Freakonomics Response

 One of the tools that the economics used from their tool box would be evidence to find the truth, a more specific name; causation. This is seen in the experiment they did at the school. The author was betting on the fact that if given the incentive one will try to work over an obstacle to get it, in this case it was money for the winner’s college. They offered money to the kids for something they did not want to do, so most kids did not work for it. In the end of the experiment a low percentage of the kids actually improved their grades. Another tool used would be surveys. Throughout the whole thing surveys were heavily used like when they were trying to show if names affected ones success rate. The one in particular was the dad that named his son Winner and Loser. Although one would expect that their names would imply their destiny the outcome was on the contrary, Loser grew up to be a success and Winner wound up a convict. They also tried to read between the lines. Sumo was supposed to be a sport buried in honor and culture but if one takes the time to look at the data one can easily see how cheating was in plain sight.

The author’s acknowledge the lack of evidence behind correlation. Correlation is when things are tied together but no one knows what caused what, and causation is when one can tell what caused what. In the movie they proved the actual causation of the issue in their example. They showed the difference between correlation and causation in the example of the crime rate growing down. According to all the charts people would believe that crime went down in the 1990 because of the rise in the police force (correlation), when the actual solution was that abortion was legalized and thus reduced the birth of babies and bad neighborhoods (causation).

I would have to agree with the statement: "Freakonomics serves as an inspiration and good example to our attempt to explore the "hidden-in-plain-sight" weirdness of dominant social practices". Although I wouldn’t say it did a very good job of it, due to the fact that it did not talk about the "weirdness" of dominant social practices, but it did talk about dominant social practices. It mainly stuck to the idea that opportunities/incentives matter. People tend to make/pick opportunities that work for them. This connects back to our investigation of U.S food ways in the way most would rather plant, grow, and use corn for most things rather then grass. Farmers would rather grow corn than grass because there is a bigger incentive that they actually want to work towards; Its fast and produces more money and the consequence of not growing it would be going broke.

Growing Your Own Food

I didnt know what to eat it with at first, but finally I made a tuna sprout sandwhich with cheese:

 Although it did not have the best flavor, the fact that I grew my own food is a really cool experience. This is so because I saw the plant as a seed and then saw it turn to a plant and then (less exciting) eat it. The fact that I knew where it came from made me want to enjoy it even more, like when I grew tomatoes in my backyard. Every time I put it in a sandwich I know that its fresh and you can actually taste a difference, juicier redder. In conclusion I wouldn’t say the experience was magical, but rather satisfactory.

Reader Response 5

Chapter 10- Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan (Precis):

America land of quantity over quality. Why did America turn its head on the environmentally friendly way of producing natural food? The answer would be how it does not meet the standard of the industrious process. The grass farming method of growing livestock is against the principle of industry: time and money. If livestock is not grown and fattened up fast enough in a certain amount of time, it will not meet the standard of industry and produce less money.
“Our civilization and, increasingly, our food system are strictly organized on industrial lines” (Gem)
To connect all back, plain and simple: corn works within this system, grass does not.

Reader Response 4

Chapter 6, Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan (Precis):

Due to the over production, the result becomes huge/excess proportions and over consumption. In this chapter the author also discussed similarities in eating binges and drinking binges. The similarities being, turning excess corn into a non-perishable form with encouragements for people to eat more of it. Something interesting about this would be the play of human psychology here: When food is placed before people majority of the time people will finish it. This may be a result of parenting which teaches/encourages their kids to "finish their plate", whether its rice to vegetables which kids may not like but grow up with the urge to finish their plates. To conclude the chapter, the author places the blame of unhealthy Americans on their agricultural policies: “we subsidize high-fructose corn syrup in this country, but not carrots.” Until we change our policy, “the river of cheap corn will keep flowing.”(Gem)

Chapter 7, Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan (Precis):

 The author takes his family to a McDonalds to eat and enjoys their meal in the family car, and takes a closer look at the highly refined foods. One of the results of all this processing is that a brand new type of "food" has been invented, one which is no longer associated with the plant and/or animal it came from. Does the chicken nugget taste like chicken? Sadly the answer is no, rather it just taste like a chicken nugget. Does the patty in the burger taste like real beef? No it does not. Using McDonalds as an example of this over-zealously over corn, the author summarizes his thoughts on the corn-empire: "The farmers going broke cultivating it; the countless other species routed or emiserated by it; the humans eating and drinking it as fast as they can, some of them—like me and my family—in automobiles engineered to drink it, too"(Gem)

Chapter 8, Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan(Precis):

