Review Of The Novel The Omnivore's Dilemma

In the United States there's four major food chains. Industrial, industrial organic, local sustainable, and hunter gather according to Michael Pollan the author of the nonfiction novel “The Omnivore’s Dilemma.” In a nutshell Pollan describes the American food chain. In his book he comes to the conclusion that the industrial food chain is bad for you, yet one question arises. Which of the three food chains would best feed the United States? Both the local sustainable and hunter gather are the healthiest food chains for the consumer. Again, another problem arises. Hunter gather and local sustainable food chains couldn’t realistically feed a whole nation. So there is only one option left, industrial organic. Consequently the industrial

In the novel the “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” Michael Pollan explains to the reader how similar the industrial food chain is to the industrial organic food chain. He says “the organic food in stores like Whole Foods is organic because it is grown without chemical fertilizers or pesticides. Yet so much of it is industrial.” (page 133 OD). Since the industrial organic food chain is similar to the industrial food chain it would be very easy for the U.S. to convert to the industrial organic food chain from its main food chain, industrial. Michael Pollan said the only thing that changes is “it is grown without chemical fertilizers or pesticides.” So the only thing you would have to change in the food chain is the growing methods. Another piece of evidence showing the industrial organic food chain being mass producing comes from an article written by Catherine Badgley called “Can Organic Food Feed the World?” Catherine tells the reader that organic food could produce plenty of food for the whole world. She says “when the same products are grown, organic yields are 8% to 19% lower on average than conventional farming yields...We currently grow far more food than is necessary.” (COFFtW). Even though organic yields are lower than non organic yields we would still have plenty of food to feed the U.S. because we grow way more food

In the book “The Omnivore's Dilemma” Michael Pollan explains the benefits of eating organic food vs eating non organic food. One study Pollan talks about is a study from the University of California and says “the study showed that the organic fruits and vegetables contained higher levels of vitamin C.”(page 156 OD) The study proves that organic food is healthier than conventional crops because they are richer in vitamins. Healthier food is better for the public’s consumption. Another reason the industrial organic food is better for the public is because it is better for farmers and labors growing it. Catherine Badgley, the author of the article “Can Organic Food Feed the World?” wrote about the benefits of eating organic. One of the topics she discussed was that farmers make more money selling organic crops vs conventional crops. Catherine said “Organic foods may cost more than conventionally grown, but they’re more profitable for farmers...cost ratios are 20% to 24% higher for the same foods produce by conventional methods according to scientists from the Washington State University.”(COFFtW) The extra 20% farmers make selling organic foods helps the farmers and labors extremely. Since the farmer is making extra they can afford to hire more hands (more jobs) and can live without the government subsides for growing corn conventionally. Both pieces of evidence supports the