Monday, March 21, 2011

Omnivore's Dilemma Ch 5-8

In chapters 5-8 of The Omnivore’s Dilemma, there was a lot of information already talked about in class because the first three chapters are all about corn, and how corn is in about everything we consume. There were, however, many things that I didn’t know that came to light in these chapters. In chapter 7, Pollen puts the fast food industry under intense scrutiny by using an example of his family going there to eat a meal. He describes what he got, what his wife got, and what his kid got; they all ate completely different meals. Pollen’s son ate a chicken nugget, which had recently been advertized because of a new recipe containing all white meat. Pollen’s son does not describe the nugget as chicken, but as simply put a nugget. Pollen finds this disturbing, and frankly, so do I because the nugget contains thirty two ingredients, and is not even recognizable as chicken from a small child eating it. He also explains the history of the “super size.” He explains that a man who worked for McDonalds pitched the idea for years that the reason people don’t buy more than one if they are hungrier is because people hate to look fat, but if the producer were to dole out larger portions for a bit more money, people don’t feel as fat anymore. Of course they eventually adopted that strategy and it has become very successful for them.
An interesting historical reference is to the alcoholic republic of the early 19th century and how relatable that time period is to the “fat republic” we live in today. They both occurred because of an oversupply of corn. In the 19th Century, farmers had more corn than they knew what to do with, and they ended up making whiskey out of it. This allowed people to drink whiskey by the pint every single day for a low price. Corn has done the same thing to our food industry, or system as Pollen would say. Corn is used to replace sugar and other ingredients for a fraction of the price, making it a desirable ingredient for business minded people. It seems like corn is a major problem in the food industry and I can’t think of anything that wouldn’t be considered un-constitutional that could end this obesity epidemic at the hands of corn. Seeing the movie in class prepared me somewhat for the horrors this book tells, but I was still astonished at the irresponsibility shown by both the producers and consumers of all these products stuffed with corn. I poked fun at a lot of these things early on, but this book as opened my eyes, and this really is an important issue.
Post by Will Roberts

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Ella

The Omnivore's Dilemma: Chapters 13-16

In these four chapters of The Omnivore's Dilemma I read about the American diet in a biological, historical, cultural and a economic standpoint. The combination of all of these different aspects to the way we eat was fascinating. Salatin's prospective on "irresponsibly priced" food brings to mind the question of how we are actually paying for what we eat; the cheaper the food, the more you pay in health, and the higher the risk of some disastrous health defect. Another interesting factor was his observation that perhaps in this new modern age we have, in fact, placed other unnecessary items above food as our top priorities. How foolish to think that testnig on our new iPhone 4G is more important than eating the three basic meals that essentially keep you alive and running on a daily basis...

Chapter 14 was short but a good read nonetheless. It makes sense that we should feel more satisfied and way safer about what we are eating if we know exactly where it came from and how it was made. It just makes it taste way better too...

Chapter 15, an almost historical chapter of information, was an engaging section about the original form of food accumulation. The ancient hunter-gatherer, who picked his way through a variety of plants and such to find those edible arrangements, is the beginning of a food system that would go to such extremes to make this easier that it would eventually corrupt eating on the whole. It's true, however, that this hunting and gathering deal would not work nearly well enough to feed the ever-increasing population of America, much less the world. Pollan notes how great the ratio of people to land is, and that there is not nearly enough natural land to produce enough for the people there are. Thus, the omnivore's dilemma...

So to think, as Chapter 16 points out, that in all the years we have been...well, eating, we have never truly established a strong food culture. Our lists of things that are edible keeps expanding, while somehow at the same time shrinking. This unrooted system leaves an opening for food companies to be able to tell us how and what and where to eat. Those big companies now control our diet's, and by doing so also control many aspects of social structure. We give them what they need to succeed, and they take every advantage that they can. Surprising? I don't think so either... Another huge contribution to the omnivore's dilemma.

Ella

"The Omnivore's Dilemma": Fast Food, Corn, Organic and More!!!

