What Can You Afford?

            Poverty is obviously a prominent issue in the United States today especially among women and children.  Many individuals are barely making ends meet, and they are forced to live day by day off of emergency food.  In chapter two of Jane Poppendieck’s Sweet Charity, she explores the problems poor people experience in relation to food.  It is obvious that poor people lack the resources to provide themselves with a healthy diet that provides them with the correct vitamins and minerals.  Everything is so much more expensive today especially necessities such as rent and utility costs.  Those in poverty do not have the necessary $100 to spend every week on food.  The solution for many of these families becomes emergency food, such as the food provided in food kitchens or food banks.  Most of these families are dealing with such horrific poverty problems because of unemployment or underemployment problems.  Whether it is short-term or long-term unemployment, many individuals in these situations turn to food pantries for help.  They cannot waste the little money they have on food when they have to pay medical and rent bills.  Rent prices have skyrocketed over the past decades, and these new prices are forcing individuals in poverty to use more then their allotted 30% of their income to pay for their shelter.  For those individuals who are applicable for soup kitchens, public assistance is another major helper.  Although this helps provide some income, the amount is still not sufficient.  Another program founded called the Food Stamps program is another attempt to help out those families in poverty.  Although this program attempted to close the gap once again between what families in poverty could and could not afford, its effectiveness is low.  Many people who should not be denied are denied, and some people are to proud to accept defeat.        

            I am absolutely horrified by the amount of poverty in the United States.  Living at Cornell now, and a nice area and New Jersey before, I have not been exposed to the many individuals  living in poverty in the United States.  This article was extremely informative because although I have heard about the widespread issues of poverty, I never realized its extent.  Since I was in Middle School I have volunteered at a Food Bank in New Jersey.  I would work on weekends, and package and sort hundreds of cans of food.  I never understood how the huge amount of food that was donated could not satisfy the number of individuals living in poverty.  Poverty is obviously a huge issue that needs to be addressed.  Although there is many programs implemented, these programs obviously do not suffice.  Poverty and hunger are obviously directly related to each other, and our task for the future will be to decrease the poverty so individuals can receive the amount of nutrition their bodies need.              

WHY?

How can the government implement a new plan that will help individuals in poverty with shelter and food without making them feel “embarrassed”

Is there a more effective way we can run soup kitchens?

No More Time

            Our society is no longer the same.  We no longer look the same and we no longer eat the same.  The American family has completely transformed over time, and our eating habits have drastically changed.  In “McDonaldization of Society” by Patricia and Peter Adler they discuss the idea of rationalization of a society.  More specifically, they discuss these two concepts in relation to our eating habits.  Rather than eating in more frequently, families find eating out an easier way to dine.  Many families rarely have time to cook family meals.  When I say eating out, I don’t mean at expensive restaurants, but rather I mean at fast – food chains where they can eat in less than 20 minutes.  Efficiency has become one of the main goals of our food system, and the efficiency does not start with the delivery of the food to consumers, but it starts with the production of any food on the farm.  Generally anything that can be done faster is better.  Another aspect of the rationalization of society is the “predictability.”  Consumers like to know what they are getting before they even get there.  Our society has become more concerned with the quantity of the food rather than the quality of the food.  I can guarantee you that few individuals know where a McDonalds burger comes from.  Although these aspects of rationalization have overcome society, there are still individuals that have yet to conform.  Although this is true, the goal of our food system is to force everyone to conform.  Lastly, relating to the idea of conformity, control is a necessary constituent of a rationalized society.  Control over customers and employees are key in the success of the society.  The authors conclude with the possible negative effects, but these issues may not be solely because of the rationalization of society, but rather the type of rationalization. 

            I think the transformation our society is undergoing is horrible.  The fact that fast-food restaurants have become so easy and ubiquitous is absolutely atrocious.  Some individuals do not have the option to eat elsewhere.  They cannot afford to buy healthy food at the market or order a salad at a high-class restaurant.  I think these fast – food chained restaurants with cheap options, should be transformed into restaurants where even slightly healthier food is served and still efficiently.  The authors bring up interesting constituents of a rational society, and it is evident that these aspects are overwhelming our society today.  Aside from the McDonalds example, I could probably pick any fast-food chain and describe how the different aspects affect that specific food chain.  Our society is discouraging individualism, and attempting consumers to conform to the norm, and what has become popular and easy in society.  The fact that fast-food chains like McDonalds have so much control over society proves that consumers are continuing to have less and less control.  Although it is true we always have a choice, our choices are getting harder, and our options are getting more limited.    

