What do you think?
Rate this book
Combat-Ready Kitchen: How the U.S. Military Shapes the Way You Eat
Americans eat more processed foods than anyone else in the world. We also spend more on military research. These two seemingly unrelated facts are inextricably linked. If you ever wondered how ready-to-eat foods infiltrated your kitchen, you’ll love this entertaining romp through the secret military history of practically everything you buy at the supermarket.In a nondescript Boston suburb, in a handful of low buildings buffered by trees and a lake, a group of men and women spend their days researching, testing, tasting, and producing the foods that form the bedrock of the American diet. If you stumbled into the facility, you might think the technicians dressed in lab coats and the shiny kitchen equipment belonged to one of the giant food conglomerates responsible for your favorite brand of frozen pizza or microwavable breakfast burritos. So you’d be surprised to learn that you’ve just entered the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Center, ground zero for the processed food industry.Ever since Napoleon, armies have sought better ways to preserve, store, and transport food for battle. As part of this quest, although most people don’t realize it, the U.S. military spearheaded the invention of energy bars, restructured meat, extended-life bread, instant coffee, and much more. But there’s been an insidious mission because the military enlisted industry—huge corporations such as ADM, ConAgra, General Mills, Hershey, Hormel, Mars, Nabisco, Reynolds, Smithfield, Swift, Tyson, and Unilever—to help develop and manufacture food for soldiers on the front line, over the years combat rations, or the key technologies used in engineering them, have ended up dominating grocery store shelves and refrigerator cases. TV dinners, the cheese powder in snack foods, cling wrap . . . The list is almost endless.Now food writer Anastacia Marx de Salcedo scrutinizes the world of processed food and its long relationship with the military—unveiling the twists, turns, successes, failures, and products that have found their way from the armed forces’ and contractors’ laboratories into our kitchens. In developing these rations, the army was looking for some of the very same qualities as we do in our hectic, fast-paced twenty-first-century portability, ease of preparation, extended shelf life at room temperature, affordability, and appeal to even the least adventurous eaters. In other words, the military has us chowing down like special ops.What is the effect of such a diet, eaten—as it is by soldiers and most consumers—day in and day out, year after year? We don’t really know. We’re the guinea pigs in a giant public health experiment, one in which science and technology, at the beck and call of the military, have taken over our kitchens.
261 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 4, 2015
56 people are currently reading
1162 people want to read
About the author
Anastacia Marx de Salcedo
5 books10 followersAnastacia Marx de Salcedo is a nonfiction writer whose work has appeared in the Atlantic, Salon, Slate, Vice, and on PBS and NPR blogs. She has worked as a public health consultant, news magazine publisher, and public policy researcher and lives in Boston, Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
September 3, 2018
Being a military logistician whose job involves, among many other things, providing combat rations, I was very eager to read Combat-Ready Kitchen. The book was very well researched, and author Anastacia Marx de Salcedo, did a great job coving the history of the U.S. Military’s combat feeding program as well as linking how military combat feeding sponsored research and development has influenced and permeated the modern commercial food industry. However, the well meaning very detailed scientific descriptions of the advances in various food technologies were at times a bit too much, distracting, and hard to follow. I also felt the information in the book could have been presented in a more logical manner. To me, at times the author skipped from one subject to the next in a way that was confusing and disjointed.
That aside, there were many very good things about Combat-Ready Kitchen. For me, the most interesting parts of the book were those that described the history and evolution of combat rations. However, the most important takeaway of the book is the highlighting of the fact that, good or bad, military funded research is an important driver of commercial innovation and technological advancement. That fact should be kept in mind whenever cuts to military R&D budgets are being considered. (ebook read)
That aside, there were many very good things about Combat-Ready Kitchen. For me, the most interesting parts of the book were those that described the history and evolution of combat rations. However, the most important takeaway of the book is the highlighting of the fact that, good or bad, military funded research is an important driver of commercial innovation and technological advancement. That fact should be kept in mind whenever cuts to military R&D budgets are being considered. (ebook read)
November 22, 2016
25% Interesting
25% Over-written
25% Boring and catalog-like
25% Bizarrely hostile, as if the author needed to prove to a disbelieving audience the military/processed food connection and assumed we will or should be shocked and upset.
25% Over-written
25% Boring and catalog-like
25% Bizarrely hostile, as if the author needed to prove to a disbelieving audience the military/processed food connection and assumed we will or should be shocked and upset.
