King Corn

David Teter, Green 4

Studies have shown that high fructose corn syrup, and in turn, a diet based solely on
nutrient devoid corn is extremely harmful to our health. In addition, subsidization of corn is

driving small farmers out of business, and making large corporate operations bigger and more
powerful than ever. Not surprisingly there is a very simple solution to our problem. The answer,
is to stop subsidization of corn. You will hear many politicians speak of a "free market,"
generally with very good connotation. The free market is magical, especially if it actually
implemented. If we stop subsidizing corn, it will no longer be profitable to farm it, so many
farmers will have to switch to growing healthier crops such as wheat, barley, or even vegetables.
Because of this, demand for corn would increase, and corn would become profitable for some
farmers to grow. Lastly, because of higher corn prices, sugarcane would once more become
cheaper to use as a sweetener.
According to a study by Princeton University high fructose corn syrup is harmful to our
health. In their study, lab animals that were fed high fructose corn syrup suffered from a rapid
increase in body fat. In addition scientists also noticed an increase in the amount of triglycerides
that were circulating in the bloodstreams of the aforementioned animals. However, sugar is
inherently not a problem, however the large amounts of fructose that is present in corn syrup
causes obesity. A portion of the animals in the test were given glucose injections, this did not
make them obese. But the ones that were given fructose rapidly became obese.
Recently, a study was completed by Central Seattle University, which discovered that
corn fed beef lack omega-3 fatty acids, which are one of the few health benefits of meat. In
addition, meat from corn fed animals is consistently more fatty, and has less protein. Corn fed
animals die after roughly six months, and then we eat their meat! Lastly, the corn we eat is
genetically engineered to resist the herbicide that we put on our crops. However, we are not
genetically engineered to resist those herbicides. There have been studies that have shown that
corn products are not harmful to us, purely by coincidence the funding for the studies comes

from the companies that produce corn products.. As you may have noticed the majority of the
corn that we consume is not corn on the cob, it is corn derivatives. Because of this, it is not that
important how the corn tastes, and thus, the corn we eat has been bred for quantity, and not taste
and nutritional value. In the documentary King Corn, people who tried the corn were unable to
eat it, because it tasted so bad.
Subsidization of corn makes the actual market price of corn drop significantly, and thus
makes it unprofitable in small amounts. This makes farmer families that have grown corn for
generations upon generations go out of business. Often, farming is their only skill, and they have
trouble finding another way to make a living. In the aforementioned documentary King Corn, the
farmer that assists in the corn experiment is forced to sell his farm, because it is too small to
compete with the massive corporate farms around him. Subsidization of corn is costing American
farmers their jobs, that is too high of a price to pay for cheaper soda.
In addition, subsidization of corn is making large corn farming corporations bigger and
more powerful than ever before. Whenever a farmer goes out of business, someone has to buy
their land and tools. Almost all the time, a large corn farming conglomerate is the buyer of said
property. Large corn farming corporations are often owned by the rich and powerful aristocracy
of America, in essence, corporate corn farming is making the rich richer and the poor poorer. I
thought we were trying to do the reverse. Secondly, the large corn farmers are often not residents
of the area in which they farm their corn. Instead the live at the top of a evil tower high rise in
some large city. This means that the corn money is leaving the town and going to some offshore
bank account. This is extremely detrimental to the already fragile economies of rural midwestern
American towns. Large companies buy smaller companies and those companies buy small family
farm.

In addition, a great deal of our money is no longer ending up in the hands of the farmer.
In 1970 forty cents of every dollar spent on food went to the farmer, now a mere nineteen cents
ends up in the hands of the farmer. In addition, the soil in the midwest is becoming gradually
more and more depleted. Plants require nutrients to grow, every growing cycle takes a certain
amount of nutrients from the soil. The nutrients to replenish over time, but currently, we are
using nutrients faster than they are regenerating. Eventually, we won't be able to grow anything
on the land currently designated for corn farming.! This would result in a food shortage, and, as a
result, a rapid and sudden increase in food prices. Since the 1970s, there are 13 more pounds of
meat per person available in the U.S. at any given time. Since meat sellers are still in business,
there must be demand for their products. Thus we can infer that we are eating 13 more pounds of
meat! Which is definitely not a good thing.
It is not naturally profitable to use corn syrup as a sweetener, as it is too expensive to
produce. According to the documentary King Corn, some time ago, the U.S. government decided
that it was a good idea to make as much food as possible. At the time, this may have been a good
idea, but now we produce more than enough food to feed our country. And because of
globalization, it is now easier than ever to import food from other countries around the globe yet,
we are still subsidizing corn.
You may have heard politicians speaking of the many wonders of the American free
market. A free market is a market that is not controlled at all by the government, that has no taxes
and no subsidies. As you may have realized by now, the American corn industry is not a free
market. Instead, it is heavily subsidised by the government. Corn is not naturally so cheap, it is
generally much more expensive. Thus, if we removed subsidies for corn, it would not no longer
profitable for the current quantity of corn farming to still occur. Because of the economic

principle of supply and demand the price of corn would increase. This would stop the process by
which small farmers go out of business. In addition, we would revert to a state in which it is
more profitable to make food products with cane sugar rather than corn syrup. Cane sugar has far
fewer health risks than corn syrup.
As I mentioned previously, stopping subsidization of corn would make it unprofitable to
keep growing corn for the majority of farmers. But, many of them would keep farming, and
would grow healthier food. Once again, supply and demand would make other foods such as
vegetables cheaper than corn products. This would be a major step toward solving Americas
obesity problem. In addition, it would once again be less profitable to produce grain fed meat.
Instead, we would have to raise grass fed livestock. Since grass fed livestock is more expensive,
it would raise the price of meat, which would lower the amount of meat intake on average. This
would also make Americans a great deal healthier. Lastly, it would make it less profitable to
grow more productive (and less nutritious) kinds of crops, not only would this further serve to
improve our diet, there would also be fewer crops per acre of land. Which would help to mitigate
the effects of high density farming on the land.
It is true that stopping subsidization of corn would make many sodas and candies more
expensive. But is it really not worth 50 cents more per soda to help the health of America as a
whole, and help farmers get their jobs back? I think you can pay a little extra for your Coke. In
all honesty, I think products made with cane or beet sugar legitimately taste better.
If we stop subsidization of corn, it will, among other things, help prevent obesity in many
Americans, stop the rich from becoming richer and the poor from becoming poorer, extend the
time we have before the American food crisis, and, in my opinion, make our food taste better.

While subsidization of corn was necessary in the 70s, that is no longer the case today. Our
government needs to quickly begin the process of stopping corn subsidization. Many of our
lawmakers receive large donations from supporters of large-scale corn farming, but I believe that
if we try hard, we can stop the subsidization and degradation of corn!
Bibliography
Eisenbraun, Karen. "Corn-Fed Vs. Grass-Fed Beef | Healthy Theory." Corn-Fed Vs. Grass-Fed
Beef | Healthy Theory. Healthy Theory, 1 Jan. 2012. Web. 28 Jan. 2013.
King Corn. Dir. Aaron Woolf. Perf. Ian Cheney, Curt Ellis. Mosaic Films, n.d. DVD.
Parker, Hillary. "Princeton University - A Sweet Problem." Princeton University - A Sweet
Problem: Princeton Researchers Find That High-fructose Corn Syrup Prompts Considerably
More Weight Gain. Princton University, 22 May 2012. Web. 28 Jan. 2013.
<https://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/>.