Brandon Zirzow

Writing 205

4/25/16

Flint Water Crisis Leaves City Drowning in Corruption

With the current United States Government recently reaching nearly 20 trillion dollars in total accumulated debt, all evidence points to Government corruption and unorganized Government spending to blame for the lack of desperately needed funding for infrastructure repairs and updates. This lack of funding has led to a multitude of recent, potentially deadly infrastructural failures all across the United States.

The infrastructure all across the United States is in such poor condition numerous major cities, in the near future, are at serious risk for infrastructural failure. Every year, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) releases an Infrastructural Report Card establishing a specific letter grade for the current condition of different types of infrastructure found in the United States; we are currently failing, “The best grade the United States received was a B- for solid waste (solid trash removal), and the ratings just keep going down” (Kearly). As the infrastructure across the United States continues to rapidly decay the amount of necessary funding needed to fix the failing infrastructure will continue to increase, “…it is estimated that 3.6 trillion dollars will need to be invested by 2020 to fix everything” (Semerau). It is apparent that the current infrastructure in the United States is in desperate need of a serious uplift but how did the condition get so poor in the first place?

The current public infrastructure established by our government, paid for by our taxes, including roads, bridges, water facilities, and other public works are currently in need of desperate updating, renovation and funding, “Railways, ports, and public parks and recreation got Cs on the ASCE report card, while dams, drinking water, hazardous waste, levees, wastewater, aviation, inland waterways, and transit all got Ds. It’s completely terrifying to think about all the disasters that could result in any one of those categories” (Kearly). The current state of the public infrastructure, specifically the public drinking water facilities, established in the United States is ranked so poorly that there have been multiple infrastructural failures all across the country that have put hundreds of thousands of innocent people at risk.

One of the most recent potentially deadly infrastructural failures occurred in decaying Flint, Michigan, “In Flint, Michigan jobs have been scarce for years, but crime and foreclosures have been on the rise” (Clarke). The infrastructural problems in Flint have reached such a dangerous level to the extent where the combination of failing infrastructure and corrupt government officials have left thousands of innocent citizens at risk. With the multitude of recent infrastructural failures across the United States and corrupt government parties, the citizens of Flint are not the only ones at risk.

In Flint, Michigan the local government represented by Governor Rick Snyder, has recently been under heavy scrutiny and criticism for improperly carrying out a 2014 decision, to desperately try to save government funding, to switch the city of Flint’s main water supply from the treated Lake Huron to the untreated Flint River (“Flint Water Crisis”, 1). The decision to first switch the city’s water supply was in result of Flint having extreme financial issues and was an attempt to cut government spending in any way possible.

Why are we (the public) taking the risk when the corrupt government is to blame? The taxes we religiously pay to the government to have these simple public works fully functional and adequate are funding the private pockets of corrupt government officials.

When the physical change in water supply was conducted, necessary chemicals were not added to the water in order to prevent pipe corrosion in the existing water infrastructure. This attempt to save even more money by cutting necessary corners allowed a dangerous level of lead to leak into the city’s main water supply therefor contaminating the public drinking water of thousands of people, “Residents have for months—by cooking, cleaning, eating and bathing—exposed themselves and, more catastrophically, their children to lead, a well-known neurotoxin” (Clarke).The trace amount of lead levels in the public water supply have slowly been building up to a potentially dangerous level due to the slow response of Governor Rick Snyder, “This combination released lead anywhere from 25 to 1000 parts per billion into residents’ tap water. To put this in perspective, the Environmental Protection Agency allows only 15 parts per billion” (Semerau). Now, instead of paying a little bit more and carrying out the proper procedures the Flint government along with the residence of Flint are going to be paying to fix the corroded pipes for years to come.

When small, harmless trace amounts of lead were first detected in Flint’s water supply, months before the Flint government publicly announced there was a public health concern, governor Rick Snyder decided to hold off administrating a state of emergency and delay telling the public of these extreme health concerns. This delay was administered in hope of saving desperately needed government funding by allowing the problem to “fix itself” instead of directly addressing the problem and asking for much needed federal aid.

This delay in emergency response from Flint’s corrupt government officials escalated the problem from a slight water contamination issue to a full city water crisis, “We know that between 6,000 and 12,000 kids…have been exposed in this period of time to lead” (Kelller). Now thousands of Flint’s residence are suffering from extreme levels of lead poisoning and have little to no access to fresh water for bathing, cooking, and cleaning, “Compounding the initial error has been a failure at all levels of government to understand and respond to the crisis, in spite of efforts among a few individuals in government and health services to bring attention to the community’s unfolding unnatural disaster” (Clarke). If Governor Snyder and his team of environmental specialist put the safety of the residence first they would have taken proper precautions and alerted the public of potential harm immediately.