WHY?

Is it possible to alter the rationalization of our society through the farmers?

Why do you think consumers are so prone to eating at fast-food restaurants even when they know the nutritional value is close to none?

Is There Such a Thing as Segregation with Food?

            Throughout the past few years, our food system has experienced drastic changes, and obesity and other food related issues have become increasingly larger problems.  Specifically in the article “Fried Chicken and Fresh Apples” by Kwate, he discusses food issues between different races.  It is evident that specific foods are not affordable to all individuals.  Especially the extremely healthy, organic foods are targeted towards middle upper classmen.  Specifically in this article, Kwate deals with the differentiation between African American societies and wealthy Caucasian societies.  In African American societies, foods such a fried chicken are more ubiquitous, and therefore easier to obtain.  Although fast food is obviously present in White Societies, for African American societies it is more convenient and practical, whereas white societies generally have many more options.  Segregation is still present in America, and currently fast food companies are targeting African American communities because the majority of them are living near each other, and an industry has to know their consumers.  The targeting of poor people generally turns into targeting specific races, and in this case specifically African Americans.  African Americans are even targeted to work at Fast Food chains, enforcing their location in African American communities.  These neighborhoods are often categorized as “ghettos,” also thought of as deteriorating neighborhoods.  Fast Food chains are more likely to overpopulate themselves in neighborhoods that are not as wealthy to ensure a large consumer population.  African American’s in general have very little political power, and have difficulty making their voice heard.  Obviously a major issue within our food system is the targeting of specific racial groups because the processed food industry, specifically fast food chains, is growing in neighborhoods where they know they can make a profit.   

            I think this is a very prevalent issue today.  If America’s food system wants to go through a transformation, wealthy white Americans cannot be the only class involved.  In my opinion a transformation has to include all of the people of America, especially those in the lower class and African American communities because they still to this day make up a large percentage of our population.  The fact that fast food companies target lower classmen and mainly African American communities, is a great advertising strategy, but terrible for the health of the African American community.  The issue lies with the idea of availability.  The fact that it is so easy for African American’s to find a piece of fried chicken over fresh grown vegetables increases the chances that they will choose the unhealthy food.  Although it is true that many African Americans cannot afford the healthy option, there are many African Americans that have to be given the option.  The overpopulation of fast food chains in specific communities needs to end, and healthier more affordable foods have to be substituted in African American and lower classmen’s diets.      

WHY?

Is it possible for the government to step in and make laws about the number of fast food restaurants in a given area?

Why are African Americans specifically targeted when there are so many other poor races?

Corn: The Hidden Cause of Obesity

            90 billion dollars.  10 percent increase in calorie increase.  Three out of every five Americans.  (Pollan 2008, p. 102).  All three of these items are characteristic of obesity.  Obesity is no longer an issue that can be fought sitting down, but rather it has become an epidemic that needs to be dealt with full force.  In Chapter 6 of the Omnivores Dilemma, Pollan discusses the causes behind obesity.  Pollan explains that the underlying problem of obesity goes back to the production of the food: the farms and more specifically the production of corn.  As individuals, including myself, we do not consider ourselves big corn eaters.  What we do not realize is that corn in some form is processed in almost all of the processed foods we get from our supermarkets today.  Farmers have discovered how to produce massive amounts of corn for extremely cheap prices.  It is easy to simply convert corn into alcohol or even fructose corn syrup.  Consumers have no idea how much processed corn they are consuming, and because portion sizes have increased thanks to David Wallerstein, consumers are eating larger amounts of the wrong types of foods and nutrients.  Humans enjoy foods with more sugar and more fats because they taste better.  With increased portion sizes and increased production of processed corns, it is inevitable that Americans have health issues.       

