The Burden of Mental Illness: A stigmatism

In recent years there has been a rash of mass shootings and other gun related violence across America.

After a tragedy of this nature occurs the nation as well as its people often ask what could have possibly driven a person to commit such a heinous act, and what can be done in order to prevent future tragedies from unfolding in the future.

Before we dive into that I think that it’s important to consider what exactly a mass shooting is. Part of the problem is that so many organizations have different definitions of constitutes a mass shooting. For the sake of this article, we’ll go with the Federal Bureau of Investigation of mass shooting which is defined as “three or more killed”(FBI) in an incident of gun violence. In the 2015 calendar year there were 355 mass shootings(NY Times). Now this may seem like a lot, and may leave the average American wondering why they haven’t heard of all of those incidents, rather than the select few that most major media outlets covered.

  A map of mass shootings that occurred in 2015 within the United States(PBS)

 

For example most Americans are familiar with the events that unfolded at San Bernardino, California that resulted in the death of 14 civilians and the 2 perpetrators, due to the large media coverage dedicated to covering the tragedy. However, most Americans were not familiar of the events that transpired in Columbus, Ohio on November 23rd, 2015. On the early Monday evening a home invader entered a residential home and shot four family members before being gunned down by responding police officers(The Columbus Dispatch). Both of these events are technically considered mass shootings by definition, however, there is a significant difference between the amount of victims in each tragic occurrence.

Regardless of the number of victims that are claimed by these senseless outbreaks of violence people demand answers as to why such events took place. In the immediate aftermath of a mass shooting that garners national attention news agencies, law enforcement agencies, and the general public immediately begin to research the background of the perpetrator in order to gain clues as to what could have driven a person to commit such an act. Consequently the media tends to publish their immediate findings rather than checking the validity of what they are going to air on the nightly news broadcast. As a result of this misinformation the general public tends to jump to conclusions, which often stigmatize a group of people who share the same trait as the person who committed such a vile act. One group of people that tend to become stigmatized based on the actions of a few people are those who suffer from mental illness.

Though there have been instances of mass shootings throughout the history of the United States, few notable incidents have cemented that notion that people who suffer from mental illness are more prone to violent outbursts in the minds of the general public. The first incident that planted this thought was the horrific events that unfolded on the campus of Virginia Tech university on the morning of April 16th, 2007. On this day, a student at Virginia Tech, Seung-Hui Cho murdered two students in their dorm room, and then headed into an academic building and began firing indiscriminately at anyone who was in the building. His rampage claimed the lives of 32 people and wounded 23 others before he turned his guns on himself and committed suicide.

In the aftermath of the shooting, people began to examine the life of Seung-Hui Cho and his history. After some digging it was found that he suffered from severe depression, anxiety, and mutism. In addition to this, it was also found that he was recommended to undergo counseling and treatment for his mental conditions, however, records indicate that he never went to any of his counseling sessions with university mental health counselors. As a result of this, people blamed his mental illness for the cause of his outburst and soon got the ball rolling on the idea that the mentally ill are prone to outbursts of traumatic violence.

After a few years that resulted in a lack of media coverage of mass shootings, the idea that mental illness was the cause of gun violence was placed on the back burner of public thought and replaced with the controversial topic of gun control. However, the actions of James Holmes undid all the progress that was being made by the American public. At the midnight screening of “The Dark Knight Rises” on July 20, 2012, Holmes entered the theater and started firing on the moviegoers with an arsenal of weapons that included an assault rifle, shotgun, and handgun. Before police were able to apprehend him he claimed the lives of 12 people and injured 70 others. Once police began to look into his personal life, they were faced with an apartment booby trapped with scores of improvised explosive devices and a bevy of cryptic findings. After the clue began to unravel, and Holmes was brought in for trial, his mental condition was called into question, in regards to determine if he was capable to stand accountable for his actions. After being reviewed by multiple psychiatrist, it was found that he suffered from “schizoaffective disorder combined with a social anxiety disorder”(Reuters).

As a result of these findings, people made the assumption that his mental condition drove him to do such torrid actions. This in conjunction with the Virginia Tech massacre, led the majority of the general American public to believe that the mentally ill are more likely to commit horrendous acts of violence. Now we may never know what drove James Holmes to do what he did, but it cannot be used to stigmatize an entire group of people.

