Pollan said that "you're eating oil" when you're eating a burger: "You need oil to make the fertilizer to grow the corn. You need petroleum to make the pesticides to grow the corn. You need oil to move it all around the country."
Factoring in production, processing, and shipment, Pollan claimed that a quarter-pounder cheeseburger amounts to 26 ounces of oil. "What it tells you is that the carbon footprint of that burger is really big," said Pollan. "The result is a product that takes a huge environmental toll and obviously takes a health toll as well."
Interest in the carbon footprint of individual food products has been growing ever since the British government announced two years ago that it was developing a plan to stamp foods with carbon labels. Many other countries have considered it as well, including Thailand and France - even California has been lobbying for it. The latest venture into carbon labeling has been in Sweden, which revamped its dietary guidelines over the summer in order to give equal weight to climate and health. The New York Times covered the story in its Oct. 23 article titled "Sweden Looks to Diet to Cut Global Warming."
If you thought it was difficult to figure out how many different colored vegetables to eat, now the Swedish need to remember to "favor carrots over cucumbers and tomatoes" because "unlike carrots, the latter two must be grown in heating greenhouses here, consuming energy."
And the new "carbon labels" don't make it any easier. A box of Swedish oatmeal, for example, has a label that reads, "Climate declared: .87 kg CO2 per kg of product." Feel enlightened yet? Don't worry, you're not alone.
A British survey conducted earlier this year discovered that "just 28% of shoppers in the UK chain Boots knew that a carbon label related to climate change. Almost half confused the label with fair trade."
And, even if a consumer miraculously understands the label, he or she then has to compute whether it is good or bad. BBC News gave the example of Innocent Drinks, a British-based smoothie company, to illustrate the mathematical hoops a shopper would have to jump through:
The company states that the UK government recommends a target of 7.9 tonnes of annual consumption of CO2 in 2009, which means 21kg per person per day; drinking a smoothie means consuming 2,700g of CO2, or 8% of our daily allowance.
Got that?
Of course, as BBC also points out, the calculations are pointless "unless you have another product on the same shelf to compare it with." On the other hand, it might not matter anyway since most food companies have different methodologies for computing their carbon consumption and so most labels are incomparable.
But assuming that there are several labels and they are comparable, even then it's probably worthless. As Phil Lempert pointed out during an interview with the online magazine FLYP, a food's "footprint" constantly changes:
The carbon footprint for a particular product, at a particular point in time, is different than it will be in twenty minutes, or a day, or a month later. So, if we look at the carbon footprint of imported strawberries in January versus in March, the number is going to be different ... Until we can have a bullet-proof standard that consumers can really rely upon, most of these logos and labels are really pretty meaningless.
And this entire train of thought is based on the presumption that shoppers are looking at the label to begin with. Since most don't even bother to look at the nutrition label much less heed it, it's safe to say that even fewer would take the time to quantify carbon emissions.
So that begs the question: Why hasn't the European food industry fought against yet another labeling regulation that could turn off customers? Quite simply because it's doing the exact opposite: it's a marketing goldmine. A UK survey for the chip manufacturer Walkers "revealed that more than half of the 1,000 people interviewed were more likely to buy a product with a carbon label, and 69 percent thought the label demonstrated corporate commitment to reducing carbon emissions" - regardless of the actual score of the product.
It's the perfect example of greenwashing, marketing products as "green" in order to boost consumption - and it's being facilitated by the Swedish government and funded by its taxpayers.
With the media's love for government regulation and the government's love to regulate, it probably won't be long before Americans are trying to work out the math in their own supermarkets.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
You're a carbon-based life form?
October 23, 2009 - 14:43 ET by CO2MakerYou shouldn't be. Stop that! OMG, you're emitting in public! Ewwww.
Wait-a-minnit. CO2 makes trees grow more? And the Amazon rainforests are being depleted? Breathe more and save the planet.
No, wait. That's can't be right. CO2 is bad. Today's CO2 will make the AGW temperatures heat up last year!
Wait! Wait! I'm so confused. Can you put more carbon information on the food labels to clear up my confusion, at least on the part of the label that doesn't confuse me! Oh, oh, oh.
