[1] The title focuses the readers attention very will. The lede was thought provoking and forced the reader to continue reading to find out the answer for themselves. Yes, it asks the reader to think about how girls are constantly taken out of the classroom for something as silly as clothing and how this has directly effected society as a whole and acceptance.

[2]  The introductory section of the article invites the reader in really well. It forces the reader to not only look at the positive things schools teach our children but also the underlying negative things that are being taught without our full knowledge. It looks at how dress codes are often ‘sugar coated’ by schools in order to look like a positive thing. However, the more cases and scenarios you look at, the more the reader can see just how much of a problem dress codes are and how they directly influence sexism and rape culture.

[3] The writer offers up a strong idea and proof throughout the article. I show multiple scenarios where girls are being overly sexualized as well as multiple instances where schools blatantly say that boys education are more valued than a girls. I think the case that refers to the transgender community might not have been immediately obvious to readers and solidifies the point that it really is for the benefit of a boys education rather than helping girls.

[4] The writer shows clarity of thought really well. Everything within the article is organized around a central theme to prove a point. It’s also presented in such a way that the examples are used to make the biggest point as well as a statistic.

[5] The writer does this really well by acknowledging both sides of the argument. For example, I talked about how schools claim that the point of dress codes are to create a distraction free learning environment, but then I show multiple examples where schools are more focused on boys learning than girls. I organized material really well, first summarizing the topic, then picking out multiple examples and talking about organizations that are in agreement with this movement as well as looking at other groups that are directly effected in order to avoid over generalizations.

[6] I used over 12 sources in order to fully research this controversy. I developed a persuasive stance by using so many examples where women are directly being targeted by sexist school dress codes. I utilized my research by using accurate statistics to make my point as well as the many examples I was able to find.

[7] I exceeded research expectations and assignment requirements. I used 11 secondary sources, 5 visual sources, as well as a primary research site.

[8] I integrated secondary sources effectively by summarizing them as well as using pictures in order to make the topic more relatedly and deepen the analysis. The primary sources was used to find statistics as well as more information and background on rape culture and sexual assault, which is mentioned throughout the article as my main argument.

[9] I persuaded the audience to consider my claims by using so many examples as well as citing multiple agencies that are trying to fight for my main argument which is rape culture and sexism. I think my use of rhetorical tools was strong. I was able to pull on emotions by talking about sexual assault and the numbers surrounding it’s victims as well as logic by looking at examples to prove my point.

[10] I think the visuals I selected were appropriate as well as revealing. All of the visuals used were of the victims to pull on the readers emotions and logic as well as photos showing the large support by outside organizations. I also used a visual with the statistics surrounding sexual assault. I placed the visual strategicially to line up with each story so that the reader could easily make a connection between the visual and the evidence. Yes the visuals contribute in a meaningful way, without them I don’t think the reader would feel as invested in the topic.

[11] I don’t think I did this very well since I was not in class in order to get in peer editing or teacher comments. However, I did reach out to multiple friends and family in order to get feedback to make sure my article was well written.

[12] I used hyperlinks effectively. They were always appropriate, often used to cite a source in case a reader wanted more information on the topic or story I was referring to. I believe it gave me more credibility.

[13] I went through my article several times as well as had family and friends look over it to check for grammar and appropriate style. I believe that my sentence issues being credibility on the issues by using hyperlinks as well as simple summarizations.

Girls are taken out of class everyday for wearing clothes the school system deems “too distracting” for male students.  However, what people don’t see is the damage this lesson has on young women and society as a whole.

School is one of the most important times in a young persons life. It’s a time when young adults learn about the world around them and create their own opinions surrounding said world. It teaches young people that in the society we live in, hard work always pays off and that education is a necessary stepping stone to be successful in the adult world.

What most people don’t think of though, is the underlying lesson schools are also teaching: girl’s bodies are inherently sexual and harassment will forever be inevitable. 

Society has been convinced that dress codes are to teach students about professionalism but since when did showing your collarbones mean you were unprofessional? This is sadly the world we live in, a world where a young girl’s body is seen as inherently sexual and something to be hidden from the male gaze. This overwhelming message of sexism is being broadcasted around the nation to impressionable young students. However, it’s not just the sexist dress codes that are the problem. It’s also the way these sexist dress codes are enforced.

Just a year ago, a teenager in Canada was given detention for wearing a full length dress because her school deemed it inappropriate. The school claims that it went against their dress code because she was showing her shoulders and back.

