In 2020, Congress Spent $1,327,781.72 Of Your Tax Dollars To See If You’ll Eat Ground-Up Bugs
A new report by Barclays cites the expanding market around the alternative protein source and predicts the edible bug industry could be worth $8 billion by 2030, up from a little under $1 billion last year.
The product is already found in experimental cuisines and boasts an “eco-friendly” reputation. But it has yet to go mainstream as Americans still prefer meat over bugs.
Well, our government seems to be in doubt about that as they spend $1,327,781.72 of your tax dollars to see if you’ll eat ground-up bugs.
Below you can see a partial list of where your taxpayer money is going:
Wasting Americans’ tax dollars, the federal government…
¾ Studied if you’ll eat ground-up bugs (NIH & NIFA) ….…….………………….…………. $1,327,781.72
¾ Asks why stress makes hair turn grey (NIH) …………………………………………………………. $36,831,620.00
¾ Tries to get Eastern Mediterranean youth to stop smoking hookah (NIH) ……………… $1,471,617.00
¾ Used cancer research money to create a “smart toilet” (NIH) ………………………………… $6,973,057.00
¾ Tried to get adults to stop watching so much TV (NIH) …………………………………………. $1,246,507.00
¾ Gives cigarettes to adolescent kids (NIH) …………………………………………………………………. $896,994.00
¾ Sent messages to moms to stop their teenage girls from indoor tanning (NIH) ……….. $3,452,234.00
¾ Funded an allegedly faked study linking e-cigarettes to heart attacks (NIH) ………….. $31,522,224.00
¾ Interviewed San Franciscans about their edible cannabis use (NIH) ……………………….. $3,125,768.00
¾ Gave federal employees duplicative Medicare customer service access (RRB) …….. $217,000,000.00
¾ Tested if hot tubbing can lower stress (NIH) ……………………………………………………… $2,004,704.00
¾ Develops a master’s degree in research ethics in Myanmar (NIH) …………………….. $968,932.00
¾ Helps justify the FDA’s Deeming Rule (NIH) ..…………………………………………… $3,696,770.00
¾ Appropriated millions to the Urban Indian Health Programs (Congress) ……………… $57,684,000.00
¾ Tries to help people get over their fears of going to the dentist (NIH) …………………….. $1,039,554.00
¾ Studied the prevalence of party drug use at NYC clubs and raves (NIH) …………………. $1,454,217.00
¾ Waited for years on delinquent undelivered orders (VA) ………………………………….. $3,496,302,352.00
¾ Studied the effect of sleepiness on diet, physical activity, and obesity in kids (NIH) …… $787,355.00
________________________________
TAXPAYER DOLLARS WASTED: $3,867,785,236.72
How appetizing does cricket powder
sound? How about if it were cooked into a
pumpkin spice muffin or a chocolate shake?
Researchers at Colorado State University, the
University of Wisconsin, and the University of
Michigan1 set out to answer those questions
using federal grants totaling $1,327,781.72 to
do it.2
The grants came from the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s National Institute
of Food and Agriculture (NIFA).3
As part of a study entitled Impact of Edible
Cricket Consumption on Gut Microbiota in Healthy
Adults, a Double-blind, Randomized Crossover Trial,
the researchers split 20 healthy adults into two
groups. The first group was asked to eat a
pumpkin spice muffin and a chocolate shake,
both with cricket powder, for breakfast for two
weeks, while the second group ate regular
muffins and shakes.4
They did not change any
another aspect of their diets.5
After two weeks of
that, both groups had a two-week cooling off
period, a “washout period,” and then they
switched places.6
The first group had normal muffins and shakes for breakfast, while the group
two had the cricket-infused muffins and
shakes.7
The goal of the research was to test
the effects on gut microbiota composition
while assessing safety and tolerability.”8
But why did the researchers think this
the research was necessary? The researchers
believed “the current pressures on global
food security, including climate change …
have ignited a search for more
environmentally sustainable protein
sources.”9
Got to find a protein substitute
when the Green New Deal
environmentalists kill all the farting cows!
Instead of testing Americans’ appetite for
cricket powder, the NIH and NIFA should
have trusted the private sector, which has filled
the market need to be created by those who opt not
to eat animal protein, and done so much better
then the government could hope if this study is
any indication of what NIH’s plan is. Two
businesses have become staples for many
trying to skip the animal while keeping the
protein. One company, which produces a
plant-based meat substitute is worth about
$4.5 billion.
10 Meanwhile, a competitor
completed another round of funding this year,
in which it raised $500 million and received a
valuation of $2 billion.11 Needless to say, it
seems Americans have made their choice
regarding what they’ll eat for protein instead of
beef, and it’s not crickets.
But, as it so often does, the federal
government ignored private-sector
developments.
In the end, the participants did not
know when they were eating crickets.
Therefore, the question of “will people
knowingly eat cricket powder?” remains
unanswered, despite that being a
the fundamental question underlying the
worth of the study as a whole. If people can
eat crickets, that doesn’t answer the question of
whether they will choose to or not.
If only Jiminy Cricket decided to be these
researchers’ conscience, and not just
Pinocchio’s. He definitely could have
convinced them not to waste Americans’
money this way.
Natalie Dagenhardt is an American conservative writer who writes for Right Journalism! Natalie has described herself as a polemicist who likes to “stir up the pot,” and does not “pretend to be impartial or balanced, as broadcasters do,” drawing criticism from the left, and sometimes from the right. As a passionate journalist, she works relentlessly to uncover the corruption happening in Washington. She is a “constitutional conservative”.
