Currently, healthcare and the financial crisis are big issues in the US. Our food system contributes substantially to these issues. Americans do not know where their food comes from, which leads to them no caring about their their food system. Although the financial crisis began to show in the housing market, and has now led to a substantial and long-term recession, a lot of it comes down to the fact that we live on a planet with limits, but think that we can just go on growing indefinitely. Food is certainly part of our economy, and although it has not been suffering as much as the market in general, it is overall, produced in a linear matter inconscidarate of the necessary cycles of nature. Big business in food is driven by profits, even when it means that the environment or public health must suffer. And healthcare in the US is phenomenally expensive, while it provides only mediocre results, partially because of the poor health of Americans, and partially due to its inefficient design. There are other options though, such as local food systems.
Many have linked increasing health care costs to the way that Americans eat. Healthcare costs of diabetes and obesity have grown to represent a large proportion of healthcare expenditures in the US. Obesity started to become an issue in late 1970s, and has been increasing quickly (Fat). In 2008, the US spent an estimated $147 billion on obesity, 9.1% of health care expenditures that year (Fat). Diabetes has mimicked the obesity curve, and has lately been receiving around $150 billion annually (Diabetes). The history of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) use in the US correlates to diabetes and obesity rates. Grain-fed beef is a significant component of the American diet, and also contributes to the poor health of Americans. How are these factors related?
HFCS and grain fed beef damage health in many ways. HFCS has become an important part of the American diet, and as it is such an energy-dense substance, too much of it is often consumed (Bray). Also, HFCS, when consumed in large quantities, alters the way that our bodies manage food consumption, increasing the likelihood of weight gain (Bray). It is unhealthy for the people that eat this meat (Pollan). It is far too heavy in omega-six fats, the kind that can clog arteries when they drastically out number omega-threes, the kind found in a much greater proportion in grass-fed beef (Pollan). Both of these products depend on corn.The federal government subsidizes corn production. As a side note, when the word “corn” is used, it refers to the corn used in industry; this corn is not very edible in its raw form. The US government gives around $4 billion a year to the corn industry (Harvie). Five percent of the US corn crop goes into producing HFCS, an average of 43 pounds per American annually (Harvie). Forty percent of the US corn crop is used to feed cattle. Corn subsidies are given in the form of making up the difference between the “market” price of corn and the break-even price for farmers. These subsidies do not actually help farmers. If corn was no subsidized, farmers would either stop growing corn, or the “market price” of corn would have to rise. If corn was not subsidized, big corn processors would start to pay farmers the actual price of producing corn. But instead, the big corn processors do not need to pay the actual cost of corn; they are the ones reaping the benefits of these subsidies. Although corn subsidies are only a small part of annual corn revenues, and getting rid of them would not substantially cut consumer consumption (Harvie), they are not needed. Corn subsidies were originally created to make food more affordable (King Corn). But now, Americans in the lowest socioeconomic class have the highest rates of obesity, showing that food affordability is no the same beast that it used to be (Wang). And anything to decrease obesity and diabetes, even marginally, could save big time.
Growing corn is also detrimental to the environment. Fossil fuels are used to make chemical fertilizers, to drive heavy equipment used in the fields, to power corn processing plants, and to transport corn products great distances. All of this contributes the carbon footprint of the corn industry. These chemical fertilizers are used on fields grown in monoculture of genetically modified corn. The corn is treated with pesticides that harm biodiversity and irrigated with groundwater from shrinking underground aquifers. This corn is then processed in many ways. Much of it is fed to cows. The manure from these animals, as well as the chemical fertilizers used in corn production, often end up in surface waters, causing algal blooms (Pollan 47). These often result in fish kills (Pollan 47). All of these nutrients, both chemical and natural, would be better off back in the ground where they could fertilize the fields that the corn is grown in. Inefficient systems like these result in the need to farm excessive amounts of land. An American needs more than an acre of crop land to supply them with enough to eat for a year in this agricultural system (Segelken). And this does not even take into consideration that over four fifths of the carbon footprint of average food in America come from transportation and processing (Rosenthal). Such methods are certainly not very sustainable, and it is highly doubtful how much longer we will be able to have such a food system, as we are running out of oil, regardless of the environmental costs.
