iam i food technologist and a animal sciencer in brazil, and all i gotta say is: even meat and milk and eggs and other kinds of food are based on corn. it has a good a bad importance, let's see both sides of it's opinion. what amercans must see is that politicians are introducin all they want in theirs head. Look at France. They r changing theyr contry, building a nation
You know, I just did an "I'm-feeling-lucky" search for homemade spaghetti sauce, and the very first recipe I found has a tablespoon of brown sugar in it... certainly not as much as there must be in the canned stuff, but it's a bit disingenuous to say "you wouldn't pour sugar on spaghetti."
It's not even just HFCS, but things like modified corn starch and what not you can find in nearly everything. And Capnvideo, watch out for Campbells soup. Many of them contain monosodium glutamate or yeast extract to trick you into thinking they're good. MSG has been known to cause health problems.
Yes, corn is useful, but the government subsidies have caused an over-production. The result is an unnatural trading of commodities, and in this case, an unnatural means of manufacturing food
@ctk1234 MSG causes health problems because of a common allergy. If you're not allergic (and the problems won't exactly sneak up on you if you are) the only problem it could ever present is the added sodium - which, of course, you should watch. The acid component is found naturally in all sorts of places, from mangoes and tomatoes, to almost all meat, to Marmite.
Fructose is a POISON to your body......your liver doesnt know what to do with the stuff. dont use it and watch the weight drop off........dont drink coca cola and other hight fructose products....the stufff is even in Campbells tomato soup
@capnvideo2006 Okay, NO. Fructose = fruct, fruit + -ose, sugar. It's called that because in the Good Old Days®, the primary known source was... FRUIT. Apples and pears, especially, are loaded with the stuff. Despite what the quacks du jour (whom we'll laugh at in ten years) think, things don't magically become better for you when they're "natural." It's not good to add too much to your grains and protein, of course, but cane/beet sugar (NASTY!), if cheaper, would be as bad or worse.
@dancar Thank you...the notion that fructose is inherently poisonous is absurd; it occurs naturally in most fruits. While I'll admit that the quantity of sugars(HFCS, cane sugar, beet sugar, sucrose, fructose, etc) is alarming and HFCS and the food system surrounding it is responsible for all sorts of ailments, don't go off labeling a molecule poison when you clearly don't know the biology and chemistry behind it. Please do more research first...
@capnvideo2006 Exactly! You might as well throw sucralose, aspartame, saccharin, etc. in that mix. You're almost better off using an "decent" amount of regular sugar than any of these. The does atleast recognize and as a result, knows how to handle sugar more than the "imposters!"
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
So, I like the way these movies try and make every corn farmer suffer. People can chose what to eat. Corn is NOT going to kill you. It's a useful product. Now we can make fuel out of it. Amazing.. yet people make these movies.
I dont think you get it... we are not having a choice anymore, when more that 70% of what you purchase in stores is made of the stuff, what choice!!! we need more organic/natural foods especially vegetables.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
hey guess what.. organic foods are almost no different then regularly processed foods. i would know i have a masters in food and nutrition and a bachelors in animal science. i know its easy to believe media.. but get your information from a reliable source... not a PETA group or an other extremist group. try USDA.
How about YOU try learning to question the very agencies that supposedly are on your side and would never steer you wrong. Do you really think that there aren't at least some people who've been bought out by the lobbyists?
@dairyprincessx3 - People can choose what they eat; they just have to read every single label of every single thing they buy if they want to avoid corn syrup. You cannot deny the correlation of time over HFCS and Obesity. We can bicker about causation all day long. But at the end of the day, it is not in doubt that the liver converts ALL fructose into fat. Nature made the stuff scarce for a reason. Now its in everything, and now we are a nation of fat asses...just sayin'...
@orgamikrikit Fructose is "scarce"? Are you kidding me? It's EVERYWHERE in nature, and in much higher percentages than in HFCS. "High-fructose" just means high compared to normal corn syrup, which has next to none. You don't want fructose, don't eat fruit! That's where most of it comes from!
@IoEstasCedonta - Oh? Fructose is everywhere for people to consume huh? Perhaps you can point to a place where sweet fruit (fructose) has grown in abundance and used as an important fuel source for humans for years. Newsflash: the supermarket is not an accurate representation of nature. Nor is the occurance of fruit in modern human diet an accurate reflection of diets of the average person a thousand years ago (a very short time ago). So yeah, it is scarce.
@orgamikrikit First off, if you're going to go back a thousand years, *honey*, not refined sugar, would have been the sweetener of choice, with roughly the fructose of HFCS. Because most nectars are mostly fructose, and certainly flowers grow everywhere.
Wild berries grow in abundance everywhere. Apples and grapes have been part of the Western diet for millenia.
Even if I'm wrong about (our cruel enemy) "nature," though, are you seriously suggesting refined sugar is better than fresh fruit?!
@orgamikrikit Sorry, thought I should clarify: I know apples (not sure about grapes) aren't native to Europe. But they are frequently referenced in artifacts dating to antiquity, even if eaten less than today (most people then being malnourished...).
And, of course, there's a such thing as too much fruit, but the point is that you're implying fruit nutritional extracts + sucrose would be better for you than most of the fruits (pineapples, et al., are a sucrose-high exception) themselves.
@IoEstasCedonta Again, fructose may be everywhere, but it was not considered important for survival...and, for the most part, scarce in terms of use for day to day caloric intake. Im not sure where I suggested that refined sugar is better than fruit. But fructose and refined sugar debate can be endless, and at the end of the day, unecessary. Either one should be a very small part of any diet, period. Unless someone is an endurance athlete...
@IoEstasCedonta - Honey would have been a treat; and to that extent, a treat like other fructose laden fruits. Apples have about 14 grams of sugar, and a cup of grapes, 20 grams. One cup of wilb berries- a large serving by the way- 14 grams of sugar (ala fructose). This is not substantial enough calories to survive. These were not fuel staples, they were an minor addition to meat, barley, corn, beans, wheat...etc--protein and complex carbs.
@IoEstasCedonta Sugar and fructrose in the modern diet, in these quantities, is so common, and so recent in terms of human history, that humans are not prepared top deal with it....this is the reason, I believe, for the obesity epidemic.
Amazing that people like you over-simplify everything. Corn isn't some 'enemy'...It's the way the HFCS molecule is metabolized (or not, depending on how you see it) in the body.
@MyceliaProductions42 No, the problem is corn, and sugar in general. The differences between HFCS/GFS (as it's known in other countries, which use wheat) and refined white sugar are tiny compared to the effects of too much sugar in the first place, and the reason so much sugar is added these days is because of the politics of corn. And that's not even getting into animal feed and modified corn starch.
The true rulers of our world don't want a well informed well educated population capable of critical thinking. If they were, there would be no rulers.
CHEMRISK - a research company hired by the Corn Refiners has recently taken down it's YouTube page.
The removal was in response to negative public perception resulting from the high-fructose corn syrup ad campaign. Apparently it has become a liability to defend the sweetener.
See the last remaining ChemRisk video at CornRefinersAssoc on YouTube.
For an excellent look at the role corn plays in factory farming, and the role that factory farming plays in feeding America, google up a copy of "power Steer" an essay by Michael Pollan.
Corn on the brain. If you are concerned about high fructose corn syrup, join a campaign to get cola companies to switch to beet or cane sugars at thepoint[dot]com and search for corn syrup ...I just signed my name.
Hopefully this starts the path to better corporate responsibility. Cola companies seem to use cane or beet sugar in countries outside the U.S. Why not in the US?
when I went to rigel 5 they do not have corn there, instead they eat uiop. I think it is better than corn. they do not make it into syrup. uiop can be used as fuel too, but only on the newest vrnaas.
What I don't understand is how it is cost effective to produce w/ petroleum based fertiliser, petroleum fuel burning to heat the stuff for how long?!? And then to add it as an ingredient...oh yeah...Subsidies...
You are talking with an agronomist. There is no other crop that can produce food and energy more efficiently for a world population that has passed the brink. fertilizer usage is actually decreasing due to GPS technologies and hybrids producing higher yields with less inputs. I am personally not a huge fan of HFCS, but #2 yellow dent is not the devil either. I personally wish that the US gov't would make it law that all gas and diesel contained oxygenated fuels such as ethanol.
