Corn Isn't What It Used To Be

When I think of corn, I think of corn on Thanksgiving Day. My mom bought it canned (unfortunate, but still very delicious) and she mixes it with some pepper and butter. It is juicy, delicious, and I definitely take an extra spoonful just to satisfy my taste buds. But I never thought of corn as a sweetener that can be even sweeter than sugar. This sweetener is known as high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Basically, HFCS is a cheap alternative for food corporations which mean they have two words in their future: KA CHING! But what’s wrong with food corporations making more money? Is it such a crime to make more money in an economy that’s been going downhill? The answer to that is no, food corporations are completely justified in trying to make money. It’s only common sense to resort to a sweetener that costs thirteen cents per pound compared to sugar that costs 29 cents per pound (114). However, although corporations are saving money, the consequences of turning to HFCS rather than sugar are impacting sugar farmers. As more corporations are converting from sugar to HFCS, sugar cane farmers are losing more money which lead to them losing their lands to farm and make money to provide for themselves and their families. In the previous chapters, Patel brings to attention the high suicide rate in farmers because the amount of money they make are not efficient enough for them to continue working as farmers. There is not enough money to provide food for their families and keep the land to grow their respective crops. In this case, HFCS is a direct cause for lessening the profits of sugar farmers which in turn can cause more farmer suicides and loss of land.

I think that the choices corporations make regarding HFCS and sugar are out any individual’s control other than the heads of those respective corporations. In a business and cost-efficient point of view, HFCS would be the best choice because it’s cheap and it provides exactly the same sweetness as sugar for their products. However, when it comes to trying to make the world a better place for food and for people who are struggling to make a living, food corporations have to apply sugar to their foods to make their foods better for consumers and assist the farmers in need of more money to keep their land.

The ultimate problem is that we live in a world full of corporations that are against change. What isn’t broken (in their eyes) doesn’t need to be fixed. In their case, since they’re making money, why should they have to settle for less? The unfortunate truth will always remain: corporate greed will never change.

Frank Menchavez