Food, Inc.

[Katy]

Quote:
Now that I've read some of this book, I have to qualify the statement above. In his essay, Robert Kenner (the director of the film) says he wanted to make a movie that told all sides of the story, and he set out to do that. But over and over, the big companies refused to speak about anything in-depth (they would make surface-level comments but nothing more), and they refused to allow the filmmakers to film their food operations, etc. Even worse, the filmmakers found that the industrial companies have a practice of intimidating those who try to share that kind of information with the outside world (for example, a team of Tyson people showing up at a farm that contracts with Tyson and "suggesting" to the farmer that he not allow filming to continue; the victim of food contamination being afraid to speak because she could be sued (apparently looser libel laws allow food companies to sue easily--think Oprah and the beef industry. So much for free speech.)). So it's not that the film is anti-industrial food necessarily, but the film does not tell the food industry's side of the story because that side refused to tell their part of the story.

I'm not saying this is the reason, but maybe they know no matter what they say or allow to be filmed, only the worst will be shown. That seems to be what has happened in the past when people made a "truthful" film.

I know there are abuses that happen and I don't condone that. I think part of the problem lies in how people view animals. I'm as big of an animal lover as you will find, but I don't put human attributes onto our animals whether they are our cattle, chickens or pets. I think people who have no personal farm or ranch background are more likely to view animals as four legged or feathered humans than most of us who have grown up on a farm or ranch and continue to make that our life. I'm sorry but as much as I love and care for all our animals, I know they are not human and don't have the same feelings or emotions as a human.

 

[PotterWatch]

I totally get what you are saying about people who humanize animals. I wasn't raised around livestock of any kind but I manage to process my own birds and see my chickens as chickens, not little people. For me, the reason I have joined the movement to eat locally and produce at least some of my own food has nothing to do with assigning human attributes to animals (though I don't really care to eat something that has lived a miserable existence). It has to do with the system that currently feeds our nation. It is a system that relies too heavily on pesticides, herbicides, and antibiotics. It is a system that spends more energy getting a watermelon shipped to my grocery store than my family will get from eating that watermelon. It is an unsustainable system. That is my problem with it.

 

[Katy]

I'm all for eating locally. A lot of people either can't afford to or are unwilling to spend the extra money to do that tho. We can make more money off our yearly calf crop by selling them at the sale barn than we could by feeding them out to butchering weight and trying to sell the meat ourselves.

I feel like part of the reason we farm the way we do is because there's always been the push to feed our US population and a good portion of the rest of the world as cheaply as possible.....for a long time it didn't matter to anyone how it was done. People gripe about their grocery store food bills as it is....I don't think people as a whole would be willing to pay what non mass produced food would end up costing them.

 

[hikerchick]

Quote:
Some of us are. Some of us see the larger picture; and it extends way beyond our own pocketbooks. I willingly pay more for locally grown produce; and I don't have a lot of money to spare. I don't think pushing farmers to grow more and more cheaply is the answer. Supporting farmers and making sustainable growth profitable is.

 

[PotterWatch]

The number of people who are willing to pay those higher prices is growing. That's partly what documentaries like Food, Inc. are trying to do, educate people about how their food choices affect not just themselves, but the environment and the population as a whole. There will certainly always be people who only want the cheapest product regardless of quality or how it was produced, but the more aware people become of the system of food production, the more people will start to realize that buying local, organic food is the better way to go.

 

[Lady Henevere]

Quote:
I agree. Also, the cheap price of processed, non-local foods has a lot to do with what gets subsidized by our taxes. (There's info about government farm subsidies at http://farm.ewg.org/farm/index.php. The subsidies for corn, for example, which is used in just about every processed food (cereal, chips, soda, popsicles, etc.) and fed to "factory-farmed" meat animals, is here: http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=corn.) If our tax money didn't help make processed foods so cheap, they wouldn't be as attractive to buyers. If this made buying "good" food prohibitively expensive for some, those same tax dollars could go toward subsidizing environmentally-friendly, healthy foods rather than junk, or could help needy families buy healthy, local food, creating a stronger market for it.

 

[hikerchick]

I really hope the day comes soon when both the government and the populace understands that we MUST begin feeding ourselves using sustainable methods. The route we are on has an end. Then what?

 

[Davaroo]

Quote:
Im with Katy. Not gonna see it, as I've seen them before. It isnt news anymore.

Until people stop eating, become utterly self-sufficient or we come up with a "Peace, Love and Kindly Vegetarian" serum for all mankind - I don't see how we can escape some degree of industrialization in our food production.
(Well, we could burn civilization to the ground, kill 80% of the population on the planet and go back to the Dark Ages. That might save the poor factory animals....)

Now, there are things about industrialized agriculture that is unpleasant, I admit. Enough so to disturb some folks. And I respect their position - hey, I used to be a vegetarian myself.

But, what I don't need is another elitist, special agenda, docu-drama shoved in my face. I'll pass on that. I have drawn my own conclusions.

 

[hikerchick]

Quote:
Im with Katy. Not gonna see it, dont plan to.
Until people stop eating, or we come up with a "Peace, Love and Kindly Vegetarian" serum for all mankind - I dont see how we can escape some degreee of industrialization in our food production.

I'm allright with it.

If we keep going the way we are, people are going to have to stop eating.
There won't be any land left capable of growing food.

 

[Davaroo]

Quote:
Im with Katy. Not gonna see it, dont plan to.
Until people stop eating, or we come up with a "Peace, Love and Kindly Vegetarian" serum for all mankind - I dont see how we can escape some degreee of industrialization in our food production.

I'm allright with it.

If we keep going the way we are, people are going to have to stop eating.
There won't be any land left capable of growing food.

I agree that the population is burdensome, but we hardly touch the arable land in the world. Just converting out carefully tended lawns to food production, would drastically change the face of things.

But, it isn't food production that worries me. There are far greater dangers lurking in the Pandoras Box of an overgrown humanity....