How about water hyacinth for a biomass fuel? It also cleans the water that it grows in...I think of corn as a very nutrient intensive crop. I've also read personal accounts, in Countryside magazine, of persons who actually got 10 mpg less w/ ethanol blended fuel. The technologies are great, but there are also tried and true organic methods, plus farming on a smaller scale, and being more regional and local would also cut down on transportation costs...
I can't disagree with you with regard to feeding the world but corn ethanol is a bad solution to our energy "needs". Most people ignore the fact that it only has about 70% of the energy density of gasoline but ethanol is not necessarily the problem. The way we produce it is and their are more efficient ways to do this than with corn.
I was born in 1956. I know how food has changed. HFCS is horrible. It makes you crave more junk food. I quit drinking juice with HFCS two weeks ago and have lost eight lbs. I started drinking a lot more water. I am also eating lean meat, stone ground wheat crackers, frozen fruit, salad, etc. Anything without HFCS in it. I do not want to eat as much. I do not crave sugar any more. I can skip dinner and just have crackers and yougart and fruit and get full. I eat what my body tells me I need now.
To avoid eating foods with contents you are unaware of, eat fresh food and make your own sauces. Health food stores offer many alternatives, the one I go to sells 'live' bread and wraps! Just don't buy packaged, processed foods, or at least avoid them as much as possible. If you are what you eat then even the meat we eat that has been raised on corn is poor quality as well!
IT IS important to know just what is in our food and who it poisons our bodies ! Quantity vs. quality . . . I'll take the quality . . .eat NOTHING with this rubbish in it !
Go to the website, kingcorn[dot]net . I believe they list where it is showing. Someone posted it will be showing on PBS in April on Independent Lens. Or, you can have your own copy (recommended!). I believe you can get the DVD on their site too.
the king corn movie (i have watched it) i mainly one side of the story. No, trying to eat corn like they did was just retarded, and we make things that are edible out of it. Not all corn is bad. The taxi driver said that pop gave him ditabities, corn may have done had a role but ditabities can run in the family. And farmers don't just raise "crap". Talk to a REAL farmer, see what he says, the farmers in the movie made it look like it was bad ON PURPOSE! Please, don't be fooled...
the king corn movie (i have watched it) i mainly one side of the story. No, trying to eat corn like they did was just retarded, and we make things that are edible out of it. Not all corn is bad. The taxi driver said that pop gave him ditabities, corn may have done had a role but ditabities can run in the family. And farmers don't just raise "crap". Talk to a REAL farmer, see what he says, the farmers in the movie made it look like it was bad ON PURPOSE! Please, don't be fooled...
yea, I watched it and I thought it would be interesting. But, out of the millions of other uses of corn, they based the whole show on one damn product from corn, high fructose corn syrup. All it was basically about was high fructose corn syrup. All the show did was criticise corn and claim it was bad. It just showed one side of corn. Oh and FYI, most field corn is fed to LIVESTOCK.
i no that it was fed to livestock, the 2 people in the movie took a random piece of corn out of the feild and ate it. i know what it's used for because i grow it and i feed some of it to my livestock
I first saw this at an art gallery, and the other film maker, Ian, was there. He said that they had enough footage to make 7 films, and chose this topic.
I don't know if you know this, but most cattle are given corn mostly during their last stages of their life, i.e. the feedlot for abut 3-4 months. Sometimes they are given corn earlier, but it's mixed with silage or forage crops. Most cattle are raised in pastures and eat forage crops. The only place where they are fed high quantities of corn is the feedlot, yet even there the feed isn't entirely made up of corn there are other forage and grain crops in the feed.
They give it to the cattle because it kills them. The cows are fed it until immediately before death, because their digestive system cannot handle corn.
This would be blatantly obvious if you had seen the cow with a hole in it's side, in the documentary.
Also, as I said before, this was roughly a seventh of what was filmed.
Sorry I'm being so bitchy about it. I just get deeply offended when people comment on clips they don't enjoy.
Corn kills cattle? Yeahh, they give corn to cattle to fatten them up, not to kill them. Dairy cattle eat corn also, yet they live a long time on dairy farms giving milk. The cow with the hole in the stomach was to monitor feed. I don't know where you get your information
The fact that corn is fed to cattle to fatten them up is blatantly obvious. There would be no other reason to give cattle food that they can't digest.
A point made in the documentary is that the amount of time eating corn, and the percentage of corn in the cows' food has been dramatically in creased within the last few decades. If you want the cattle to live, you don't cause acidosis, by giving them 90% corn for longer than they can handle.
And how would acidosis benefit the farmer? A farmer wants his cattle to go to the market healthy and, for lack of a better word, fat or 'meaty'. A farmer doesn't want his cattle dying by some nutritional disorder. Acidosis is usually cused by adjusting cattle high grain diets from predominant forage diets that disrupts microbal enviroment and can cause acidosis. Basically saying giving cattle grain when they have been eating forage crops before. (cont.)
The key is gradually introducing grain to cattle and having mixed diets of grains and forages. There are a lot of problems with acidosis that would not benefit the farmer. Oh, and I have watched it. Try not to make assumptions that aren't true. It makes you look stupid.
The point is that they fatten the cow until when they would kill it anyway, which is a point I've made several times now. Somehow you seem to have missed it.
They work backwards from the time of death, to start as early as possible, in order to fatten it before the acidosis occurs kills it.
Dairy farmers don't give cattle 90% grain, because they can't very well make a profit if the cow is dead.
Also, acidosis, in this case, is caused by the cow's stomach trying to break down the corn.
Remember that the primary reason for humans eating grain is fiber. The body cant digest fiber, and it knows it. We eat it because we can't digest it. What we don't do, is eat 90% fiber.
Did you think maybe there was a reason cows don't eat corn?
They fatten cattle to get more yield, the yield being meat. Corn, fattens them up, thus making more yield. Corn = fatten the cattle up= higher yield = more profit. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. 70% of america's antibiotics are produced to treat livestock? Someone must believe everything they hear. Rumen acidosis causes a lowered appetite in cattle, so it would be no benefit to the farmer if his cattle had acidosis. Dairy cattle usually have a diet of corn, alfalfa, and hay.
You still haven't answered how a farmer would benefit if his cattle had acidosis. Oh, and occasionally cattle might die from acidosis. It's not like any cow who has acidosis is going to automatically die. Try not to act intelligent when not using logic or facts. I suggest you do some research.
You seem to have missed it again, so I'll explain it slowly this time: they target the amount of time it takes for acidosis to become lethal. The time the cattle begin to be fed corn is judged based on the average time acidosis takes to become lethal, in order for this time to coincide with the time the cattle is to be killed for meat.
Basically what they don't want is for the cow to have stomach acid to burn through it before this time.
Also, corn-fed beef has 9x the amount of fat of grass fed.
They time the acidosis' lethality so they don't have to deal with serious acidosis.
Another point to be stressed is that chances are, you don't want something with a pH level of about 2 running through your livestock.
This is why it is timed to have a small effect. I trust that the documentary was correct in saying those 70% of antibiotics went to livestock, but obviously, 70% does not go to cattle.
Small amount of damage done to stomach=small cost for antibiotics=more profit.
In the end this system works, because it's not as if they will continue to feed the cattle corn and hope it lives to old age. They kill it before the problem gets too serious.
The only flaw I find is that you're ignoring the obvious fact that, had the cattle not been killed before acidosis became severe, they would die.
I'm not saying the farmer doesn't make a profit, because that would be an ignorant statement. If they didn't, they wouldn't use this system.
I said it one and I'll say it again, they give cattle corn to decrease teh time to fatten up cattle. "Most cows have a diet that is composed of at least some forages(legumes or silage). In fact most beef cattle are raised on pasture from birth in the spring until fall(7-9 months). Cattle fattened in feedlots are fed small amounts of hay or straw supplemented with grain, soy and other ingredients in order to increase the energy density of the diet." -Wikipedia.
Farmers don't 'target the time it takes acidosis to become lethal'. They don't want it happening to the cattle b/c cattle will eat less and less. "The time the cattle begin to be fed corn is judged based on the average time acidosis takes to become lethal, in order for this time to coincide with the time the cattle is to be killed for meat." What if they give corn and other grains to cattle during the backgrounding part of beef production, or on the cow-calf part of the beef production?
They don't just give grain to cattle only at the feedlot. I was looking on Wikipedia and found your statement about the antibiotics. The source came from the Union of Concerned Scientists. It says on Wikipedia the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group, advocate raising cattle on pasture on other forages. Try and use unbiased sources in your arguments.
