If corn is so bad why are we still growing so much of it?

I am aware that we mainly grow "field corn" and it is not the one we eat from a can or on the cob, and most are fed to animals, turn into HFCS or ethanol (same thing really just one process apart from each other). The main question I am wondering is: are feeding corn to animal better for them (grow faster) or cheaper (because corn is cheaper to grow or corn is subsidized more than others) compare to say, soy, alfalfa, grass, other feed, etc?

Why aren't other nations in the world rely as much on corn as we are? or rely on farming so much corn instead of a variety of other crops? to a point that we cannot afford to not grow them even if they are not the best for the soil or make a lot of money?


Thanks for the link y_p_w.
 
Last edited:
I think I found the answer here:

“Corn has a particular kind of metabolism shared only with 5 percent of flowering plants,” Salvador told me. He explained that those plants (called C4, for a four-carbon molecule that’s part of the photosynthesis process) have special cells that make them up to three times as productive as the unfortunate 95 percent.

That means corn averages roughly 15 million calories per acre.
By contrast, wheat comes in at about 4 million calories per acre, soy at 6 million. Rice is also very high-yielding, at 11 million, and potatoes are one of the few crops that can rival corn: They also yield about 15 million (although record corn yields are much higher than record potato yields).

 
You get 2-3 more bushels per acre with corn than beans meaning you can grow more with less.

Corn is hard on the soil, but farmers get around this by adding nutrients to the soil. This has gotten better with the use of GPS systems and samples being taken from the whole field.

As far as corn being bad for you, I really can’t think of foods I normally eat that contain it in excess. Others consume it in excess so I guess there’s a need. I also don’t need the government to ban something so I don’t consume it. Corn syrup is bad, but you can smoke? Oh okay. (Once again, I don’t care. Smoke, eat corn syrup, etc.)

I’m personally not opposed to ethanol, but I don’t have anything that can safely run on blends greater than E10 either. Some stations are starting to blend ethanol with gas. E15 or E20 is substantially less than E10, but without the MPG hit of E85. I will say the lower gas prices have made it less cost effective, which I am okay with as well. We’re also the number 1 exporter of oil.

We are also the number 1 corn exporter in the world meaning we grow enough food to not only keep for ourselves but also sell it. We aren’t like China and rely on other countries for food.

Corn and farmers also make great neighbors. We have 5 acres in a 200 or so acre field. Our closest neighbors are a few hundred yards away. The corn comes up and it’s like we’re in the middle of nowhere. Lots of privacy once it comes up. Beans not so much.. lol
 
Last edited:
Because the corn we grow today is so inbred and cross bred, along with genetically modified,
that a large percentage of the population has become allergic,
and most of the flavor is gone...

The same thing is happening to flour, and peanuts...

I can eat ancient grains, amaranth, spelt, and quinoa...
White flour, and corn make me sick..

Now scientists are trying to find the old versions....

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesal...lost-ancestral-peanut-of-the-south-is-revived
 
An Ag guy cousin of mine said corn drew and required large amounts of water, thus irrigation and now drawing down aquifers as ma nature often doesn't provide enough in many of the expanded growing areas. Look at Google earth to view the circular center well systems. It also emits large amounts of the water as it matures markedly raising area humidity and affecting residents and area weather. This adds to higher evaporation/humidity from the many reservoirs created over the last 90 years.
 
Cheap, entrenched as a supply chain, established fuel for living things and machines.
As a people we've either taken it too far and some are starting to raise warnings or it is so effective and popular that there is an inevitable crowd of nay-sayers who zoom in on perceived imperfections and then define the entire phenomenon by them.
 
An Ag guy cousin of mine said corn drew and required large amounts of water, thus irrigation and now drawing down aquifers as ma nature often doesn't provide enough in many of the expanded growing areas. Look at Google earth to view the circular center well systems. It also emits large amounts of the water as it matures markedly raising area humidity and affecting residents and area weather. This adds to higher evaporation/humidity from the many reservoirs created over the last 90 years.
Which should return as additional rainfall, correct?
 
Too much of just about any kind of sugar is not very good for us to consume. Too much of honey, cane sugar, beet sugar, corn syrup, molasses, maple syrup, apple juice, orange juice, etc., etc.....

It is a bit of a fallacy to think that the "natural" sugars are okay but HF corn syrup is the boogie man in our diets.

Moderation of everything, not just avoiding the things we think are bad and loading up on the things we think are good.
 
Because the corn we grow today is so inbred and cross bred, along with genetically modified,
that a large percentage of the population has become allergic,
and most of the flavor is gone...

The same thing is happening to flour, and peanuts...

I can eat ancient grains, amaranth, spelt, and quinoa...
White flour, and corn make me sick..

Now scientists are trying to find the old versions....

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesal...lost-ancestral-peanut-of-the-south-is-revived

You can still find them in the poor agricultural nations. People don't grow enough of the heirloom grains to feed themselves. I'm sure many of them switch to the US based GM crops for a reason and it is about yield and money, at the expense of their field. Now compare between soy and corn I'm sure both are big commodity crops and I was just wondering why corn was popular but not soy or wheat.

It looks like corn yield is much higher (only potatoes can match, rice a distance 2nd) and they are bad for the soil because their yield is much higher (so we pump more fertilizer and water to get the yield), and the yield is much higher because of the photosynthesis pathway.

If we don't force ethanol on domestic use due to politics, maybe growing non-corn crops will be more "efficient" in feeding animals and people, but then the farmers will make less money, and we will have less money feed into the natural gas producers.
 
Why don't I find it surprising that this thread (ostensibly started about the amount of corn grown) has instead devolved into an instructional treatise on the dangers of GMO, big agriculture, paleo diets, HFCS and the dangers of US farming practices?

I'm shocked Monsanto hasn't been mentioned yet or is it Bayer now?
 
Last edited:
Someone please explain to me why high fructose corn syrup is somehow worse for us than cane sugar. Just curious. I'd like to know how my body would know the difference.
 
The corn grown for feeding stock and producing ethanol is not edible. You eat sweet corn.
We consume stuff made from field corn all the time, so it's perfectly edible. Corn flakes. Corn starch. Corn flour. Doritoes. Tortillas. It can even be eaten fresh if it's just right, but most field corn is dried first. This kind of demonstrates what it's like when it's not right for eating straight up.



And when it's at the right state.

 
Someone please explain to me why high fructose corn syrup is somehow worse for us than cane sugar. Just curious. I'd like to know how my body would know the difference.
There's lots of articles about it out there, just google it. Although technically you might be right, the basics of it is that we just eat too much of it and we didn't in the past. Nothing wrong with it in moderation, it's the excess that's a problem.


 
Someone please explain to me why high fructose corn syrup is somehow worse for us than cane sugar. Just curious. I'd like to know how my body would know the difference.

None really. Sucrose is C12H22O11 and chemically just a fructose C6H12O6 molecule connected to a glucose C6H12O6 molecule. There are a lot of articles that says that sucrose is 50/50 glucose/fructose, but that's in a combined molecule and not as free glucose and free fructose. The body will quickly break it down into fructose and glucose by adding a water molecule, then the body just treats that the same as if it were free glucose and fructose. HFCS can vary in terms of proportion.

I believe the reason for the conversion is that the glucose in natural corn syrup isn't as sweet. So converting some of it to fructose makes it sweeter since fructose is sweeter. I believe that the typical 55% fructose HFCS found in sodas is slightly sweeter compared to sucrose watered down about the same.
 
Back
Top