Al! Make 'em stop, Al!
I am freezing my global
October 23, 2009 - 14:47 ET by EdhenryI am freezing my global warming @$$ off this year.
We never eat hamburgers. But I think we will have hamburger tonight.
Like George Kanstanza, do the opposite of liberal principles and you will be successful.
This is where I wish we had
October 23, 2009 - 14:49 ET by bse5150This is where I wish we had another Hannah Giles to follow one of these jackass GMA types around and film what they eat. You can bet your ass these people eat at ONLY the finest and most expensive restaurants and that their refrigerators are STUFFED with expensive food of all kinds. How about the cars they drive?
The vacations they take?
The homes they have?
The planes they own?
The boats they own?
The number of children and grandchildren they have?
Let's see it all, then they can talk to us about cutting back on things.
That looks like some "funny
October 23, 2009 - 14:59 ET by MaximusBraveheartThat looks like some "funny business" going on w/ the media not following the White House green-code of conduct. Better report it to the WH e-mail hot line. M-B
CARBON UNITS
October 23, 2009 - 15:44 ET by ptsonKirk to Enterprise, Scotty beam us up, they eat carbon units on this planet.(humans for those of you to young to remember) Now, trading carbon units will be done by those wall street banks under control of the pay czar. Aside from billions in profits and restrictions on incomes of "the workers," one other question comes to mind? Trading carbon units? Slavery?
Copenhagen Agreement
October 23, 2009 - 18:50 ET by ThisnThatBTW, here are a few excerpts from the Copenhagen climate treaty obama wants to sign. This is very scary stuff:
Notice how we, as an industrialized country since 1850 have obligations to make things equal? This climate change treaty is nothing but reparations to other countries, and total and complete redistribution of wealth. Thanks, obama, for promising to sign this.
Next step: Reparations for slavery. Thanks, obama, for making this reality.
And thanks, America, for voting this communist into office.
__________
"mmm, mmm, mm. Barrack-Hussain-Øbama↓." - The liberals coolaid drinking song
What other developed nations
October 23, 2009 - 19:00 ET by general companyAre thinking seriously of signing that thing? Trying to think of imbeciles equivelant to ours?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Here's the general funding
October 23, 2009 - 19:41 ET by ThisnThatHere's the general funding philosophy: The generation of financial resources shall be guided by the principles of the Convention, in particular the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, taking into account the ability to pay and greenhouse gas emissions. This is pure socialism.
And here's a partial list of candidate funding mechanisms:
And where would this money go? To the following:
That's why this is a redistribution program. Money from developed countries will go directly to other countries, all under the guise of "saving the planet".
__________
"mmm, mmm, mm. Barrack-Hussain-Øbama↓." - The liberals coolaid drinking song
Reparations
October 24, 2009 - 17:08 ET by misterbee241Reparations are already happening. It's called socialized health care. Then we begin the real redistribution of wealth.
"I dont need to read a newspaper to know the world's been shaved by a drunken barber."
Walter Brennan, The Colonel, Meet John Doe, 1941
CO2Maker, here's somethig
October 23, 2009 - 19:03 ET by MikeBCO2Maker, here's somethig to make you feel better: carbon free sugar! Of course, chemically, sucrose (sugar) is C12H22O11. When you take the carbon out of sugar, you are left with H22O11, which is 11 molecules of WATER! bwuahahahaha.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
It's like the old saying
October 23, 2009 - 19:36 ET by CO2MakerYou can take the carbon out of sugar, but you can't take the sugar out of sugar. Or something like that.
Package label: "I can't believe it's not sugar!"
hot air
October 23, 2009 - 14:53 ET by cajun2I would like to see these guys move out from the desk, get off the sofa and get a real job. Work for awhile on a construction site in the hot sun, put a new roof on a house, work in the fields til dark, then go home and eat your damn tofu burger and green sprouts. Then do a special on saving the environment and changing eating habits. It takes on a whole new meaning.
GMA in 10 years
October 23, 2009 - 14:55 ET by dboWhat is the carbon footprint of having egg all over your face?
What is GMA's carbon footprint??
