Pros And Cons Of Locavorism

Locavores consume only locally grown foods in an effort to reduce their carbon footprints and lose weight, among other reasons. The popularity of locavorism has grown dramatically over the last decade, and its merits are extolled by scientists and ordinary consumers alike. The locavore movement seems to be indisputably beneficial to the environment, the economy, and to consumer health, yet close examination of its common tenets reveals issues which should be taken into account before beginning a locavore diet.

Saving the planet is a topic that is taken seriously by a huge part of this planet’s population. James McWilliams argument, “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying from Nearby Farmer Won’t Save the Planet,” explains why people need to buy food from people other than the local farmers. He believes that the focus of the locavore movement on transportation is wrong because the real problem lies within the energy-hogging factors in food production. McWilliams also went on to explain that another mistake that the locavore movement made was how food miles were calculated. He believes that a truck with 2,000 apples driving 2,000 miles would consume the same amount of fuel as a truck that carried 50 apples to a local shop only 50 miles away. James McWilliams states that “The critical measure here is not food miles but apples per gallon.” He also argues that taking meat out of a person’s diet would cut down on the carbon footprint of his or her dinner because it takes less energy to bring plants, rather than meat, to the table.

How a national food policy could save millions of American lives discusses the lack of a national food policy in America and how the food industry affects people and the world. Examples of issues that a nation food policy could alleviate include Americans access to healthy food and reducing the carbon footprint from food production. The article also discusses how special interests flourish from issues related to the food industry while citizens and the environment suffer.

America’s vast food supply has increased. Foods that were once hard to come by can be found in almost all the grocery stores across the nation. In the article “What’s Eating America”, by Michael Pollan, who is a professor of journalism, explains how the bounty of food came about. He writes about the creation of synthetic fertilizer and how it was used to fertilize crops and essentially make all the foods today. He writes about the harmful effects that are occurring as a result of the chemically made fertilizer. In another article called written by Katherine Spriggs, a student from Stanford University, she writes about the benefits of buying local versus becoming dependent on the import of food. She feels that buying from local farms

Finally, in the book The End of Food, by Paul Roberts, the author displays the impracticality of the local food movement. When discussing how much of a poor fit a locavore food system is in the modern United States, Roberts states “...in the United States, 80 percent of us live in large, densely populated urban areas, usually on the coast, and typically hundreds of miles, often thousands of miles, from the major centers of food production”. This exhibits how eating locally would be a

The local sustainable food chain from The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan would best feed the United States because it is efficient and natural and has little to no impact on the environment compared to the industrial food chains. Pollan illustrates several different food chains in his book, but currently we are depending on two out of the four he discussed. The two industrial food chains already are feed the entire U.S, and it doesn’t look like they are going away. In a perfect world we would all buy local sustainable products.

Many people are not sure whether the locavore movement is the right route to take, however, Americans are not aware of the positive things it brings to its community. The taste and quality of their produce will improve, along with nutritional factors. Making

The locavore movement has become increasingly popular over the last decade. Locavores are people who prefer to eat food that is locally grown and doesn’t travel long distances before getting to their plates. This thought process is slowly changing the way people eat and the ideals people consider when choosing food to eat. Along with this fresh perspective on where our food comes from, the movement provides a innovative ideal towards what is sustainable and what is not sustainable. While the definition of local is dependent on the buyer the effect is the same. The locavore movement has a positive impact on the local communities through improving the income and number of local farms that fosters good communities, and increasing the nutritional value of food eaten.

The book called The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan talks about 4 different food chains and their pros and cons. The Local sustainable farms let the animals roam free and feed them what the animals are supposed to eat. The food from the local sustainable farms are all natural with no pesticides or artificial fertilizer etc. The local sustainable food chain has the potential to feed all the people of America because it’s healthier for the consumer, animals eat what they are supposed to, and it’s healthier for the environment.

Have you ever walked down the grocery store aisle and wondered where your chicken comes from? Or if the ham you just bought is healthier for your family, than the other brand of ham you saw? In “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”, Michael Pollan states that there are four different food chains. They’re the industrial, the industrial organic, the local sustainable, and the hunter-gatherer food chains. I believe that the best food chain for everyone in the United States would be the local sustainable. The local sustainable food chain is the best for the United States because it is better for the animal, and better for the environment. Although the local sustainable food chain would take a long time to get used to, it would be the best option for the United States.

In order to change the way the United States food system is operating at the moment, a change needs to be made in the education that people are receiving about the way their food is produced, manufactured, distributed and consumed. The U.S. food system has become increasingly reliant on mass production factories and multinational retail corporations while local farms and family owned food markets diminish. Economies of scale and opportunity costs represent barriers to change of the current food system because of the many different paths available, each creating different outcomes for consumers, sellers, large corporations and small farms, determining their profit, prices, capital and value. Educating the American people about the benefits of local food production and the downsides of large scale food production, such as nutritional value, disease and safety concerns, and economic advantages, will help to move our food system from “point A” to “point B”.

In the end, it becomes troublesome to go grocery shopping. Likewise, this ties into the idea of environment. Which is more environmentally friendly: to walk to a local Whole Foods or to drive to the “local” farmer’s market? Many would say buying local reduces waste due to transportation; nonetheless, a chart from the magazine Conservation Magazine proves that a majority of gas emissions actually comes from the production of the food (Source D). Transportation is low already, so why should we add to that by traveling far distances? Becoming a true locavore for an environmental reason is not worth the efforts because the changes are very miniscule To become a true locavore has many incentives, but there are other reasons that influence can someone to dedicate a portion of their diet to local foods.

Berry talks about how consumers should know where the food they eat comes from and should learn to adapt in producing their own food. His main idea is “eat responsibly” (47). Food is not considered by farming

It’s no secret, Americans love their processed, energy-rich foods. And undeniably, this love affair has led to an obesity epidemic. In spite of the evidence against processed food, however, there are some who believe the problem may hold the key to the solution. David Freedman, author of “How Junk Food Could End Obesity,” criticizes Michael Pollan for his argument in support of unprocessed, local foods due its impracticality. Freedman’s criticism is based on the idea that “It makes a lot more sense to look for small, beneficial changes in food than it does to hold out for big changes in what people eat that have no realistic chance of happening” (Freedman Sec. 1). He contends that processed foods already play a big part in our diets, so instead of trying to expand the wholesome food business, we should try to make processed foods healthier. Freedman’s argument, however, overlooks many negative effects of processed foods and conventional farming. Michael Pollan’s wholesome food movements takes into account not only the obesity problem, but also the quality of the environment and the rights of farmers. Although Pollan’s solution to obesity may not seem the most efficient or time effective, the trades offs it provides in terms of environmental sustainability and the well-being of farmers outweigh the loss of efficiency.

According to a recent poll 6 to 8 million American’s do not eat meat, fish, or poultry. From these studies, they have been researching about the effects of a vegetarian diet on the body. Compared to most meat based diets, vegetarians consume less saturated fat and cholesterol from not eating meat. Choosing this route will have a person what would be considered a better quality of life and overall good health. Research so far has shown that a vegetarian diet reduces the risk of heart disease. In recent years a study was done using different participants and the results showed that vegetarians were 25% less likely to die from heart related problem. “This is because vegetarians tend to consume more high-fiber, whole grains, and legumes which have a low glycemic index and the body digests slowly. This keeps blood sugar levels steady. Another food item that helps reduce the risk of heart disease is walnuts” (Sixwise). This is because the omega-3s in walnuts help reduce total cholesterol. There is some controversy over this specific topic, thus, are they really that healthy? What does it mean to be a vegetarian, and what do professionals have to say about being a vegetarian?