Re: Why is only a small subset of all species of used for food?

DSR,

First I must say that there is not one set answer as to why our diets consist of such a narrow range of foodstuffs, but I will offer some points which you can consider including palatability, toxicity, and economic sustainability.

The first consideration is of course palatability. If you can not bear the taste of a certain food you are unlikely to consume that item on a regular basis (assuming of course that there is not an eminent threat of starvation). Therefore, a very large percentage of the plant and animal kingdoms would be eliminated. The question of palatability is also influenced by cultural norms. Bats, rats, canines, eels, horses, and an enormous list of animals and plants are consumed regularly by many people in the world as part of their normal diet. This greatly expands the list of meat animals available for consumption but western cultures stigmatize their consumption and we refrain from eating them. It is important to note also that many cultures do not eat normal American food such as beef either because of religious beliefs or because the animals are much more valuable as beast of burden.

The second consideration is toxicity. If something will kill you or make you ill, whether plant or animal, it is a pretty safe bet that you will avoid its consumption.

The third point is economic sustainability/viability. As agriculture becomes more centralized and the population as a whole becomes more urbanized, producers will limit there production to those foodstuffs that produce the most value per acre (whether it be pounds of beef, bushels of corn, etc) and the fringes of consumer demands (organic herbs, Kobi beef) will be met by smaller niche producers. Also as consolidation in food retail outlets has increased, producers have been required to meet an more narrow range of product specifications. Large food retailers want agricultural products that ship as easily as possible, sell as fast as possible and that are homogenous. These tenets do not lend themselves well to species diversification.

The interplay of palatability, toxicity, and economics must be mentioned. If there are only 100 people in the nation that enjoy eating Product X it would be impossible to find on a widespread basis due to the fact that no producers would be wiling to base their lively hood on its production. if Product X happens to also be toxic then the market will soon be narrowed even more.

Again there is not set answer as to why our diets are based on such few species but I hope that I have given you some food for thought (pun intended).

Forrest