October 23, 2009 - 15:11 ET by motherbeltWhy doesn't someone figure the carbon footprint of one GMA broadcast? Maybe they should shorten their show, or only be on a couple of times a week....I doubt they would be missed.
But of course, as elite liberals, they don't have to sacrifice, because after all, they are doing important work, you know.
I'd like to think...
October 23, 2009 - 14:55 ET by ChristianRebelThere's some tree hugger out there sitting in a Prius at a fast food window hearing this cited on the radio either freaking out or scoffing "now that's going too far!"
I wonder if they factored in the cow farts that they're so adiment about taxing as part of the fast food footprint.
26 oz oil...? If the ONLY
October 23, 2009 - 14:56 ET by MaximusBraveheart26 oz oil...? If the ONLY cost were the oil, a burger would be 40 cents (at $82/barrel) or beef at $1.60/lb. But there are way more other costs like labor, stock cost, land cost, feed cost, vet/med care, processing, etc. and profit. I would guess that McD's can buy beef at $1.60/lb making the "oil cost" likely way, way less. M-B
Perhaps we mere peons should just give up food altogether
October 23, 2009 - 14:56 ET by R D HelmThat way, that no-TP guy wouldn't smell, and the planet would be saved.
-Dave
Our elected representatives have failed us.
You're not far off,
October 23, 2009 - 15:13 ET by motherbeltYou're not far off, Dave....some of the more extreme greenies actually do claim that the plantet would be better off without humans...
NO we would be better off
October 23, 2009 - 15:24 ET by kangarooNO we would be better off with out pyscho flipping liberals
I only wish
October 23, 2009 - 19:32 ET by Tugboat Philthey'd be true to their convictions and commit suicide. Instead of just going green, they could go soylent green.
Gun Control - The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.
Unfortunately, when they
October 24, 2009 - 10:59 ET by HermanoUnfortunately, when they decompose they emit CARBON.
Only two forms of government? Find out why... http://www.flixxy.co...
mb,
October 24, 2009 - 08:44 ET by R D HelmYeah, I have read about those people.
Scary.
LOL- I also read Rainbow Six.
-Dave
Our elected representatives have failed us.
oh noes!
October 23, 2009 - 14:59 ET by katainkentand here I was, wondering what to fix for dinner.
____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes
In honor of ABC News
October 23, 2009 - 15:01 ET by Candance MooreI am off to McDonald's for a tasty burger.
Right behind you, Candace
October 23, 2009 - 15:19 ET by B-townGiantOff to In-N-Out for a tasty Triple Triple, hold the onion, add ketchup and mustard.
Mmmmmmmmm. Tastes even better knowing I just pissed off a liberal enviro-whacko.
Cattle are within one mile of my house...
October 23, 2009 - 15:01 ET by upcountrywaterKangeroo gets to travel 11,000 miles, by boat.
Yea freekomoronics in action.
another example of liberal
October 23, 2009 - 15:19 ET by motherbeltanother example of liberal magical thinking......the kangaroo meat will just appear magically in your local supermarket.
WTH ever happened to their eat locally grown and produced products solution?
Are you talking about me, or
October 23, 2009 - 15:32 ET by kangarooAre you talking about me, or tasty roo burgers, LOL
Lucky I am a sailor I can get home from here.
So exactly where can I get some roo meat in America, am I missing something
Boing!
October 23, 2009 - 15:53 ET by RukusHere's a start roo. : )
$16/lb! Wowzer!
Gary
POLITICS: poly (many) + ticks (blood sucking parasites)
16 Bloody bucks a pound,
October 23, 2009 - 17:10 ET by kangaroo16 Bloody bucks a pound, when they hang in my backyard when I was home and my dads and by brothers, they breed like rabbits, crikeys I am in the wrong biz. thanks for that link by the way.
I will stick to the local fair, carbon footprint and all that hyped up jazz and knock a deer on the head instead.
Thanks for the slip Upcountrywater but would take a more southern route coming from the canal,
roo dude, stop by here on your way home.
October 23, 2009 - 16:10 ET by upcountrywaterI'll swab the decks, well maybe...
I have a friend that will let you borrow his slip here.