            The first step in understanding obesity, is acknowledging the greatness of the problem within the United States.  Obesity is no longer an issue that a very small percentage of the population, but rather obesity is an issue that nearly the majority of the population is forced to deal with.  I think the first step to helping this epidemic has to come from the government and the industries.  Without a significant change in our food system, Americans are not going to want to change.  Currently Americans are eating what they think is good food for completely reasonable prices.  Americans need to be educated because the foods they are eating with surpluses of corn, high fructose corn syrup and other products are increasing their chances of becoming obese.  Obesity cannot be taken lightly, and in this case I think increasing awareness is the first realistic goal.  Until the food system makes dramatic changes, the only things Americans can do themselves is become aware of what they are actually eating.  Although it has become so easy for farmers to take corn and make so many different processed products, there has to be a means to an end.  A way to prevent obesity, starting with the bottom of the food chain. 

WHY?

What would be the most effective way to start conquering the problems of obesity?

Is it possible to wean America off of mass production of corn to another product that might be healthier and slightly more expensive?

Is There Such a Thing as American Cuisine?

            It is evident that food plays a very important part in our lives in America as well as other individual’s lives in countries such as Japan, Italy, and China.  In the article “Eating America” by Sidney Mintz she discusses the importance of food in the United States in relation to our cuisine.  In the introduction of this article Mintz expresses the misconception that culture and cuisine are the same thing.  When Mintz introduced America as having no cuisine, many individuals were offended because they assumed culture and cuisine went hand in hand.  Mintz by no means meant to say that American’s had no culture, but solely that we have no specific cuisine.  Throughout the article he deals with the possibility of the creation of a new cuisine as well as the changes America has experienced over time.  A large part of the reason American cuisine is so diverse is because of the variety of descendents coming from outside of the United States such as Europe.  European cuisine varies significantly from American cuisine, but throughout the years, Europe’s cuisine continues to make itself more visible in the United States.  Rather than adopting their own cuisine, it is so common for individuals in the United States to eat a variety of cuisines.  Mintz discusses the important different between being socially and culturally alike in terms of food.  This is important because it proves that although we have very similar opinions on what American food is, culturally we are extremely diverse. Americans eat more Italian, Chinese, and even Greek food than Italians, Chinese, and Greek people eat of American food.  It is so easy to get any type of food in America because foods are no longer region-specific because of the decrease in price of transportation.  American’s have truly stopped caring about the types of food we eat, which is why Mintz believes that we do not and will not have a cuisine specific to America.     

            I found this article really interesting because I never thought of an American Cuisine.  Whenever I order take out or go out to dinner with my family we always go out with the purpose of having Italian, Japanese, Chinese or even Greek food.  Although I consider foods such as hot dogs, hamburgers, and even macaroni and cheese American, I agree with the statement that Americans truly don’t have a cuisine.  Americans tend to be more diverse regarding to food because food is such an important part of our lifestyle.  I don’t mean that American’s necessarily eat the most expensive foods or the most exquisite cuisines, but we definitely eat the most food.  American’s have developed their own type of cuisine that includes every other cuisine possible.  Although this obviously means that America does not have an original cuisine, in my opinion diversity in this sense is almost better.  I enjoy being able to have good Chinese and Italian food without having to travel all the way to China and Italy.  Lately our food system has become dependent on fast food and cheap unhealthy food, adding to the reason why it is almost impossible for America to have a unique cuisine.

WHY?

Does a cuisine have to be different or it is possible for a cuisine to be a mixture of other cuisines?

Do you think American cuisine is taking a turn for the worst?

To Eat or Not to Eat

           Our society has become overly dependent on meat throughout the past few centuries.  Meat used to be a delicacy, but now it is sold in supermarkets and restaurants for prices that are unimaginable.  The fact that it is possible to get a burger at McDonalds for $1 is absolutely ridiculous.  In Chapter 17 of Michael Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma, he discusses the moral aspects of eating meat.  Is it morally acceptable to slaughter animals even if the animals are feeling absolutely no pain?  Today in our food system animals are slaughtered in two different ways: in farms like Polyface the animals generally feel no pain, but in industrialized farms animals generally feel the pain because they see their own death coming.  Pollan illustrates two different perspectives about the slaughtering of animals.  One perspective identifies the idea that animals are “machines incapable of thought or feeling”(306), and another perspective deals with the idea that killing animals in general is unethical.  The supporting details for the first perspective is that if animals have no language, they cannot talk, and therefore they cannot suffer.  If animals are not suffering, keeping them out of the wild is actually benefiting their species as whole although not necessarily each individual.  Although there are a significant amount of farm animals that cannot survive in the wild, there are many people that believe breeding animals just to kill them is inhumane.  Regardless of the process animals are killed, members of PETA, vegetarians, and animal activists in general believe animals have a right to live.  The question becomes whether killing animals provide more advantages to humans and even the species itself than disadvantages.        