With America still shaken to its core about the events that unfolded in Aurora, Colorado, another senseless act of gun violence occurred a few short months away on December 14th, 2012. On this day Adam Lanza gained access to his mother’s Bushmaster assault rifle, murdered his mother in her sleep, and then drove to the Sandy Hook Elementary School. From there broke into the school and began firing indiscriminately in classrooms. His rampage cost the lives of 20 students who attended the elementary school, as well as 7 of its staff members before he took his own life. Much like the previously mentioned tragedies, Adam Lanza’s personal life began to be scrutinized by the media and law enforcement agencies. After examining his past and his personal actions, and it was found that he was diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder(PBS). Though the authorities were able to find Adam Lanza’s medical records they were unable to find a clear motive as to what drove him to murder his sleeping mother and storm Sandy Hook Elementary School. The combination of these two led the general public to believe that his mental condition drove him to commit such an atrocity.

As a result of this, the media and the general public used this to reinforce the idea that those who suffer from some form of mental illness are more likely to commit horrible acts of violence on innocent people.

A survey released by the University of Texas asking what is to blame for mass shootings(Lubbock Online).

 

Now these are just notable examples of the mass shootings that occurred in America in recent years. After the findings by the authorities were released in each of these circumstances people began to notice a trend. That being; all of these tragedies were committed by those who suffered from some form of mental illness. People began to believe that the mentally ill were unstable people and prone to violent outburst of gun violence that leave a trail of bodies in its wake. Now for some they may find it fair to make this assumption, however what needs to be considered is what the definition of a mass shooting is, and more importantly the victim count that qualifies for term mass shooting. In order to determine if mental illness was actually the cause of all of these tragedies, the National Library of Health released a study that sheds light on the risks of gun violence and suicide linked to people with mental disorders. The study found that out of a one year population of instances of gun violence only “4%”(National Library of Health) were perpetrated by those who had a mental illness.

Now this statistic comes as a surprise to most Americans. The eye openingly low number goes to show the perception of the general public can be manipulated by the media. Due to the technicality of what constitutes a mass shooting and the instances of mass shootings that media agencies cover the American public has reached the conclusion that the mentally ill are responsible for most mass shootings and more prone to outbursts of violence. However, the findings of the National Library of Health show that those who suffer from a form of mental illness are only responsible for a fraction of mass shootings.

Yes there have been horrific outbursts of gun violence that have claimed the lives of many by those suffering from mental illness. However, an entire group of people, those being who suffer from mental illness, cannot be stigmatized and stereotyped based on the actions of a few people, nor can they be used as a scapegoat to justify the horrific actions of those responsible for committing them. Though the motives as to why these individuals did what they did may never have been found, it cannot be assumed that their mental state was the reason that they committed such unspeakable tragedies. Just because a person suffers from a mental illness doesn’t make them any less of a person, or more prone to outbursts of horrific gun violence.

 

Works Cited:

“A Study of Active Shooter Incidents Between 2000 and 2013.” Federal Bureau of Investigation. Department of Justice, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.  

Follman, Mark. “How Many Mass Shootings Are There, Really?” The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Dec. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.

Rinehart, Earl. “Family, Neighbors Wait for Answers after Hilltop Fatal Shootings.” The Columbus Dispatch. N.p., 25 Nov. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.

Coffman, Keith. “Second Psychiatrist Concludes Colorado Cinema Gunman Was Sane.” Reuters. N.p., 08 June 2015. Web. 16 Apr. 2016.

“Raising Adam Lanza.” PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 16 Apr. 2016

Swanson, Jeffrey W., E. Elizabeth McGinty, Seena Fazel, and Vickie M. Mays. “Mental Illness and Reduction of Gun Violence and Suicide: Bringing Epidemiologic Research to Policy.” Annals of Epidemiology. Elsevier, n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2016..

“Here’s a Map of All the Mass Shootings in 2015.” PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016

“Texas Tribune Poll: Texans Say Mental Health Top Cause of U.S. Mass Shootings.” Lubbock Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016..