March 28, 2017
Our preservatives-laden food and throw-away American lifestyle suddenly make much more sense when you realize that a lot of it came straight from the US military, and the expedients of war logistics. Thought-provoking and highly recommended.
September 25, 2015
I wanted to like this, but it was pretty uneven. Some stretches were quite interesting, some were deathly dull. The author seemed to have an undertone of scorn for the military and the idea that "they" were forcing our food choices on us, but she presented so many excellent advances in food storage, preparation, shipping -- I don't see where the problem is.
March 2, 2018
The author examines the relationship between between military research and what the civilian community eats and why. The book is well researched with an extensive bibliography. A good read for those who want to know more about our eating habits.
May 26, 2016
absolutely fascinating, highly recommend
March 27, 2017
A fascinating but flawed pop history of the U. S. military's (specifically, the Army's) influence on food processing and handling.
There are two kinds of pop history book; the kind that is written by experts who are good at talking to the public, and the kind that is written by non-experts who are good at talking to experts. Both kinds can be good, but this one definitely is the latter. Sometimes that shows to disadvantage, but on the whole I think it is an asset in this specific case.
The Good:
Several things especially stand out.
- Food is an existentially important and interesting topic.
- The Army really has exerted titanic influence over virtually every aspect of how food is transported, processed, stored, and prepared, and de Salcedo does an estimable job of laying out how and why this is the case.
- In a complicated topic, de Salcedo successfully resists the urge to wander astray and talk about things like the possibility that the Army is largely responsible for the near-extinction of consumer-level butcher shops in the U. S. The book confines itself to the military's contributions to food processing/storage/transport and the technologies associated with them.
- De Salcedo is fundamentally good at writing for non-specialist audiences, and she clearly isn't afraid to get up to her elbows into interviews with experts and readings from all manner of abstruse, boring technical material in order to understand what she's reporting on.
- The book treats the subject matter neutrally most of the time. When it doesn't, you can easily discern that de Salcedo is editorializing. But see a related point under "The Bad."
The Bad:
There are three things that bugged me about the book. None of them are deal-breakers, and in fact I'd give the whole thing a solid 80% positive review. But I'm going to go into somewhat greater detail about the negative aspects of the book, because I think that if any of these things irk you, you'll want to know about them and prepare yourself ahead of time.
- De Salcedo has a tendency to provide details about the science involved in a given kind of food processing technology, which is okay in itself, but she does not have the expert's knack for discerning which details are pertinent to non-experts.
At various points in the discussion, she regurgitates "science-y" sounding facts that are much more than what is needed to provide an executive summary of how something works, but much less than needed for real understanding. I suspect that these sections of the book are ones where she listened to a subject-matter expert instead of her editor; I find that in a book written directly by a subject-matter expert, the editor tends to win these fights.
- As discussed above, most of the time de Salcedo reports neutrally (if entertainingly) on the subject matter. Occasionally, she indulges in what I can only describe as granola-laced polemics against the Army's combat feeding research programs. I did not especially appreciate them, but the upside is that de Salcedo doesn't try to slip them past you as some kind of subtle spin on the facts. She beats you about the face and neck with them, which is annoying but not insidious. She has an opinion, but it's not hidden.
A friend of mine, discussing some of the early parts of the book, commented, "I could do without the moral indignation that military acquisition should dare be a major impact on civilian industry," and "It's practically a rant on the evils of the military-industrial complex."
De Salcedo pulls back on that a little bit in the middle parts of the book, but it comes back again at the end. In particular, she ends the book with a diatribe against the possible unforeseen consequences of all the preservatives and additives in processed foods, and against the possible contaminants that may leach out of modern packaging materials. Legitimate concerns, I think. But where De Salcedo misses the boat is that she pushes responsibility for this onto the Army and demands that civilian concerns receive a hearing in the Army's decisions about what research to fund.
That's asinine; it's perfectly reasonable for us to want and expect private and public research to be directed at finding and addressing any long-term effects related to the techniques and materials that came out of the Army's 80-year-plus history of involvement in food processing R&D. But let's be real. The Army needs to finance research on stuff that directly serves its own interests. The FDA and USDA can and should look at clinical outcomes, especially in terms of long-term, low dose consumption of foods that are wrapped in plastic and filled with all chemicals to keep them crunch, moist, chewy, etc. for long periods of time without significant refrigeration. And yes, they should be looking at toxicology in more than just the fairly limited sense that they check to see if things are carcinogenic.
