Davey.Food,Inc.

Michael Davey Film Annotation 7: Food, Inc. Words: 843, Date: 11/15/2010 2. The central argument of Food, Inc. is that our post WWII industrial economy has mechanized, centralized and artificially selected our food and food products while separating the consumer from the process which brings it its food. 3. The sustainability problems pressed by the film include food safety, genetically modified foods and monoculture, industrial farming techniques and their impact and the benefits of local, traditional farming. Animal welfare and disease have major implications for food safety as well as centralization of food production. If the vast majority of our food is produced in one location, we are likely to see contamination across brands in the event of a disease outbreak. Industrial farming strives to follow a linear model in line with the parent company’s goal of return on investment, or profit. 4. The part of the film I find most compelling is the scene where a scientist is describing how high fructose corn syrup is beneficial to the food system. Essentially, he describes a situation in which a base material can be made into any flavor and used in almost any food at extremely low cost. This manipulation of taste and ingredients had never been seen before and greatly increases the demand for corn. If corn can be used to make anything, the supply must increase and therefore the mode of production must adapt and grow into a vast infrastructure, which in the case of corn uses vast resources and pollutes soil with nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides which would not be necessary if we farmed in a way which imitated the cycles of nature. However, our food system now treats corn as a commodity, so food must be grown linearly rather than cyclically. Another powerful moment in the film comes when there is a Mexican family that can supposedly only afford to get enough sustenance at McDonalds, ordering from the dollar menu. This strikes me as wrong two levels. Level one is that the burgers and fries, which go through many processes, are more affordable, which means either McDonalds is extremely efficient and knows who to minimize costs, or the government subsidizes ingredients that go into the food, thus driving the price down. Taking a closer look at corn reveals that the government does in fact subsidize it and therefore all ingredients of a McDonald’s meal. Secondly, the converse, the vegetables and meats at the grocery store are too expensive. Why is corn subsidized and veggies are not? The answer is that corn can be stored for a long time and shipped anywhere in the world. These characteristics render corn as close to a commodity as it needs to be in order to have a place at the table of foreign and domestic trade on a large level. This upsets me because I think food should be cherished, and grown, not manufactured and incorporated into a balance sheet. 5. I was compelled but not utterly convinced by the segments on Monsanto and its shady tactics for running farmers out of business. Perhaps it is only logical that a company so big and influential would essentially have a death squad of lawyers for shutting down farms that make a fuss about their products or policies. Even so, accounts of defense lawyers would have held more weight in terms of data rather than scared farmers speaking from shadows. That said, the sheer fright of the farmers on the topic of Monsanto speaks volumes for how severely a giant company can affect a farmer’s life. 6. This film best addresses everyone because we are all stakeholders in the food system and its practices, good or bad. 7. I believe this film was well organized and well presented, but if there had been more detail on the development of funding for farming operations we would have a better idea about how the government addresses the food industry. 8. A large action point initiated by the film is to find a local farm and support it. An inference to take from that is if we decentralize our food sources, food safety risks are minimized, shipping costs are reduced due to local distribution and quality can be better assured depending on how local the farm is. Some local farms even allow customers to harvest their own vegetables. Other action points would be to push for food safety legislation such as “Kevin’s Law” which will tighten the belt around the food companies and enforce regulations more effectively. Also, the short case study of Stonyfield yogurt alludes to some potential pitfalls of organic going big, this was not explored in much depth. 9. Further research done was on the widespread harvesting of corn. According to the USDA, in 2010 we will harvest 81 million acres of corn, after planting 88 million, therefore yielding 92%.([]) Additionally, after investigating Monsanto’s statements on intellectual property, I discovered that they use all money garnered from fines to fund organizations like 4H and Future Farmers of America, ([]).
 * Title: Food, Inc. (2008), Director: Robert Kenner **