” If you are truly so concerned that a boy in this school will get distracted by my upper back and shoulders, then he needs to be sent home and practice self-control.” – Lauren Higgins

When the teen in question tried to speak out against the school for the over sexualization of her shoulders and back, she was sentenced to a one-day suspension.

However, this was not the only time a young woman was personally attacked by a sexist dress code. In the UK, Bridlington School announced a plan to ban skirts all together just over a year ago. The school claimed that female students wearing skirts made the male teachers feel “uncomfortable”.

The sad fact is, these are just two of the many cases on an ever-growing list regarding sexist dress codes in schools. The showing of un-sexualized body parts, such as shoulders and knees, have become the epitome of a war zone within schools world wide. Clothing deemed as appropriate by the fashion world, such as leggings and yoga pants, have been banned by many schools. Girls attire is constantly being inspected by school staff, while boys walk by without receiving a second glance.

Schools are quick to respond to criticism, claiming that they are only trying to maintain a ‘distraction free’ learning environment. However, it seems to me that the only learning environment they’re trying to protect is that of the male student body.

However, there are two groups that are trying to fight against this subtle injustice towards women: the Everyday Sexism Project and the Amber Rose SlutWalk.

The Everyday Sexism Project is a website where people from around the world can post about their experiences with gender inequality. The website has gained hundreds of testimonies from young women from around the world who are directly effected by sexist dress codes. Many young women who post on the site claim that they personally feel a strong sense of injustice due to their gender.

” I got dress coded at my school for wearing shorts. After I left the principal’s office with a detention, I walked past another student wearing a shirt depicting two stick figures: the male holding down the females head in his crotch and saying ‘good girls swallow’. Teachers walked right past him and didn’t say a thing.” – Anonymous, Everyday Sexism Project

One student on the site claims that she was given three reasons why there was a dress code at her school:

“1) There are male teachers and male sixth formers (high school seniors)

2) Teachers feel uncomfortable around bras, etc. 

3) Don’t want the boys to target or intimidate you”

This powerful and sexist message in schools and society is one of the many reasons why Amber Rose created the SlutWalk. SlutWalk is a city wide event where people gather and march in the streets to fight against “all forms of sexism and bigotry”. Similarly to the Everyday Sexism Project website, SlutWalk allows its users to post about their own battles with sexism. Just like the Everyday Sexism Project, hundreds of posts directly refer to sexist and unfair school dress codes.

These sexist dress codes teach children that the female body is meant to be sexualized and that boys are biologically programmed to objectify said body.

This message prepares our children for college, where one in five women is sexually assaulted. However, rather than fighting this, society will instead blame the victim and let the real criminal get away with little to no disciplinary action being taken. This problem is only furthered by the fact that most of the time, there is little to no disciplinary action when boys are showing harassing behavior. This simply maintains the idea that it’s the victims fault and they should be held responsible for preventing such instances. There have been thousands of cases posted to both SlutWalk and the Everyday Sexism Project where girls are sexually assaulted at school, only to be told that “boys will be boys”.

What schools fail to realize, is that the very act of teachers calling out young girls for their clothing simply perpetuates the over sexualization of said clothing item or body part.

In this case, girls are not the only victims. There have many instances where boys have also been banned from school due to their clothing choices. However, it’s probably not for the reason you’re thinking of.

Boys have been banned from school for having their hair deemed ‘too long’ or wearing fashion choices that are dictated by the school as ‘feminine’. This includes but is not limited to skinny jeans or skirts.

One instance of this injustice came from a transgender student. The student claims he was threatened to have his yearbook photo removed, simply because he wore a tuxedo to prom.

It’s beginning to look like school dress codes are less about protecting children and more about exploiting them. Schools seem to be more interested in protecting widely accepted social norms that exclude diversity.

When a girl is removed from class for showing her shoulders because she’s ‘distracting’ to her male classmates, his education is prioritized over hers. When schools chose to focus on the covering of the female body while ignoring inappropriate behavior from boys, the school is only prolonging and supporting the assumption that victims of sexual violence are responsible for their own fate.