Reflection Questions:

1. The title attracts the reader by informing them of what the piece would be about and how so they are being marginalized, that being people who suffer from some form of a mental illness. The lede following my title attracts the reader by explaining what the particularly the piece will be about. The reader then uses these two to make the connection that the piece is about mental illness and gun violence. Though the lede isn’t necessarily all too creative, it delivers a sense of exigency through explaining that the subject of the piece will be about recent events taking place across the country.
2. As previously mentioned in the first question, the introductory section of my piece delivers a sense of exigency because it informs the reader that the events that will be mentioned in the piece took place recently across the United States. It then locates the problem of which the piece will be about, that being instances of mass shootings across the country and what could have potentially caused them. Followed by this is the rationale and base of my argument, being that the term “mass shooting” is vaguely defined, varies from organization to organization and is largely brought to the attention of the public based on the decision on whether or not to broadcast coverage of the event.
3. I offer a strong idea that requires analysis and support, that being that there is no link between mental illness and gun violence. The analysis part was accomplished by tracking the amount of mass shootings that occurred in the United States during a specific time period and what technically qualifies as a mass shootings. Then I cited specific instances that occurred outside of this timeframe, that people with the opposite viewpoint of me would use as their justification for their viewpoint. I then cited the findings of the National Public Library of Health that reinforced my point in order to effectively inform and persuade my audience. I choose to use the findings of this organization because their findings may not have been necessarily obvious to the average reader.
4. Clarity of thought is present in my article because it introduces the problem, examines the roots of said problem, examples of where the problem occurs, and how the problem got to where it is today. This coincides and reinforces with the writing style, historicised topics, and uniqueness of presentation that I utilized in my piece. My article demonstrates historicized topics by bringing up not only the instances of mass shootings in the year 2015, but also by the way that I brought up specific instances of mass shootings that occurred in previous years such as the Virginia Tech massacre, the Aurora Theater shooting, and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
5. I believe that I did refrain from developing a cliche argument, and in the process of doing so, I believe that my argument would not be considered vague. My argument is developed and sequenced logically by stating the problem, explaining the problem, taking a look at the root of the problem, analyzing the cause of the problem, offering a solution to the problem, and then explaining the rationale behind my solution. I also believe that the average reader of a New York Times article will find that the argument featured in my piece is not overgeneralized, underdeveloped, or poorly explained.
6. It’s no question that mental illness and gun violence is a controversial subject that most Americans would rather sweep under the rug than talk about and try to solve. It is clear that I researched this topic by not only analyzing the big picture of mass shootings in America, but also certain instances that could be utilized by both my side of the argument, and the opposing side of the argument. After informing the reader of these things, I then stated my side of the argument, that being that there is no link between mental illness and gun violence, but also the reasoning I used to arrive at that conclusion. I then joined the “debate” by stating that those who suffer from some form of mental illness cannot be stigmatized by the actions of a certain few people, as well as cannot be used as a scapegoat to justify the actions of others.
7. I believe that I, not only meet all of the research requirements, but also go above them. For example I used two visual sources instead of the required one. To elaborate on this, I provided a map of all the mass shootings that occurred in the United States during the calendar year of 2015. In conjunction with this, I also put the results of a poll released by the University of Texas regarding what the public was believed to be the cause of mass shootings. In regards to the primary research, I met that requirement by utilizing documents that were published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Public Library of Health. The requirement for the amount of secondary sources was also met by citing six pieces of evidence that I believe qualify as secondary sources.
8. The focal points of my argument rest upon the integration of the primary and secondary sources that I used as evidence. The primary sources were integral into mentioning facts that based the rationale of my argument. Whereas the secondary sources were used to bring up specific instances that could be used to create a different facet of my argument so that those who may not have the same viewpoint as me could see in relation to the events that they may be using to develop their own point of view. By integrating both of these, I am able to create an in depth analysis into the problem at hand, and my viewpoint in regards to how I got it.
9. I feel that the rhetorical strategies that I employed in my piece are able to effectively persuade the audience about their stance on the issue of mental illness and gun violence. In order to appeal to their emotional needs I explained the instances of mass shootings by using words that invoke emotion such as “tragic”, “heinous”, “senseless”, and “massacre”. Though appealing to the emotional appeals of the reader is important, it is also important to consider the logical appeals of the reader. In order to do this, I evaluated the specific instances that I was using with details such as the weapon used during shooting, the casualties of each instance, and the mental condition that each perpetrator was in when they committed such act. On top of appealing to the emotional and logical appeals of the reader it also crucial to establish a sense of credibility. I was able to do so by getting the evidence to support my claims from highly credible institutions such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Public Library of Health. By utilizing all three of these rhetorical strategies, I feel that I am able to effectively persuade my audience to change their views from their pre-determined stance on the issue of mental illness and gun violence to my views.
10. In regards to my choices of visual displays, I believe that both of them are appropriate, interesting, and revealing. For example the map of mass shootings across the country is both interesting and revealing because most readers are not aware of the amount of mass shootings that take place across America during a certain time period due to the media only covering certain events. This contributes to my essay because it allows the audience to better visualize one of the focal points of my argument. The other visual that I used was the results of a survey that asked the subjects of it what they felt was the cause of instances of mass shootings. This is appropriate because it provides the thoughts of the general public. Both of these pieces of visual reinforcement contribute to the piece based on the content that they present, but also because of the placement of them throughout the piece.
11. The article displays that I have edited it throughout the revision process. For example, during the scrambled draft writing workshop, it was brought to my attention from one of my classmates that my piece did not have a lede. As a result of this exercise I was able to develop a lede for my piece. In addition to this, this exercise as well as others reading my draft that my paragraphs were too long and did not accurately resemble a New York Times article. With this being brought to my attention I reshaped the structure of my paragraph so that it would resemble a New York Times news article.
12. Hyperlinks are effectively used throughout my article because they link the sources that I am using to reinforce my claims to the website where I found them. I believe that this would qualify as an effective use because it provides the reader with links if they so choose to look further as to where I was getting the reasoning for my argument from.