EDIT: Better hurry! surf is kicking up and the first whales have just arrived.
State controlled health care is Tort Reform.
Oops!
October 23, 2009 - 16:48 ET by RukusMight want to make that roo dudette. LOL! : )
Gary
POLITICS: poly (many) + ticks (blood sucking parasites)
LOL yes some of us are
October 23, 2009 - 17:43 ET by kangarooLOL yes some of us are girls, he he he
Girls girls girls, well hay, bust a move with that sail boat of
October 23, 2009 - 20:43 ET by upcountrywateryours. I see you will need extra sheets to transit the pamana canal.
22 foot seas, gale force winds... that's the worstest weather, I've been sailing in ( I was below at the time, so I wasn't blasted overboard with a big wave) . Oh yea I was in a following sea, so not as bad as it could of been.
Dang sorry about calling you a Dude...
State controlled health care is Tort Reform. Update! music video.
Just so incredibly tedious.
October 23, 2009 - 15:14 ET by svh83Please step back George and Michael (oil guy), just for a second. Watch yourselves on this ridiculous, hand wringing, sniveling segment and then look youselves in the mirror and ask this question: Am I really considered the male of the species?
"I think you'd better call John, 'cause it don't look they're here to deliver...the mail". -NY
BORRRRRR-RING!- channelling Joanne Worley
October 23, 2009 - 15:16 ET by motherbeltThese idiots need to get real jobs...preferably in back-breaking line of physical work....then they won't have time and will be too exhausted to contemplate this nonsense.
Bigger question
October 23, 2009 - 15:16 ET by B-townGiantHey, all you man-made global warming alarmist idiots out there, here's one for you:
Exactly what is the carbon footprint of all this analysis and production of information to determine what the carbon foootprint is of everyday items we all use each and every day of our God forsaken polluting lives?
If we eliminated all this analysis AND the left wing belly aching over the pseudo-science that is the global warming/climate change industry, we would probably eliminate global warming!
Ya think? You betcha!
B-town, We the tax payers get billed...
October 23, 2009 - 15:37 ET by upcountrywater$ 79 BILLION and counting...
The report’s author, Joanne Nova, points to a “well funded, highly
organized climate monopoly” that she says is spending billions of
dollars without any proper scientific audits.
Any dollar to carbon foot print conversion tables out there?
Screw that, it's a rip offf.
I HATE this term... "climate forcing" it's a total CROCK..
Fits right in there with, "free energy"
Churlish with a show!
October 23, 2009 - 15:18 ET by CrashWhat is the carbon footprint of heating/cooling the set, lighting the set, cameras, production room, offices, green rooms, sending limousines to pickup guests, feeding the crew, anon, .... you get the picture?
Good point; but I beat you
October 23, 2009 - 15:20 ET by motherbeltGood point; but I beat you to it. Look above.
GMTA ;-)
Good question
October 23, 2009 - 15:22 ET by CO2MakerIs it more than:
A. the cost to run Al Gore's house?
B. The cost to run John Edwards' house (sans basinet)?
C. Friday Night Date Night in NY for POTUS and FLOTUS?
Answer
October 23, 2009 - 15:42 ET by Big WallySo in order for the elite in our society to continue their lifestyle us peons should not eat hambergers anymore.
Just wondering, how many kangaroos are there inside the borders of the US?
Folks we are in trouble "Mark Levin"
Here's An Idea
October 23, 2009 - 15:24 ET by justbob223Why don't we all just starve to death so that our carbon footprints go to zero? After all, we must save the planet. At least, that's what the "warmers" would prefer. We must protect Mother Earth.
Man
October 23, 2009 - 15:46 ET by jacktheripperneeds meat (protein) or we would be extinct...like homo erectus
I for one will eat meat until my arteries clog for good
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money." – Alexis de Tocqueville
Has anyone tried polar bear
October 23, 2009 - 15:47 ET by BKeyserHas anyone tried polar bear yet?
Rotisserie Style, with BBQ Sause
October 23, 2009 - 16:07 ET by SkipperMLMDispite my eating 2 polar bears a year, the population continues to grow.
