The Corn Documentary Analysis

“The Omnivores Dilemma” a book written by Michael Pollan, where he asks a very straightforward question of what we should have for dinner. In the first chapter, titled “The Plant”, tells a story from the perspective of Pollan himself as an everyday shopper in a modern day American supermarket. Pollan brings up the fact that from a naturalist’s perspective our grocery stores are absolutely astonishing, because where else are you going to find an array of different cultured foods in just one store. He then goes on to pose a question: Do you really even know where the food you eat comes from? Pollan decided to do some digging of his own, seeing if any completely opposite foods had anything in common. To his surprise, a lot of these diverse foods did have something in common when it came to ingredient and it was corn. From finding out that information he goes on to compare Americans consumption of corn, to Mexicans consumption of corn. Pollan’s findings show that Americans do in fact consume more corn than our neighbors to the south, Mexico. This first chapter really made me think about how much, we Americans, consume corn (or some derivative of corn) and if there is a healthier option to choose from. So my question that I must ask is: why is corn a more efficient and beneficial option than any other plant, and is there a plant that would be a better option?

There is a lot of speculation as to why this trend is happening, however the most common held belief is that there is no money in the agricultural industry and if you want to be successful you should look somewhere else. If we are to save America’s most important industry it starts with preparing now.

The food we eat and the quantity of it is what industries base their investments on; they use this to their advantage and produce more quantity than quality for us to consume, without taking into consideration the effect this might have on us or on the world as a whole. In the article “When a Crop Becomes King” written by Michael Pollan we see what the excessive use of a crop can do to our health and the environment. The vast production of products made with corn has made it the crop which is grown more than any other in the United States, but the process of adapting to the high consumption of corn came at a high cost. While corn is the easiest and cheapest substitute for sugar and animal food it is also linked to the cause of chronic diseases and serious, long-lasting damage to our ecosystems. The production of certain things is something we might not have control of but what we should have control of is our health and what better way than denying anything that we know might give us a hard time the power to do

Corn is not the ideal nutritious food. It wreaks havoc on the animal;s' digestive system and gets turned into sweeteners that makes people obese, aside from giving us an unhealthy diet. In other words, the industrial food chain that American man is sustained on is largely based on corn, whether in its direct form, fed to livestock, or processed into chemicals such as glucose, and the cheapest forms of these are high-fructose corn syrup and ethanol. The former, particularly, through a combination of biological, cultural, and political factors, appears in the cheapest and most common of foods that constitute the American diet. It is the ingredient that results in obesity, and, since it appears in the cheapest products, the ingredients that more poor, than wealthier individuals, consume.

Farm subsidies have become an somewhat debated topic in recent year, with increasing numbers of critics believing that these are detrimental not only to the economy, but also by implication to the health of Americans. Subsidies are offered by the USDA to farmers of commodity crops such as corn, wheat, rice, and livestock such as cattle. This makes these types of food cheaper than other, potentially healthier choices such as organic products. Farm subsidies were initially implemented after the Great Depression to help farmers cope with the economic effects after the Depression years. In other words, they were to stimulate the economy after the difficult years of the downturn. Although initially intended as a temporary measure, the subsidies remained part of the government assistance program for farmers even today. As a proponent of this system, my viewpoint is that farm subsidies ultimately benefits the United States in terms of protecting domestic product against foreign competition, national security, and American food aid to poorer countries.

Many people who relied on their farm and on agriculture struggled in the 1980’s. WWII was the fire that lit the Farm Crisis of the 1980’s. WWII brought forth many new advances in all aspects of agriculture. New farm equipment, pesticides, seeds, and fertilizers made it easier for the everyday life of a farmer. Greater efficiency and productivity were the result of the new inventions. In the 1950’s and 1960’s there was a massive

The 1960s pushed farming to a new low. “federal agriculture policy continued to curtail surplus production and raise farm incomes, but it placed greater emphasis on guaranteeing low food prices” (Miller, 2011). Farmers were competing with other farms just to keep their farms and homes. The government implemented additional programs like the use of food stamps and the free school lunch programs, which further deemphasized the necessity for production for the farmers.