13. After proofreading my work, I believe that there are no grammatical or spelling errors that can be found. In addition to this, the writing style and usage is appropriate for the context and message that I am conveying through this piece. By doing so, I am able to establish a sense of credibility by coming across as professional and well informed when it comes to talking about such a sensitive that is mental illness and gun violence.

We as a human race and as a society have evolved and grown over time, so changes happening dramatically and some happening slowly. Every facet of human life has changed since the dawn of time. The food we eat know is much different than what our forefathers ate for the past hundreds and thousands of years, what’s startling is that “the way we eat has changed more in the last 50 years than in the previous 10,000”(Food Inc.). As a result of this the human body is struggling to adapt to the rapidly changing diet. Subsequently, humans are paying a high toll and the government does not seem to be doing anything to fix this.

Often times the journey that our food takes may seem simple taking it from the farm to our table, it is much more complex than that. The food arrives to our tables after it makes its way through a complex network of farms, slaughterhouses, transport systems, processing plants, and then finally to the grocery stores where we buy our food. In addition to all of this there is also a bureaucratic environment that complicates the process of getting the food from the farm to our tables even more difficult.

Being that the process of getting the food from the farm to the table involves so many different people, organizations, and processes there is a litany of experts on the topic. Each expert has their own knowledge on their individual area of expertise in the process. As a result of this, every expert has their own story to tell, or a set list of responses they can reply to interview questions that their company permits them to say. Subsequently these responses paint two polar opposite pictures of what actually goes on during the process of getting the food from the farm to the kitchen table. As a result of this, the journey is shrouded in secrecy that often results in the deceit of the customer, that could either leaving them feeling satisfied with their meal or feeling ill from the results of negligently handled food.

While the text argues that there needs to be more government regulations in regards to the handling of the food we eat, my own view is that the government does not have enough resources to do so, nor the power to do so because of the lobbying done by the industrial food complex. The United States government relies upon two agencies to thoroughly inspect the food that we as consumers eat. These two agencies are the United States Department of Agriculture(USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration(FDA). The USDA is tasked with inspecting and regulating the meats being processed at the slaughterhouses, the carcasses of animals, as well as poultry. Whereas the FDA is responsible for regulating drugs consumed by both humans and animals, tobacco, the safe and responsible transportation of food, and the additives that are put into food. Though these two agencies have different responsibilities, they are faced with the same issue, a stunning lack of resources to effectively complete the task they are given. The federal government employs about “700 FDA inspectors [who] must oversee 30,000 food manufacturers and processors, 20,000 warehouses, 785,000 commercial and institutional food establishments, 128,000 grocery and convenience stores, and 1.5 million vending operations”(Nestle). Similarly to this account, the USDA “has 7,000 inspectors or so, and they oversee 6,000 meat, poultry, and egg establishments –and– 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). Due to the tremendous responsibility that these organizations are tasked with, food that is not fit for human consumption often slips through the proverbial cracks and onto the dinner table.