1. In order to move from general to specific, I started using databases that were more tailored to my topic. For example, I wouldn’t use a research database that focused on politics. Instead, I would use a database that focused on perhaps gender studies or sexuality in general. I think a huge mistake I made was relying on google originally. It comes up with way too many articles and it’s hard to sift through which ones are truly relevant to the topic. My advice for future researchers is to research the database itself first. Make sure the database you’re using is truly meant to help search for articles within your topic. Also, use more than one database because even when I used the same search terms, each database came up with different results.
2. GenderWatch, which is a branch of Proquest, gave me the most search results. This particular branch of this database looks for articles directly related to gender issues, which my topic was centralized around. Proquest is also a massive database so I was able to get most of my research from them or their counter part GenderWatch.
3. The research process is a lot more in depth then just typing some words into Google and hoping what it spits back at you is relevant to your topic. You have to not only look at google several times and adjust your search terms, but also use different databases entirely. I don’t think I’ve ever used more than one database for a research project ever, but now I see just how important it is. You truly do get a much broader search and get access to articles you might not have thought about by using multiple search engines and databases.
4. I personally struggled with the speaking portion in general. I have horrible anxiety and I struggle with public speaking. The research portion, while lengthy, was not as difficult for me. I struggled with how exactly I was going to pull the assignment off. I wasn’t sure how my presentation would look and what I would say. I ended up watching several more Ted Talks in addition to the ones we already watched in order to get a feel for how their presentations looked. I then decided it would be easiest for me if I wrote myself a ‘script’, so that I could memorize it and have an easier time speaking to the class without losing my train of thought or getting overly anxious.
5. Exigency refers to the urgency of my topic and kairos refers to the timeliness. My topic has both because this problem is currently happening today and we’re seeing more and more of it within the news every week. With schools tightening dress codes and the increase in the ‘she was asking for it based on what she was wearing’ excuse, I figured it was time to speak up.
6. I think my comfort level is about an 8. I feel pretty comfortable using them but I struggle with how narrow I can make my research results before I don’t end up with any articles at all. I also struggle with finding databases I can use other than the ones Patrick showed us. I wish he would have shown us how to navigate the databases a bit more and how to find one that is better suited for each of our topics.
7. I think the expectations for the Ted Talk was to be thought provoking yet simplified. I kept my Ted Talk simple my keeping the slides I used as minimalist and ‘non wordy’ as possible. I kept it thought provoking while speaking in a question answer format. Each slide had a question about the topic and why it was important, and then I would answer it. I also think the Ted Talk, while it’s about a serious topic, was intended to be fairly light hearted. I tried to add a bit of humor as well as pointing out how ridiculous this issue is while remaining straight forward.
8. As we shift into Unit 3, I think I’ll still use the articles I found from the database research. I don’t think I’ll end up using as many opinions based pieces since I don’t think they’ll be as useful to me. I’m hoping to find more articles to connect my main idea which is that dress codes help lead to sexual assaults later down the line. I need to do more research on this to make my point. I also need to find more articles that are less biased. Ones that aren’t influenced by their own experiences because I felt like most articles were one side or the other rather than remaining neutral and stating the facts.
9. I think having us watch the two Ted Talks and then write things we noticed about them was really helpful for me in deciding how I was going to do my presentation. I think all the research workshops were helpful as well because I don’t think I would have put in as much time into the research otherwise.

When most people think of where their food comes from, they probably think of a farm. This stereotypical farm image is generally what most people think of. People generally picture a big field with cows eating grass and a red barn. What nobody realizes though is that farms haven’t been like the image above in decades. The sad truth is that farms have become factories with the sole goal of creating cheap and sustainable food. However, it’s not the farmers that are in control of these farming practices, it’s big businesses.

These businesses have a lot more power than the average Joe thinks they do.  Most of these large corporations have a strong hold on the average farmer. These large businesses often put farmers in crippling debt in order to silence those who are against current farming practices.

“You have to do it, or you’re threatened with loss of a contract. This is how they keep the farmers under control. It’s how they keep them spending money, going to the bank and borrowing more money. The debt keeps building. To have no say in your business, it’s degrading. It’s like being a slave to the company.” – Farmer in Food Inc.

Many of these businesses have large monopolies within the farming realm. With very few companies having such control over certain types of food, farmers have no choice but to succumb to whatever the company wants, or risk losing a contract and farming job entirely.

The food industry has an unfathomable amount of control over the consumer. As revealed in Food Inc., larger companies such as Tyson, give the consumer the illusion of more options by hiding behind smaller name brands. This means that even if you think you have a real say in what you’re eating, you might not.

But the corruption does not stop there.

Almost all of these large food production companies have members running for important positions in government. This leads to an ever present bias within government towards the food industry rather than public safety. These government positions allow for companies to have control over what safety precautions are made, which often benefits the food industry rather than the consumer.