They kill the cow once it reaches slaughter weight, not because 'they want acidosis to get to serious.' Cattle can catch acidosis any time, and also only cattle with severe acute acidosis can die. If they don't have acute acidodis, most cattle can recover from acidosis.
Even if I'm wrong, we have utterly digressed, mostly because I'm kinda bullheaded and bitchy.
My original point was that they didn't focus entirely on HFCS, and that they picked topics that revolved around this specific corn. The point of the film was this specific corn, so they chose from roughly 7 films worth of recordings and focused it mainly on four topics: the recent changes in farming, the growth of this corn, HFCS, and corn's effects on cattle.
As I said in my first post, I didn't like the movie b/c, as kylegetoutofme said, it only showed one side of the story. All they did was basically criticize corn. It was basically an anti-corn movie. In my opinion, and this is my opinion, the movie could be summed up in a few words, "corn is bad and evil; we shouldn't grow corn."
As I said, they focused on this specific type of corn.
The idea is that nothing good can be said about this particular type of corn.
One example, that wasn't in the movie, was that the wife of the farmer who let them use the acre of land died, from the weed-killers getting into the water supply. Ian said they didn't include it, because though it would be a powerful point, they felt it would be disrespectful.
He said that was the main reason for the farmer's move in the end.
This corn is yellow dent #2. That's the type I was referring to. It's a bullshit crop to begin with. Genetically engineering it and coating it with weed killer don't help.
Tell me something that is good about yellow dent #2.
It's "corn is bad and evil; we shouldn't grow corn." in the same way that Orwell Rolls in His Grave is "media control is bad and evil; we shouldn't allow media control to grow."
Simplifying it to your level doesn't benefit anyone reading a review. In fact, it does the opposite.
Build on and examine ideas. Don't remove the facts and turn them into a slogan for a five year old.
What does the media have to do with anything? I see this movie as anti-corn(and we're talking field corn), and you've just proved my point with this comment;
"The idea is that nothing good can be said about this particular type of corn."
Ha, you really need to do some research if you think field corn is only used as livestock feed and HFCS. Products that use Corn: Adhesives, synthetic rubber finishes, tires, dry cell batteries, coatings on wood, paper, and metal, crayons and chalk, degradable plastics, dyes, toothpaste, wallpaper, carpet rugs, shoe polish, ink, latex paint, and many many more. I better not be seeing you use any of these products.
Yellow dent #2 and field corn are the same damn thing. Field corn is just another name for dent corn. It doesn't take a freaking rocket scientist fo figure it out.
"Corn-on-the-cob and canned and frozen corn at the grocery store come from sweet corn. The corn grown in gardens is also a variety of sweet corn. But the most abundant type of corn grown in the U.S. is actually FIELD, OR DENT, CORN." Straight from the National Corn Growers Association, even they call it field corn. Try using logic when commenting, b/c it makes you look dumb.
"but it's shitty food. That's why we don't eat it raw."
My mother and her parents used to eat it all the time. Sure, it wasn't as sweet as aweet corn b/c sweet corn has a high sugar content, unlike field corn.
"I didin't know you were the youtube grammar fairy. I can see your very ignorant. This is about corn, not grammer smart one."
Wow, I've never met anyone over the age of 14 who says "smart one."
I like the first two lines the best, though. An extremely intelligent insult, followed by calling me ignorant. Thank you for showing me the error of correct grammar in a subject that isn't directly related to grammar.
Seriously, this argument is retarded. I comment on why I didn't like the movie and I get some person ranting about how I should believe it. MMGiru, you haven't convinced me of anything. All you've done is type a bunch of stuff trying to get me to believe you and the video. Too fucking bad, because it isn't working.
"Is there some rule that I didn't know about that makes your sources unable to lie?"
Is their some rule that makes your sources truthful?
"I suggest you stop reading other people's research, because you obviously can't accept that you choose to believe it's true."
Oh, sorry I'm not as gullible as you. Sorry I don't beleive biased sources unlike you. Sorry I can actually make informed decisions unlike you. Sorry I don't beleive everything unlike you.
Give it up MMGiru. Yes you have an opinion, but dissmissing your opinion as 'facts' to convince someone that they're wrong is pathetic. As seeing from your previous comments, you obviously can't accept that another person may be right. And as seeing from your previous comments, you can't accept different views. Simply accept that you may be wrong, and accept people who are going to have different views.
"Yes you have an opinion, but dismissing your opinion as 'facts' to convince someone that they're wrong is pathetic. As seeing from your previous comments, you obviously can't accept that another person may be right. And as seeing from your previous comments, you can't accept different views. Simply accept that you may be wrong, and accept people who are going to have different views."
Why the fuck did you even comment on this movie in the first place?
"Why the fuck did you even comment on this movie in the first place?"
What, so I can't have an opinion? It's called FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH. I guess you can't fucking handle other people's opinions.
"No need to be a hypocrite."
Who says I'm a hypocrite. Oh that's right, you. You obviously can't handle other people's opinion, as it shows in your previous comment, and others. As for being wrong, maybe you should look at your comments, b/c half the crap you wrote doesn't have very much truth.
"Why the fuck did you even comment in the first palce?"
Proof that you can't handle other people's opinoins.
"No need to be a hypocrite."
I can accept you having an opinion, but using your opinions as facts to convince someone, which I've explained over and over, is bullshit. And as for being wrong, I actually know a lot on this stuff. And your so called 'facts', are just what you believe is true.
Believe it or not, I know a bit about psychology, and am capable of using common sense. Making leaps from one subject to another because you think they have a connection is what we call "superstition."
My implying you're a hypocrite, changing into you're idea that it had something to do with you're "FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH", for example.
"Telling me to research is telling me to listen to what someone feels is fact; what you feel is fact."
That's an opinion. If someone feels it's a 'fact', then it's not a fact. It's a bias. I never implied that what I said was what I felt was facts. I have knowledge on this issue, and I've researched enough to know what's true and what's not. Can't say the same for you.
According to your logic, two, plus, two, equals four, isn't a fact. According to you, Alaska is the biggest state landwise in the union, isn't a fact. According to you, corn is fed to livestock, isn't a fact. You sure have flawed lgic. And of course, according to you, your a hypocrite based on your previous comments.
"Making leaps from one subject to another because you think they have a connection is what we call "superstition."
You should look at your previous comments.
"My implying you're a hypocrite, changing into you're idea that it had something to do with you're "FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH", for example."
Wow. I was commenting on your 'why did you fucking comment in the first place' comment. You obviously need to reread your other comments as far as I can see.
Your arguments are like a building without any walls. You try and build up from your comments, but there are no sturdy walls, so your still at level one.
"I don't care if you have an opinion, just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats."
This idea is ignoring the "fact" that we've both been doing this the entire time.
For example: "just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats." is a command. You've told me something you feel I need to do. You've shoved an opinion at me.
Sorry if you're not able to have abstract thoughts (e.g. there's no such thing as facts) and are stuck on the childhood concrete thinking
"'My implying you're a hypocrite, changing into you're idea that it had something to do with you're "FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH", for example.'
Wow. I was commenting on your 'why did you fucking comment in the first place' comment. You obviously need to reread your other comments as far as I can see."
Another opinion being shoved down a throat
Maybe if you had actually bothered to read the comment yourself, you would have realized what it meant.
Maybe if you had actually bothered to read the comment yourself, you would have realized what it meant."
"For example: "just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats." is a command. You've told me something you feel I need to do. You've shoved an opinion at me."
"Your arguments are like a building without any walls. You try and build up from your comments, but there are no sturdy walls, so your still at level one."
"When did it become mandatory that I had to believe YOUR pathetic comments? Oh, that's right, NEVER. It's not my problem your so misinformed and ignorant. Take your anti-corn comments somewhere else. Farmers don't give a shit what YOU think, and neither do I. If you want to be anti-corn, I don't fucking care. But enough with pushing it on me and others.
People don't have to follow YOUR lifestyle, nor do they have to agree or believe your opinion, so get over it. Do you really think I will believe your pathetic comments, because I won't.
P.S. Going off topic on that corn video just proves your ignorance."
Wow, notice that your the only one who cares. Don't you think it's an odd coincidence that I said I'm just trying to get a laugh out of your reaction?
My best guess is that humans are a bit like a river, once bad stuff has stopped being introduced, then the river washes most of it away, so my un-professional opinion is Yes you are doomed, but if you watch what you eat, you will probably live to be 120 and laugh about all of those who only made it to our 70s and 80s.
