Brandon Zirzow

As the organic revolution continues to gain momentum, the perception of how the public views the traditional (conventional) way of farming continues to be manipulated by big industry in order to fuel the rather weak argument for establishing an all organic food industry.

When it comes to organic produce many of us (the public) have been lied to and deceived by propaganda, sent out by big-time organic corporations, without realizing the lack of credible evidence proving any nutritional benefits. Many people simply do not understand what it takes to certify something as organic, “The word “organic” refers to the way farmers grow and process agricultural products, such as fruits, vegetables, grains, dairy products and meat. Organic farming practices are designed to encourage soil and water conservation and reduce pollution” (Mayo Clinic Staff). This lack of knowledge creates a false understanding of the true (if any) health benefits of organic food. In the pure definition of organic there was never reference to any safer procedures or healthier food production.

As the movement for healthier and safer (organic) food continues to gain recognition with the millennials, many people have started to question the extent of the safety and regulation of produce in the United States. There are no doubt many individual improvements that can be made regarding the regulation of produce in the food industry in the United States but the extent of the safety the public now demands from the government to have a ‘perfect’ regulation system would be economically irrational and feasibly unreasonable.

As the population continues to increase with higher life expectancies, thanks to newer technology and better medication, there is an ever growing demand on farmers for an even more increased produce yield. In result, as argued in Robert Kenner’s Food Inc., many large food corporations have quickly expanded making regulating each and every factory, slaughter house, and barn even more feasibly impossible for the government to do just based on the sheer number of investigations they are responsible for. In Nestle’s Resisting Food Safety, Nestle starts to explore how the government is tasked with breaking down and taking on the task of regulating the entire food industry in the United States. In this piece, Nestle argues that as the produce industry continues to expand the expectations for the government, from the public, to regulate ALL produce becomes more and more impossible.

The majority of the food regulated by the government is overseen by 2 agencies; the USDA and the FDA. Each is responsible for different parts of the regulation process where the FDA is in charge of regulation up until the slaughter house and inspects all foods except meat, poultry and eggs; where the USDA is then in charge of the rest of the regulation process beginning at the slaughter house and inspects meat, poultry, processed meat and eggs. Because of the recent expansions in the food industry both agencies have recently become extremely over worked and as stated by Nestle, they are tasked with an impossible task of regulating the entire food industry, “By the early 1980’s, for example the poultry industry had already expanded far beyond any reasonable inspection capacity” (Nestle, 59).Already by the 80’s, Nestle explains how the poultry industry has reached a size beyond reasonable inspection capacity.

As the food industry continues to grow so does the responsibility of regulating it. Nestle goes into further detail and provides the overwhelming statistic of the amount of establishments each agency is each responsible for, “In 1975, USDA officials examined 14 billion pounds of birds at 154 plants; just six years later they had to inspect 29 billion pounds at 371 plants. The USDA has 7,000 inspectors or so, and they oversee 6,000 meat, poultry, and egg establishments – and 130 importers- that slaughter and process 89 million pigs, 37 million cattle and 7 billion chickens and turkeys not to mention the 25 billion pounds of beef and 7 billion pounds of ground beef produced each year” (Nestle, 59). Those statistics are quite overwhelming and the FDA doesn’t get it any easier, “If anything, the demands on the FDA are even more unreasonable. About 700 FDA inspectors must oversee 30,000 food manufacturers and processors, 20,000 warehouses, 785,000 commercial and institutional food establishments, 128,000 grocery stores, and 1.5 million vending operations. The agency also must deal with food imports, which comprised 40% of the country’s supply of fresh fruits and vegetables and 68% of the seafood in 2000” (Nestle, 59). Not only are both agencies significantly understaffed but they are also greatly underfunded, “The FDA’s budget allocation for inspection purposes was just $283 million in 2000, miniscule by any standard of federal expenditure”(Nestle, 59). As proven by Nestle the demand on the government to regulate the entire food industry is physically impossible, and even if it were are the health and safety benefits of having an all organic produce system much more significant than the conventional one?

Many people have come to believe the fictional narrative that organic food is a safer and healthier option than traditionally grown produce, but as argued by Blake Hurst in Organic Illusions, the advantages of having a theoretically all organic system does not outweigh the disadvantages. Even with a major increase in the demand for organic produce the size of the industry is still relatively insignificant, “Despite the growth in organic food sales, they only constitute 4 percent of the dollar value of all foods sold; and since organic foods often cost twice of what conventionally grown foods do, the quantity of organic sales constitutes considerably less than 4 percent of the total market” (Hurst). The margin of income when growing all organic food is radically less than that of traditionally grown produce.