It seems that as the food industry becomes larger and more profitable, food safety decreases. The problem according to Nestle is the government. There is not nearly enough regulations set in place by the government to protect the consumer. Nestle argues that many of these food borne illnesses could be prevented if the proper regulations were put in place. However, the main issue seems to be a lack in man power. The food industry has gotten much too large to be regulated by the limited federal government.

“By the early 1980’s, for example, the poultry industry had already expanded far beyond any reasonable inspection capacity.” – Nestle

While simply adding more regulations seems like the perfect solution, there seems to be many more underlying problems within the food industry.

Pesticides. Antibiotics. Animal Feed. These are just a few of the many problems within the food industry that wouldn’t be fixed with a few simple regulations.

But how do these problems effect you?

Pesticides:

So if pesticides are the problem, why don’t more people choose organic? After all, isn’t it true that organic farming uses less pesticides? This is the question many people seem to be asking. The problem with this statement is that the answer may not lie within the organic food industry. In a study done by Stanford University, it was found that organic foods did have less pesticides than conventional food. However, E. Coli was far more present in the organically grown food. It was also proven that organic foods aren’t really any healthier for you than conventional foods. In an article written by Blake Hurst, it was revealed that even the organic food industry is not entirely pesticide free. While the pesticides being used are not as strong, the organic farmer will often have to use more pesticides in order to make the less potent kind more successful. Hurst also argued that pesticides are necessary in farming. Without them, fields would need to be weeded by hand which takes up more time and requires more man power. So while the idea of not using pesticides sounds nice, it doesn’t seem to be entirely realistic. So if you’re trying to avoid pesticides entirely, you may be out of luck.

Antibiotics:

The reason why antibiotics are used in food production is not necessarily a bad one at first glance. The reason is to prevent sick animals from creating sick consumers after eating that animals’ product. When animals are kept in such tight quarters, it’s not uncommon for animals to carry bacteria. However, the more antibiotics are used in animals, the more antibiotic resistant bacteria are formed. This resistant form of bacteria contaminates the food that comes from that sick animal, which can then make the consumer develop an antibiotic resistant infection. The CDC says that the use of antibiotics in the food industry is ok. However, it should only be used to address sicknesses in animals, not to promote growth. However, even animals that are not sick get large doses of these antibiotics in order to create a bigger ‘super’ animal to create more food per animal. While this saves the food industry on costs, it only harms the consumers health in the long run.

Animal Feed:

What do you think a cow eats? Most people would say grass, right? Well the sad truth is that most cows and other animals no longer eat grass, they eat corn and other waste products. According to Consumer Reports these waste products are not limited to processed feathers, poultry litter, floor waste, feces, plastic pellets, and other forms of meat. As we know, cows and chickens are not carnivores and probably should not be eating feces from other animals. The reason why the food industry does this is because this type of ‘animal feed’ makes the animals fatter creating more food production per animal, which is then more profit for the food industry. This also creates less waste from the food industry since rather than throwing these things away, they feed them to the animals. The problem with this practice though, is that whatever the animal eats directly influences the consumer. In a study done by the Animal Protein Producers Industry, salmonella was found is about one fourth of feed on average. To simplify, if the cows are eating salmonella contaminated food, and then the consumer is eating it, there is a much higher likelihood that the consumer will then be contaminated as well.

So, why should any of this matter to the consumer [you]?

The consumer should have a say in how their food is being made. They should also be knowledgeable about what exactly the risks are to what they are eating. If the consumer is unaware of the practices being used in the food industry, how will they be able to fight it? They won’t.

The food industry needs a complete renovation. The government should not be biased towards companies using unsafe practices. While the lack of resources to monitor these farms is a valid excuse, it’s still not a good enough reason to put public health at risk. The people that make decisions on consumer health should be the consumer themselves, not the company or official getting a paycheck. The only people that should have a say in what a safe farming practice is, is the consumers, the FDA, and other food safety commissions. We as the consumer need to put a higher focus on food safety in order to protect ourselves and the rest of the nation.

A change needs to be made, and while change may take time it is definitely worth the wait to save even one life from dangerous food consumption. Food should not be made on a conveyer belt. Cows and other animals were meant to eat grass and be able to roam around. While these new techniques have made quite the profit for these big companies, the consumer is suffering greatly.