Wow, sulfuric acid and harmful enzymes? Yum! I guess this is why they say its better not to eat processed food. Avoid anything with the HFCS and transfats too, thats the idea. Thanks for making this and posting it.
Enzymes are just tools, and your body makes lots of enzymes. If you chew on bread or a cracker long enough, an enzyme in your mouth starts changing the starch to sugar.
Yeah, I see your point, but the keyword was "harmful" enzymes. I think the one he put in came with some kind of a warning label (its now been a few weeks since I watched this clip). I'm guessing the enzymes our own bodies produce are not harmful to us.
Please watch my satirical documentary, find it on my channel, thumbs up so people can see!
asapics 11 months ago
Hello Dear Filmmakers
If you're ever in need of a professional and affordable soundtrack / score for your projects, please check out my royalty free collection under :
audiojungle(dot)net/user/SonicCube/bookmarks
Thank you and good luck with all your projects.
soniccube 11 months ago
Poison and GM Poison too... it's a double whammy. And Monsanto is at the top of the pile of dead bodies...
cosmowaif67 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No way out man Asian women #lushfmlk.info#
kathejuisa 1 year ago
iam i food technologist and a animal sciencer in brazil, and all i gotta say is: even meat and milk and eggs and other kinds of food are based on corn. it has a good a bad importance, let's see both sides of it's opinion. what amercans must see is that politicians are introducin all they want in theirs head. Look at France. They r changing theyr contry, building a nation
back112358 1 year ago
Comment removed
back112358 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
An ad just ran for McDonalds before I could watch this video. Irony?
fishfoodgeneral 1 year ago
An ad just ran for Macdonalds before I could watch this video. Irony?
fishfoodgeneral 1 year ago
"Food technologists developed high fructose corn syrup," That line alone is scary!
Orbot 1 year ago
You know, I just did an "I'm-feeling-lucky" search for homemade spaghetti sauce, and the very first recipe I found has a tablespoon of brown sugar in it... certainly not as much as there must be in the canned stuff, but it's a bit disingenuous to say "you wouldn't pour sugar on spaghetti."
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
Big Oil...Big Corn...we are all slaves to industry...
Suburbancowboy123 1 year ago
It's not even just HFCS, but things like modified corn starch and what not you can find in nearly everything. And Capnvideo, watch out for Campbells soup. Many of them contain monosodium glutamate or yeast extract to trick you into thinking they're good. MSG has been known to cause health problems.
Yes, corn is useful, but the government subsidies have caused an over-production. The result is an unnatural trading of commodities, and in this case, an unnatural means of manufacturing food
ctk1234 2 years ago
@ctk1234 MSG causes health problems because of a common allergy. If you're not allergic (and the problems won't exactly sneak up on you if you are) the only problem it could ever present is the added sodium - which, of course, you should watch. The acid component is found naturally in all sorts of places, from mangoes and tomatoes, to almost all meat, to Marmite.
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Make yourself aware of these industry sponsored advocates on YouTube who are lying about the safety of High Fructose Corn Syrup.
Robyn Flipse - watch?v=D1pGsaaDrrI
Neva Cochran - watch?v=BHaV_B4ZRgY
Brooke Douglas - watch?v=etE3BKWklzg
Stephanie Green - watch?v=YNgCH3__8pE
Chere Bork - watch?v=Mhh32gLkVXM
Kristine Clark - watch?v=vplp1ofzqBc
James M. Rippe - watch?v=QimveYJcJWo
neuroholic1 2 years ago
Fructose is a POISON to your body......your liver doesnt know what to do with the stuff. dont use it and watch the weight drop off........dont drink coca cola and other hight fructose products....the stufff is even in Campbells tomato soup
capnvideo2006 2 years ago 8
@capnvideo2006 Okay, NO. Fructose = fruct, fruit + -ose, sugar. It's called that because in the Good Old Days®, the primary known source was... FRUIT. Apples and pears, especially, are loaded with the stuff. Despite what the quacks du jour (whom we'll laugh at in ten years) think, things don't magically become better for you when they're "natural." It's not good to add too much to your grains and protein, of course, but cane/beet sugar (NASTY!), if cheaper, would be as bad or worse.
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
thanks for opening my mind.....:-)
capnvideo2006 1 year ago
@capnvideo2006 so anyone who ever ate a piece of fruit should be dead from the poison which is fructose, which is in fruit........
dancar 1 year ago
@dancar Thank you...the notion that fructose is inherently poisonous is absurd; it occurs naturally in most fruits. While I'll admit that the quantity of sugars(HFCS, cane sugar, beet sugar, sucrose, fructose, etc) is alarming and HFCS and the food system surrounding it is responsible for all sorts of ailments, don't go off labeling a molecule poison when you clearly don't know the biology and chemistry behind it. Please do more research first...
fishfoodgeneral 1 year ago
@capnvideo2006 Exactly! You might as well throw sucralose, aspartame, saccharin, etc. in that mix. You're almost better off using an "decent" amount of regular sugar than any of these. The does atleast recognize and as a result, knows how to handle sugar more than the "imposters!"
Orbot 1 year ago
Comment removed
Orbot 1 year ago
@capnvideo2006 fructose = not poison, natural in diet, especially as it occurs in fruits and vegetables
high fructose corn syrup = poison
thecommentmonster 1 year ago
@capnvideo2006 tell that to durian rider dumbass...
trz541 3 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So, I like the way these movies try and make every corn farmer suffer. People can chose what to eat. Corn is NOT going to kill you. It's a useful product. Now we can make fuel out of it. Amazing.. yet people make these movies.
dairyprincessx3 2 years ago
I dont think you get it... we are not having a choice anymore, when more that 70% of what you purchase in stores is made of the stuff, what choice!!! we need more organic/natural foods especially vegetables.
jumaibox 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
hey guess what.. organic foods are almost no different then regularly processed foods. i would know i have a masters in food and nutrition and a bachelors in animal science. i know its easy to believe media.. but get your information from a reliable source... not a PETA group or an other extremist group. try USDA.
dairyprincessx3 2 years ago
How about YOU try learning to question the very agencies that supposedly are on your side and would never steer you wrong. Do you really think that there aren't at least some people who've been bought out by the lobbyists?
MyceliaProductions42 1 year ago
@dairyprincessx3 - People can choose what they eat; they just have to read every single label of every single thing they buy if they want to avoid corn syrup. You cannot deny the correlation of time over HFCS and Obesity. We can bicker about causation all day long. But at the end of the day, it is not in doubt that the liver converts ALL fructose into fat. Nature made the stuff scarce for a reason. Now its in everything, and now we are a nation of fat asses...just sayin'...
orgamikrikit 2 years ago
@orgamikrikit Fructose is "scarce"? Are you kidding me? It's EVERYWHERE in nature, and in much higher percentages than in HFCS. "High-fructose" just means high compared to normal corn syrup, which has next to none. You don't want fructose, don't eat fruit! That's where most of it comes from!
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@IoEstasCedonta - Oh? Fructose is everywhere for people to consume huh? Perhaps you can point to a place where sweet fruit (fructose) has grown in abundance and used as an important fuel source for humans for years. Newsflash: the supermarket is not an accurate representation of nature. Nor is the occurance of fruit in modern human diet an accurate reflection of diets of the average person a thousand years ago (a very short time ago). So yeah, it is scarce.
orgamikrikit 1 year ago
@orgamikrikit First off, if you're going to go back a thousand years, *honey*, not refined sugar, would have been the sweetener of choice, with roughly the fructose of HFCS. Because most nectars are mostly fructose, and certainly flowers grow everywhere.
Wild berries grow in abundance everywhere. Apples and grapes have been part of the Western diet for millenia.
Even if I'm wrong about (our cruel enemy) "nature," though, are you seriously suggesting refined sugar is better than fresh fruit?!
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@orgamikrikit Sorry, thought I should clarify: I know apples (not sure about grapes) aren't native to Europe. But they are frequently referenced in artifacts dating to antiquity, even if eaten less than today (most people then being malnourished...).
And, of course, there's a such thing as too much fruit, but the point is that you're implying fruit nutritional extracts + sucrose would be better for you than most of the fruits (pineapples, et al., are a sucrose-high exception) themselves.