Another disadvantage argued by Hurst is that the extra production steps required to grow all ‘organic’ food would require an unrealistic number of increased employment in the food industry, “Millions of additional hands would be needed to produce food on America’s farms without modern technology. In many places around the world where organic farming is the norm, a large proportion of the population is involved in farming. Not because they chose to but because they must”(Hurst). Growing organic food not only takes more care and more time but would require people in the industry to leave their current jobs to join the farming industry!

Lastly, Hurst argues that there is a lack of proven significant health benefits that the organic narrative claims to provide, “The Stanford study found that organic foods were considerably less likely than conventional foods to have pesticide residues, although organic foods were higher in E. coli” (Hurst). This document by Hurst really starts to uncover the truth of organic food and the lack of significant health benefits that the public have been repeatedly led to believe.

After looking at these texts it is already clear that one; the process of regulating the entire food industry in the United States is an unfathomable task for the government (by itself) to accomplish and two; that even if it was feasibly possible to have an entirely organic food industry, the health benefits and relative safety of the food in the United States would not be significantly impacted.

After reading a snippet of a headline talking about the seriousness of foodborne illnesses and the poor safety regulation job the government does, many simple minded consumers jump to the conclusion that the traditionally grown food they eat is substantially less safe than organically grown food. When in fact, most of the public does not understand that traditionally grown food is equally as safe and goes through extreme testing and research.

The amount of research and testing done regarding the safety of our food is overwhelming.

Many organic consumers claim that the traditional animal feed is unsanitary and contains harmful bacteria and pathogens, but as put forth in You Are What They Eat, from consumer reports, the opposite is actually true, “The waste is processed until it bears no resemblance to its former self. Thomas Cook, president of the National Renderers Association, told us that after the rendering process thoroughly heats, presses and grinds animal tissue, it “looks like a pile of brown sugar”” (Consumer Reports, 27). Not only is the procedure highly regulated and sanitary but there are also multiple health benefits often times not spoken of, “Phillip Petry, president of AAFCO, speaks of the merits of chicken waste. “There is a yuck factor because it doesn’t sound at all appetizing he says, but the nitrogen level in poultry litter is real high, so they get a real good protein jump out of that”” (Consumer Reports, 27). The animal feed that traditional farmers use not only save a large amount of resources by recycling waste but it has also been found to boost the nutritional factors of the produce.

Traditionally grown produce has been a key contributor to successfully developing society into the technologically advanced, mass media culture that we live in today.

Ever since the industrial revolution, farming has mostly become mechanized and replaced with new technology in hopes of producing higher produce yields. The result, the ability for humanity to exponentially expand as less people were required to produce more produce. Today, some people argue that this method, that has got us to where we are today, is unsafe and unhealthy and to promote a healthier style of living we should eat only organic food. As argued in Consumer Reports, You Are What They Eat, the traditionally grown food process, has historically and currently, goes through extensive safety tests and regulations providing extremely safe and healthy food. Hurst argues in, Organic Illusions, that a majority of the public misunderstands what organic food really entails and the extent of the absence of any proven health benefits. In Resisting Food Safety, Nestle argues that the public demand to have an entirely organic produce system would be physically and economically impossible. The lack of government funding and man-power leaves the FDA and USDA with the next to impossible task of regulating all produce (and some imports) within the United States.

There are no doubt many individual improvements that can be made regarding the regulation of produce in the food industry in the United States but the extent of the safety the public now demands from the government to have a ‘perfect’ regulation system would be economically irrational and feasibly unreasonable.

 

Works Cited

• Consumer Reports, “You Are What They Eat”, January 2005. (26-30pg)
• Hurst, Blake, “Organic Illusions”, American Enterprise Institute, October 1, 2012
• Kenner, Robert, Food Inc., Magnolia Home Entertainment, 2008
• Mayo Clinic Staff. “Nutrition and Healthy Eating.” Organic Foods: Are They Safer? More Nutritious? Mayo Clinic. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
• Nestle, Marion, Food Politics: “Resisting Food Safety”, University of California Press, 2013. (27-61pg)

Reflection Questions

Unit I / 10%

Using the homework, in-class workshops, revision workshops, etc.

 

