My thoughts after having watched Food, Inc.
I finally got a chance to, on a lazy Saturday afternoon last weekend, watch Food, Inc. If you don't know what this movie is, it's a documentary that this investigative journalist did on on the food industry that supplies the vast majority of our supermarket and fast food products to the shelves that we purchase everyday. Chances are, if you have seen it, it disturbed you. It disturbed me.... from thoughts of "well, that's not completely destructive but it's unjust and I'm certain it's unethical" to "that is downright disgusting" (seeing the cattle feedlots and the chicken coop will do that!)
Now, I'm a conservative. What that means is, I don't feel that the government should be telling us what we should and should not eat. I'm very opposed to their infringement in the personal everyday decisions of citizens. And I totally get that we as citizens need to exercise personal responsibility when making decisions on the food we put in our bodies.
However....
What became clear to me was that this argument has logical flaws in it.
First, the government IS responsible for this problem. Did you know that the "farm bill" subsidizes corn production in the United States so that companies can purchase corn below the cost of production? We complain about Europe subsidizing industry but our Federal Government does the same thing with agriculture in this country. This is a boon for corn farmers (well, maybe) but it has unintended consequences, like the prevalence of high fructose corn syrup in about the vast majority of the supermarket items on the shelf (go read the ingredients label and you'll be shocked!). And even without HFCS, corn products are in EVERYTHING, including the feedstock for the beef, chicken, farm-raised fish, etc. that we purchase.
This stuff that is being subsidized by our government is not for food that is beneficial for the health of consumers, but more likely beneficial for the profits of large agribusiness companies like Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Montsano. Most of the products that we consume that are derived from corn (the biggest culprit being "high fructose corn syrup" - which is labeled in a couple of different ways) are contributing heavily to the obesity epidemic in our nation and in fact HFCS has been statistically linked to a higher probability of developing Type II Diabetes. However, we subsidize these nutritionally deficient/calorie dense products and not the nutritionally dense crops that we need (if you want to see the difference, check out how expensive the healthy food is at the grocery store - or just walk into Whole Foods)
Second, information about what we are buying is not readily available to consumers. We do not have information as to whether the produce we buy is genetically modified or not; we have to watch documentaries to see the conditions that the animals we eat live in (and you wonder why there have been so many eColi and Samolina outbreaks in the last 15 years?), and "All Natural," "0% Trans Fat," etc. doesn't necessarily mean what is shouting out at you on the box.
--------------------
So what can we do?
Watch the movie and get informed. You may not agree with everything in there (I didn't), but you'll walk away with a more informed opinion.
I'm not going to say we should stop all of the corn & soybean subsidies (speaking of soybeans, did you know that over 90% of the soybeans grown here are GMO from Montsano?), but we should think about what they are producing socially, not just on the bottom line of the large agribusiness companies. In addition, our government SHOULD use their constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to demand and require food companies to label products clearly (on the front) on whether they contain HFCS or not, contained genetically modified crops or not, are sourced outside of the U.S., and whether animals received growth hormones during their incubation. This IS responsible, and an ethical and responsible oversight group should demand that we have all of the information we need to realistically be personally responsible for our choices. Misinformation and 30 second marketing messages are not adequate. Once we are fully informed, the personal choice argument will be valid.
Know that when we purchase products, we are voting. Corporations, as much as they can be vilified for some of the decisions they make, are not evil and are truly trying to do what they feel is in the best interest of their consumers (in terms of what we are demanding) and their investors. If we vote with our dollars for healthy and humanely treated foods, they will produce more of them because that is what consumers demand.
Case in point is Wal-Mart, who now sells all of their milk as not treated with rBST (a bovine growth hormone). Why? Because Wal-Mart got an ethical heart? NO! It's because they saw consumer trends that said that consumers didn't want this crap in the cows that produce their milk! This is a case-in-point that when we as consumers make good decisions (assuming we have all the information we need), businesses will follow suit to fill that need.
It's also the reason that Wal-Mart purchases and sells millions of dollars worth of 100% organic Stoneyfield Yogurt in their stores. They want to make money... and they see that there are enough consumers out there that want pure food on their tables so they are doing what they need to do to get them in their stores (by the way, Stoneyfield is awesome... you should try it). Wal-Mart, like most other companies we buy our products from, is run by sound business people that when they see that a product is in demand they are going to move to supply it. It's how capitalism, in its purest form, works.