So you don't think they're
October 23, 2009 - 16:35 ET by BKeyserSo you don't think they're endangered, do ya?
So you don't think they're endangered, do ya?
So you don't think they're endangered, do ya?
So you don't think they're endangered, do ya?
(cut his mic off...) ;~b
That's the solution...
October 23, 2009 - 22:27 ET by MaximusBraveheartThat's the solution... replace $2/lb meat w/ $16/lb meat. Government economics at work.
Pot Calling The Kettle Oily - Priceless
October 23, 2009 - 15:57 ET by SkipperMLMAnd how many pounds of CO2 was spent making that lame announcement?
CAB to Mickey D's in NYC 3500 CuMeters
Setting up an interview with Qurious George 1,213,000 CuMeters
Doughnuts and coffee for the informative guest 11,500 CuMeters
Pointing out the evils of the burger destroying the planet - Priceless
For liberals...there is always toufoo
The people who control information in our society...
October 23, 2009 - 16:10 ET by ThalpyThe people who control information in our society share a number of beliefs: 1. Obama would be an insightful, gifted leader for our country, 2. all whites are inherently racist, 3. redistribution of America's wealth is necessary, 4. almost everyone is entitled to free health care, 5. social justice is attainable, 6. multiculturalism, 7. diversity, 8. inclusion, 9. perfectibility of mankind, 10. America continues to be a racist country, 11. polar bears are in decline, 12. current representatives are as smart or smarter that the slave owners who wrote and signed our Constitution, 13. not all speech should be free speech, 14. the right to own and carry a firearm isn't what they had in mind, 15. the earth is warming at a fast pace caused by men and women, 16. there is little or no evil in the world, simply a lack of understanding among people, 17. CO2 is a dangerous gas that has caused global warming, 18. President Bush must be responsible for all of this, somehow.
Can there be any doubt as to why we're in the mess we're in?
What do you want to bet ...
October 23, 2009 - 16:12 ET by CO2Maker... that in the Middle East, they're worried about the water stain, not carbon footprint, of products? Oil, they've got that by the barrelful. Water, oy, that's another problem.
Water's essential for life in the Middle East, but apparently not so much in the Central Valley of Calleefornia, or so says the Browner patrol.
I wonder?
October 23, 2009 - 16:14 ET by Dave in TexasDoes ABC ever run advertisements from companies that sell hamburgers? If so, will they stop doing that in the future? If not, then doesn't that make ABC complicit in the "planet killing"? Will GMA ever address that?
By the way, I watched a program on the Travel Channel about hamburgers across America last night. It would have made Michael Pollan cry. :)
I got your complacency right here!
October 23, 2009 - 16:39 ET by CobraManI got your complacency right here, GMA! It's been snowing here, for the third time in the last two weeks. I don't remember when we had this much snowfall this early in the season. Not only is it snowing out-of-season, the first day of fall our temps were in the mid 30's, and it hasn't improved much since then! We're experiencing the Year without Fall here in Minnesota How does THAT fit into your "global warming" BS?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
CO2ugh syrup
October 23, 2009 - 16:56 ET by SkipperMLMIt took more co2 to make the chocolate syrup!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where does chocolate come from? Then it has to be process.
It's like Gore and is "carbon neutral" gas lamps in front of his house.
Hey Al...what's wrong with you going carbon negative so I can drive to work?
Maybe we should all eat
October 23, 2009 - 17:20 ET by danboMaybe we should all eat carbon free sugar.
The chemical structure of sucrose is C12H22O11.
No carbon in that. The label tells us so.
These people are insane.
The We already pay farmers not to farm. Why can’t we pay legislators not to legislate? PJTV
When they came out with that
October 23, 2009 - 17:28 ET by kangarooWhen they came out with that carbon free sugar I was scratching my head. They plough the field with tractors, when grown they set it on fire, then they use more machinery to harvest the stalks, and then, process the stalks, what the!!!
The sugar itself is carbon.
October 23, 2009 - 17:47 ET by danboThe sugar itself is carbon.