However, as legitimate at these concerns may be for civilian consumers, those long-term issues are not within the scope of concern for the military. The Army is properly concerned with providing food that will keep soldiers alive and healthy for extended periods of time in environments where it isn't practical for them to cook and eat fresh food. If it fails to address that concern, then frankly it doesn't matter whether the packaging and additives are bad for you if you eat the stuff over the long term. Dead soldiers don't suffer long-term adverse effects as a result of their diets.
- De Salcedo has a bad habit of showcasing her internalized guilt as a woman professional who struggles to balance wife/mommy stuff with the desire to have a career and do stuff outside of the home is the pretext for a bunch of unnecessary and unwelcome moralizing about the superiority of preparing lovely home cooked meals from fresh, unprocessed, organically grown and cruelty free meats and veggies and feeding them to your adoring hubby and children.
Example: the conclusion of the book features de Salcedo making an unconvincing attempt at showing how writing this history changed her attitudes about food: when learning, from her mother-in-law, how to make a specific Columbian chicken dish for her husband's enjoyment, de Salcedo alters mom-in-law's recipe to use pre-packaged breast, thigh and drumstick portions from Whole Foods instead of breaking down entire birds to get the same thing, and then simpers insipidly because SHE HAS SEEN THE LIGHT and not all processed foods are bad!
Yeah, that's right. Whole Foods' chicken pieces are processed food to her. Gag.
There are two kinds of pop history book; the kind that is written by experts who are good at talking to the public, and the kind that is written by non-experts who are good at talking to experts. Both kinds can be good, but this one definitely is the latter. Sometimes that shows to disadvantage, but on the whole I think it is an asset in this specific case.
The Good:
Several things especially stand out.
- Food is an existentially important and interesting topic.
- The Army really has exerted titanic influence over virtually every aspect of how food is transported, processed, stored, and prepared, and de Salcedo does an estimable job of laying out how and why this is the case.
- In a complicated topic, de Salcedo successfully resists the urge to wander astray and talk about things like the possibility that the Army is largely responsible for the near-extinction of consumer-level butcher shops in the U. S. The book confines itself to the military's contributions to food processing/storage/transport and the technologies associated with them.
- De Salcedo is fundamentally good at writing for non-specialist audiences, and she clearly isn't afraid to get up to her elbows into interviews with experts and readings from all manner of abstruse, boring technical material in order to understand what she's reporting on.
- The book treats the subject matter neutrally most of the time. When it doesn't, you can easily discern that de Salcedo is editorializing. But see a related point under "The Bad."
The Bad:
There are three things that bugged me about the book. None of them are deal-breakers, and in fact I'd give the whole thing a solid 80% positive review. But I'm going to go into somewhat greater detail about the negative aspects of the book, because I think that if any of these things irk you, you'll want to know about them and prepare yourself ahead of time.
- De Salcedo has a tendency to provide details about the science involved in a given kind of food processing technology, which is okay in itself, but she does not have the expert's knack for discerning which details are pertinent to non-experts.
At various points in the discussion, she regurgitates "science-y" sounding facts that are much more than what is needed to provide an executive summary of how something works, but much less than needed for real understanding. I suspect that these sections of the book are ones where she listened to a subject-matter expert instead of her editor; I find that in a book written directly by a subject-matter expert, the editor tends to win these fights.
- As discussed above, most of the time de Salcedo reports neutrally (if entertainingly) on the subject matter. Occasionally, she indulges in what I can only describe as granola-laced polemics against the Army's combat feeding research programs. I did not especially appreciate them, but the upside is that de Salcedo doesn't try to slip them past you as some kind of subtle spin on the facts. She beats you about the face and neck with them, which is annoying but not insidious. She has an opinion, but it's not hidden.
A friend of mine, discussing some of the early parts of the book, commented, "I could do without the moral indignation that military acquisition should dare be a major impact on civilian industry," and "It's practically a rant on the evils of the military-industrial complex."
De Salcedo pulls back on that a little bit in the middle parts of the book, but it comes back again at the end. In particular, she ends the book with a diatribe against the possible unforeseen consequences of all the preservatives and additives in processed foods, and against the possible contaminants that may leach out of modern packaging materials. Legitimate concerns, I think. But where De Salcedo misses the boat is that she pushes responsibility for this onto the Army and demands that civilian concerns receive a hearing in the Army's decisions about what research to fund.