Consumer health needs to come before profit, and the only way to do that is to fight the industry for change. By voting for change in the food industry, we will once again put the power back in the hands of the everyday consumer [you].

Reflection Questions: 

1.) The “writer’s project” seems to be whatever the writers main purpose is for writing an article. For example, in Blake Hurst’s article his “writer’s project” is to spread awareness about the real differences between organic and conventional farming methods while also exposing that conventional food isn’t necessarily bad for you. I was able to identify the texts project by summarizing the article and focusing on whatever the writers main argument was. My own “project” for this article was to spread awareness of the many dangers in the food industry and the many corruptions that prevent change being made. I also wanted to promote that consumers fight for a change within the food industry.

2.) The “Sorting it Out” workshop was actually really helpful. I ended up referring to it several times when drafting my article. I think the most helpful sections were summarizing each article and figuring out what it’s “project” was. It helped me remember which article was about what so I didn’t confuse the articles. The workshop also allowed me to start picking out quotes and connecting articles together so I could come up with one centralized idea for my article.

3.) Synthesis is taking information and simplifying it. It takes several different ideas or stories and combines them into one singular piece. It basically takes multiple perspectives and puts them together for a more rounded perspective. For my drafts I synthesized each piece and then used that to come up with my main argument.

4.) I learned how to create hyperlinks and write in a less formal tone.

5.) I originally began with the idea that the government was entirely to blame for the flaws within the food industry. However, later on I realized that perhaps the consumer is also to blame. After all, we’re the ones that vote these people into government roles. We should do our research to make sure these candidates have no biases. I attribute this revolution to the inclusion of more sources and also reading other peoples articles to get a better sense of what my opinion was on the topic.

6.) My organizational strategy was pretty simple. I broke it up the same way I would any other writing piece, just by topic. The only difference is that this article was much more casual and short so I broke it up into easier paragraphs. I just made sure to condense my topic as much as possible and shorten everything.

Example:

Original Draft:

These businesses have a lot more power than the average Joe thinks they do.  Most of these large corporations have a strong hold on the average farmer. These large businesses often put farmers in crippling debt and force them to follow unsafe farming practices. With most of these businesses having a huge monopoly within the farming realm, most farmers have no choice but to succumb to whatever unsafe practices that company wants. Large companies such as Monsanto, have even gone as far as controlling what type of seed farmers use and how they use it. They use scare tactics to keep farmers from speaking out or breaking these unfair rules. But the corruption does not stop there.

Final Draft:

These businesses have a lot more power than the average Joe thinks they do. Most of these large corporations have a strong hold on the average farmer. These large businesses often put farmers in crippling debt in order to silence those who are against current farming practices.

I also added block quotes to the final draft to help make my point while also keeping the paragraphs simple.

7.) Example: It seems that as the food industry becomes larger and more profitable, food safety decreases. The problem according to Nestle is the government. There is not nearly enough regulations set in place by the government to protect the consumer. Nestle argues that many of these food borne illnesses could be prevented if the proper regulations were put in place. However, the main issue seems to be a lack in man power. The food industry has gotten much too large to be regulated by the limited federal government.

While I focussed on one particular article in this example, I think I did a good job touching base on the main argument in several other sources. My inclusion of the texts increased as I got further along in drafts and got closer to the final product.

8.) My ‘lede’ originally was really long, to be honest it didn’t even exist. I just started talking without hooking the reader in. The lede in my final draft forced the reader to imagine a stereotypical farm and then forced the reader to face the reality that farms don’t actually look like how they picture it.

Original ‘Lede’:

When most people think of where their food comes from, they probably think of a farm. Perhaps their farm has a happy farmer and his family making conscious decisions about the food they are making. The farmer would be the one in charge of how his food is created and what growing practices he/she chooses to follow. However, the sad reality is that the food industry is no longer controlled by the farmers themselves, they are controlled by big businesses.

Final ‘Lede’: When most people think of where their food comes from, they probably think of a farm. This stereotypical farm image is generally what most people think of. People generally picture a big field with cows eating grass and a red barn. What nobody realizes though is that farms haven’t been like the image above in decades. The sad truth is that farms have become factories with the sole goal of creating cheap and sustainable food. However, it’s not the farmers that are in control of these farming practices, it’s big businesses.

The feedback I got was to be more specific and make the reader picture what the farm looks like a little better. I originally was pretty vague and focussed more on the farmers than the farm itself.