Grass is as difrent from industrial farming as can be. There are many diffrences of these is the natural cycle that is made when animals eat what they were made to eat. Cows for example when they eat grass.In the cow-grass cycle there is no such thing as waste, firstly when they eat grass they make fecis and the fecis in turn goes to the grass as fertilizer making the cycle start over."We never called ourselves organic- we call ourselves 'beyond organic'. Why dumb down to a lesser level then we are?"(Gem)


Chapter 9, Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan (Precis):

So the items labeled with the nice "Organic" sign on the store shelves are not what they seemed...
As it turns out, the mainstream organic should be called "Big Organic". Although it started as a bunch of organic farms owned by hippies in the 70's, which used no chemicals to grow produce things started to change as time went on. After experiencing growing pains and limitation in agriculture, they went to industrial machinery to help them extend business. This somewhat ironic that the same people that once "raged against the machine" eventually turned to it (industrial organic).

Thoughts:

 "Are we the masters of corn, or is corn the master of us?"
"Will we ever be able to escape the fast food chain?"

Reader Response 3

Chapter 5- The Omnivore's Dilemma-Micael Pollan(Precis)

We are the industrial eater, it takes a certain kind of eater, the industrial eater, to eat corn that has been broken down and put back together but as processed food like “margarine, Tang, Cheez Whiz and Cool Whip”. All of which are, essentially “food imitators” they can provide sustenance but they won’t really sustain us. Chapter 5 explains how since there is a large surplus of corn, industries need to get all that surplus biomass somewhere. This is where we come in, exploiting the human desire for sweet stuff, High Fructose Corn Syrup is born. Following this logic leads to the conclusion that Americans are unhealthy for a reason; they are doing their part to consume all excess biomass, as efficient as possible.

Thoughts:

One response made by a New York food additive manufactrurer in the book was that natural food is a: "dubious substance, came to be eaten by humans at thier own risk", my response: "WHAT!!!!??!!"

Reader Response 2

Chapter 3-Omnivore's Dilemma Michael Pollan(Precis)

Turns out Old McDonalds’ happy farm isn’t so much a farm nor is it happy. In chapter 3 I found out Old McDonald (the average meat maker) upgraded from farm to a feedlot or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation which feeds our cows low quality corn and leave them in low quality holders and in turn eat a whole bunch of low quality cow (and I mean a lot, specifically 100 million beef cows).These feedlots, like cheap corn, brought the work ethic of quantity over quality when making meats. Paraphrasing what was said on page 68; when animals live on a farm the very idea of waste cease to exist due to their ecological loop, on the other hand feedlots take this wonderful idea and neatly divide it into two new problems, a fertility problem which is "fixed" by adding chemical fertilizer and a pollution problem that is hardly "fixed" at all (Gem). More importantly the chapter discussed how "You are what what you eat eats" and something interesting that I never thought of, is how in America we do an amazing magic trick which is turn excess bushels of cheap corn into steaks.

Thoughts:
1. The more I read this book the more I find out that I really don’t know what I’m eating and what I’m eating is eating
2. When did these facts become acceptable?

Reading Response 1

Chapter 1- The Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan(Precis)

 Do we really know what we are eating? Although the author, when following the industrial food chain, expected his investigation to lead to a variety of out lets, majority of comes from or is corn. Ever since the food line processed food is not what it seems:
"In recent years some of this supermarket euphemism has seeped into Produce, where you will now find formerly soil encrusted potatoes cubed pristine white, and "baby" carrots machine-lathed neatly into tapered torpedoes. -page 16"(gem)
 From our so called chicken nuggets and the soda we drink to wash it down to the very store we purchase these items from corn is there. 

Chapter 2- The Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan(Precis)

 The people of America are corn. I mean that in every sense of the phrase. Chapter 2 explicitly shows that although we American would like think that we eat a diverse diet everything from burgers to Twinkies, when we look at what makes up our food on a molecular level majority of it is processed corn. Most importantly we have become what we eat, corn with legs.

Chapter 3- The Omnivores Dilemma, Michael Pollan(Precis)

Corn is not just a food anymore, its a commodidty. Chapter 3 tells how some corn went from being a crop grown by farmers who actually gave a .... about what they grew to corn that is grown just to apease the masses. In fact there is corn made that actually has little to no nutritional benifits.Somthing that stood out to me was on page 60 was:
"A commodity is like a filter stripping qualities and histories from the harvest of a particular farm an farmer."(gem) This made me wonder, when did we start to put quantity over quality in food?

Thoughts:
1. When did we become so dependent on this one crop?

2. Is this corn issue a triumph of capitalism or failure of imagination? or both?
3.when did we start to put quantity over quality in food?