Personal emails containing information about the lead contamination between Flint’s top environmentalist and Governor Rick Snyder have been leaked to the public further confirming the rumor that Flint’s government officials knew of the possible lead contamination in the water months prior before publicly releasing a state of emergency, “Snyder acknowledged lead poisoning of Flint’s drinking water around Oct. 1, but faced strong criticism for not declaring a state of emergency in Flint and Genesee County until more than three months later, on Jan. 5” (Eager). This information was wrongful withheld from the residence of Flint and now they are the ones suffering because of it.

Today, Flint is relying on the support and funding of hundreds of outside, private donors such as sports stars, famous actors and actresses and a multitude of local companies, “As celebrities, corporations, and concerned citizens from around the country send bottled water and aid to Flint, Michigan to help the beleaguered community deal with the lead crisis, some residents are being shut out from receiving clean water” (“Seriously? Some Flint Residents…Don’t Have an ID”). Many more have pledged to continue to donate crates of fresh, uncontaminated water bottles, lead poisoning tests and other supplies directly to the people of Flint in order to help those directly affected by this deadly water contamination crisis.

Many people now claim that the slow response time to receive outside aid from the federal government and large support organizations was due to Flint’s mainly minority demographic. Many of the residence claim that this type of extreme infrastructural failure and decay would never happen in more affluent neighborhood and if this were to happen in another neighborhood, they believe the response would have been a lot swifter and more effective.

Flint’s failing infrastructure has been of public concern for quite some time and has just recently started to receive federal funding and attention due to the most recent fresh water crisis Flint is now recovering from. This issue in Flint brings up a bigger issue regarding large-scale Government corruption and failing infrastructure at all government levels across the United States (local, federal, community). The government’s first concern should always be preserving the safety of its people. This was not the case for Flint. Flint’s elected government officials deceived and lied to the public, the press, and the residence of Flint about the seriousness and extent of the water contamination in attempt to save corrupt government money.

At what point does the primary concern of government officials become protecting their own pockets and fixing their own self-made corrupt financial issues? It doesn’t. The primary concern of any (community/ local, state, federal) government first should be protecting and ensuring the safety of its citizens, and this was not the case for the residence of Flint.

 

Works Cited

• Clarke, Kevin. “Flint Water Crisis Draws National Response As      Donations Pour In.” America 214.4 (2016): 10-11. OmniFile Full Text Mega (H.W. Wilson). Web. 23 Apr. 2016.
• Egan, Paul. “E-mails: Snyder Could Have Declared Flint Emergency Sooner.”Detroit Free Press. USA Today Netwprl, 29 Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Apr. 2016. (Primary Source)
• Direct emails, concerning lead contamination levels, between Governor Snyder’s political parties.
• Flint Water Crisis.” Congressional Digest 95.3 (2016): 10. OmniFile Full Text Mega (H.W. Wilson). Web. 23 Apr. 2016.
• Kearly, Kendyl. “United States Infrastructure Is Failing Dramatically, But No One Is Paying Attention.” Bustle. 20 June 2015. Web. 23 Apr. 2016.
• Keller, Andrew. “United Way Estimates Cost of Helping Children $100M.” – WNEM TV 5. Meredith Corporation, 18 Jan. 2016. Web. 23 Apr. 2016.
• Semerau, Kat. “Evaluate Failing Infrastructure’s Role in Flint Water Crisis.” University WireMar 07 2016. ProQuest. Web. 23 Apr. 2016 .
• “Seriously? Some Flint Residents Can’t Get Bottled Water Because They Don’t Have an ID.” Clutch Magazine RSS. Sutton New Media LLC. Web. 23 Apr. 2016. 

   

Reflection Questions

1.) I titled this specific magazine article Flint Water Crisis Leaves City Drowning in Corruption, in order to capture the reader’s attention by playing with words to create a title that gives the reader enough understanding about what the paper is about but also keeps the reader guessing and wondering about exact argument and correlation between the two. The lede, in my article, establishes the main background information I utilized in my paper (the Flint Water Crisis) in order to establish my own, “bigger picture” argument about how government corruption and corporate greed influenced and escalated the Flint Water Crisis.

2.) The introductory section of my magazine article provides valuable background information and allows the reader to connect to the issue I established my argument on. This slow building of information allows the argument to develop and further invest itself with the outside source information I provided.

3.) In my magazine article I attempted to ease the reader into the argument by providing various types of evidence and background information before thoroughly explaining my specific argument.

4.) My New York Times magazine article establishes a clear track of clarity throughout the piece by utilizing and maximizing the relationship between the paragraph transitions. The transitions helped connect the information from the previous paragraph to the next paragraph and foreshadows the next advancement in my argument.

5.) Because of the specific audience of New York Times Magazines I was forced to provide enough background information on my given topic in order to properly inform the reader before establishing my argument.