That's asinine; it's perfectly reasonable for us to want and expect private and public research to be directed at finding and addressing any long-term effects related to the techniques and materials that came out of the Army's 80-year-plus history of involvement in food processing R&D. But let's be real. The Army needs to finance research on stuff that directly serves its own interests. The FDA and USDA can and should look at clinical outcomes, especially in terms of long-term, low dose consumption of foods that are wrapped in plastic and filled with all chemicals to keep them crunch, moist, chewy, etc. for long periods of time without significant refrigeration. And yes, they should be looking at toxicology in more than just the fairly limited sense that they check to see if things are carcinogenic.
However, as legitimate at these concerns may be for civilian consumers, those long-term issues are not within the scope of concern for the military. The Army is properly concerned with providing food that will keep soldiers alive and healthy for extended periods of time in environments where it isn't practical for them to cook and eat fresh food. If it fails to address that concern, then frankly it doesn't matter whether the packaging and additives are bad for you if you eat the stuff over the long term. Dead soldiers don't suffer long-term adverse effects as a result of their diets.
- De Salcedo has a bad habit of showcasing her internalized guilt as a woman professional who struggles to balance wife/mommy stuff with the desire to have a career and do stuff outside of the home is the pretext for a bunch of unnecessary and unwelcome moralizing about the superiority of preparing lovely home cooked meals from fresh, unprocessed, organically grown and cruelty free meats and veggies and feeding them to your adoring hubby and children.
Example: the conclusion of the book features de Salcedo making an unconvincing attempt at showing how writing this history changed her attitudes about food: when learning, from her mother-in-law, how to make a specific Columbian chicken dish for her husband's enjoyment, de Salcedo alters mom-in-law's recipe to use pre-packaged breast, thigh and drumstick portions from Whole Foods instead of breaking down entire birds to get the same thing, and then simpers insipidly because SHE HAS SEEN THE LIGHT and not all processed foods are bad!
Yeah, that's right. Whole Foods' chicken pieces are processed food to her. Gag.
December 10, 2023
I thought the author did a really great job with her writing for this book, which is a mix of history and science. There was a lot about it that was really fascinating--how so much of our food and its packaging had it genesis in the military who needed to feed their soldiers food that wouldn't spoil over time without refrigeration. She talks about military food throughout time starting with cave people to Napolean, the Aztecs, etc., which was really interesting. Her conclusion was packaged and prepared food is here to stay because it's convenient, and she uses it herself. And choices have to be made about how we want to spend our time---in the kitchen or writing a book (as per herself.) She says she will continue to use packaged foods but you just have to know that the food itself as well as its packaging will have long-term negative effects on our health... And the verdict isn't out on how bad a lot of it actually is. Two stars just because a LOT of it is pure science.
September 8, 2020
For me, reading Combat-Ready Kitchen was an exercise in frustration. I would actually have been happy to wade through the reams of detailed information if only the author had managed to be precise enough to give me confidence I was learning from her.
Her premise is interesting. She says that America’s food industry is largely driven by military research, because as the armed forces develop new technologies for preserving, packaging, and transporting food (typically in response to various wars), the military shares that information with private companies in order to ensure that someone will know how to make the stuff should it be needed on a large scale. Essentially, it’s the military’s fault that Americans eat so much processed food.
Unfortunately, Mrs. Marx de Salcedo is a food blogger rather than, say, a scientist; and she seems unable to resist humorous and colorful phrases even if they obscure her actual meaning. She also waltzes merrily through a number of sloppy claims. For instance, she tells us, “Historically, 90 percent of all war fatalities have taken place on the battlefield, most often from loss of blood. This all changed after World War I." No doubt she intended to say that combat fatalities happened on the field. Considering, though, that the vast majority of historical soldiers who died during wars were the victim of disease, the sentence is quite misleading. It made me wonder whether it was worth reading her chapters on food chemistry and other material I don’t know anything about. What might be misstated there?
I also had to roll my eyes when she proffered, as a solution to the food problems of America, that the FDA needs vastly increased powers so that it can (among other things) research whether or not various foods make us obese.
However, I will admit that she has spurred me to change my life in one way. I think I’m going to try baking my family’s bread. She’s right that commercial loaves in America have become utilitarian instead of yummy.
Hopefully I can disprove the saddest statement in the whole book: ““Cooking, like music before it, is a dying art, moving from the precincts of the private and personal--our great-grandparents sang and played instruments--to the realm of the public and commercial.”