            In my opinion, I do not think I would ever be able to become a vegetarian.  Our society has become so reliant on meat, including myself that I don’t think I would be able to stop eating meat completely.  Although I truly believe I could not stop eating meat, I think it is important to closer investigate the types of meat I eat.  Pollan clearly reiterates the fact that many people believe animals have no soul like philosophers such as Descartes, and therefore the act of slaughtering them is completely ethical.  Although I believe that animals have a soul, I think the process of slaughtering animals when they feel no pain is completely ethical.  In actuality humans are the main reason why many species are surviving today.  There are so many animals such as chickens that would have a very difficult time living out in a wild.  Although farmers end their death earlier than they would have liked, the fact that they are living in a safe environment keeps their species alive.  It is true that there is no clear right answer to this debate, but in my opinion as long as the animals are healthy and feeling little pain, the slaughter of animals to benefit not only humans, but also their species is completely acceptable.      

WHY?

Is it possible for the government to mandate how animals are killed in industrial farms?

If people were to see the slaughter process at industrial farms do you think that would affect their intake of meat?

150 Miles for a Supermarket

            The thought of driving 150 miles for a supermarket sounds outrageous.  Why should we drive more than a few if there is a Wegmans, Walgreens, or Kings nearby?  Quality over Price.  In Pollan’s 13^th Chapter in the Omnivore’s Dilemma, he deals with the importance of understanding what quality truly is.  Very few people are taking the time and effort to understand where their meat comes from, but those few people are willing to drive hours to provide their family with healthy safe meat.  They want to know what kinds of farmers are growing their kids food.  Individuals have stopped questioning where there meat comes from, and regardless of the quality they are considering all meat the same.  Meat and even produce used to have seasons, but with today’s technology supermarkets no longer have seasons.  Pollan reinforces this issue as one of the many issues with our food system today, and he provides some solutions for a gradual change within our reliance on the industrial food system.  Rather than always going to a supermarket for fresh food, Pollan suggests the idea of forming a relationship with the farmers in order to know directly where your food is coming from.  Aside from just relationships with the consumers, local farmers and restaurant owners are starting to form relationships.  Another idea was to pledge a certain amount of money to a specific farm, and then rather than going to your supermarket receiving weekly boxes of food.  Pollan underlines the fact that “you can buy honestly priced food or you can buy irresponsibly priced food.”  When we eat the mystery meat at McDonalds or buy the cheap steak off of Walmart’s shelves, how can we know what we are really eating?  The key to success to transform our industrial food system is truly connecting the consumers with the farmers.    

            After reading more and more responses, I am starting to believe that Pollan’s so-called “solutions” are not so realistic anymore.  Although we would all like individuals to pay more attention to where there food is coming from, very few Americans are willing to put in more energy and time into the food they eat.  Just like Pollan said, today Americans spend more time picking a plumber than they do choosing the food they eat.  I would like to think that American’s care about what they put into their body, but although our society has become more health-conscious, we still lack the ability to differentiate the meats and produce on the shelves of the supermarket.  I wish I could say this didn’t apply to me, but I most certainly don’t have the time or the money as a college student to shop at the local farmers market or form relationships with the local farmers.  I think this is where the government should come in, to create policies creating relationships between the locals and their farmers.  It is unrealistic to believe we will drive 150 miles for a supermarket, but it is realistic to believe over time farmers can create new systems to attract new customers, improving the quality of the food we eat every day.      

WHY?

What kind of policies can the government create to improve the relationships between the consumer and their local farmers?

Is it possible to start having two barcodes on the meats in chain supermarkets so that consumers can understand where their food is coming from?