Though we need a lot of other elements for various reasons. Like calcium to make bones, iron to make blood cells... I was trying to remember if there was any other element we burned as fuel for energy.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Well corret me if I am
October 23, 2009 - 17:56 ET by kangarooWell correct me if I am wrong, but breathing heavy, does make co2 which makes plants smile
Yep. Even light breathing.
October 23, 2009 - 18:01 ET by danboYep. Even light breathing.
And yes without CO2 there would be no life on this planet. No Polar Bears.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Death By Cheeseburger
October 23, 2009 - 17:28 ET by Candance MooreEnjoy.
I noted the question on
October 23, 2009 - 17:59 ET by danboI noted the question on using all that food to feed cattle, food that could go to making earth saving ethanol.
Of course all that food that goes into making earth saving ethanol can go into feeding starving stomachs and saving 3rd world people; instead of feeding elitist twits gas tanks.
Funny video.
How things have changed.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Ok Ms. Candance "Wacko Environmentalist" Moore...
October 23, 2009 - 18:13 ET by BKeyserwhat about all the flatulence we're eliminating with the slaughter of these delicious animals? Huh? What about that? Huh? ....... <waiting>..... Don't have an answer do you?!
Seems to me you'd rather have a hot, stinky earth than take our chances with the burgers! O for shame!
What's next? A "living" tax?
October 23, 2009 - 18:12 ET by metaphorsbwithuI demand that all height and weight statistics of all elected officials be publicized immediately! Any health care benefits they receive from taxpayers should be charged back to them for every pound they exceed recommended levels.
And how about mandating that only taxpayer-approved rations of "healthy" carbon-neutral foods be allowed for purchase by individuals on food stamps?
The fact that we are even having conversations about potentially controlling what people eat, controlling everything they do eventually actually, is frightening.
That, and instituting a "living" tax, is what this is all about.
metaphorsbwithu
Grass
October 23, 2009 - 20:13 ET by jaywlGrass is the answer. Lets eliminate all the middle men (consumption layers) between grass and humans. I know it will be a little rough (age) for a while, but we will evolve. The cows did, I saw one with a see through stomach, a porthole as it was. Anyway, the whole cycle is simple. Dirt with minerals and water, sunlight, green stuff growing, cut it and enjoy. I know someone will bring the farting up and say this will increase methane output. Everyone can wear a bag and deliver it to a central location. Perhaps after reuse at birthday parties (or stag parties, what a hoot!) or even in millions of cars powered by fartgas, we can inject the remaining gas into the unused oil and gas wells for sequestration. Perfect!
jaywl, humans need 3 more stomachs, Cows have 4 of'em.
October 23, 2009 - 21:03 ET by upcountrywaterThe thing is Humans can COOK food, ever see a cow do that?
Your proposals sound as good as some of the free energy non-science floating around as fact.
State controlled health care is Tort Reform. Update! music video.
You watch!
October 23, 2009 - 20:59 ET by MightyMouthSomeone will come up with a Bovine Catalytic Converter and become a zillionaire!
"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
Big job creator as well
October 23, 2009 - 21:06 ET by general companySomeone will have to clean it after every dump. More jobs Americans refuse to do.
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
These guys read The Jungle
October 24, 2009 - 06:36 ET by RR GOPThese guys read The Jungle back when they were in high school, were traumatized, and still think that commercially produced food contains human body parts.
Actually, read an environmental text book and they are certainly going to point out the disparities between the Western haves and the Third World have nots. Fundamentally, this is what they're about. Energy, fat, protein, resource disparities and what goes along with that? Politics and economics.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
When do we receive our orders to wear Mao Suits?
October 24, 2009 - 07:33 ET by ekslibRemember the pictures of the Chinese people in the 60's?
http://www.sacu.org/...
The
October 24, 2009 - 09:16 ET by jessieHThe world is becoming insane & the media is the first to develop symtoms. Let these idiots eat their shoes. That's the only footprint they need.
Missing the point!
October 24, 2009 - 09:33 ET by YankeeBubbaAn Alinskyite would force them to adhere to their own rules. To wit: demanding the carbon output required, with enhanced resolution photography, to sustain the viability of my three favorite Swedish dishes.
Swedish meatballs,
Tiger Wood's wife,
The Old Milwaukee Swedish bikini team!