Her premise is interesting. She says that America’s food industry is largely driven by military research, because as the armed forces develop new technologies for preserving, packaging, and transporting food (typically in response to various wars), the military shares that information with private companies in order to ensure that someone will know how to make the stuff should it be needed on a large scale. Essentially, it’s the military’s fault that Americans eat so much processed food.
Unfortunately, Mrs. Marx de Salcedo is a food blogger rather than, say, a scientist; and she seems unable to resist humorous and colorful phrases even if they obscure her actual meaning. She also waltzes merrily through a number of sloppy claims. For instance, she tells us, “Historically, 90 percent of all war fatalities have taken place on the battlefield, most often from loss of blood. This all changed after World War I." No doubt she intended to say that combat fatalities happened on the field. Considering, though, that the vast majority of historical soldiers who died during wars were the victim of disease, the sentence is quite misleading. It made me wonder whether it was worth reading her chapters on food chemistry and other material I don’t know anything about. What might be misstated there?
I also had to roll my eyes when she proffered, as a solution to the food problems of America, that the FDA needs vastly increased powers so that it can (among other things) research whether or not various foods make us obese.
However, I will admit that she has spurred me to change my life in one way. I think I’m going to try baking my family’s bread. She’s right that commercial loaves in America have become utilitarian instead of yummy.
Hopefully I can disprove the saddest statement in the whole book: ““Cooking, like music before it, is a dying art, moving from the precincts of the private and personal--our great-grandparents sang and played instruments--to the realm of the public and commercial.”
December 1, 2015
I just finished Combat-Ready Kitchen. It goes into (very scientific) detail about how the military influences the food decisions we make everyday (primarily by funding research that benefits them).
Food & equipment like:
* Granola bars
* Processed meat
* Cookies that stay soft almost forever
* Bread (that lasts longer than a couple days)
* Microwaves
* Clingwrap
* Plastic packaging
* etc
All come from research funded by the US Military. It’s really interesting but a bit too scientific for me. I like that she explains how the lipid-barrier prevents microbes from interacting with the water activity on the food but damn there’s only so much talk about lipids that I can listen to before tuning out.
It was interesting from a political standpoint to hear that basically all food science innovation is coming from the military. Industry is looking to sell more widgets. They don’t want to do year long studies to see which foods last longer, are genuinely tastier, or are better for you. They want to turn a quick profit so the invest in fancy packaging & branding. Almost all research is funded by the military to extend food longevity, let it survive at room temperature, kill harmful bacteria, etc. The military is good at this since they want healthy soldiers but it isn’t perfect and not having another (non-military) influence on our food science is a problem.
If you wanted to get the 80% of this book just read chapter 12 (on the audible version) which summarizes a bunch of this information without the huge amounts of science. Or better yet listen to this episode of 99% Invisible (http://99percentinvisible.org/episode...) which introduces the book and does a great 20 minute summary.
3/5 stars from me.
Food & equipment like:
* Granola bars
* Processed meat
* Cookies that stay soft almost forever
* Bread (that lasts longer than a couple days)
* Microwaves
* Clingwrap
* Plastic packaging
* etc
All come from research funded by the US Military. It’s really interesting but a bit too scientific for me. I like that she explains how the lipid-barrier prevents microbes from interacting with the water activity on the food but damn there’s only so much talk about lipids that I can listen to before tuning out.
It was interesting from a political standpoint to hear that basically all food science innovation is coming from the military. Industry is looking to sell more widgets. They don’t want to do year long studies to see which foods last longer, are genuinely tastier, or are better for you. They want to turn a quick profit so the invest in fancy packaging & branding. Almost all research is funded by the military to extend food longevity, let it survive at room temperature, kill harmful bacteria, etc. The military is good at this since they want healthy soldiers but it isn’t perfect and not having another (non-military) influence on our food science is a problem.
If you wanted to get the 80% of this book just read chapter 12 (on the audible version) which summarizes a bunch of this information without the huge amounts of science. Or better yet listen to this episode of 99% Invisible (http://99percentinvisible.org/episode...) which introduces the book and does a great 20 minute summary.
3/5 stars from me.
March 16, 2018
I loved this book. The concluding three chapters were as engaging as the rest of the book. "A trip to the Supermarket" took us aisle by aisle to see product types originally developed for the military. The next chapter summarized possible future developments including solar paneled refrigerated containers and shelf stabilized fresh fruits and vegetables. The final chapter was good but not what I expected. She was less negative than I expected. She also offered ways to make the food science research and development process more inclusive and transparent.