Are there better alternatives to our current agricultural system that is heavily dependent on corn? Eliot Coleman grew all of the vegetables needed for students at the Mountain School in Vermont at a rate of forty people per acre (Coleman 66). He could do this by using small-scale organic methods, which consume far less fossil fuels than conventional agriculture. And when there is no transportation involved, and only the processing necessary by the kitchens for preserving food and preparing meals, the carbon costs of food are phenomenally low. These methods are far more efficient than those used in America’s conventional food system. In Sweden, they are showing people that some foods are more efficient than others by adding carbon footprint labels to foods (Rosenthal). The Mountain School consumes beef as well, but in a smaller relative proportion of their diet compared to the average american. This beef is far healthier than its grain-fed counterpart. Overall, food grown in a local system is much healthier than conventional food. On the small scale, HFCS, grain-fed beef, and other energy-intensive foods that comprise a large part of the common american diet are not feasible. It is simply easier to make foods that are tastier and healthier. How can people get involved in such food systems?
Edible Communities is a publication that helps unite geographic areas around their characteristic foods. They publish about fifty different quarterly magazines across the US. Locally-based food systems have been growing quickly in the US. Local means less transportation, and it also can mean direct marketing. Growing food is expensive, even if cheap oil, subsidies, and many other things make it look cheap conventionally. “High” prices can especially be seen in food from small-scale organic growers. Food is expensive; Europeans spend about a third of their income on food, when we spend less than a tenth, although that figure does not include health costs (Pollan). Local markets have turned to direct-marketing techniques to cut out the middle man; conventional food often leads to farmers seeing only about a tenth of revenues (Laskawy). Marketing techniques like farmer’s markets and community sponsored agriculture can lead to more competitive pricing. Also, due to the relatively high expenditures around energy with conventional food, and the relatively low energy costs related to local food, a carbon tax would not only help the environment, it would also make the US healthier by drastically increasing the price of unhealthy foods.
Local economies are more stable than global economies. At the same time as making pricing more competitive, direct marketing on the local scale spreads wealth very evenly, cutting out the possibility for national, or international corporations to take a cut.
A capitalist system, reliant upon growth and consumption, is a system that is inherently linear, inconsiderate of physical limitations. If we hope to be around much longer, we are going to need to start to be receptive to the limits of our planet. The food system that we choose is a large part of the solution.
Works Cited:
Bray, George A., Nielson, Samara Joy, and Popkin, Barry M. “Consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 79.4 (2004): 537-543. Web. 26 Oct 2009
Burros, Marian. “How to Eat (and Read) Close to Home.” New York Times. New York Times, 29 Aug 2007. Web. 13 Oct 2009.
Coleman, Eliot. “The New Organic Grower: A Master’s Manual of Tools and Techniques for the Home and Market Gardener. White River Junction: Chelsea Green, 1995. Print.
“Diabetes Treatment Costs.” Allied Quotes. Allied Quotes, 1 Oct 2007. Web. 18 Oct 2009.
“Farm Economics: Facts & Opinions.” Farm Business Management. University of Illinois, 11 Jul 2008. Web 18 Oct 2009.
“The Fat of the Land.” The Wall Street Journal. The Wall Street Journal, Aug 2009. Web. 18 Oct 2009.
Harvie, Alice, and Wise, Timothy A. “Sweetening the Pot: Implicit Subsidies to Corn Sweeteners and the U.S. Obesity Epidemic.” Global Development and Environmental Institute. Tufts University, Feb 2009. Web. 18 Oct 2009.
King Corn. Dir. Aaron Woolf. Writ. Ian Cheney, Curtis Ellis. Balcony Releasing, 2007. Documentary film.
Laskawy, Tom. “Big Ag’s odd obsession with You-Know-Who.” Grist. Grist, 9 Oct 2009. Web. 13 Oct 2009.
“Maize.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 2009. Web. 18 Oct 2009.
Murray, Danielle. “Oil and Food: A Rising Security Challenge.” Energy Bulletin. Earth Policy Institute, 10 May 2005. Web. 26 Oct 2009.
Pollan, Michael. “The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals.” London: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Rosenthal, Elizabeth. “To Cut Global Warming, Swedes Study Their Plates.” New York Times. New York Time, 22 Oct 2009. Web. 26 Oct 2009.
Segelken, Roger. “”Ethanol Fuel from Corn Faulted as ‘Unsustainable Subsidized Food Burning.’ Health and Energy. Web. 18 Oct 2009.
Wang, Youfa, and Beydoun, May A. “The Obesity Epidemic in the United States – Genher, Age, Socioeconomic, Racial/Ethnic, and Geographic Characteristics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis.” Epidemiologic Reviews. Oxford Journals, 17 May 2007, Web. 20 Oct 2009.
We’re starting something new. Activists nowadays talk. We are actualists. We do.