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@IoEstasCedonta Again, fructose may be everywhere, but it was not considered important for survival...and, for the most part, scarce in terms of use for day to day caloric intake. Im not sure where I suggested that refined sugar is better than fruit. But fructose and refined sugar debate can be endless, and at the end of the day, unecessary. Either one should be a very small part of any diet, period. Unless someone is an endurance athlete...
orgamikrikit 1 year ago
@orgamikrikit Wild berries, on the other hand, have been a source of energy since the glaciers receded.
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@IoEstasCedonta - Honey would have been a treat; and to that extent, a treat like other fructose laden fruits. Apples have about 14 grams of sugar, and a cup of grapes, 20 grams. One cup of wilb berries- a large serving by the way- 14 grams of sugar (ala fructose). This is not substantial enough calories to survive. These were not fuel staples, they were an minor addition to meat, barley, corn, beans, wheat...etc--protein and complex carbs.
orgamikrikit 1 year ago
@IoEstasCedonta Sugar and fructrose in the modern diet, in these quantities, is so common, and so recent in terms of human history, that humans are not prepared top deal with it....this is the reason, I believe, for the obesity epidemic.
orgamikrikit 1 year ago
Amazing that people like you over-simplify everything. Corn isn't some 'enemy'...It's the way the HFCS molecule is metabolized (or not, depending on how you see it) in the body.
MyceliaProductions42 1 year ago
@MyceliaProductions42 No, the problem is corn, and sugar in general. The differences between HFCS/GFS (as it's known in other countries, which use wheat) and refined white sugar are tiny compared to the effects of too much sugar in the first place, and the reason so much sugar is added these days is because of the politics of corn. And that's not even getting into animal feed and modified corn starch.
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@IoEstasCedonta Ah cool. Sorry if that post of mine was belligerent. God knows how late it was when I did that. Hehe. Thanks for the info.
MyceliaProductions42 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RECENT HFCS UPDATE:
Some US food producers have dropped the term High-Fructose Corn Syrup and replaced it with:
- Glucose-Fructose Syrup
- Glucose Syrup.
These are alternate terms for High-Fructose Corn Syrup. Make yourself aware of these new names when purchasing packaged foods.
lepusforamen 2 years ago
the industry paying for an Ad one the screen of this video! how much money are they spending?
pedroelmaspulento 2 years ago
Yea the ad for HFCS is still up, they're worried about loosing money
golcynski 2 years ago
We are being poisoned through our food and drinking water. The question is why?
ladylisy21 2 years ago
The true rulers of our world don't want a well informed well educated population capable of critical thinking. If they were, there would be no rulers.
silversobe 2 years ago
The rats are jumping ship.
CHEMRISK - a research company hired by the Corn Refiners has recently taken down it's YouTube page.
The removal was in response to negative public perception resulting from the high-fructose corn syrup ad campaign. Apparently it has become a liability to defend the sweetener.
See the last remaining ChemRisk video at CornRefinersAssoc on YouTube.
BeaucoupRed 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Contact the President of the CRA and share your thoughts regarding HFCS
Audrae Erickson
President
Corn Refiners Association
1701 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20006-5806
Phone: 202-331-1634
Fax: 202-331-2054
pressinquiry@corn(.)org
lepusforamen 2 years ago
ugh! where can i see this today!???
kamakaze2fusion 3 years ago
For an excellent look at the role corn plays in factory farming, and the role that factory farming plays in feeding America, google up a copy of "power Steer" an essay by Michael Pollan.
spurcross 3 years ago
COrn=good, High Fructose Corn Syrup= not so good at all
Surtur676767 3 years ago
MAN MADE SUGAR IS EVIL- Hfcs
AcaiBerryMONAVIE 3 years ago 3
Corn on the brain. If you are concerned about high fructose corn syrup, join a campaign to get cola companies to switch to beet or cane sugars at thepoint[dot]com and search for corn syrup ...I just signed my name.
Hopefully this starts the path to better corporate responsibility. Cola companies seem to use cane or beet sugar in countries outside the U.S. Why not in the US?
free2hug 3 years ago
when I went to rigel 5 they do not have corn there, instead they eat uiop. I think it is better than corn. they do not make it into syrup. uiop can be used as fuel too, but only on the newest vrnaas.
buffuzo 3 years ago
What I don't understand is how it is cost effective to produce w/ petroleum based fertiliser, petroleum fuel burning to heat the stuff for how long?!? And then to add it as an ingredient...oh yeah...Subsidies...
impalapez 3 years ago
What subsidies?
marceads 3 years ago
the 200 billion in fossil fuel subsidies that allows for the use of artificial fertiliser to be cost affective
impalapez 3 years ago
You are talking with an agronomist. There is no other crop that can produce food and energy more efficiently for a world population that has passed the brink. fertilizer usage is actually decreasing due to GPS technologies and hybrids producing higher yields with less inputs. I am personally not a huge fan of HFCS, but #2 yellow dent is not the devil either. I personally wish that the US gov't would make it law that all gas and diesel contained oxygenated fuels such as ethanol.
marceads 3 years ago
How about water hyacinth for a biomass fuel? It also cleans the water that it grows in...I think of corn as a very nutrient intensive crop. I've also read personal accounts, in Countryside magazine, of persons who actually got 10 mpg less w/ ethanol blended fuel. The technologies are great, but there are also tried and true organic methods, plus farming on a smaller scale, and being more regional and local would also cut down on transportation costs...
impalapez 3 years ago
I can't disagree with you with regard to feeding the world but corn ethanol is a bad solution to our energy "needs". Most people ignore the fact that it only has about 70% of the energy density of gasoline but ethanol is not necessarily the problem. The way we produce it is and their are more efficient ways to do this than with corn.
Menomenation 2 years ago
Corn is what is used to fatten up live stock..
quikgamer 3 years ago 3
MEC316 & MMGiru Get a room!
jrockforsure 3 years ago 4
I was born in 1956. I know how food has changed. HFCS is horrible. It makes you crave more junk food. I quit drinking juice with HFCS two weeks ago and have lost eight lbs. I started drinking a lot more water. I am also eating lean meat, stone ground wheat crackers, frozen fruit, salad, etc. Anything without HFCS in it. I do not want to eat as much. I do not crave sugar any more. I can skip dinner and just have crackers and yougart and fruit and get full. I eat what my body tells me I need now.
pixiecherries 3 years ago
To avoid eating foods with contents you are unaware of, eat fresh food and make your own sauces. Health food stores offer many alternatives, the one I go to sells 'live' bread and wraps! Just don't buy packaged, processed foods, or at least avoid them as much as possible. If you are what you eat then even the meat we eat that has been raised on corn is poor quality as well!
nolakitty13 3 years ago
IT IS important to know just what is in our food and who it poisons our bodies ! Quantity vs. quality . . . I'll take the quality . . .eat NOTHING with this rubbish in it !
muggyspin 3 years ago
King corn comin atcha. I also enjoyed the high fructose corn syrup villain on the tshirtinsurgency shirts. Quite creepy.
truggle45 3 years ago
King Corn airs TONIGHT (april 15) on pbs stations!
eltearpdx 3 years ago
Where can one view the entire documentary?
nicanicabad 3 years ago
Go to the website, kingcorn[dot]net . I believe they list where it is showing. Someone posted it will be showing on PBS in April on Independent Lens. Or, you can have your own copy (recommended!). I believe you can get the DVD on their site too.
cookingupastory 3 years ago
Thanks very much--I'll see if i can get it on the net-cause I'm overseas.
nicanicabad 3 years ago
sorry, double clicked
Kylegetoutofme 3 years ago
the king corn movie (i have watched it) i mainly one side of the story. No, trying to eat corn like they did was just retarded, and we make things that are edible out of it. Not all corn is bad. The taxi driver said that pop gave him ditabities, corn may have done had a role but ditabities can run in the family. And farmers don't just raise "crap". Talk to a REAL farmer, see what he says, the farmers in the movie made it look like it was bad ON PURPOSE! Please, don't be fooled...
Kylegetoutofme 3 years ago
the king corn movie (i have watched it) i mainly one side of the story. No, trying to eat corn like they did was just retarded, and we make things that are edible out of it. Not all corn is bad. The taxi driver said that pop gave him ditabities, corn may have done had a role but ditabities can run in the family. And farmers don't just raise "crap". Talk to a REAL farmer, see what he says, the farmers in the movie made it look like it was bad ON PURPOSE! Please, don't be fooled...
Kylegetoutofme 3 years ago
yea, I watched it and I thought it would be interesting. But, out of the millions of other uses of corn, they based the whole show on one damn product from corn, high fructose corn syrup. All it was basically about was high fructose corn syrup. All the show did was criticise corn and claim it was bad. It just showed one side of corn. Oh and FYI, most field corn is fed to LIVESTOCK.