 

9.) The next unit project I’d like to make more drafts. Maybe go to office hours to ask for better revisions. It felt like I had to make tons of revisions at the end for the final paper because I didn’t get enough feedback from my peers.

 

When most people think of where their food comes from, they probably think of a farm. Perhaps their farm has a happy farmer and his family making conscious decisions about the food they are making. The farmer could be the one in charge of how his food is created and what growing practices he/she chooses to follow. However, the sad reality is that the food industry is no longer controlled by the farmers themselves, they are controlled by big businesses.

These businesses have a lot more power than the average Joe thinks they do.  Most of these large corporations have a strong hold on the average farmer. These large businesses often put farmers in crippling debt and force the to follow unsafe farming practices. With most of these businesses having a huge monopoly within the farming realm, most farmers have no choice but to succumb to whatever unsafe practices that company wants. Large companies such as Monsanto, have even gone as far as controlling what type of seed farmers use and how they use it. They use scare tactics to keep farmers from speaking out or breaking these unfair rules.

But the corruption does not stop there.

Almost all of these large food production companies have members running for important positions in government. This leads to an ever present bias within government towards the food industry rather than public safety. These government positions allow for companies to have control over what safety precautions are made, which often benefits the company rather than the consumer.

In the world of food production, money is a much larger concern than food safety. The people within this growing industry are fully aware that their food is unsafe, yet they continue with these bad practices because they are more profitable.

But that leads to big question: what is making our food unsafe?

You could point to a number of culprits: pesticides, antibiotics, pathogens, and animal feed. However, these are just a few of the many problems within the food industry.

Pesticides:

So if pesticides are the problem, what don’t more people choose organic? This is the question many people seem to be asking. The problem with this statement is that the answer may not lie within the organic food industry. In a study done by Stanford University, is was found that organic foods did have less pesticides than conventional food. However, E.Coli was far more present in the organically grown food. In an article written by Blake Hurst, it was revealed that even the organic food industry is not entirely pesticide free. While the pesticides being used are not as strong, the organic farmer will often have to use more pesticides in order to make the less potent kind more successful. So in regards to pesticides, there does not seem to be a way around it entirely.

Antibiotics & Pathogens:

The reason why antibiotics are used in food production is not necessarily a bad one at first glance. The reason is to prevent sick animals from creating sick consumers after eating that animals product. However, the more antibiotics are used in animals, the more antibiotic resistant bacteria are formed. This resistant bacteria contaminates the food that comes from that sick animals, which can then make the consumer develop an antibiotic resistant infection. While the CDC says that the use of antibiotics in the food industry should only be used to address sickness in animals, not to promote growth. However, even animals that are not sick get large doses of these antibiotics in order to create a bigger ‘super’ animal to create more food.

Animal Feed:

What do you think a cow eats? Most people would say grass, right? Well the sad truth is that most cows and other animals no longer eat grass, they eat corn and other waste products. These waste products are not limited to processed feathers, poultry litter, floor waste, feces, plastic pellets, and other forms of meat. As we know, cows and chickens are not carnivores and probably should not be eating feces from other animals. The reason why the food industry does this is because this type of ‘animal feed’ makes the animals fatter creating more food production per animal, which is then more profit for the food industry. This also creates less waste from the food industry since rather than throwing these things away, they feed them to the animals. The problem with this practice though, is that whatever the animal eats directly influences the consumer. In a study done by the Animal Protein Producers Industry, salmonella was found is about one fourth of feed on average. To simplify, if the cows are eating salmonella contaminated food, and then the consumer is eating it, there is a much higher likelihood that the consumer will then be contaminated as well.

So, why does all of this matter to the consumer?

It matters because the consumer should have a say in how their food is being made. They should also be knowledgable about what exactly the risks are to what they are eating. If the consumer is unaware of the practices being used in the food industry, how will they be able to fight it? They won’t.

The food industry needs a completely renovation. The government should not be biased towards companies using unsafe practices. The people that make decisions on consumer health should be the consumer themselves, not the company getting a paycheck. Th only people that should have a say in what a safe farming practice is, is the consumers and the FDA or other food safety commissions.

A change needs to be made, and while change may take time it is definitely worth the wait to save even one life from dangerous food consumption. Food should not be made on a conveyer belt. Cows and other animals were meant to eat grass and be able to roam around. While these new techniques have made quite the profit for these big companies, the consumer is suffering greatly.  Consumer health needs to come before profit, and the only way to do that is to fight the industry for change.