6.) My preliminary research focused on the Flint Water Crisis ranging from the very beginning of the issue all the way to the current recovery. I then focused on developing an argument about how Flint’s corrupt government influenced and escalated the seriousness of the water contamination. To tie my argument into a recent argument of larger importance, I then related my specific argument to overall government corruption and failing infrastructure and the possibility of future catastrophes.

7.) In the Magazine Article itself I presented the readers with at least 6 outside sources and 1 primary source (direct emails between Flint’s Government Officials) along with 3 separate visual sources that all aid in the development of the argument throughout the article. The numerical representation exceeds the research expectations and I also fully utilized the specific outside sources to their maximum potential in aiding my argument.

8.) Before introducing any of my outside source material I clearly stated my own opinion and argument and then utilized the research and evidence from the outside sources to backup and further establish credibility of my own argument.

Specific Example: [Every year, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) releases an Infrastructural Report Card establishing a specific letter grade for the current condition of different types of infrastructure found in the United States; we are currently failing, “The best grade the United States received was a B- for solid waste (solid trash removal), and the ratings just keep going down” (Kearly).]

9.) In order to create a persuasive magazine I utilized various forms of ethos, logos, and pathos to connect to the reader on a multitude of levels.

Specific Example of Ethos: [Every year, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) releases an Infrastructural Report Card establishing a specific letter grade for the current condition of different types of infrastructure found in the United States; we are currently failing, “The best grade the United States received was a B- for solid waste (solid trash removal), and the ratings just keep going down”] (Kearly).

Specific Example of Logos: [“This combination released lead anywhere from 25 to 1000 parts per billion into residents’ tap water. To put this in perspective, the Environmental Protection Agency allows only 15 parts per billion” (Semerau).]

Specific Example of Pathos: [At what point does the primary concern of government officials become protecting their own pockets and fixing their own self-made corrupt financial issues? It doesn’t. The primary concern of any (community/ local, state, federal) government first should be protecting and ensuring the safety of its citizens, and this was not the case for the residence of Flint.]

10.) The visual aids I specifically selected to include in my magazine article further reinforced my argument in a multitude of ways that just using words would not have fully captured. The image of the extreme difference in coloration of the Flint water and the Detroit water is quite an overwhelming photo and clearly represents the grotesque water contamination issue. The images of the direct emails between Flint’s government officials also provides a different view on the seriousness of the corruption in Flint.

11.) My first preliminary drafts I used to compile all of my researched information and get my main arguments out by crudely combining quotes, written text, and visual aids from a variety of sources. My following drafts I focused on the clarity of the argument and overall flow of the paper. The comments from my peers focused on defining the clarity of my main argument and forced me to narrow my argument and relate the outside information back to my main argument.

12.) The hyperlinks I utilized in my article were specifically chosen to help establish further credibility and ethos from outside sources. The hyperlinks bring the reader to the generic site of specific organizations in order to provide valuable information on the credibility of the companies I drew research from.

13.) Between each stage of development I read over the entirety of my magazine article multiple times in my head, as well as, out loud in order to ensure that the writing was free of grammatical errors and maintained an even flow and voice throughout. I also purposefully varied the sentence length, sentence structure, and punctuation in order to create a unique reading experience for the reader that would not bore them.

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.

 

 

 

As the movement for healthier and safer (organic) food has recently gained 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 for an increased produce yield. In result 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 regulate just due to the pure number of investigations they are responsible for. In Nestle’s Resisting Food Safety, Nestle starts to explore how the government has to break down and take on the task of regulating the food industry in the United States. Nestle argues that as the produce industry continues to expand the expectations from the public for the government to regulate all produce becomes more and more un-realist. 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 expansion in the food industry both agencies are extremely over worked and as stated by Nestle are tasked with an impossible task of regulating the food industry, “By the early 1980’s, for example the poultry industry had already expanded far beyond any reasonable inspection capacity.” Already by the 80’s Nestle explains that the poultry industry has reached a size beyond reasonable inspection capacity. Then 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.” Those statistics are unfathomable 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.” 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.” As proven by Nestle the demand on the government to regulate the entire food industry is physically impossible, and even if it was are the benefits of having an all organic produce system that significant?

Many people have come to believe the 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.” 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 ‘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.” Not only does Nestle explain the many inefficiencies with organic farming he also explains the lack of 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.” This document 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 two 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 would not be significantly impacted. After reading a snippet of a headline talking about the seriousness about foodborne illnesses and the poor safety regulation job the government does many consumers jump to the conclusion that the food they eat is substantially less safe than organic food when in fact most of the public does not understand the extreme testing and research done on the traditionally grown produce.

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 Assoctiation, told us that after the rendering process thoroughly heats, presses and grinds animal tissue, it “looks like a pile of brown sugar.”” Not only is the procedure highly regulated but there are also multiple health benefits 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.”” The animal feed that traditional farmers use not only save a large amount of resources but it has also been found to boost the nutritional factors of the produce.

 

Conclusion

–

–

–