just take that as a starting point, what then is an ethical humane way to treat an animal? I look at ethical humane animal treatment as the major phases of life. So conception, birth and mothering, diet, those are kind of the major touch points of life. So what we're looking at is evolutionary approach, which means is the animal eating what it evolved to eat primarily? Is the animal primarily outdoors, which is how all animals evolved, given when the climate's appropriate for it. There's certain times when you can't have animals fully outdoors, like here on our ranch, we have had issues with cold weather and things. But so if you have appropriate weather conditions, does the animal outdoors? Is the animal able to nurture and engage with its young? Those are the kind of key touch points, but it's really the birth of it. Let me start this one from the scratch. Okay, so when I'm looking at, or when I consider what's humane, setting aside the death part, I look at the evolutionary diet, access to the outdoors, and ideally spending the majority of its life outdoors, low density, so animals spread out, and engagement with young, social interactions, and that's all kind of simplistic. Social interaction is a cool one. I mean, I also read an article that like, cows, for example, have social, like they have friends. Yeah, yeah. That's fascinating. I mean, that piece with the young, social interaction with young, social interaction with each other, that at a basic level, I'm sure that interaction is not as rich as humans, but that piece seems to be part of the humane picture. And you said also, just a quick comment, evolutionary diet, meaning the diet that they were evolved to have. And that's pretty simple. You can look at the physiology of the animal and figure that out. So ruminant species are lamb, goats, and beef, and they have five stomachs. They evolved eating really low calorie, high fiber foods. That's why they've got all the stomachs. They need a lot of processing. You or I were to eat grass, we die in a week, right? Our physiology can't handle it. Cows were built and evolved to eat this very low calorie, very high fiber, very low density food. And they walk around slowly, they're moving constantly and they're eating it. When we put them on a corn fed diet, that's the opposite of their evolutionary diet and their systems really struggle with it. Now, pigs and chickens are different. Pigs and chickens are omnivores and pigs will happily eat chickens, for example. Our pigs on the farm will hunt and kill rattlesnakes and eat them. They enjoy all of it. They're omnivores. So that you often see, and I've seen people try to raise like a grass fed chicken and that doesn't exist. I mean, they need a higher, omnivores eat everything. They're what's called monogastric. They got one stomach and that one stomach needs higher density nutrients. So in the case of chicken, if you're to do, look back in American history and in the 1950s, it took, commercial chickens took like 54 weeks to come to full weight. Now it's two and a half weeks in confinement farming on our systems, it's like eight to 10 weeks typically. So it's a very, you have to give them some amount of nutrient density, but there's the idea that no grain, because that's a misinformation for any type of commercial operation, free range, regenerative, pastured, everything, you're gonna have to have a grain feed to get any type of, it's actually, I think for the case of chickens, unless you're in a place with like tons of natural seeds and grubs and worms and stuff to eat, really challenging for the chicken. So you gotta give them some high density, high calorie food different from that. That's the evolutionary diet is a really key thing. That's the fundamental thing for health. And it's also interesting because the evolutionary diet ties to human health. I've looked at the nutritional analysis on all of our products and it's, the evolutionary diet is for the case of beef and lamb gets their omega three to six ratios, the same as wild game. So it's not like beef is really radically different from elk, a ruminant species, right? If you feed beef an evolutionary diet, their nutritional profile is the same as wild meat. There's a wild ruminant. I got a chance to witness Neuralink, I don't know if you're familiar with that company, the brain computer interfaces. And they have, I got a chance to see in person just a bunch of pigs who had Neuralink chips implanted and taken out. Those pigs are so happy with life. I don't know, I've never seen a happier animal. I mean, cause they get to eat, cause you were mentioning sort of diets and stuff. Pigs seem to love a lot of stuff. They're easily made to be happy. I don't know if you can comment on your thoughts of exploring the capacity of the pig mind through some of this testing with Neuralink, whether that's exciting to you, whether maybe on the humane side, it's a little bit concerning, if there's something to be said on sort of like, yeah, I don't know if it's even the ethical side, but just because of your connection to meat and to nature and understanding these living beings. Well, pigs are incredibly intelligent. So I'm not surprised that they're a subject matter for Neuralink. They're smarter than dogs and they're empathetic and emotional. And we'll go look at our pigs afterwards and see, but they're kind of like joyful and exuberant when they're in good health. And so that makes sense. I'm interested and open. I feel that the kind of bleeding edge agriculture movement that I'm on the edge of in some ways, we're a larger operator, but we as a movement have to get into the game. We have to move forward in a way that allows us to scale if we wanna be viable. So I think there has to be openness to how that can happen. And I also think there needs to be more thoughtful and noisy data about how regenerative ranching can sequester carbon. I mean, thousands of American ranches are selling carbon credits right now. The data is that valid. And they're not selling carbon credits from like grassland that just got a fence around it. They're selling carbon credits for verified data from animals assisting in carbon sequestration, right? So there's got to be a way to get the tech community involved in ways to help regenerative agriculture scale. In different creative ways. And actually, that'd be interesting if like Neuralink somehow has, and especially because Elon Musk is involved and Kimball Musk has his whole effort and appreciation of regenerative agriculture that I wonder if Neuralink has a role to play, like exploring the neurobiology of the animal, if that somehow will create innovations

本集資源與出處