• Describe your understanding of the “writer’s project”? How were you able to identify the texts’ “project”? Discuss your own “project” as it pertains to this particular blog article.
  • To me the writer’s project encompasses the argument in its entirety and explains the reason the author is composing the piece. When identifying the writer’s project in other texts locating the author’s thesis and carefully reading the conclusion can help determine the author’s ‘project’. My own ‘writer’s project’ focused on the public’s false view of organic food and the misconception that organic food is healthier and safer than the current government regulation system.
• Describe your completion of the “Sorting it Out” workshop? What sections were most beneficial to the development of your ideas—and why? Discuss how this workshop assisted in development of draft and/or assignment organization?
  • The last part of “Sorting it Out” where we were asked to synthesize specific quotes from each text really helped me form and structure my essay. This part made me tie direct relationships between the different sources instead of trying to summarize each text and then relating them to each other. By doing this I started to realize distinct similarities and differences in not just the content but also how each of the pieces was written and composed.
• Describe your understanding of synthesis. What is its importance? How did it manifest within your drafts and/or final blog article? Provide examples.
  • My understanding of synthesis is refining an argument between different sources down to its most basic and concise form by drawing similarities and differences between arguments. Its importance is to help explain and bring together the main argument of a piece and brings together multiple forms of credible evidence. It helps tie everything in the piece together. Synthesizing in my blog was really evident when I compared arguments from the different sources, “As argued in Consumer Reports, You Are What They Eat, the traditionally grown food process, has historically and currently, goes through extensive safety tests and regulations providing extremely safe and healthy food. Hurst argues in, Organic Illusions, that a majority of the public misunderstands what organic food really entails and the extent of the absence of any proven health benefits. In Resisting Food Safety, Nestle argues that the public demand to have an entirely organic produce system would be physically and economically impossible.
• Describe your own accomplishment (of something) during this unit.
  • During this unit I furthered my understanding of how blogs are composed and the specific genre expectations that come with it. I hadn’t done much blog reading or composing previously but I learned that it can provide a different style of writing and can display information to a larger less-informed target audience more effectively than a research paper or book can.
• Discuss the evolution of the main idea. Where did you begin (include the example) and show its progress (again, include example) throughout the drafting/revision process. To what do you attribute its evolution?
  • My first draft at a main idea was, “How does our current government produce regulation system compare to other regulation systems and the relative safety of our food”
• When trying to further develop and synthesize my argument I tried to better relate my main idea to the texts and have them influence my approach to forming an argument.
  • My final draft’s main idea was, “There are no doubt many individual improvements that can be made regarding the regulation of produce in the food industry in the United States but the extent of the safety we demand from the government to have a ‘perfect’ regulation system would be economically irrational and feasibly unreasonable.” This thesis came through the multiple rewritings of my first draft. I focused on developing a stronger argument that further questioned the referenced texts.
• Discuss what organizational strategies you implemented in order to structure this blog article. Provide examples from a section(s) of an earlier draft and other excerpts in later drafts to support your response.
  • When organizing the blog I started off by explaining my argument and then used each of the sources to individually respond to my argument and then further related and connected them later in the piece. This allowed for a greater understanding of each individual piece and the argument each was displaying before trying to compare and relate them to each other.
  • “The majority of the food regulated by the government is overseen by 2 agencies; the USDA and the FDA. Each is responsible for different parts of the regulation process where the FDA is in charge of regulation up until the slaughter house and inspects all foods except meat, poultry and eggs; where the USDA is then in charge of the rest of the regulation process beginning at the slaughter house and inspects meat, poultry, processed meat and eggs. Because of the recent expansions in the food industry both agencies have recently become extremely over worked and as stated by Nestle, they are tasked with an impossible task of regulating the entire food industry.” This paragraph exemplifies the organization strategies in that it gives a substantial amount of background information on the topic before discussing the arguments specific argument.
• Provide an example of the final draft where you successfully synthesize 3 texts in a concise and direct manner. Discuss how this evolved throughout the drafting process for you.
  • “As the movement for healthier and safer (organic) food continues to gain recognition with the millennials, many people have started to question the extent of the safety and regulation of produce in the United States. There are no doubt many individual improvements that can be made regarding the regulation of produce in the food industry in the United States but the extent of the safety the public now demands from the government to have a ‘perfect’ regulation system would be economically irrational and feasibly unreasonable.”
  • This paragraph from my paper accompanies an argument that can be related back to each of the documents and furthers a different analysis approach to the produce industry.
• Discuss the evolution of the ‘lede’ in earlier drafts and its final version (provide examples of each): where did you begin, what feedback did you receive, and how did it end up in final blog article?
  • First lede draft: “When it comes to organic produce many of us (the public) have been lied to and deceived by propaganda, sent out by big-time organic corporations, without realizing the lack of credible evidence proving any nutritional benefits.”
  • The big thing I focused on when revising and developing my lead was forming a stronger and more legible argument as well as quickly grabbing the reader’s attention. The feedback I received talked about developing an argument that related to a bigger issue and could be supported or analyzed through the multiple texts.
  • Current lede: “As the organic revolution continues to gain momentum, the perception of how the public views the traditional (conventional) way of farming continues to be manipulated by big industry in order to fuel the rather weak argument for establishing an all organic food industry.”
• Name a specific writing/researching/revision goal you’d like to work on during the next Unit projects.
  • When progressing into the next Unit I would like to focus on further revising my paper and writing a more concise piece. I want to focus on writing and saying more in a piece but using less words.