“Trust is a Must”- Maddie Hinderstein

Producers and consumers are in need of some serious couples therapy.

When we put food into our mouths, our initial reaction is “I can’t wait to eat this!” It’s not like we think, “Hmm, I wonder what cow this hamburger came from?” But in that lies the problem. We shouldn’t have to question it because we should know where our food comes from right down to the cow.

Since we’re starting with the animal itself we have to go a little lower on the food chain to what the animals are eating. All farms are different, so there isn’t one overall way that they’re supposed to feed their animals. According to, “You are what they eat” by Consumer Reports 10-30% of animals diets are unknown. Cattle are allowed to eat processed feathers for protein and chickens can have meat and bone meal.

By doing this they fatten the animals quickly and cheaply. In addition to those tasty treats, animals are constantly being injected with steroids and other hormones to make their meet more profitable. I don’t know about anyone else, but personally I’d rather not be eating steroids and bones for dinner.

Even though those animals are most likely forced to eat the bones and take the steroids, there are industries where we can’t always control what the animals are putting in their bodies. Our seafood industry in huge especially because we import 80% of it, but the FDA only tests 2% of the imports for drug residues. Salmon and tuna are two of the biggest fish that we eat. Since there at the top of the food chain they eat everything that there prey has eaten. By the time that all of the toxins and chemicals build up and then get to us, it’s a disgusting amount of bad things to be putting in our body.

We shouldn’t be eating blindly and that’s what this author is trying to say. We should be able to know more about where our food is coming from, what the animals are eating, and in the long run what are we going to be putting into our bodies. Since many people eat from large conglomerate companies, it’s important for their reputation that the customers are confident in their products.

The author makes it very clear that there are dangers in the fact that consumers don’t know where their food is coming from or what it’s consuming. The only negative about this author is that it gives both sides of the story. I understand that that is what makes a good piece of writing, but since it’s coming from the perspective of the consumer it should be highlighting the problems and the ways that they can be improved.

There are many differences between different consumers and different producers. A big difference between producers is whether a business is small or large. Small businesses, like farmers markets, rely on loyal customers with good relationships. Large businesses have a huge base of customers and they don’t pay attention to whether or not someone starts using their products.

Another large difference is between the customers themselves. There are some people who have the luxury of being able to buy high end ingredients that are healthy and organic, but some people have to buy discounted things and don’t have the opportunity to properly nourish themselves or their families. Some people don’t really have the ability to choose what they eat. They have to just deal with what they’re given and that’s unfortunate because there are probably lower-class families that want to be healthy and be nourished and don’t have the ability to do so.

Although its thought to be “the way of the future” or “the only way to have a healthy lifestyle”, there are many secrets behind the organic industry that its consumers don’t know about. According to “Organic Illusions” by Blake Hurst, the organic industry isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Even though the industry itself is expanding, organic food sales only make up, “4% of the dollar value of all foods sold,” (Hurst). With his witty and sarcastic tone, Blake Hurst is able to connect with readers and make them see that not everything is so black vs. white in the food industry.

Companies can lose customers by the buzz that’s created about them, but if they prevent the buzz then nothing gets lost. That didn’t matter for one family featured in Food Inc., a documentary focusing on “America’s corporate controlled food industry. When a family was asked to be interviewed for the movie, they didn’t hesitate because they wanted to get their story out to public so that they could know the truth. The film captures the heartbreak and the struggles extremely well and has the ability to make viewers really feel something.

Barbara Kowalcyk is a food safety advocate and when her son, Kevin, was only 2 years old, he ate some bad meat and was stricken with E. coli 0157:H7. Within a matter of 12 days he was dead. She explains throughout her segment in the movie that she had a bill made, Kevin’s Law, that would give back to the USDA the power to shut down plants that repeatedly produced contaminated meat. President Obama eventually passed the law in 2011, but that was six years after the bill was introduced. And before the law even had to be made, the company the produced the meat tried suing the USDA because ‘they didn’t have the authority to shut down the meat plants.’

Barbara said that all she wanted was an apology from the company for the loss of her son, but she didn’t even get that. She just wanted to feel protected and she didn’t get that either. No matter how much power we think we have, it may never be enough to stand up against big companies. It’s sad to think that the death of someone’s child didn’t even make the company feel sorry for that poor family. It goes to show how screwed up the system is, just because you’re big and mighty doesn’t mean you get to step all over people.

As humans, we’re programmed to want to know things. The absence of knowing leads to suspicion, worry, and lack of trust, which is exactly what people, are feeling towards many companies. According to, “Consumers Want Food Companies to Pull Back the Curtain,” by Charlie Arnot the only way to earn a consumer’s trust is through transparency. Companies have to be honest with their customers and if they’re not honest it’s because they’re trying to hide something. This source had an excellent view from a passionate consumer that wanted to be part of the conversation with producing companies. They want there to be a good relationship between producer and consumer so that loyalty never has to be compromised or questioned.