I wish I had the paper book instead of the audio book to look up her references, including patents. But the story was well told. The narrator on my edition - available through Alaska's Digital Library - enhanced the book instead of getting in the way. Worth a listen or read.
I wish I had the paper book instead of the audio book to look up her references, including patents. But the story was well told. The narrator on my edition - available through Alaska's Digital Library - enhanced the book instead of getting in the way. Worth a listen or read.
September 11, 2015
Interesting but too much detail
The topic of this book is rather interesting, as it describes the influence that the military's innovations have had upon both food and the way we consume it. However, I only give it three stars as I felt like there was often too much detail in each chapter, padding out the book and not necessarily critical. If it was slightly abridged, without me skipping whole chapters or large parts of them, this would easily be a four out of five book.
The topic of this book is rather interesting, as it describes the influence that the military's innovations have had upon both food and the way we consume it. However, I only give it three stars as I felt like there was often too much detail in each chapter, padding out the book and not necessarily critical. If it was slightly abridged, without me skipping whole chapters or large parts of them, this would easily be a four out of five book.
August 24, 2017
A pretty good history of how the need to feed the military has influenced food in the consumer market. Surprisingly dry. The author tries to add a lot of witticisms to liven it up, but they just fell flat to me.
October 21, 2017
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Interesting choice of topic which is fresh and relevant, writing is conversational and funny at times, the science is succinct and accurate.
May 25, 2018
equal parts enlightening and horrifying. negative audiobook points for distractingly mispronouncing Natick throughout.
August 31, 2023
This started off promisingly - somewhat like Mary Roach - as it was amusing and all over the place, from Aztecs eating humans and removing their beating hearts to how pathogens and bacteria work. However, it soon became pretty tedious with a lot of the history of various agencies or information about the vapor pressure ratio. On the plus side, I learned several new words.
While it’s disturbing to learn how engineered our food really is (“restructured meat”), there have also been real benefits. For instance, during the 1940s “the service branches were forced to reject almost half of the first two million war recruits for health issues related to malnourishment or poor medical care.” After that, the Army was responsible for enriching bread and other foods to prevent beriberi, goiters, pellagra, and anemia.
There’s an interesting final section on what the military was working on when the book was published (2014) and, therefore, what we can expect to see for civilians’ use in the future.
While it’s disturbing to learn how engineered our food really is (“restructured meat”), there have also been real benefits. For instance, during the 1940s “the service branches were forced to reject almost half of the first two million war recruits for health issues related to malnourishment or poor medical care.” After that, the Army was responsible for enriching bread and other foods to prevent beriberi, goiters, pellagra, and anemia.
There’s an interesting final section on what the military was working on when the book was published (2014) and, therefore, what we can expect to see for civilians’ use in the future.
February 21, 2021
A great premise for a book — looking in-depth at how foods developed for the military transformed civilian cuisine. I’m glad I read it if only for the insight about how the military needs food companies for two reasons: (a) to engineer foods suitable for military use, and (b) to encourage civilian use of those foods so that the technology will be available at any time the military might suddenly need use of it. I knew about (a) but hadn’t even considered (b). The reason I can’t rate it highly is that it just didn’t seem to know whether it was a science book or a history books. I suppose it’s both, but it would have been stronger if it had just committed to one or the other more strongly. The scientific descriptions were so detailed and lengthy that even with some effervescent and vivid writing, I got lost. I started skipping pages regularly if anything scientific came up. A very worthwhile topic and thesis, but didn’t work for me in the execution.
July 30, 2025
thank you military industrial complex for boxed mac & cheese
June 9, 2024
I found this book rather interesting. However, I knocked off a star due to the writing. Between the over-the-top technical speak, Ms de Salcedo's snarkiness, and her incredibly pedantic, run-on (and on, and on) sentences, the book can be trying at times. But I will say this: I'll NEVER look at groceries the same way again.
March 13, 2016
Salcedo explores the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Center, ground zero for the processed food industry. This R&D center has funded research in packaging, preservation and processing and shipping of food since World War II.
Why I started this book: The title was awesome and I was eager to learn more.
Why I finished it: This book was delightfully quirky, the audio jumped thru history, science experiments and the food industry with abandon. Several times on the audio, I had to rewind to make sure that I hadn't missed anything. However there were a lot of side comments that are hysterical if you knew the history that Salcedo was winking at. Lots of science and interesting point that the only one funding R&D in the food industry is the military. And their efforts in shipping and supplying food was deliberately spilled over into the commercial/public side.