Throughout the process of getting the food from the farm to the table, it becomes exposed to certain substances that can cause detrimental effects on human health. One particular foodborne illness that is common is the E. Coli virus. E. Coli bacteria is found in the digestive tracts of livestock, it becomes exposed to the consumer when the bacteria laden manure is used to fertilize crops. Though there is no way to eradicate the E. Coli bacteria found in the digestive tract of livestock, there is a way to reduce the chance of having food tainted by the bacteria, and that is the growing system utilized by the farmer. According to Blake Hurst there are two farming systems, those being the conventional approach and the organic approach. The conventional approach involves the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers in order to help the plant grow and remain healthy. On the other hand, the organic method does not use such strong pesticides and fertilizers in favor of organic alternatives. After detailing the differences between the different farming methods he then goes on to say “organic foods were considerably less likely than conventional foods to have pesticide residues, although organic foods were higher in e. coli”(Hurst).

The issue of food safety recently garnered national attention when the popular fast food restaurant Chipotle recently had an E. Coli outbreak in some of their locations. The Center for Disease Control found that there were two different outbreaks of E. Coli. The first outbreak was much larger than the second one and “55 people in 11 states”(NPR) whereas the second outbreak “infected 5 people in Oklahoma, Kansas, and North Dakota”(NPR). Another thing that contributes to the issue of food safety is the food that livestock consumes before being slaughtered. In a report published by Consumer Report it was found that “10 percent to 30 percent of feed can differ radically from what cows and poultry would eat in their natural habitat”(Consumer Report). The purpose of doing so is that a farmer can fatten up their livestock in the most rapid and cost effective manner. However, this does come at a price, the difference in dietary substanance often has adverse health effects on the animal which in turn leads to the increased of foodborne illness on the consumer’s end.

Due to the attention that this food safety crisis caused, there has been an increased call for the government to step in and introduce stricter regulations regarding the safety of the food that we consume. As previously the government already employs two food regulatory agencies, those being the FDA and the USDA, however, they do not have the resources to effectively protect the general public. Though the government has tried to increase its regulatory power, special interest groups and the large agricultural companies lobby and try to prevent the federal government from being able to enact harsher regulations and legislation. The 2008 documentary regarding the U.S. agricultural system, Food Inc., reveals that during the Bush administration several of his appointed leaders were part of the special interest groups who would have suffered had tougher regulations been enacted. For example, the head of the FDA during his presidency, Lester M. Crawford Jr. was the former executive vice president of the National Food Processors Association. In addition to this, the appointed chief of  USDA James F. Fitzgerald was the former chief lobbyist for the beef industry in Washington. Coinciding with this, in 1998 meat and poultry associations used their influence by suing the USDA into stripping them of their power to shut down food processing plants if they repeatedly failed microbial testing done by the USDA.

Clearly the journey our food takes from the farm to our table is far more complex than what it seems. The journey displays the complex relationship between the industrial food complex, government regulatory agencies, and the special interest groups who are trying to get their agenda pushed to the forefront of public attention.

Now after reading this you may find yourself asking if what you can do to try and solve the issue at hand. Though there are many things we as consumers can do, the most effective one will be what we choose to do with our money. By refusing to buy certain products or choosing to opt with a more organic choices we are able to show the major food corporations that control American agriculture that we demand change. Cutting into these companies’ bottom line will certainly attract their attention and garner change in their policies and actions.

Works Cited:

Nestle, Marian. “Resisting Food Safety.” (n.d.): 1-19. Print.

Hurst, Blake. “Organic Illusions – AEI.” AEI. N.p., 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Kennedy, Merrit. “E. Coli Outbreaks At Chipotle Restaurants ‘Appear To Be Over,’ CDC Says.” NPR. NPR, 01 Feb. 2016. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

You Are What They Eat. Rep. N.p.: Consumer Report, n.d. Print.

Food, Inc. Movie One, 2008. DVD.

Reflection Questions:

1. The “Writer’s Project” essentially argues that the traditional way of interpreting a piece solely by its thesis isn’t exactly the best way of going about and doing that. It argues that a better way of doing so is to consider the aims, methods, and materials that the author used throughout their piece.. I was able to identify the text’s “project” by carefully annotating the text and discussing its findings with the rest of the class. By listening to the findings of my peers I was able to see another perspective on the same material. My “project” was to inform the audience about the dangers of the American agricultural and how governmental oversight is largely at the root of the problem.
2. I believe that the “Sorting it Out” workshop was highly beneficial towards helping me complete the project. By completing it I was able to organize my thought into a rudimentary draft before I went about doing the leg work of writing the preliminary draft. The section that helped me out the most was Section E. In this section I had to take the summary of the sources and then utilize them in the terms of my own project. Through doing this I had an even better idea on how I will formulate my piece and in what I order I will utilize all of the sources.