MEC316 3 years ago
i no that it was fed to livestock, the 2 people in the movie took a random piece of corn out of the feild and ate it. i know what it's used for because i grow it and i feed some of it to my livestock
Kylegetoutofme 3 years ago
sorry I wasn't talking about you just the others on here
MEC316 3 years ago
If you've seen it, you should know that the corn talked about, gives cows ulcers.
MMGiru 3 years ago
I first saw this at an art gallery, and the other film maker, Ian, was there. He said that they had enough footage to make 7 films, and chose this topic.
MMGiru 3 years ago
I don't know if you know this, but most cattle are given corn mostly during their last stages of their life, i.e. the feedlot for abut 3-4 months. Sometimes they are given corn earlier, but it's mixed with silage or forage crops. Most cattle are raised in pastures and eat forage crops. The only place where they are fed high quantities of corn is the feedlot, yet even there the feed isn't entirely made up of corn there are other forage and grain crops in the feed.
MEC316 3 years ago
As for ulcers, I've never heard of it happening.
MEC316 3 years ago
They give it to the cattle because it kills them. The cows are fed it until immediately before death, because their digestive system cannot handle corn.
This would be blatantly obvious if you had seen the cow with a hole in it's side, in the documentary.
Also, as I said before, this was roughly a seventh of what was filmed.
Sorry I'm being so bitchy about it. I just get deeply offended when people comment on clips they don't enjoy.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"They give it to the cattle [at the end of thier life] because it kills them."
MMGiru 3 years ago
Corn kills cattle? Yeahh, they give corn to cattle to fatten them up, not to kill them. Dairy cattle eat corn also, yet they live a long time on dairy farms giving milk. The cow with the hole in the stomach was to monitor feed. I don't know where you get your information
MEC316 3 years ago
They give corn to cattle in feedlots to fatten the cattle up.
This would be blatantly obvious if you did a little thing called research.
MEC316 3 years ago
The fact that corn is fed to cattle to fatten them up is blatantly obvious. There would be no other reason to give cattle food that they can't digest.
A point made in the documentary is that the amount of time eating corn, and the percentage of corn in the cows' food has been dramatically in creased within the last few decades. If you want the cattle to live, you don't cause acidosis, by giving them 90% corn for longer than they can handle.
Try watching it before saying you have.
MMGiru 3 years ago
And how would acidosis benefit the farmer? A farmer wants his cattle to go to the market healthy and, for lack of a better word, fat or 'meaty'. A farmer doesn't want his cattle dying by some nutritional disorder. Acidosis is usually cused by adjusting cattle high grain diets from predominant forage diets that disrupts microbal enviroment and can cause acidosis. Basically saying giving cattle grain when they have been eating forage crops before. (cont.)
MEC316 3 years ago
The key is gradually introducing grain to cattle and having mixed diets of grains and forages. There are a lot of problems with acidosis that would not benefit the farmer. Oh, and I have watched it. Try not to make assumptions that aren't true. It makes you look stupid.
MEC316 3 years ago
The point is that they fatten the cow until when they would kill it anyway, which is a point I've made several times now. Somehow you seem to have missed it.
They work backwards from the time of death, to start as early as possible, in order to fatten it before the acidosis occurs kills it.
Dairy farmers don't give cattle 90% grain, because they can't very well make a profit if the cow is dead.
MMGiru 3 years ago
If you watched it, you should remember that over 70% of America's antibiotics are produced to treat livestock.
Try not to act intelligent while backing your arguments with circular logic. It makes you look like a dink.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Also, acidosis, in this case, is caused by the cow's stomach trying to break down the corn.
Remember that the primary reason for humans eating grain is fiber. The body cant digest fiber, and it knows it. We eat it because we can't digest it. What we don't do, is eat 90% fiber.
Did you think maybe there was a reason cows don't eat corn?
MMGiru 3 years ago
They fatten cattle to get more yield, the yield being meat. Corn, fattens them up, thus making more yield. Corn = fatten the cattle up= higher yield = more profit. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. 70% of america's antibiotics are produced to treat livestock? Someone must believe everything they hear. Rumen acidosis causes a lowered appetite in cattle, so it would be no benefit to the farmer if his cattle had acidosis. Dairy cattle usually have a diet of corn, alfalfa, and hay.
MEC316 3 years ago
You still haven't answered how a farmer would benefit if his cattle had acidosis. Oh, and occasionally cattle might die from acidosis. It's not like any cow who has acidosis is going to automatically die. Try not to act intelligent when not using logic or facts. I suggest you do some research.
MEC316 3 years ago
You seem to have missed it again, so I'll explain it slowly this time: they target the amount of time it takes for acidosis to become lethal. The time the cattle begin to be fed corn is judged based on the average time acidosis takes to become lethal, in order for this time to coincide with the time the cattle is to be killed for meat.
Basically what they don't want is for the cow to have stomach acid to burn through it before this time.
Also, corn-fed beef has 9x the amount of fat of grass fed.
MMGiru 3 years ago
They time the acidosis' lethality so they don't have to deal with serious acidosis.
Another point to be stressed is that chances are, you don't want something with a pH level of about 2 running through your livestock.
This is why it is timed to have a small effect. I trust that the documentary was correct in saying those 70% of antibiotics went to livestock, but obviously, 70% does not go to cattle.
Small amount of damage done to stomach=small cost for antibiotics=more profit.
MMGiru 3 years ago
In the end this system works, because it's not as if they will continue to feed the cattle corn and hope it lives to old age. They kill it before the problem gets too serious.
The only flaw I find is that you're ignoring the obvious fact that, had the cattle not been killed before acidosis became severe, they would die.
I'm not saying the farmer doesn't make a profit, because that would be an ignorant statement. If they didn't, they wouldn't use this system.
MMGiru 3 years ago
I said it one and I'll say it again, they give cattle corn to decrease teh time to fatten up cattle. "Most cows have a diet that is composed of at least some forages(legumes or silage). In fact most beef cattle are raised on pasture from birth in the spring until fall(7-9 months). Cattle fattened in feedlots are fed small amounts of hay or straw supplemented with grain, soy and other ingredients in order to increase the energy density of the diet." -Wikipedia.
MEC316 3 years ago
Farmers don't 'target the time it takes acidosis to become lethal'. They don't want it happening to the cattle b/c cattle will eat less and less. "The time the cattle begin to be fed corn is judged based on the average time acidosis takes to become lethal, in order for this time to coincide with the time the cattle is to be killed for meat." What if they give corn and other grains to cattle during the backgrounding part of beef production, or on the cow-calf part of the beef production?
MEC316 3 years ago
They don't just give grain to cattle only at the feedlot. I was looking on Wikipedia and found your statement about the antibiotics. The source came from the Union of Concerned Scientists. It says on Wikipedia the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group, advocate raising cattle on pasture on other forages. Try and use unbiased sources in your arguments.
MEC316 3 years ago
Yes, they fatten the cattle in a short amount of time with corn, because corn is cheap.
Also, it works, because they fatten the cow up to the max, before acidosis becomes lethal.
MMGiru 3 years ago
They kill the cow once it reaches slaughter weight, not because 'they want acidosis to get to serious.' Cattle can catch acidosis any time, and also only cattle with severe acute acidosis can die. If they don't have acute acidodis, most cattle can recover from acidosis.
MEC316 3 years ago
not because 'they DON'T want acidosis to get to serious.'
MEC316 3 years ago
In reference to myself: "Also, it works, because they fatten the cow up to the max, before acidosis becomes lethal."
MMGiru 3 years ago
Even if I'm wrong, we have utterly digressed, mostly because I'm kinda bullheaded and bitchy.
My original point was that they didn't focus entirely on HFCS, and that they picked topics that revolved around this specific corn. The point of the film was this specific corn, so they chose from roughly 7 films worth of recordings and focused it mainly on four topics: the recent changes in farming, the growth of this corn, HFCS, and corn's effects on cattle.
MMGiru 3 years ago
As I said in my first post, I didn't like the movie b/c, as kylegetoutofme said, it only showed one side of the story. All they did was basically criticize corn. It was basically an anti-corn movie. In my opinion, and this is my opinion, the movie could be summed up in a few words, "corn is bad and evil; we shouldn't grow corn."
MEC316 3 years ago
As I said, they focused on this specific type of corn.