Cheap Calories

            Easy.  Cheap.  Large.  Our food industry is becoming less and less concerned with creating high quality food, and instead they have been concerned with creating the most amount of food for the cheapest prices.  In “Farmer in Chief,” an article in the New York Times by Michael Pollan, Pollan discusses the lack of attention to food policy in history.    He specifically deals with Nixon, but he mentions the necessity of the need for change.  Throughout the years our food industry has changed significantly, and we are at the point where we can no longer just increase or decrease food prices, but instead we have to alter the entire food system.  From using ridiculous amounts of fossil fuels to spending excessive amounts of government funding on health issues our government truly has issues regarding our food system today.  Throughout the years there has been a significant transition from solar energy to fossil energy, but our excessive use of fossil- fuel energy has harmed the environment as well as the well being of our food system.  There has also been a shift from farms to feedlot allowing Americans to buy proteins such as burgers at a ridiculously cheap price, but increasing the pollution into the environment. 

            Pollan argues that in order to improve the food system there are some essential steps that need to be taken.  Starting with our diets and ending with government policies pertaining to food supply, there are many actions we must take to improve the food system.  Rather than rewarding diversity, producers and our government have been discouraging farmers from producing specialty foods and instead encouraging them to produce a lot of cheap food.  This lack of diversity requires the need for more fertilizers and pesticides, negatively affecting our environment.  Pollan makes it clear that in order for the food system and our health to improve, it is a necessity that more farmers are willing to grow food and that we are willing to accept somewhat higher prices.  There has clearly been increased demand for local markets, but as of now the government has no role in the rapid growth of these markets.  As America tries to reconstruct its food systems, it is crucial that all individuals that deal with food for their job such as farmers and even consumers play a role in changing this system. 

            This article brought up the issues our food system has created throughout the years, and the possible long – term solutions for this immense problem.  This problem clearly cannot be fixed by a few changes in government policy, but in my opinion this transformation requires the cooperation of the producers, consumers, and industries.  Less processed and healthier food has the potential to benefit all three of these groups, if the system is changed correctly.  Without the addition of more farmers growing more diverse food, it is impossible for the consumers to expect diverse food in the supermarkets.  Without industries willing to expect to make less of a profit off of their foods, it is impossible for farmers to create food.  Cooperation is the key to success in our food system.  We need to stop thinking solely about cheap calories, and instead think about healthy calories.  With obesity being a major problem in the United States, we need to start to focus more on changing our food system to benefit the people.  It is true that you can get 5 hamburgers for 5 dollars at McDonalds, and probably feel full, but that is not the type of eating that Americans should continue.  Americans need to convert their food system, and they need to start today.

WHY?

Is it really possible to transform our food system after so many years of abusing fossil fuel energy?

What do you think is the best way for the government to approach creating policies for the local food markets to decrease the prices to make the food more affordable for the lower class citizens? 

Food Inc. Controversy

POSITIVE RESPONSE:

http://mazon.org/2009/06/17/food-inc-review/

In Mazon: a Jewish Response to Hunger, a foundation to prevent and help hunger around the world, Ed – Yerke Robins comments on the positive aspects of the documentary Food Inc.  Coming from an organization whose goals are to prevent the hunger, Robins comments on the fact that the Food Inc. documentary helps educate Americans about the reality of our food production.  The focus of this response is around the mass-production of food in comparison to the mass production items such as sneakers.  Food has become so commonplace, that we forget that so many people are still hungry, and do no have the food security so many of us are fortunate to have.  Eating and specifically healthy eating is a prevalent issue today, and through Robins response he advocates for the necessity to stay involved and educate yourself through videos such as Food Inc.  Robins provides the example, of Kevin, of whom the food industry failed, and uses him as an example of why we need to educate ourselves and understand what is actually being put in our food. 

NEGATIVE RESPONSE:

http://greenupgrader.com/8020/monsantos-food-inc-facts/

http://gliving.com/foodinc/

I could not find the exact blog where Monsanto negatively responds to the issues in Food Inc., but I found many newspaper articles with quotes directly from the blog.  According to Monsanto, which is a US agricultural biotechnology corporation, the Food Inc. documentary was an extremely one-sided film where America’s hidden production secrets are revealed.  Monsanto produces genetically engineered seeds along with other genetically engineered products.  Monsanto uses extremely strong language against the facts in the Food Inc. documentary especially those dealing with the role of the farmers.  The Monsanto Corporation argues that the solution to feeding our entire country is unrealistic.  Farmers have the responsibility of growing a lot of crops in a short amount of time, and the Monsanto Corporation comments on the unrealistic aspects of the improvement of production.  Coming from a company that genetically modifies seeds, in my opinion they are against Food Inc. because it leaks a lot of the secrets, producers want to keep secret. 