I'm not a health-food nut by any means so it was fascinating to compare this to Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal and The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals and Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life. I was struck by the variety that the military has introduced into the American diet, their efforts to deliver fresh food and their willingness to continually improve; searching for faster, safer and cheaper food.
Why I started this book: The title was awesome and I was eager to learn more.
Why I finished it: This book was delightfully quirky, the audio jumped thru history, science experiments and the food industry with abandon. Several times on the audio, I had to rewind to make sure that I hadn't missed anything. However there were a lot of side comments that are hysterical if you knew the history that Salcedo was winking at. Lots of science and interesting point that the only one funding R&D in the food industry is the military. And their efforts in shipping and supplying food was deliberately spilled over into the commercial/public side.
I'm not a health-food nut by any means so it was fascinating to compare this to Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal and The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals and Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life. I was struck by the variety that the military has introduced into the American diet, their efforts to deliver fresh food and their willingness to continually improve; searching for faster, safer and cheaper food.
April 6, 2016
This is an excellent book. When we consider the "military-industrial complex", we peace freaks are most inclined to assume this idea is regarding the manufacture of weapons, armaments, electronics components, and etc. ("Stuff.") But de Salcedo's work also brings into historical and present day focus the vast, complete, and ever-present reach of the military into the modern American grocery store. In fact, she concludes, that if one were to walk into a grocery and take away all the items within that the US Army and Department of Defense had some part in creating whether through ingredient sleight of hand, processing, packaging and transportation, you would be left with something less than half of the store. That's just how insidious the grip of military interest is over the modern civilian population in the US. The food industry has profited immensely both monetarily and developmentally from ideas and projects contracted for and out of the US military chain of command since the late 1800s. (Hand in hand, they walk together, the great food giants, and the machinery of organized murder.) And de Salcedo makes excellent historical references, names the names of the men responsible for the changes- not all necessarily negative- and different means of production that make the food you take for granted every day on your dinner table so much different than that your grandparents and great-grandparents knew. An eye opener.
February 21, 2018
I've been interested in this book since I heard and interview with the author back when the book was first published. I thought this book would fit in with Poulan's writing. The author is a food writer in Boston, a real farm-to-table type, not at all interested in processed food. Her investigations on the books subjects led her to the aermy's food lab in Natick Mass. The folks at the lab were first hesitant to talk to her, figuring she was there to do a hack job on them. However, the book is a balanced exposure of the subject. Basically, all our processed food is the result of the miitary's quest for shelf stable eaily prepared food for the soldier in the field. Salcedo also provided an enlightening history of feeding the military thru the ages, from Genghis Khan, thru the US Civil War, Napoleon, the world wars, Viet Nam and the latest incursions in the middle east by the US military. The author learns to reconcile the need for processed foods and actually comes to peace with the idea that processed food serve a purpose. She does note that there are some long term health concerns with some of the packaging materials currently. All in all a very interesting read.
April 29, 2016
Combat Ready Kitchen enters the ring with hard punching reporting against our processed food industry and the consequences of it's success to our overall health. What follows is the intriguing origin story of nearly all the innovations in modern food science and it's delivery system since WWII. The punch line is that our packaged foods were expertly designed for the front lines, not everyday consumption and yet... Here we are eating our own military funded success for the sake of convenience with serious consequences.
In her summary, the author becomes resigned to the overwhelming totality of it all and seemingly accepts our current cultural standard of convenient sustenance. I also felt despaired at moments but was ultimately disappointed in the level of resignation in the author. She seems to posses a faith that the militarily directed scientific research will ultimately self correct to our ultimate benefit one day soon. I have more hope for the human health focused slow and primal food movements despite it's weaker position within present day society and corporate interests.
In her summary, the author becomes resigned to the overwhelming totality of it all and seemingly accepts our current cultural standard of convenient sustenance. I also felt despaired at moments but was ultimately disappointed in the level of resignation in the author. She seems to posses a faith that the militarily directed scientific research will ultimately self correct to our ultimate benefit one day soon. I have more hope for the human health focused slow and primal food movements despite it's weaker position within present day society and corporate interests.
January 13, 2017
Could have been good, but with the amount of "white American" slang used in this book, it is hard to read for a non born-and-bred redneck. The amount of low-brow colloquialisms used makes me believe a writer who claims to be somewhat worldly couldn't have written this but rather it was edited thinking the target reader was walmart novela readers.
