Unfortunately, we as humans have an "elastic appetite" with a capacity to eat well beyond what our bodies actually require to sustain life -- so "when food is abundant and cheap, people will eat more of it and get fat." p. 102 Do you buy into the conspiracy theory that our government is intentionally making its nation sick? After all "we subsidize high-fructose corn syrup...but not carrots...guaranteeing that the cheapest calories in the supermarket will continue to be the unhealthiest." p. 108
What are some other explanations for a food environment that supports “industrial eating?”
6 comments:
I don't think the food industry is trying to make people unhealthy, I think it is just a biproduct of them trying to make more money and spend as little as possible. Our food is filled with cheap additives (corn), which make is less healthy, but pretty tasty. People are often willing to turn a blind eye or underestimate a problem if it is profitable to them. I think that this is the case, as with so many other things big businesses do (child labor, environmental pollution, etc.)
I really don't think the government is intentionally encouraging unhealthy diets--they are attempting to support American farmers, though Pollan makes it clear that the policies are not helping farmers all that and result in terrible health. I also agree with Blair, however, that the food industry and goverment are more than willing to be blind to the negative impacts of their farm policies. This is really a complicated problem, though. We can't afford to not raise our own food, but we are at a point where drastic reductions in subsidized agriculture could result in the end of major American food production. It will require a gradual shift.
In a way I disagree with you Loren. I don't really believe the government cares all that much about helping farmers. If they cared about farmers, they wouldn't be forcing them to produce monocultures of crops that are mainly used to feed animals and not humans...which in the end has put most farmers out of business and living somewhere along the poverty line. A few months ago I was at a national nutrition conference and saw this film on "big business farming" which has taken over the midwest. People cannot afford to farm for a living and big companies can do it cheaper. Our whole structure of food production is so screwed up. I know a lot of you have been to other countries where produce is far cheaper. Yet it is so expensive here in the States. Farmers should be subsidized to grow produce, animals, and grains- not just corn.
I agree with what has been said, but I also think that no real change will occur until we are confronted with Pollan's 'dialemma' in real-life terms. By that I mean, when the convenience of cheep tasty food becomes seriously dangerous to the extent that the majority of America is effected and aware of this danger. It is also more expensive to change the system, and too many big businesses have too much to loose by changing it. Ultimately for Pollan's ideas to work, they need to go from the pages of a best-selling book to the halls of congress. I don't see that happening any time soon--at least past the grass-root levels.
I don't necessarily believe that the government cares about farmers as individuals, but does care about the farm industry. Though farmers are not very well off with the government subsidies, without them I think farming would be unsupportable. American farmers are guaranteed a market and an artificially high price for their grain. Without government support I don't think there would be a farming industry in the US at all--farming jobs would be sent overs seas where the job can be done more cheaply. As well, I don't think the government cares especially about sustainable agriculture, but about maintaining the support of an industry. The US currently dumps an unbelievable amount of corn on the international market every year--food we don't need here and that hurts other countries by driving down prices. Whoever decides to cut farm subsidies in the US will have to be a brave leader, willing to lose the support of a large industry. In the end, I also don't know how I would feel about cutting farm subsidies without providing an alternative to support farmers. It is an issue of security as a country to be able to produce your own food...
It's a huge issue of food security. Can you imagine not being able to provide food for our own nation? Scary thought. But why not shift the government subsidies? Let's still help the farmers out with gov money, but money that goes to fruits and grains that humans can eat- not monocultures of soy and corn. I don't understand it. Other countries do this, why can't we?
Post a Comment