Food Inc. : A Rhetorical Analysis Food Inc., a documentary film produced by Robert Kenner and based on Eric Schlosser's book Fast Food Nation, is designed to inform the American people of the food industry’s sinister side. The film paints the food industry in a more realistic light than the advertised and perceived image of an “Agrarian America.” Food Inc. not only uses compelling images, such as hundreds of baby chickens being raised in spaces no larger than a desk drawer, but also includes the voices and stories of farmers, businessmen and women, government officials, and victims of the food industry. As the film is being played, the audience sees the horrors and immorality of the food industry, feels disgust towards the unethical greed for wealth over safety of customers, shares in the helplessness of oppressed farmers, workers, and animals, finally feeling a sense of hope at the end where the film tells the audience they can vote for safer, better foods with what they decide to buy. Food Inc. effectively intertwines visual elements along with commentary, forging an ominous and foreboding image of the food industry that is furthered by its audio track and expert testimonies, creating a potent warning to the American consumer of the darker side within the food industry. In the opening moments of the film, images of corn and wheat fields spanning acres of land, along with a cattle rancher riding his horse among a magnificent grassy landscape surrounded by trees, are

This article is completely relevant to our current geography, living in Midwest means we are surrounded by flat land, perfect for farming. Many people that live in Illinois often make fun of the fact that farmland is all we have around us; no mountains, no volcanos, just corn. This article made me realize how truly important the conservation of the Midwest is for the production of the abundance of food we consume as Americans. Almost every food we consume can be traced back to the production of a single plant, corn. Many years ago farmers were producing an abundant amount causing the price of corn to plummet. This soon changed after farmers began processing. If human interaction causes corn to be scarce then it will have an unraveling effect

For my film analysis I selected the film, Food Incorporated. Food Incorporated, is a documentary about the awareness of the food consumed in everyday America. This documentary makes the clear thesis statement that what Americans consider to be food, is not actual food. In other words, the food most Americans consume are processed and artificial.

In the article Farmer’s Market Values by Mark Bittman, published by The New York Times in August 2014 indicates that “Farmers’ markets are not just markets. They’re educational systems that teach us how food is raised and why that matters.” When purchasing from a supermarket no one really know where the fruit or vegetable came from. Agricultural consumer can ask how the they farmer grew the crop. Therefore, getting to know your farmer is the only way on getting to know your food. A tomato at a farmer’s market cost $6 a pound, you might have notice a tomato in the supermarket cost $4 the pound. The difference between tomato is not only the price but the explosive flavor the surges through your mouth. In other words, the tomatoes from the farmers market might cost a little bit more, but you can be guaranteed that those tomatoes are the most flavorful tomatoes you have ever purchased.(figure1)It’s not about the quantity but the quality of the crop. Having the investment into the crops farmers desperately need they will keep their farms afloat. As a result of keeping their farms afloat farmers will not have to pursue on having a second job. Farmers will once again will just be farmers growing their beloved

It relies heavily on expensive fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. The cost of food could be significantly lower with the reduction of monocropping. Monocropping increases the cost of food by having a large area of land producing only one type of crop, this means that only that crop will be readily available in that area and all other produce will have to be shipped in. Monocropping is beneficial for the farmers growing heavily subsidized crops like corn, wheat, or soy. Farmers are able to turn a profit on commodity crops, no matter how much is bought and what price the crop is sold for. Farm subsidies are known to benefit the larger farms the most. Agricultural subsides inflate the price of farmland. Most US citizens don't see the true cost of their food, from 1995 to 2012 the US Government spent $18,563,609,563 on corn subsidies. The Government has spent $9,508,633,852 on wheat subsidies and $8,179,977,437 on soybeans. From 1995-2012 there has been $57,592,341,340 spend on food subsidies and there has been 35,789,071 policies passed regarding food subsides. The US population was 361.1 million people in 2012, in order to pay for the cost of the food subsides each person would need to pay $182.20, that number includes unemployed individuals, children, and those below the poverty line. In addition to the ludicrous amount of tax dollars spent on farm

I came to realize that almost all the American food diet is now Corn based. There has been change in the grocery store prices in past 30 years. It’s because food prices

The agriculture field is one of the biggest employers, employing over 155 million people in the United States. What do you think about when you hear the word “agriculture?” Many people would say farming, but this is not the most common occupation in this field. Farmers make up a fraction of the agricultural jobs at 900,000, but over 2.1 million people own, rent, and claim farming as a primary source of income. The average farm size has dropped from 460 acres in 1990 to 418 acres in 2007, while the average age of this occupation rose to 57, making this one of the older workforces in the United States.

The Agriculture sector has changed monumentally over the past century in response to vast economic change and technological advancements. Farm subsidies are various forms of payments from the federal government put in place in an effort to stabilize prices, keep farmers in business, and ensure quality of crops. The federal government currently pays $20 billion in cash each year to US farmers and spent an estimated $250 billion between 1995-2005. Presently, a new farm bill is passed every five years