Another thing that a lot of companies hide is their information on illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths. According to “The Politics of Foodborne Illness” in 1999 there were millions of illnesses, thousands of hospitalizations, and hundreds of deaths due to foodborne illnesses. One of the worst parts about this is that the chart in the article only lists the best-known pathogens that cause foodborne illnesses. There are so many more bacteria or other things that could be causing the illnesses the consumers don’t know about.

It’s unfair that the consumers and the victims of the illnesses aren’t even aware of why they’re becoming sick. It’s pretty sick and twisted that the relationship between the consumer and the producer isn’t strong. It’s unfair that consumers have to suffer and producers can just slide underneath the cracks like nothing has happened. Consumers need to have a voice in the conversation!

With the chart, the article is able to inform the readers of the statistics that stand. It’s one thing to hear about an illness or a death in the news, but to know that the numbers are so large is another thing.

Trust is a must. It’s crucial for any functioning relationship even if it’s such a large relationship in the food industry. For it to succeed, it needs work and effort from both sides. Consumers need to trust, but producers need to give them a reason to trust. There needs to be constant communication and equal communication from both sides or else the relationship will fail and the food industry will collapse.

 

Unit 1 Reflection

To me, a writer’s “project” is a culmination of a few things. The most important thing about a project is the point that one trying to get across to the readers and what is trying to be proven. The more secondary things are the types of genres one uses, the tones, the word choice and other things that help support the point that is trying to be made. For my blog, my project is that consumers need to be able to trust producers that are giving them food.

Especially since I got a late start on the project, the “Sorting it Out” workshop was a life saver for me. It helped me organize my thoughts in a really concise way and helped me figure out what message I wanted to get across.

Synthesis is crucial when reading something because you want to be able to grasp the meaning that the author was putting into their writing. The point of synthesizing is to figure out what the author meant and why they said something. They wouldn’t have said it if it didn’t have importance.

This unit I was able to become confident in my writing again. When I took WRT 105 last semester I wasn’t confident in my work and that made me want to share less and it didn’t make me want to be honest in my work. I usually just faked it til I made it and I now understand that that’s not the way to succeed.

From the beginning this was going to be my main idea. I know it sounds like I made no improvements on it but that’s what it is. For a while now I’ve been very passionate about my main idea the issue behind it and I knew from the beginning that this was what I wanted to do.

I started with talking about examples from each of the sources I used. I then synthesized them and gave my opinions. Then I talked about the article itself, meaning the aesthetics of it like the tone and word choices.

Throughout the blog I talk about each of my articles and the authors projects. I go into detail about their tones and how they come across to the readers.

Originally my lead was very long and choppy and it didn’t seem like it was going anywhere. Since I started my project so late I really just sat down and started writing and I never really had a traditional first draft. But when I was reading over my lede to make sure it made sense, I didn’t. So I looked at other leads on Huffington Post and I was able to get some inspiration.

I’d like to learn how to revise better on my own. I usually rely on others for revisions and I’d like to learn how to use myself as a resource and no depend on other people.

Do you know where your children are…because I doubt it’s the fruit section of the supermarket. But does that even matter anymore when the entire system has formed its own agenda?

The idea of food safety is so common in our day to day lives but it is still not taken seriously enough when both major companies and the government thrive on the fact that they can cover up these safety issues in spite of their ‘publicized efforts’ to help. The food industry has not been helping anyone but themselves, and this has become apparent in the last few years.

Many investigative journalists and brave writers have gone out in search of the truth about the food industry and what they found was definitely a wake up call. It is one thing to hear about an outbreak or two on T.V and brush it aside; it is another to completely disregard countless warnings about food safety that could endanger your well-being or even life. This is why when it comes to seeing who is really being protected we must look into the big food corporations and how the government is allowing them to get away with so much.

Food safety has become something completely different than what the average American comes to think of. It used to be the idea that both the corporations and government were on the people’s side, fighting for our health and vitality; it is no longer so.

Food safety has now become big corporations fighting to gain as much leeway from health regulations so they can stay within ‘code’ and adding other ingredients to counter balance the bacteria living within. Safety has become fighting against the bacteria that is already there, rather than fighting to never have it present at all. This then becomes a vicious cycle. The more the government allows this to go on, the more and more leeway the government gains and continues to abuse the system.

So when it comes to food safety, who is it really saving?

When looking at statistics on food-borne illnesses in the U.S. alone, we begin to see just how careless our government has been. “The most authoritative estimate of the yearly number of cases of food-borne disease in the United States defies belief: 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, 5,000 deaths” (Nestle, 27). Now what could be so safe about that? Nestle is a revered professor on food safety and wants to inform us all on what the dangers could be, because aren’t we all what we eat? She wants to bring forward facts from her own research and knowledge and give true information to those willing to listen. Because if all we ingest are toxins and runoff medication, what do we then become?

