Stuffed And Starved Summary

Profit-oriented leaders of new diet fads surely would be infuriated while reading the words of Michael Pollan in his work, Unhappy Meals—not necessarily because of his aim to disprove diet fallacies but, rather, the possible ramifications of Pollan’s words on their bank accounts. Explained in the article, the world’s understanding of diets and their effects on the human body has improved steadily—if not exponentially—throughout recent history. Here, the advocates of new diets claim the changing world and its understanding of health requires changes in diet; the human body will adapt to the new times. To counter, Pollan argues that is definitely true, but we have to be open to the idea of the death that occurs during the process.

Like consumers, farmers do not have much choice either. Farmers plant crops that are demanded by the global food market. Essentially, farms are no longer owned by farmers and the farmers become the laborers. Also, it sometimes is all or nothing for farmers. For one, some land can only be used for one crop, for example coffee, and if something goes wrong with the crop, farmers lose everything. Second, unskilled labor jobs are dwindling, so there might not be much else a farmer could do if something were to happen to their land. It seems that when crops do well, farmers should be making a lot of money, however, the food processors and distributors are the ones who make most of the profit. Because of this, farmers are left with pennies compared to what the others make. Farmers and consumers have fought to control the food system, but what other choice do they have than to support it?

The world continues to face a wide-scale food crisis. The effects of this crisis reach from the farmers who grow and raise the food to the very system of laws that are in place to govern the system itself. Food giants are reaching deep into their pockets for lobbying in order to take advantage of both the producers and the consumer all in the name of profit. Moreover, farmers are being driven to suicide, and the ecosystem’s livelihood is treading a fine line. Both Michael Pollan and Raj Patel bring to light these problems and offer suggestions to help lessen their severity. Though there are many philosophies on which they both agree, they both have their own ideas to fight back. Pollan seeks to challenge the consumer as an individual while

Throughout the book “Stuffed and Starved”, Raj Patel, the author, makes connections between the current state of the world food system, and the Malthusian and Rhodes dilemmas, the first, proposing that the world population is growing exponentially, but the resources to feed this growing population are finite, whereas the second suggests that hunger leads to unrest, hence as long as people are kept fed, they won't revolt. Patel sections the system and points out to the defects at all levels—starting from the fundamental unit—the seed, going broader touching upon redistributors, consumers, corporations, and, above all, governments and policies. The five major areas Patel criticizes I would like to emphasize are: prevalent selection of desirable

Monsanto positions itself as a relatively new agricultural company having formed in 2002, and focused on supporting local farmers around the world. They also promote themselves as a guardian of the environment with a mission “to produce more food while conserving more” (Monsanto.com). Today’s Monsanto conglomerate also promotes itself as the “New Merchants,” a leading research company in the field of agriculture-crop production, as well as a strong supporter of public and private research through its grant, donations and University scholarship programs.

As the world expands through time and business, the natural process of developing food is forced to adapt to the growing demands of civilization. Henceforth, the modern-day food industry is capable of producing a plethora amount of nutrients that sustains mass populations. However, is the modern tradition and technique of mass food production hiding a burdened truth behind the curtains of society’s unawareness? Is such truth more sinister than productive? Filmmaker Robert Kenner directed a documentary in 2008 where the methods of processing meats and harvesting crops were analyzed with their effects. As a result, Kenner’s documentary, Food Inc., has revealed that the ways foods are processed have consequently made them perilous for society. Through the use of

Richard Robbins explores and analyzes the creation and the upkeep of hunger in his book “Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism. Each day, over a billion people in the world lack basic food needs. Common misunderstandings about world hunger are that it is the result of insufficient food production, famine is the common reason for hunger and that hunger is caused by overpopulation. Robbins argues against that theory and says that famines is not the leading cause of hunger and hunger is not due to overpopulation or insufficient food production. “Food production is not determined by the global need for food; it is determined on how many people have the means for it” (page 176). The documentary “The End of Poverty” reinforces Robbins belief that food is a commodity.

Raj Patel’s Stuffed and Starved analyzes the paradoxical content in its title statement. Patel demonstrates how the world food system has created two opposite, but inherently linked epidemics: obesity and crippling hunger. Throughout the course of this book, it becomes painfully clear that the majority of the world’s population is being manipulated by our global food system and by the corporations and their CEO’s who control it. Patel encourages his readers to make themselves politically responsible (313) and through Stuffed and Starved, highlights the discrepancies and major imbalances of our world food system, the small percentage of people who benefit from it, and the vast majority of humanity who does not. He does all this while

Many factory farms are owned by corporations, who have the funds to invest in their farms to make them better than their competition. They’re able to sell their products at a lower price due to their efficiency and as a result, many groceries and supermarkets choose to buy from them rather than more expensive rivals. This poses a threat to smaller farms, that for the most part don't have expensive equipment or larger spaces. Therefore, they can’t compete with their larger and technologically advanced rivals.

Monsanto and other companies profit at the expense of hard working farmers across by disallowing seed saving and enforcing their patents with private investigators.

If one company owned an entire food crop, it would result in a huge profit of money for that company. However, it would also result in destroying the tradition of farming for farmers and their families. A primary reason why companies would want to own an entire food crop is because they will make a lucrative amount of money. A statistic involving this is stated by www.not-gmoreport.com, “ The cost for Monsanto’s Roundup Ready 2 soybeans in 2010 was $70 per bag, a 143% increase in the price of GM seed since 2001.” This inflation is called seed monopoly. One reason people strongly dislike seed monopoly is because of the way it affects not only farmers, but also the consumers. Farmers will have to pay more money for seeds, which will eventually

It doesn’t help that Monsanto also has power in politics, one of the Monsanto chiefs for food safety, Michael Taylor was actually appointed by Barrack Obama himself. Barrack Obama also appointed his Supreme Court judge: Elena Kagan, who happens to be the chief defender of Monsanto and GMO’s. Whether Republican or Democratic, Monsanto wields a strong power within politics that helps give them an edge in keeping their company going. (Obama). There are good aspects of Monsanto, like the efficiency of cheap seeds, and crops that can withstand the harsh behaviors of weathers, and the ability the crops have to survive a longer time. But not even the cheapest crops can cover up Monsanto’s long history of evil, from polluting the environment with PCB’s, the chemical Agent Orange, and the weed killer “Round-Up Ready”, to Monopolizing itself to being the owner of 90% of the seed industry and shutting down small

Monsanto Company is the world’s largest seed company. They specialize in genetic manipulation of organisms.

Genetically modified seeds patent protection is vital for every firm and this does make the cost of seeds more expensive to the point were some of the poorest farmers are not able to afford them. In order to ensure that farmers are not saving seeds for their next crop they Monsanto has “seed Police” to protect the productions of their seeds. The company maintains that their products are patented and cannot be reproduced or saved for future use. Buyers sign an agreement containing this information at the time of their purchase stating they understand this agreement. Although not all farmers abide by these stipulations and it has resulted in court hearings due to the cost to purchase their seeds, which has resulted in the seed police.

Additionally, big business controls the farmers by capitalizing on widely used commodities. For example, the company Monsanto which is based in St. Louis, Missouri protects its dominance over the genetically modified crops such as the soy bean with the use of a patent law. Because of this, Monsanto’s patented genes “account for 95 percent of all soy beans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S.,” (Associated Press). Although genetically modifying the soy bean crop has made it more readily available and more sustainable, this comes at a high price to farmers. Monsanto continues to raise their prices, which forces farmers to accrue even more debt, and there is no sign of the rise in the seed prices stopping. Since a lot of the farmers are under contract with Monsanto, there is nothing they can do about this unethical policy in fear of losing their job.