The Omnivore's Dilemma By Michael Pollan

The Omnivore’s Dilemma, written by Michael Pollan, gives light to the question, “What should we have for dinner?” that he thinks Americans today cannot answer simply due to the fact that there are too many food options. This book serves as an eye-opener to challenge readers to be more aware and accountable of what is consumed daily. In order to understand fully where our food comes from, we must follow it back to the very beginning. Pollan goes on to discuss three different modern food chains in which we get our food: the industrial, the organic, and the hunter-gatherer. By tracing our food back to the beginning, we can understand that most of the nutritional and health problems America is going through today can be found on the farms that make our food and the government that can decide what happens. America deals with many food related illness such as, heart disease, obesity, and type II diabetes. Majority of a human and animals diet consists of being corn-fed leading to a high cause of obesity in the United States these are just some of the many diseases that come with over processed foods and diets we are unaware of. In this study, we will highlight the environmental and health issues and impacts related with modern agriculture and how these systems can be made more sustainable.

For example, in the 1990s, there was a food scare, called Alar. “Alar was a chemical conventional growers sprayed on apples to help them ripen. In 1990 the Environmental Protection Agency found that Alar could cause cancer” (Pollan, 2009, p. 117). Since the EPA found that Alar could cause cancer, the was a huge jump in the demand for organic foods. In the book, Omnivore's Dilemma, it states, “According to the book Omnivore's Dilemma, it states,¨In a shed attached to the mill sit vat of liquid vitamins. Beside them are fifty-pound sacks of antibiotic drugs¨ (p.55). Industrial farmers who raise cattle, use antibiotics and other medications to make their cows grow faster and fatter. In conclusion, industrial organic is better for your family because there aren’t harmful chemicals like Alar, being used to produce your crops. Also, the farmers don't feed the animals medications and drugs to make them grow fat. They use organic feds which are better for the animals and resulting in a better tasting

Michael Pollan the author of Omnivore 's Dilemma discusses and asks, “what should we have for dinner?” He attempts to answer one of the pressing questions of sustainability in today 's society, to save money or to save the planet, and how? Pollan talks about how humans are omnivores and we have the choice to eat whatever we want, no matter the health and sustainability implications of our decisions. Pollan discusses three main food chains, industrial (corn), organic, and hunter/gatherer. He analyzes each food chain, learning eating industrial is basically eating corn, and goes into the complex issues

The omnivore's dilemma is not a new thing, but why do we have it? As Pollan says best, "Today we can buy just about any sort of food from anywhere in the globe, in any season." (86) He's right! With the availability of any

What am I exactly eating? Where does our food come from? Why should I care? “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” may forever change the way you think about food. I enjoyed Mr. Pollan’s book, “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” and learned a great deal of information. Pollan’s book is a plea for us to stop and think for a moment about our whole process of eating. Pollan sets out to corn fields and natural farms, goes hunting and foraging, all in the name of coming to terms with where food really comes from in modern America and what the ramifications are for the eaters, the eaten, the economy and the environment. The results are far more than I expected them to be.

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.

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.

It is very easy to be amazed at the variety of products that can be found in today's supermarkets, all over the world. The United States in particular is a society of consumers, and many in this country would expect no less than full shelves of everything from produce, to meats, to snacks, etc. However, what most consumers today fail to realize is that the variety seen in most supermarkets in this country is really not too varied at all. In fact, the point that Michael Pollan aims to make in the first chapter of his book is just that: everything comes from corn. The paragraphs below will detail this author's beliefs in relation to today's consumer market, and focus on the ways in which most of us consume the products we are offered (often without questioning anything). Pollan's point will be stressed in this paper as well; namely, that today's society is suffering from poor nutrition and a lack of variety, due to the fact that 'everything boils down to corn,' as Pollan states, as well as the relative lack of education about the places from which one's food comes.

68.8 percent of people in the United States and 30 percent of the entire global population are obese. “Obesity today is officially an epidemic; it is arguably the most pressing public health problem we face, costing the healthcare system an estimated $90 billion a year.” said Michael Pollan in “The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals.”

Pollan’s style of writing has often left me in confusion from some of the details he provides. In chapter 3 of “The Omnivore’s Dilemma,” it’s clear to me how and why farmers previously used burlap sacks for their corn and that in 1850’s they had to transition to the system of commodity corn due to the invention of the grain elevator in the 1850’s. However, what I don’t understand is the technical issue between the burlap bag and the grain elevator that caused the inevitable scheme of commodity corn. Why couldn’t the elevator store the burlap sacks? Furthermore, if the elevator couldn’t accommodate for the sacks, then why was it invented that way?

In the book Omnivore's Dilemma, author Michael Pollan explains the many deficits that he perceives in the ways in which food is distributed in the United States of America. Pollan's harshest criticisms are aimed at the food production companies and the ways in which they have bastardized the natural system of food production and turned it into a system which is dependent on fossil fuels; specifically the way that processed corn has become a staple of food products including how it is used as a substitute for grass in the feeding of cattle and as corn syrup and similar derivatives to be used to unnaturally preserve packaged food products. Omnivore's Dilemma does make an interesting point about the denaturalization of the food industry, but Michael Pollan overlooks the many benefits of the current system of food production, which allows humans to produce more food on less land than in pre-industrial agriculture which in turn allows for greater sustenance to the human consumer. Additionally, the proposals that Pollan makes are simply not feasible. He believes that the United States should change from an industrialized food distribution system to a model which only uses local produce, a proposal which is not economically logical, particularly in this aggressively depressed economy.

In the book ‘The Omnivore’s Dilemma’, by Michael Pollan, he inquires into the secrets within the four food chains; Industrial, Industrial Organic, Local Sustainable, and Hunter-Gatherer. Pollan lists the pros and cons of these four food chains. Industrial food is your Wendy’s, your McDonalds, your Burger King. There are multifarious benefits to this food chain. A major benefit for sure is the fact that it is inexpensive.

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan is a comprehensive look into the present day food culture of the United States. Throughout the book the author tries to find out the true composition of the diet that is consumed by Americans on a daily basis. There is an excessive dependence by the American population on the government to know which food is good for them. This paper will critically analyze the book as well as the stance that the author has taken. Since there is a deluge of information about diets and health available today, the relevance of this well researched book in the present day world cannot be emphasized enough. Its relevance is not limited to the United States alone but to the entire human society which is moving towards homogenous food habits.

Eating meat has become a staple in the modern society we live in. This has led to high levels of fuel emissions and pollution. A common belief is that a meal only exists when it has meat in it. That’s not true, but society has taught us that it is. Fad diets are pretty common in the society we live in, but many people don’t take into account the planet’s health, only their own. Although, our health is contingent on the planet’s health. To keep the planet’s health up, the human race must make sacrifices to prevent the loss of our planet which will lead to the loss of animal life, human life, and plant life. Already, the planet’s biodiversity has decreased. Switching to a diet that does not include meat, specifically beef, can help the environment by eliminating or decreasing fuel emissions and pollution in general.

It’s impossible to deny that mankind’s way of living is destructive and unsustainable. However, people have been attempting to find new, more sustainable ways to live. One of those ways are changing the eating habits of mankind. In the last few years, many have purposed an organic, vegan diet as the solution for a better way to feed the world, while limiting the impact on the environment. Though the organic/vegan diet may be best for the environment, problems of ethics and practicality arise when it’s applied in the real world. So, while it may be plausible option it should not be the only one considered.