Food Inc Essay

The movie makes well-nigh really good points. The best point is that subsidized corn artificially lowers the cost of animal feed and high-fructose corn syrup. This creates a tax-subsidized economic incentive for people to choose fast food over nutritious options. Scrapping bring out subsidies including corn would be a great estimate (that the movie doesnt propose). It has a good segment about how Monsanto is using intellectual retention law to unfairly create a US soybean monopoly, suing farmers who neer bought Monsanto seed and forcing them to capitulate becaexercising of the sheer weight of wakeless bills.But the movie descends into sensationalism. For example, it takes a sad case of a kid named Kevin who died of E Coli inebriety after eating a hamburger. It traces the painss response which is to use ammonia to make sure that almost no E Coli survives and criticizes its solvent while playing ominous music in the background along with unanswered cries of anguish from Ke vins mother. It fails to mention that (1) all E Coli dies when philia is cooked properly (2) using ammonia to kill E Coli is an ingenious idea thats very effective (3) the food with the greatest risk of E Coli poisoning is perfect spinach.It doesnt mention how the fast food industry eliminated the use of hydrogenated vegetable oil, almost completely eliminating trans fat from fast food. It has a scene comparing the resources used by a free hold cow farmer who has about 20 cows versus an industrial slaughterhouse that processes thousands failing to mention that if the free range farmer produced cows on the same scale he would use 4x to 10x the resources for the same output. The movie takes an paradoxical stance against genetically modified food (google Norman Borlaugh).It makes several self-defeating arguments (like arguing that our industrially-produced food is infected and resource-intensive and that we should pay more to eat organic which is dressually much more resource i ntensive and more credibly to be contaminated by bacteria because of the use of poop as fertilizer instead of nitrates). The movie makes some interesting points. But the unscathed big business bad thing is a completely ineffective attitude that is a constant source of irritation to me personally.People and businesses have, do, will, and should act in their own best interests. The question is which policies should be created to incentivize wise outcomes? Regarding Monsanto, the job isnt evil big business, its that the US should reform its legal system to act like the UKs where if you sue someone and bear then you have to pay their legal fees. That would prevent Monsantos abuses of IP law (and would accomplish tort reform in medical malpractice).