Then why didn't the author just say HFCS? It's because he makes the same mistake so many others do by equating corn syrup with HFCS. They are two very different products, used in very different applications, and someone who understood the topic he was writing about would have been clear in making the distinction. Corn syrup hasn't replaced sugar as a sweetener like he claims. However, HFCS has replaced sugar in many applications over the past 35 years.
Nutritionally inferior, because Grain-Fed beef has more Omega-6 and Saturated fat, and less Omega-3.
You're just guessing this is what the author meant. We'll never know. The fact he doesn't know the difference between corn syrup and HFCS leads me to believe he wouldn't know Omega 3 from the Omega Syndrome. Besides that, it's absurd to claim that I should eat lousy grass fed beef with poor or non existent marbling just to get more Omega 3 fatty acids. Not at $10.00 a lb.
Corn would be more expensive if not for the subsidies, and farmers wouldn’t feed so much corn to beef.
Corn might be less expensive without the subsidies but farmers would use it just the same to fatten their hogs and cattle. Consumers like flavorful beef and where would the flavor go during cooking without the marbling? You may have to pay more for your steak to compensate for the loss of corn subsidies but there is no way farmers are going to begin using barley, oats or wheat to fatten their commercial animals in place of corn. Additionally, the public isn't going to shift their taste preferences to lousy grass fed beef in any meaningful way so you can be assured that corn will continue to be the product used to make beef and pork taste better.
I’m just going to say that although I can’t afford grass-fed beef in the US, Argentinian and Brazilian beef is awesome.