The idea is that nothing good can be said about this particular type of corn.
One example, that wasn't in the movie, was that the wife of the farmer who let them use the acre of land died, from the weed-killers getting into the water supply. Ian said they didn't include it, because though it would be a powerful point, they felt it would be disrespectful.
He said that was the main reason for the farmer's move in the end.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"The idea is that nothing good can be said about this particular type of corn."
Exactly why I said the movie could be summed up in a few words, "corn is bad and evil; we shouldn't grow corn." And I am referring to field corn.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Field corn"?
Tell me another kind of corn.
This corn is yellow dent #2. That's the type I was referring to. It's a bullshit crop to begin with. Genetically engineering it and coating it with weed killer don't help.
Tell me something that is good about yellow dent #2.
MMGiru 3 years ago
It's "corn is bad and evil; we shouldn't grow corn." in the same way that Orwell Rolls in His Grave is "media control is bad and evil; we shouldn't allow media control to grow."
Simplifying it to your level doesn't benefit anyone reading a review. In fact, it does the opposite.
Build on and examine ideas. Don't remove the facts and turn them into a slogan for a five year old.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Yellow dent #2 is field corn.
"Tell me another type of corn."
Sweet corn and corn silage.
Oh and FYI, dent corn is the same thing as field corn. It's just another name for it.
MEC316 3 years ago
What does the media have to do with anything? I see this movie as anti-corn(and we're talking field corn), and you've just proved my point with this comment;
"The idea is that nothing good can be said about this particular type of corn."
Are you trying to convince me to do something?
MEC316 3 years ago
Orwell Rolls in His Grave is a documentary. It was an analogy, so get over yourself.
Corn is grown in fields. Tell me somewhere other than a field, in which corn is grown.
Sweet corn is grown in a field, and corn silage isn't a type of corn. It's a by-product of corn.
The difference between sweet corn and yellow dent #2 is that one is grown to be eaten as corn, the other is grown to be eaten as HFCS.
Therefor sweet corn is grown in much smaller fields, but fields none the less.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Ha, you really need to do some research if you think field corn is only used as livestock feed and HFCS. Products that use Corn: Adhesives, synthetic rubber finishes, tires, dry cell batteries, coatings on wood, paper, and metal, crayons and chalk, degradable plastics, dyes, toothpaste, wallpaper, carpet rugs, shoe polish, ink, latex paint, and many many more. I better not be seeing you use any of these products.
"Corn is grown in fields."
No duh, captain obvious.
MEC316 3 years ago
Yellow dent #2 and field corn are the same damn thing. Field corn is just another name for dent corn. It doesn't take a freaking rocket scientist fo figure it out.
MEC316 3 years ago
'to' figure it out
MEC316 3 years ago
"'Corn is grown in fields.'
No duh, captain obvious."
Then why the fuck would you say field corn?
There's no such thing, because all corn is grown in fields. As you said: "It doesn't take a freaking rocket scientist to figure it out."
Compare natural corn to this bright yellow "wonder" and you'll get a pretty good idea of how "great" it is.
All the other uses for it are fine, but it's shitty food. That's why we don't eat it raw. How much of it do you think goes into those other products?
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Corn-on-the-cob and canned and frozen corn at the grocery store come from sweet corn. The corn grown in gardens is also a variety of sweet corn. But the most abundant type of corn grown in the U.S. is actually FIELD, OR DENT, CORN." Straight from the National Corn Growers Association, even they call it field corn. Try using logic when commenting, b/c it makes you look dumb.
MEC316 3 years ago
"but it's shitty food. That's why we don't eat it raw."
My mother and her parents used to eat it all the time. Sure, it wasn't as sweet as aweet corn b/c sweet corn has a high sugar content, unlike field corn.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Try using logic when commenting, b/c it makes you look dumb."
Yeah, wouldn't want to make myself look "dumb" by using logic.
Try using correct sentence structure when you comment, because it makes you look like less of a jackass.
So far as past generations eating corn goes, read pixiecherries' comment.
Saying that the most abundant type of corn in the US is dent corn, rather than sweet corn, simply fuels my point.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Try using correct sentence structure when you comment, because it makes you look like less of a jackass."
I didin't know you were the youtube grammar fairy. I can see your very ignorant. This is about corn, not grammer smart one.
"Saying that the most abundant type of corn in the US is dent corn, rather than sweet corn, simply fuels my point."
What fucking piont are you talking about. The point you think corn is bad? Your opinions aren't facts. Sorry to rain on your parade.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Try using correct sentence structure when you comment, because it makes you look like less of a jackass."
Try using actual facts and logic in your agruments. Using your opinions in arguments makes you look like a retard.
MEC316 3 years ago
I meant grammar on the first comment. Just had to say before you go off like an asshole about it.
MEC316 3 years ago
"I didin't know you were the youtube grammar fairy. I can see your very ignorant. This is about corn, not grammer smart one."
Wow, I've never met anyone over the age of 14 who says "smart one."
I like the first two lines the best, though. An extremely intelligent insult, followed by calling me ignorant. Thank you for showing me the error of correct grammar in a subject that isn't directly related to grammar.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Your opinions are based on what you believe to be fact; therefor there's no such thing as an argument without opinion.
We're both arguing for what we believe to be true.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Your opinions are based on what you believe to be fact."
Pretty much sums up all of your comments.
"Wow, I've never met anyone over the age of 14 who says "smart one."
Guess you don't get sarcasm.
"We're both arguing for what we believe to be true."
Unlike you, I use unbiased resources in my arguments.
Oh yeah, and I was calling you ignorant for using something as stupid as grammar in your argument. It's pathetic.
MEC316 3 years ago
MMGiru, I suggest you do some research on corn. You shouldn't believe everything you hear or see.
MEC316 3 years ago
Seriously, this argument is retarded. I comment on why I didn't like the movie and I get some person ranting about how I should believe it. MMGiru, you haven't convinced me of anything. All you've done is type a bunch of stuff trying to get me to believe you and the video. Too fucking bad, because it isn't working.
MEC316 3 years ago
This is biased and your sources aren't?
Is there some rule that I didn't know about that makes your sources unable to lie?
MEC316, I suggest you stop reading other people's research. You shouldn't believe everything you hear or see.
Simply accept that you choose to believe what you believe in.
MMGiru 3 years ago
I reread this and found that I forgot to clarify something.
I suggest you stop reading other people's research, because you obviously can't accept that you choose to believe it's true.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Is there some rule that I didn't know about that makes your sources unable to lie?"
Is their some rule that makes your sources truthful?
"I suggest you stop reading other people's research, because you obviously can't accept that you choose to believe it's true."
Oh, sorry I'm not as gullible as you. Sorry I don't beleive biased sources unlike you. Sorry I can actually make informed decisions unlike you. Sorry I don't beleive everything unlike you.
MEC316 3 years ago
Give it up MMGiru. Yes you have an opinion, but dissmissing your opinion as 'facts' to convince someone that they're wrong is pathetic. As seeing from your previous comments, you obviously can't accept that another person may be right. And as seeing from your previous comments, you can't accept different views. Simply accept that you may be wrong, and accept people who are going to have different views.
MEC316 3 years ago
Sorry that your so anti-corn.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Yes you have an opinion, but dismissing your opinion as 'facts' to convince someone that they're wrong is pathetic. As seeing from your previous comments, you obviously can't accept that another person may be right. And as seeing from your previous comments, you can't accept different views. Simply accept that you may be wrong, and accept people who are going to have different views."
Why the fuck did you even comment on this movie in the first place?
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Simply accept that you may be wrong, and accept people who are going to have different views."
No need to be a hypocrite.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Why the fuck did you even comment on this movie in the first place?"
What, so I can't have an opinion? It's called FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH. I guess you can't fucking handle other people's opinions.
"No need to be a hypocrite."
Who says I'm a hypocrite. Oh that's right, you. You obviously can't handle other people's opinion, as it shows in your previous comment, and others. As for being wrong, maybe you should look at your comments, b/c half the crap you wrote doesn't have very much truth.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Why the fuck did you even comment in the first palce?"
Proof that you can't handle other people's opinoins.
"No need to be a hypocrite."
I can accept you having an opinion, but using your opinions as facts to convince someone, which I've explained over and over, is bullshit. And as for being wrong, I actually know a lot on this stuff. And your so called 'facts', are just what you believe is true.
MEC316 3 years ago
I guess you think everyone should be mindless sheep and not think for themselves.
MEC316 3 years ago
Unlike you, I think for myself. I don't let some other person think for me.
MEC316 3 years ago
Obviously not judging by your references to research.
Telling me to research is telling me to listen to what someone feels is fact; what you feel is fact.
Little hint about facts:
There's no such thing.
For example: the "fact" that there's no such thing, is not a fact.
"Fact" is an oversimplification of the greatest extent ever conceived.
MMGiru 3 years ago
People choose to believe certain things.
Believe it or not, I know a bit about psychology, and am capable of using common sense. Making leaps from one subject to another because you think they have a connection is what we call "superstition."
My implying you're a hypocrite, changing into you're idea that it had something to do with you're "FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH", for example.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"Telling me to research is telling me to listen to what someone feels is fact; what you feel is fact."
That's an opinion. If someone feels it's a 'fact', then it's not a fact. It's a bias. I never implied that what I said was what I felt was facts. I have knowledge on this issue, and I've researched enough to know what's true and what's not. Can't say the same for you.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Little hint about facts:
There's no such thing."
According to your logic, two, plus, two, equals four, isn't a fact. According to you, Alaska is the biggest state landwise in the union, isn't a fact. According to you, corn is fed to livestock, isn't a fact. You sure have flawed lgic. And of course, according to you, your a hypocrite based on your previous comments.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Making leaps from one subject to another because you think they have a connection is what we call "superstition."
You should look at your previous comments.
"My implying you're a hypocrite, changing into you're idea that it had something to do with you're "FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH", for example."
Wow. I was commenting on your 'why did you fucking comment in the first place' comment. You obviously need to reread your other comments as far as I can see.
MEC316 3 years ago
In the end though, from your two recent posts, your argument fails altogether. You basically just went in a big round circle with your argument.
MEC316 3 years ago
Your arguments are like a building without any walls. You try and build up from your comments, but there are no sturdy walls, so your still at level one.
MEC316 3 years ago
You want to make another big circle with your comments?
MEC316 3 years ago
I don't care if you have an opinoin, just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats.
MEC316 3 years ago
Right, so...
Because you have researched certain things, that makes them facts?
Though it may be a shocking concept, we only perceive 3 dimensions. Does that mean there are only 3?
For a time, that there were only three dimensions was fact. For a time, it was fact that dinosaur tracks were freshly made by dragons.
Whose to say what is and isn't fact?
You're more right than me?
There's no such thing as right or wrong.
Think of this argument as an attempt to lead up to that concept.
MMGiru 3 years ago
"I don't care if you have an opinion, just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats."
This idea is ignoring the "fact" that we've both been doing this the entire time.
For example: "just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats." is a command. You've told me something you feel I need to do. You've shoved an opinion at me.
Sorry if you're not able to have abstract thoughts (e.g. there's no such thing as facts) and are stuck on the childhood concrete thinking
MMGiru 3 years ago
"'My implying you're a hypocrite, changing into you're idea that it had something to do with you're "FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH", for example.'
Wow. I was commenting on your 'why did you fucking comment in the first place' comment. You obviously need to reread your other comments as far as I can see."
Another opinion being shoved down a throat
Maybe if you had actually bothered to read the comment yourself, you would have realized what it meant.
There's an opinion being shoved down your throat.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Why bother with your stupid comments. They are pathetic. This has gone from talking about corn to you ranting and ranting. Take it somewhere else.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Another opinion being shoved down a throat
Maybe if you had actually bothered to read the comment yourself, you would have realized what it meant."
"For example: "just don't be ignorant and shove it down other people's throats." is a command. You've told me something you feel I need to do. You've shoved an opinion at me."
Hmm, such ignorance.
MEC316 3 years ago
I can see your a hypocrite, too.
MEC316 3 years ago
Congrats, you just failed your own argument.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Your arguments are like a building without any walls. You try and build up from your comments, but there are no sturdy walls, so your still at level one."
Congrats, your at level one again.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Congrats, you just failed your own argument."
I never introduced an argument in the first place.
You were just enough of a dumbass that it was fun to watch you try to argue.
It was like watching a Christian trying to prove his beliefs.
Most of what I said was true, but some of it was bullshit, to see how you would react.
Basically, it was free entertainment.
You could also call it a sociological experiment, without payment to the subject.
But for me, they're the same thing.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Now, you've gotten boring, and I feel like playing audiosurf.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Hah, your pathetic.
"I never introduced an argument in the first place."
Wrong
"Most of what I said was true, but some of it was bullshit, to see how you would react."
Wrong Again
It was fun watching you start a huge pathetic argument, and fail it at the same time.
"You were just enough of a dumbass that it was fun to watch you try to argue."
More like you.
Now your just being and asshole to make yourself feel better. It was sure fun watching you rant and start shit.
MEC316 3 years ago
"It was like watching a Christian trying to prove his beliefs"
That was you.
"I never introduced an argument in the first place."
And that was you.
MEC316 3 years ago
Keep being ignorant, MMGiru. Each time you get deeper in the hole.
MEC316 3 years ago
At first I thught your arguments were worthy, no wait, your arguments were never worthy, they were pathetic.
"Now, you've gotten boring, and I feel like playing audiosurf."
Yes, go take your ignorant self and play audiosurf.
MEC316 3 years ago
"Hah, your pathetic."
"At first I thught your arguments were worthy, no wait, your arguments were never worthy, they were pathetic."
"Now your just being and asshole to make yourself feel better."
"That was you."
"Each time you get deeper in the hole."
Yay! I can use your comments to make a story.
And that's only what you just wrote.
Imagine a week of that, and you should have a pretty good idea of the comedy I get by keeping this up.
Feel free to make one of mine. It better be good though
MMGiru 3 years ago
Ooh, a message:
"When did it become mandatory that I had to believe YOUR pathetic comments? Oh, that's right, NEVER. It's not my problem your so misinformed and ignorant. Take your anti-corn comments somewhere else. Farmers don't give a shit what YOU think, and neither do I. If you want to be anti-corn, I don't fucking care. But enough with pushing it on me and others.
[cont.]
MMGiru 3 years ago
People don't have to follow YOUR lifestyle, nor do they have to agree or believe your opinion, so get over it. Do you really think I will believe your pathetic comments, because I won't.
P.S. Going off topic on that corn video just proves your ignorance."
Wow, notice that your the only one who cares. Don't you think it's an odd coincidence that I said I'm just trying to get a laugh out of your reaction?
MMGiru 3 years ago
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
MEC316 3 years ago
What? No story?
That's pretty friggin boring.
Oh well. I'm glad that you care so much about this that you're still continuing it after two weeks.
Frankly, I find that people are much funnier when they're pissed because they can't accept new ideas.
MMGiru 3 years ago
I got about 26 messages like this:
"CORN IS A-MAIZE-ING! CORN IS A-MAIZE-ING!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I could fucking do this all fucking night!!! Yeah!"
Which is why it's fucking hilarious. Sanity is lessening, and it's getting more and more fun.
MMGiru 3 years ago
Sick and tired of what is done to us! Is there a website that lists foods that contain little or not corn syrup at all?
Forsure3333 3 years ago
muito bomm
valdircr 4 years ago
Wow. as well. I am so amazed at this substantial change in so many things I eat from the food I ate when I was young.
Thanks
Dan
dmccoig 4 years ago 2
how old are you if You don't mind my asking... Do you think people in my generation (in their 20s) are doomed since we ate this stuff as kids?
blackberryjuice1 4 years ago
I dont mind, I am soon to be 47.
My best guess is that humans are a bit like a river, once bad stuff has stopped being introduced, then the river washes most of it away, so my un-professional opinion is Yes you are doomed, but if you watch what you eat, you will probably live to be 120 and laugh about all of those who only made it to our 70s and 80s.
dmccoig 4 years ago
Wow, sulfuric acid and harmful enzymes? Yum! I guess this is why they say its better not to eat processed food. Avoid anything with the HFCS and transfats too, thats the idea. Thanks for making this and posting it.
cynicallisa 4 years ago
Enzymes are just tools, and your body makes lots of enzymes. If you chew on bread or a cracker long enough, an enzyme in your mouth starts changing the starch to sugar.
parduspilot 4 years ago
Yeah, I see your point, but the keyword was "harmful" enzymes. I think the one he put in came with some kind of a warning label (its now been a few weeks since I watched this clip). I'm guessing the enzymes our own bodies produce are not harmful to us.
cynicallisa 4 years ago