3.From what I understand, I believe that synthesis involves analyzing all the given pieces in order to determine what stance they have on a particular issue. This is crucial because if I wasn’t able to tie all of the sources together in a clear and logical manner, my argument would crumble and cause me to lose the reader’s attention. The synthesis process manifested in my final draft because I was able to connect all of my sources in a clear and concise manner in order to form a stronger argument in the piece that I wrote.

4. One accomplishment that I felt that I achieved during this unit was learning how to blend persuasive and research writing. Through the blog format of this piece it is crucial to attract the reader’s attention through persuasive means, in addition to providing them with carefully researched facts in order to reinforce the claims made throughout it. In addition to this, I also learned what a lede is, and how to construct one. This is an important skill to know because a lede allows for me to attract the reader into reading the piece that I have written.
5. At first I wasn’t entirely sure what the main idea of my piece would be. After doing some of the workshops in class I was able to come up three main ideas, they were “While it seems that Organic food is healthier for the consumer, it does come at an increased risk of foodborne illnesses.”, “Although Monsonto produces seeds that do grow faster and provide cheaper seeds, they unfairly target farmers who do not use their product”, and “While the text argues that there needs to be more government regulations in regards to the handling of the food we eat, my own view is that the government does not have enough resources to do so, nor the power to do so because of the lobbying done by the industrial food complex”. Throughout the drafting process and peer review I was able to get a stronger idea on what idea I wanted to use, I decided that I could write the stronger argument with the third main idea that I came up with. I can attribute the evolution of my main idea to the workshops that were done in class and through peer review.
6. In order to structure this article I wanted to be able to connect the “project” of each piece together in a logical and coherent manner. Earlier in the drafting process I didn’t have my interpretations of each piece in any order, I simply just took what each piece was arguing and explained it. After doing so I began to connect them with my interpretation of them and how they can be tied together and how they tie together with my version of the ‘Writers Project”
7. In order to make this piece flow I needed to synthesize all of the sources I used in a logical manner. In order to do so I had to first have a clear idea on how I can connect them all. I decided to write my paper on how foodborne illnesses are becoming increasingly dangerous to society due to the lack of government action. Since not all of the articles played a direct hand in contributing in this argument I had to pick out the pieces that did. For example Blake Hurst’s piece didn’t mention government oversight, however it did mention the prevalence of foodborne illness in the American farm system. This then evolved into me being able to tie all of the sources together in order to make my argument stronger, as demonstrated in the essay above.
8. After being introduced to the concept of a lede I wasn’t entirely sure how to create an effective one. The first draft of my lede was too lengthy and didn’t have any of attention grabbing features that were in the examples on the lede and synthesis workshop activity. After receiving some peer review I decided to introduce a quote in it from one of the sources that I found to be particularly interesting. To be fair my lede did become more lengthy than the average lede, I think that the extra wordage was necessary to attract the reader’s attention and summarize what they will be reading about in the piece.

9. In the next Unit projects I want to be able to write stronger and more effective ledes. Being that this unit was the first time I was introduced to ledes, I feel that with even more experience and practice I can grab the reader’s attention and motivate them to read my work.

Often times the journey that our food takes may seem simple taking it from the farm to our table, it is much more complex than that. The food arrives to our tables after it makes its way through a complex network of farms, slaughterhouses, transport systems, processing plants, and then finally to the grocery stores where we buy our food. In addition to all of this there is also a bureaucratic environment that complicates the process of getting the food from the farm to our tables even more difficult.