The undeveloped cannibalism section makes it appear like there are anti-meso American sentiments in need of therapy.
The anger which peaks censored on the last page could have been put to better use since I don't believe un-angry people would bother to read this.
The book also engages in continental appropriation, stripping the name of a whole continent and continuously applying it exclusively to refer to the USA, which is offensive to both, the continent(s) as a whole and this great nation which has its own name and theoretically doesn't interfere with the sovereignty of the rest of the nations in this land.
The undeveloped cannibalism section makes it appear like there are anti-meso American sentiments in need of therapy.
The anger which peaks censored on the last page could have been put to better use since I don't believe un-angry people would bother to read this.
The book also engages in continental appropriation, stripping the name of a whole continent and continuously applying it exclusively to refer to the USA, which is offensive to both, the continent(s) as a whole and this great nation which has its own name and theoretically doesn't interfere with the sovereignty of the rest of the nations in this land.
February 4, 2016
This book makes good points albeit with some overly tendentious argument. The basic thrust of the book is thorough and the logic unassailable: that the American military's quest for safer, lighter, faster, and ever-more-processed foodstuffs to power our troops has cascaded throughout the supermarket aisles and into our kitchens and lunch boxes. And wow is there abundant detail here which the author explores in painstaking depth, especially in the cozy relationship between the Army (especially an obscure research lab in Natick, MA) and the food and agribusiness conglomerates. Where the book periodically gets tiresome is the overly technical discussion of some of the food safety and processing technology, and moreso in the occasional conspiracy-theorizing tone. It's certainly eye opening and informative but I wish those elements could have been trimmed.
May 10, 2016
Half of this book was really interesting. The other half was frankly boring. The interesting aprt is when the author is describing all the food processing inventions created and driven by the US Army. The boring part is when she slogs through various organizations and people involved in the history of the Army's food research.
Also there's a cutesy tone to this book similar to how Mary Roach writes. Roach pulls it off, but some of the jokiness in this book just falls flat.
Anyway, my suggestion is read the interesting parts of this book and skim the rest. It really is a fascinating story that very few people understand. Did you know that we have powdered cheese on all our junk food thanks to the Military?
Also there's a cutesy tone to this book similar to how Mary Roach writes. Roach pulls it off, but some of the jokiness in this book just falls flat.
Anyway, my suggestion is read the interesting parts of this book and skim the rest. It really is a fascinating story that very few people understand. Did you know that we have powdered cheese on all our junk food thanks to the Military?
April 18, 2016
Pretty much exactly what I expected to read. No moral judgments, as I'm one of the "get dinner on the table as fast as possible" types, though I have privately been meaning to work a little harder on at least getting more "from scratch" food on the table, and less out of a box or can.
Still, it's really so much easier to make a fantastic-tasting meal from some processing (such as canned diced potatoes or a tube of ground pork and some flash-frozen broccoli) that is about as healthy as you can get it without spending hours sourcing raw food.
Still, it's really so much easier to make a fantastic-tasting meal from some processing (such as canned diced potatoes or a tube of ground pork and some flash-frozen broccoli) that is about as healthy as you can get it without spending hours sourcing raw food.
April 12, 2021
I liked the book for it's information, and respect the author's great research. I learned a lot, which was the main thing. Sometimes I wish the book wasn't so ....sentence lengthy? (pg 50)...."Between the latitudes 23.4378 N and 23.4378 S, in the geographic region known as the tropics, the weather is very pleasant for three months a year, conveniently coinciding with northern postholiday ennui and the frigid temperatures that wither the desire for outdoor adventures, and steamier than the sixth circle of hell the rest of the time." My head hurts, figuring that one out.
December 15, 2016
I will never go grocery shopping the same ever again. This book is very informative about the major role the US military has in modern food processing. It makes sense though once one thinks about it. The military has the money and the means to create foodstuffs that are portable, edible, and non-perishable. I've tried MRE's before and they're okay - not as bad as some people say they are. It's interesting to know that a lot of science and technology went into the making of these meal packets.
August 1, 2018
This book was fascinating. Scary, too about how much hi-tech processing goes into our modern food supply. Is this tech good or bad? Anastacia lets you decide for yourself. But, even with an advanced degree in nutrition and courses in food science and food safety, I found some parts of this slow going and over the top technical. Perhaps that is because she put so much information into the book that it had to be technical. I recommend reading this, but expect some heavy science. And expect to take a long time at the grocery store next time you go.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews