Federally-Funded Obesity
Agricultural subsidies flow towards the mass production of cheap crops that are contributing to rising obesity rates. Corn, soy, and wheat are among the most highly subsidized crops in America.
Have you ever picked up a box of Nature Valley granola bars and seen the enthusiastic “16g of Whole Grains!” logo, masquerading as a claim of health? Well if you still believe that whole grains are good for you and a necessary food group, I hate to be the bearer of bad news. If anyone truly believes that grains should be the largest part of our diet on the USDA MyPlate (thanks Michelle Obama for raising the U.S. obesity rates), this information is for you. While this article will focus primarily on the subsidized commodities of soybeans, corn, and wheat, it will be part of a larger series on the agricultural-industrial complex.
It seems as if it would be self-evident information, but it is not obvious to most people that grains, corn, and soybeans are not good for your metabolic and physical health. The majority of the American public, having been the subject of a vast propaganda campaign to demonize real health foods, unironically believes that meat, dairy, and other animal foods are bad for you, while highly-processed and packaged foods that contain “whole grains”, “high-fructose corn syrup” and “soybean oil” are healthy alternatives. There are numerous historical, nutritional, and chemical factors why these subsidized commodities are extremely detrimental to human health, and further, why these foods are contributing more calories to the average American diet every year.
In the United States, farmers are able to receive a wide variety of government assistance to grow certain crops, primarily commodity crops such as corn, wheat, soy, cotton, etc. These forms of government assistance are usually grouped under the broad term of “agricultural subsidies”, determined by the USDA and the omnibus legislation that passes roughly every five years as the “Farm Bill.” This omnibus legislation that is passed in Congress always claims that it will help struggling farmers, but repeatedly, the Farm Bill has proven to be a method for subsidizing the largest commodity crop operations through the use of taxpayer funds.
In 2020 alone, more than $20 billion in subsidies were paid by the USDA to farmers, ranchers, and agriculture operations. They are often limited to $125,000 per individual farmer, but the corporate farming operations can usually find loopholes and methods to extract more money for their commodity crops. The largest agribusinesses that produce corn, soy, wheat, cotton, and rice (the five most subsidized commodity crops) generally see the most benefits from subsidies, with the top 1% of all operations receiving 25% of subsidies in 2019, and the top 10% of operations receiving more than 2/3rds.
In a way, farm subsidies are a great example of a socialist policy being implemented and subsequently only benefiting the “elites” of the industry. It is quite unfortunate that farm subsidies even exist, but the fact that they consistently benefit the largest corporations, using tax dollars from smaller farmers, is quite opposite of the stated goals of lending aid to struggling farmers. It is also tragic that the government pays farmers to grow commodity crops rather than organic fruits and vegetables, grass-fed meat and dairy, and pasture-raised chicken and eggs.
The agricultural subsidy system is an artificial crutch for markets that are unsustainable. For example, corn reached an all-time high of $900/acre in 2011, then decreased in value to $550/acre in 2016. The average cost to produce corn was $700/acre. The subsidies in 2016 are there to prop up farmers that lost money producing corn. If a farmer can’t make a profit from growing a certain crop, it is either because there is too little demand for that crop or there is too large of a supply of that crop. The free-market solution is to grow a different crop that people want, meanwhile the government’s solution is to pay these massive producers millions of dollars because they overproduced this commodity which no one asked for and no one wanted.
This creates a positive feedback loop where corn, wheat, and soy producers produce too much, must get paid their subsidies, then, realizing they will be paid even higher subsidies for the more that they produce, they continually increase output of these commodities, and they get paid more as the years go on. The government has to try to find new uses for these commodities, such as more feed for cattle or more ingredients for processed foods, in order to avoid destroying millions of tons of these crops annually.
It is well-established throughout the history of the United States, and more broadly the world, that anytime a government decides to start subsidizing a particular industry, product, or commodity, it means that they intend to exert full control over it to build its monopoly. If a company, farm, or businessman receives subsidies, it usually means that there are strings attached. When subsidies are received in place of real profits, the government then can say how the industry or business should be run. Already, the government has a certain amount of power over the industry because it funds the industry. Over time, the industry will get so used to being paid subsidies by the government, that it will become fully dependent on the subsidies, until almost all of their income comes from the government. At that point, the government now fully controls the industry, and when the government runs something, it is a monopoly.
The overall effect of the farm subsidy programs that began to be implemented in the 1930s as part of the New Deal is that the price of farmland has steadily risen, driving out lower-to-middle income farmers and making most farm operations associated with large agribusiness corporations. Under the Obama administration, the 2014 Farm Bill did nothing to slow this problem, but in fact, made it so much worse. This legislation actually removed all existing limits to subsidies for the largest farm operations and increased the subsidy amounts for crop insurance. The sleight-of-hand language manipulation appeared to reform agricultural subsidies for commodity crops, but all it did was to make crop insurance subsidies virtually limitless, further driving up farm prices.
The above image of a Food Compass from Tufts University has spread like wildfire across the internet during this past year. The image, while only the guidelines of one institution, is a symptom of the overall disease that is plaguing the Big Food/Ag, the scientific research institutions of universities, and federal regulatory agencies. In her Substack, Unsettled Science, Nina Teicholz provides a great critique of this horribly deceptive and corrupted graph. In my opinion, I believe that this chart unveiled at the White House conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health, is an example which perfectly encapsulates the concept of regulatory capture. Nina Teicholz writes in her article that:
In all, nearly 70 brand-named cereals from General Mills, Kellogg’s, and Post are ranked twice as high as eggs cooked in butter or a piece of plain, whole-wheat toast. Egg whites cooked in vegetable oils are also apparently more healthy than a whole, boiled egg, and nearly all foods are healthier than ground beef.
Despite all of this, I want you to come to your own conclusions about the brevity and consequences of this information.
One of the major problems with the increased consumption of grains, soybeans, corn, and other subsidized crops is glyphosate. One of the most notorious chemicals ever created, glyphosate was patented as Roundup by Monsanto in the 1970s, quickly becoming the most widely used weed-killer worldwide, especially in the United States. However, Roundup had problems of its own. The way that glyphosate works to stop weeds is by preventing them from making the proteins necessary to their survival. Nearly all plants produce these proteins through the same processes, and Roundup was not only killing weeds, but killing the crops and other plants as well.
Monsanto, having a vested interest in the continued widespread application of Roundup, needed a solution. They needed farmers to grow crops that were resistant to the destructive nature of glyphosate. Enter GMO agriculture…
In 1996, Monsanto introduced Roundup Ready soybeans, a genetically-modified breed of soybeans that used genes from Agrobacteria, to render these GMO soybeans immune to the effects of glyphosate. Roundup, which used to be sprayed in the rows between crops in order to kill weeds in the field, was now being showered across entire fields, contaminating the crops, weeds, and all other organisms. Over 18.9 billion pounds of Roundup have been applied to fields since 1974, with the majority being used on GMO wheat, soy, corn, and more.
In recent years, Monsanto has been involved in a substantial amount of lawsuits due to extreme harm caused by the use of Roundup by farmers, lawn care professionals, and even homeowners. Additionally, the cancer-causing chemical glyphosate was found in 80% of adult urine samples and 87% of children’s urine samples according to a CDC survey which tested over 1,600 samples. In 2018, Bayer purchased Monsanto amid the latter’s numerous lawsuits and settlements around the United States. The toxicity of glyphosate has been well-established, and the exponential increase in its usage since the mid-1990s has been linked to rising rates of cancer and other chronic health issues amid the human population.
That’s just one piece to the puzzle. In summary, by heavily subsidizing crops such as corn, wheat, and soy (which are almost exclusively GMO), chemical and pharmaceutical giants benefit from the use of their toxic herbicides and GMO seeds.
It is no secret that most multinational corporations have one main goal: Their Bottom Line. Nearly every company must turn a profit to stay in business, so it is not a problem that companies desire to stay afloat and increase earnings for their shareholders. But why is it that the most heavily subsidized crops in the nation also happen to be the most widely used ingredients in most food items at both restaurants and grocery stores? Profit! These crops, even without being subsidized, would be among the cheapest to mass produce. Naturally, if you’re the CEO of a massive corporation producing processed foods, wouldn’t you want to use the cheapest ingredients?
Aside from resistance to glyphosate, profit is one of the main reasons that GMO crops are grown. While GMO crops may be more hardy and resistant to herbicides, they are very deficient in the proper nutrients that these foods should normally contain, namely protein as I explained the process of “Roundup Ready” seeds above. Some sort of allergic or negative reaction is bound to happen from the continual consumption of GMO ingredients, because the human body is simply not designed to eat them. Manufacturers love corn, soy, and wheat because they are typically genetically-modified, and thus the prices are generally very low.