While the text argues that there needs to be more government regulations in regards to the handling of the food we eat, my own view is that the government does not have enough resources to do so, nor the power to do so because of the lobbying done by the industrial food complex. The United States government relies upon two agencies to thoroughly inspect the food that we as consumers eat. These two agencies are the United States Department of Agriculture(USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration(FDA). The USDA is tasked with inspecting and regulating the meats being processed at the slaughterhouses, the carcasses of animals, as well as poultry. Whereas the FDA is responsible for regulating drugs consumed by both humans and animals, tobacco, the safe and responsible transportation of food, and the additives that are put into food. Though these two agencies have different responsibilities, they are faced with the same issue, a stunning lack of resources to effectively complete the task they are given. The federal government employs about “700 FDA inspectors [who] must oversee 30,000 food manufacturers and processors, 20,000 warehouses, 785,000 commercial and institutional food establishments, 128,000 grocery and convenience stores, and 1.5 million vending operations”(Nestle). Similarly to this account, the USDA “has 7,000 inspectors or so, and they oversee 6,000 meat, poultry, and egg establishments –and– 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). Due to the tremendous responsibility that these organizations are tasked with, food that is not fit for human consumption often slips through the proverbial cracks and onto the dinner table.

Throughout the process of getting the food from the farm to the table, it becomes exposed to certain substances that can cause detrimental effects on human health. One particular foodborne illness that is common is the E. Coli virus. E. Coli bacteria is found in the digestive tracts of livestock, it becomes exposed to the consumer when the bacteria laden manure is used to fertilize crops. Though there is no way to eradicate the E. Coli bacteria found in the digestive tract of livestock, there is a way to reduce the chance of having food tainted by the bacteria, and that is the growing system utilized by the farmer. According to Blake Hurst there are two farming systems, those being the conventional approach and the organic approach. The conventional approach involves the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers in order to help the plant grow and remain healthy. On the other hand, the organic method does not use such strong pesticides and fertilizers in favor of organic alternatives. After detailing the differences between the different farming methods he then goes on to say “organic foods were considerably less likely than conventional foods to have pesticide residues, although organic foods were higher in e. coli”(Hurst).

The issue of food safety recently garnered national attention when the popular fast food restaurant Chipotle recently had an E. Coli outbreak in some of their locations. The Center for Disease Control found that there were two different outbreaks of E. Coli. The first outbreak was much larger than the second one and “55 people in 11 states”(NPR) whereas the second outbreak “infected 5 people in Oklahoma, Kansas, and North Dakota”(NPR). Another thing that contributes to the issue of food safety is the food that livestock consumes before being slaughtered. In a report published by Consumer Report it was found that “10 percent to 30 percent of feed can differ radically from what cows and poultry would eat in their natural habitat”(Consumer Report). The purpose of doing so is that a farmer can fatten up their livestock in the most rapid and cost effective manner. However, this does come at a price, the difference in dietary substanance often has adverse health effects on the animal which in turn leads to the increased of foodborne illness on the consumer’s end.

Due to the attention that this food safety crisis caused, there has been an increased call for the government to step in and introduce stricter regulations regarding the safety of the food that we consume. As previously the government already employs two food regulatory agencies, those being the FDA and the USDA, however, they do not have the resources to effectively protect the general public. Though the government has tried to increase its regulatory power, special interest groups and the large agricultural companies lobby and try to prevent the federal government from being able to enact harsher regulations and legislation. The 2008 documentary regarding the U.S. agricultural system, Food Inc., reveals that during the Bush administration several of his appointed leaders were part of the special interest groups who would have suffered had tougher regulations been enacted. For example, the head of the FDA during his presidency, Lester M. Crawford Jr. was the former executive vice president of the National Food Processors Association. In addition to this, the appointed chief of  USDA James F. Fitzgerald was the former chief lobbyist for the beef industry in Washington. Coinciding with this, in 1998 meat and poultry associations used their influence by suing the USDA into stripping them of their power to shut down food processing plants if they repeatedly failed microbial testing done by the USDA.

Clearly the journey our food takes from the farm to our table is far more complex than what it seems. The journey displays the complex relationship between the industrial food complex, government regulatory agencies, and the special interest groups who are trying to get their agenda pushed to the forefront of public attention.

Works Cited:

Nestle, Marian. “Resisting Food Safety.” (n.d.): 1-19. Print.

Hurst, Blake. “Organic Illusions – AEI.” AEI. N.p., 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Kennedy, Merrit. “E. Coli Outbreaks At Chipotle Restaurants ‘Appear To Be Over,’ CDC Says.” NPR. NPR, 01 Feb. 2016. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

You Are What They Eat. Rep. N.p.: Consumer Report, n.d. Print.

Food, Inc. Movie One, 2008. DVD.