I could probably write a novel here, but to wrap it up. Be informed. If you care about your health and want to vote correctly, read ingredient labels and buy from companies that are truthful about what they are selling you. We can change this thing, one dollar and meal at a time.
Now, I'm a conservative. What that means is, I don't feel that the government should be telling us what we should and should not eat. I'm very opposed to their infringement in the personal everyday decisions of citizens. And I totally get that we as citizens need to exercise personal responsibility when making decisions on the food we put in our bodies.
However....
What became clear to me was that this argument has logical flaws in it.
First, the government IS responsible for this problem. Did you know that the "farm bill" subsidizes corn production in the United States so that companies can purchase corn below the cost of production? We complain about Europe subsidizing industry but our Federal Government does the same thing with agriculture in this country. This is a boon for corn farmers (well, maybe) but it has unintended consequences, like the prevalence of high fructose corn syrup in about the vast majority of the supermarket items on the shelf (go read the ingredients label and you'll be shocked!). And even without HFCS, corn products are in EVERYTHING, including the feedstock for the beef, chicken, farm-raised fish, etc. that we purchase.
This stuff that is being subsidized by our government is not for food that is beneficial for the health of consumers, but more likely beneficial for the profits of large agribusiness companies like Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Montsano. Most of the products that we consume that are derived from corn (the biggest culprit being "high fructose corn syrup" - which is labeled in a couple of different ways) are contributing heavily to the obesity epidemic in our nation and in fact HFCS has been statistically linked to a higher probability of developing Type II Diabetes. However, we subsidize these nutritionally deficient/calorie dense products and not the nutritionally dense crops that we need (if you want to see the difference, check out how expensive the healthy food is at the grocery store - or just walk into Whole Foods)
Second, information about what we are buying is not readily available to consumers. We do not have information as to whether the produce we buy is genetically modified or not; we have to watch documentaries to see the conditions that the animals we eat live in (and you wonder why there have been so many eColi and Samolina outbreaks in the last 15 years?), and "All Natural," "0% Trans Fat," etc. doesn't necessarily mean what is shouting out at you on the box.
--------------------
So what can we do?
Watch the movie and get informed. You may not agree with everything in there (I didn't), but you'll walk away with a more informed opinion.
I'm not going to say we should stop all of the corn & soybean subsidies (speaking of soybeans, did you know that over 90% of the soybeans grown here are GMO from Montsano?), but we should think about what they are producing socially, not just on the bottom line of the large agribusiness companies. In addition, our government SHOULD use their constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to demand and require food companies to label products clearly (on the front) on whether they contain HFCS or not, contained genetically modified crops or not, are sourced outside of the U.S., and whether animals received growth hormones during their incubation. This IS responsible, and an ethical and responsible oversight group should demand that we have all of the information we need to realistically be personally responsible for our choices. Misinformation and 30 second marketing messages are not adequate. Once we are fully informed, the personal choice argument will be valid.
Know that when we purchase products, we are voting. Corporations, as much as they can be vilified for some of the decisions they make, are not evil and are truly trying to do what they feel is in the best interest of their consumers (in terms of what we are demanding) and their investors. If we vote with our dollars for healthy and humanely treated foods, they will produce more of them because that is what consumers demand.
Case in point is Wal-Mart, who now sells all of their milk as not treated with rBST (a bovine growth hormone). Why? Because Wal-Mart got an ethical heart? NO! It's because they saw consumer trends that said that consumers didn't want this crap in the cows that produce their milk! This is a case-in-point that when we as consumers make good decisions (assuming we have all the information we need), businesses will follow suit to fill that need.
It's also the reason that Wal-Mart purchases and sells millions of dollars worth of 100% organic Stoneyfield Yogurt in their stores. They want to make money... and they see that there are enough consumers out there that want pure food on their tables so they are doing what they need to do to get them in their stores (by the way, Stoneyfield is awesome... you should try it). Wal-Mart, like most other companies we buy our products from, is run by sound business people that when they see that a product is in demand they are going to move to supply it. It's how capitalism, in its purest form, works.
I could probably write a novel here, but to wrap it up. Be informed. If you care about your health and want to vote correctly, read ingredient labels and buy from companies that are truthful about what they are selling you. We can change this thing, one dollar and meal at a time.
Comments