After reading chapters 9-12 in "The Omnivore's Dilemma" I came across a ton of interesting and somewhat shocking facts. I haven't eaten at McDonald's since freshman year when we watched "Super Size Me", and after reading chapter 9, I definitelly don't plan on going back any time soon. It's so sad to hear that one in every three American children eat fast food every day and 19% of American meals are eaten in cars... what has this world come to? The amount of corn in a fast food diet is absolutely rediculous. For example, of the 38 ingredients in a McDonald's McNuggets, 13 of them come from corn. The McDonald's meal options are so high in corn it's amazing: Soda- 100% corn, Milkshake- 78% corn, Salad dressing- 65% corn, Nuggets- 56%, Cheesburger- 52%, Fries- 23%. Not exactly what I want to be putting into my system... And it's not just corn that's a problem at fast food resturants.... 45 of the 60 menue items contain high fructose corn syrup. This chapter really gave an inside look into fast food chains and exposed the food for its undesireable ingredients and health problems.

Chapters 10-12 talked about everything organic and the difference between organic and industrial organic. Although I personally do not eat organic, I can definitelly see why many people are starting to. Organic has gone global. There are now "organic TV dinners" and even organic twinkies are on the rise, but most industrial organic foods are not very different from the non-organic foods as most people think. If you've ever heard of a free-range organic chicken, let me tell you what they mean by "free-range": "There is a little door in each shed leading out ot a narrow grassy yard", but they can't go out until they are five weeks old and are to be slaughtered the next week.  Many people don't even realize that organic factory farm chickens live only slightly better lives than the no-organic chickens. Not only that, but industrial organic foods contain just as much fossil fuels as non-organic foods. If you want to have the TRUE organic experience you need to go to organic farms where they refuse to ship their food anywhere and let their animals live off of the grass.

Honestly, this made me a little angry to know that the supposedly "organic" foods are not as organic as we think, only the truly local farms can be considered organic: food grown without pesticides and animals raised without corn based meals. Next time you want to eat organic, eat local!!!!

-Ann

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Fertile Realestate: Rich governments buy up fertile land in Africa

It appears that rich national governemnts are trying to secure future food supplies. The national governments of China, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait in 2009 began purchasing and leasing large land tracks in poor central and east African/Asian states for the purpose of food production. Though these areas suffer frequent famine, and the foreign capital may provide poor farmers with much needed capital, the specific details of the deals remain secret. These moves, criticized by some as "neo-colonialist", may lead to further corruption and possible unrest in regions affected. Besides the obvious risk, this aggressive strategy does not bode well for international food prices. If national policy makers in wealthy states, especially China which already possesses a vast ammount of arable land, expect a shortage or increase in the price of food supplies, then it looks very likely the price spike in agricultural will be longterm. As we have already scene in Egypt and Libya, revolutions both sparked by increased food and energy prices, this strain on international pocket books could have far reaching political consequences. http://www.economist.com/node/13697274 by Isaac

(also blog post about chapter one of omnivore's dilemma and Walmart and Africa were posted by me)

Sunday, March 13, 2011

The illusion of Choice: The doublethink of the American Food Industry

After reading chapter 1 of "The Omnivore's Dilemma", I am especially struck by the paradox that occurs every day in American supermarkets and restaurants; the seemingly endless choice with such limited variety. With most food today being produced from corn and only a hand full of heavily subsidized cash crops, despite the myriad of tempting logos, pastelled boxes and near-divine photographs, we in reality only choose between a dozen types of food produced by half a dozen conglomerates. Essentially, we are bamboozled and disoriented on a primal, instinctual level to commit to a diet that violates our very hunter gather sensibilities. Even extending beyond the supermarket, I am especially struck by how the entire food industry and agricultural policy seems to simply be a collection of paradoxes. We have farm subsidies to protect the idyllic American free farmer, yet these very laws have driven this archetype into decline and near servitude; we have genetic modification to increase biodiversity, yet we are now driven to only token number of crops; we have globalization to increase prosperity for all, yet only the corporations yield true profit. This is a very worrying set of contradictions.

Defending the beef!

Taco Bell is defending their beef in every possible way with their recent ads stating "Thank you for suing us", but now they are taking it to television. After multiple allegations claiming that the "beef" filling in Taco Bell's food is not "beefy" enough to be considered beef, they are turning to advertisements of all kinds to fight back against their lawsuit. They are even using media sources such as Twitter and Facebook to defend themselves and bring back the customers that they may have lost when the accusations were made public. On Facebook they are offering their fans free beef tacos as a token of their appreciation for their fans' support. Although the many different lawsuits Taco Bell has faced in the past including the E. coli breakout and rat infestation concerns, they have only been slightly detrimental to their sales. Taco Bell continues to serve millions of people per week. I guess their "12 percent signature recipie" is just too good to pass up.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41834155/ns/business-consumer_news/

-Ann