EVEN-HEADED RESPONSE

http://jenniferchandler.com/uncategorized/food-inc-documentary

            In Jennifer Chandler’s blog “Esteem Rising,” she discusses the video Food Inc. from what seems like an unbiased point of view.  She is not part of a large corporation or a foundation, and she therefore is responding from the point of view of a consumer.  Chandler discusses the idea that the documentary deals with the Food Industry as a whole from the farms to the corporations rather than dealing with a specific section of the food chain.   From the immigrants who work in the factories to the consumer’s role in the whole process, Chandler clearly illustrates the importance of the Food Inc. documentary.  Even if you don’t agree with the documentary, the documentary demonstrates some of the major problems in our food systems.  If anything this documentary increases awareness on the safety and health issues of the food we eat everyday.  Chandler openly discusses the importance for increasing awareness of the industrial food chain in our society today.         

“There are No Seasons in the Supermarket”

Where does our food actually come from?  Are we actually eating what we think we are eating?  Through the documentary Food Inc., the director explores the food system in general from its production on farms to being placed in the supermarket aisles.    Unlike what food companies and supermarkets want us to believe about the diversity of most of the food we are eating, the majority of the food we eat comes from a very small amount of companies and producers.  Our food is no longer thought of as being produced by individual farmers, but rather it is thought of as being produced by a system.  A system that has become so accustomed to modifying our food so that it is easy to produce and cheap for the consumers.  People are no longer willing to pay for expensive meats or really any other processed food when they can get the same amount for half the price.  Franchises like McDonalds are creating menus such as the dollar menu, where they are able to charge meat for just a dollar.  This obviously cannot be sanitary, and the probability of the consumers contracting diseases such as e coli is significantly higher. 

How does this disgusting meat make it to our plates?  Throughout the video, the process of catching the chickens and cattle is shown vividly, and the lack of the catchers’ attention to detail is evident.  The chickens are left in a dark tunnel to facilitate the process for the catchers, but by no means is this process hygienic.  It is atrocious what these poor animals go through, but it is also atrocious that these farmers and producers deem it appropriate to put these packages of meat on the shelves of our supermarkets.   

            I have never been more disgusted from watching a movie than after I watched Food Inc.  I cannot believe the process our meats and poultry experience before they are cooked and eaten.  The segment on fast food chains scared me the most.  The fact that unhealthy and unsanitary meat is being served to customers worldwide every day is abominable.  Fast food chains generally gross me out anyways, and I try to stay as far away from them when I’m choosing my meals.  The specific case with Kevin’s death was a wakeup call in the seriousness of the food we put into our bodies.  I am a huge meat eater.  Whenever I’m home, I eat meat all the time whether it is my mom’s cooking or at a small diner down the street.  I never realized the consequences of “bad” meat or even the severity of eating “bad” meat.   Throughout the years, people have stopped checking the quality of the meat, and instead they have been checking the price of the meat.  Especially in this economy it is so difficult to eat healthy and support a family.  In my opinion it is outrageous that the meat companies are lining the supermarkets with unsanitary, processed, uniformed meats.     

WHY?

Is the government going to create new laws requiring certain sanitary needs for the production of our meat?

If the meat production increases the price of meet at the expense of making the meat more sanitary, will consumers still buy as much meat?

Why do you think people still eat as much meat even while it is so unsanitary, and processed so thoroughly?

“Bye, Bye Mommy”

Aside from solely tracking corn through the entire food chain, in Chapter 4 of “The Omnivores Dilemma” Pollan decides to track the industrial food chain further dealing with cattle from the very beginning till it ends up on our dinner plates.  Therefore Pollan buys steer, 534, in order to trace it through its entire life span.  The first stage in the production of meet is called the “cow-calf” operation where beef cattle are born ranches not owned by a major corporation.  The cattle have no idea what they are in for as they spend the first six months of their lives next to their mother, until the six-month comes and they are weaned from their mother.  Calves are weaned so that their mothers can have more calves as well as the need for a change in their diet, but it is a shocking time for the calves.  The calves are then shoved together in a feedlot and put on a strict diet of solely feed made of corn and high in protein and fat to significantly increase the size of the calves.