While these commodity crops are pervasive in our own food supply, they are also extremely common as animal feed. From pigs to chickens to cattle, corn, wheat, and soy and their subsequent byproducts make up the majority of the diet for animals raised in factory farms and feedlots. Rather than subsidizing true health foods, the crops that the government incentivizes people to grow are used as feed to fatten up cattle, and (coincidentally?) given to humans in the form of ultra-processed “food”. If certain commodity crops are specifically grown, subsidized, and given to cattle to make them fatter to increase their market weight and value, what effect might that food possibly have on you?
Soy is so ubiquitous in the American diet that the term “soyboy” has unfortunately become a reality. It is a hidden ingredient of almost every food that isn’t produce or grass-fed meat and grass-fed dairy. In 2019, soy displaced corn as the largest crop by acreage, a feat once seemingly impossible. I used to eat a lot of burgers at my university’s dining hall. One day, I saw a sign advertising the “blended burger” that they use. It was basically a creative, deceitful way to say that their burgers are a “blend” of 50% beef and 50% soy. Needless to say, I stopped eating burgers at the dining hall. However, my experience is not at all unique, as the use of soy as a beef substitute is incredibly common at fast food chains. Do you really think you’re getting 100% real beef when you pay $1.89 for 2 cheeseburgers at McDonald’s?
It is very important to remember that if the government wants to pay farmers to grow certain crops, it probably isn’t because these foods are nutrient-dense and healthy, there are almost certainly some ulterior motives. To conclude, corn, soy, and wheat are highly subsidized because:
They are almost always genetically-modified organisms (GMO) and therefore are resistant to glyphosate and other herbicides.
They are incredibly cheap to produce and food manufacturers can make a number of different low-cost ingredients from these commodity crops.
A large amount goes towards cattle feed in order to increase cattle weight before they go to market and raise their percentage of fat in the carcass.
When you really look into an issue, you see that the government always works towards its own best interest and self-preservation, regardless of the needs and wants of the people it is supposed to represent. A majority of the farm bills passed in Congress fund unhealthy, chemical-laden crops, prop up the largest agribusiness corporations, and put pressure from the top down onto small-midsize farmers. The only people benefiting from these arrangements happen to be the politicians being lobbied by Big Food/Ag and the already massive multinational corporations selling commodities and herbicides. The consumers are not helped, only fattened and given chronic illnesses. The environment isn’t helped because monocrop agriculture destroys all wildlife in a field and severely diminishes the fertility and moisture content of the soil. The farmers are not helped, but rather slowly squeezed out of the industry.
It takes curiosity, an open mind, and a skeptical nature to see the extent of the perversion of the agricultural system caused by draconian government mandates and the state-sponsored oligopoly that is Big Food/Ag. I hope that people begin to awaken over the next few years and processed foods become a thing of the past. I hope that people learn about soil health and regenerative agriculture, and how a herd of pasture-raised cattle are astronomically better for the environment than fields as far as the eye can see planted with the same commodity crop. I hope that people come to the realization that farm subsidies, state-sponsored oligopolies and expensive-to-implement restrictions upon farming are not the products of a free market system, but rather meant to centralize control of agriculture into the hands of a small few.
In closing, I would like to leave you with a few questions that require some real critical thinking:
If the federal government heavily subsidizes these commodity crops that are unhealthy and unnatural for human consumption, what is their endgame? Do they have any interest in having a metabolically healthy and fit population? Do they support the small local farmer who grows organic vegetables and pasture-raised chickens and eggs on his modest 20 acres or do they support the agribusiness corporations that have revolving doors with the FDA?
References:
https://thenutritionwatchdog.com/chemical-corn-wheat-oats-soy-worse-gluten/
https://unsettledscience.substack.com/p/cheerios-a-health-food-says-leader
https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/
https://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12302-016-0070-0
https://www.fb.org/market-intel/usda-predicts-king-soybean-by-2019
https://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/diet.fitness/09/22/kd.gupta.column/
https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps/2021-farm-subsidies-ballooned-under-trump/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/45129315#metadata_info_tab_contents
https://modernfarmer.com/2017/12/soy-set-become-biggest-crop-acreage-soy/
You are ahead of the curve with your writing. Just read the article in the Wall Street Journal this week about ultra processed foods, but you were warning about some of the same things over a year ago.
Might be favorite article so far. I guess I'll add the agriculture industry to the list of things that the government has ruined to the detriment of its people.