Starting this new diet negatively affects the calves because they are not used to eating corn or any type of feed of that kind.  Health problems are ubiquitous among calves when they first change their diets.  Corn is used because it is cheap.  By no means is it used because it is better for the calves.  Because this system focusing on benefiting the producers, the health of the cows is overlooked, and cows tend to develop diseases such as mad cow disease.  This then affects the health of the consumers because they are being served unhealthy and unsanitary meat. 

The process of production involving the cattle is inhumane in my opinion.  I cannot believe the process that the beef cattle endure without a choice.  They are born with their mothers, but before than can even truly adapt to their settings they are weaned away from their mothers.  They are forced to eat food that is terrible for their own health, but rather solely benefits the producers.  The feed made of corn is cheap calories, and all producers are looking for is the cheapest way to produce the most amount of food.  Today so many of the meats in our supermarkets are so much cheaper than they used to be.  This is not because it has become easier to produce beef cattle, but rather they have improved the speed of the production of cattle.  Beef cattle are becoming bigger and stronger in less time, yet they are contracting diseases, and passing them on to the other cattle.  I think that producers should take a step back, and reevaluate this process.  Although I understand cheapest is generally the way to go, in this sense the health of the cattle and the consumers should be taken more into consideration. 

WHY?

What else could be substituted into the feed, that is still cheap, but healthier for the cattle?

What percentage of the meat we eat has been produced by infected cattle?

Is the meat on our supermarket shelves safe to eat?  Is this meat just as bad as the meat in McDonalds?   

Corn. Dextrin. Dextrose. Maltodextrin

   Who would've thought that corn would be one of the most important aspects of our industrial food chain today?  In the first three chapters of "The Omnivore's Dilemma," Pollan describes the necessity of corn to our industrial society and to basically the majority of the foods we consume.  Although our supermarkets are filled with diversity among the many different aisles, the diversity is lacking in the production of these products.  In the beginning of Chapter 2, Pollan identifies the importance of each individual farm to the production of corn for our society because one farm has the ability to feed 129 individuals.  Although each farm can feed 129 individuals, it is very rare that the farmers producing the corn attain enough profit to make a decent living for themselves.  Pollan visits George Naylor’s farm in an attempt to trace the production of corn until it is processed to when it becomes the food we are familiar with and eat every day ranging from a breakfast bar to the completely processed chicken McNuggets you order from McDonalds.  

            From discussing genetically modified corn to the fall in population of the American Belt, corn has become the number one item on a farm, even higher than necessities such as cattle.  Corn’s production has increased significantly, but with its increase, its cost continues to decrease, increasing the hardships farmers have to experience.  Constrained by the government, farmers are forced to continue selling large amounts of corn, although they rarely make a significant profit.  Corn continues to have an extreme impact on our food chains, acting as an ingredient in numerous numbers of food products.    

Until I read these chapters in “Omnivore’s Dilemma,” I had no idea that corn is in almost everything we eat.  I try to read the labels to see whether what I am eating is healthy or not, but for some reason I have rarely seen corn on the label.  After reading these chapters I went through the food in my desk, and found corn as an ingredient on every item on my desk.  It is actually ridiculous that corn has become so commonplace in so many different supermarket items, especially after learning the process behind the corn production.  I can no longer force myself to believe that all this genetically modified corn, hybrid corn used in the production of our food is actually healthy.  

            It is outrageous that although our society relies so heavily on the production of corn, farmers whose main occupation is producing corn cannot make a living for themselves.  I cannot comprehend how the government is standing by without making more policies benefiting those farmers and the quality of the corn itself.  I will never again be able to think of corn as the long yellow cob I eat at barbecues, but instead I will think of the corn being planted at the beginning of the food chain and the complex process it endures until it becomes the food I eat and enjoy everyday.  

WHY?

At what point and why did corn production become genetically modified? 

Are we getting the correct nutrients that are necessary for our body if corn is present in different forms in almost every item we eat?

Is it practical to expect the government to start taking action to increase the profits each individual farmer makes on the corn he grows?

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

I commented on this in my response shortly, but I think Maddy brought up a very interesting point dealing with large companies gains at the expense of the small farmers.  Farms are becoming less and less prevalent in society, and large companies rarely hesitate if it means making a profit at the expense of the farmers at the other end of the food chain.