This doesn’t sound like food safety at all, this sounds like food politics. Covering up this immense number and making it sound as if these small outbreaks didn’t truly affect many people at all. “It was only a few people” (or so we saw on T.V.), “why should we stop our daily lives to worry about such an issue?” This excuse cannot be used so loosely anymore, especially when we begin to see how the government responds to these issues.

If you go on the internet to see how the government responds to food-borne illnesses, it seems to take it much more seriously on paper. The steps that need to be taken just aren’t being taken to the best of the governments ability and it is beginning to show. When searching the internet on how the government deals with food borne illnesses we are directed to a site named FoodSafety.gov. How convenient. The page that promotes safety has the url of GOV and yet the protocols they promise to enforce are not being taken seriously.

This all becomes relative to the American people until one sees just how close this could be to their own front door. This is why the government should be stepping in and helping rather than covering up. As both a large enough entity and ‘protector’ of the people, this is one of their largest tasks, and they are failing. And to an even further extent, they are guilty. We see this plainly in the documentary Food, Inc. 

In Food, Inc. we learn so much about the food industry and what this enormous job entails if we want to improve our food. We get to not only hear but actually see where our food is truly coming from, and it is not a pretty sight. Robert Kenner, the director of Food, Inc. felt it was time the people of the United States could finally see where their food was coming from and what was being put into it.

“80% of all antibiotics are used on factory farm animals. This statistic at first seemed unrealistic. How was it possible that all the people in the U.S. were only using 20% and then we essentially were eating what was left. What ends up happening is now Americans have a much larger intake of antibiotics than they thought. They are consuming all these products without realizing the consequences behind them.This then becomes an enormous problem that the government isn’t taking care of. This ‘overdose’ of medication is too much for the body and more than usual, they are left regretting that last burger at 2AM.

In Blake Hurst‘s article, he speaks about how although some produce is organic it doesn’t mean it is completely free of pesticides or additives. To grow organics they are allowed to use certain pesticides as long as they are natural ingredients. This is one of the large inconsistencies that Americans have. Even though something is organic, the fine print doesn’t mean the same thing that has been ingrained into our heads. This then goes back to the main issues in Food, Inc. and Nestle’s article, even though things may be understood to be a certain way that is not always the case, and even Hurst, who is on the ‘other side’ of food safety can see holes in the system in which he works.

Organic doesn’t always mean completely free of pesticides and that can be a common misconception. The food industries are thriving on these misconceptions so they can label certain items and charge more, even when the content isn’t completely true. Although Hurst is for conventional farming and it seems he is anti-organic, he is still fueling the fire and informing us on what he feels are issues with farming and pesticide quantity. And the government allows this to happen without a second glance. Once we look deeper into what the contents are, we learn just how misguided and malinformed we are.

This becomes extremely apparent once we read the Consumer Report, “You Are What They Eat.” This is a non-biased publication that brings different information to the table on food safety. It provides countless professionals as well as company players to give info and statistics on food safety subjects. One of their biggest points is if it is okay to eat meat that has been fed animal feed.

David Bossman, recent president and CEO of the American Feed Industry Association recounts its safety. “The food supply as it comes from the production source is very, very safe. We’ve seen that from all sources. And you can eat meat with confidence that not only is it safe, but it’s getting safer because of all the things that industry is doing” (Consumer Reports, 27). This man is a key player in the government as he has a job in the American Feed Industry Association. He has a much larger say in what would be fed to the animals we eat than the people, of course he would defend the actions of the food industry, for he is the man making money from it. Being president of the company only enforces his opinion to support it.

Those fighting against feed had another opinion entirely. Carol Tucker-Foreman, director of the Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America, said nearly the opposite. “Rules protecting the feed supply aren’t as strong as they should be, and the FDA enforcement has been more wishful thinking than reality. Contaminated animal feed can result in contaminated food, putting the public health at risk” (Consumer Reports, 27). This woman has no ties to the large corporations or feed developers. She is just a woman who wishes to better the lives of countless Americans with the knowledge she has. This is the kind of information that the government isn’t giving us and in turn is betraying our trust in the government.

So before you decide to trust everything you hear on the news or something in a magazine, just think. Stop and think. Am i being told the truth about what I’m eating or should I take another look. It may end up saving your life.

Reflection:

1. My understanding of the writer’s project is to get deeper into the meaning of a text. Not to have one main thesis and base your entire paper on it but to have a more fluid project. Of course you need to have a certain main idea, but the rules are slightly changed. You don’t have to live in the parameters given by conventional writing but rather are given the freedom to choose words, phrases, and ideas that may otherwise have been left out from the argument. In my own article I feel I did this by making my main argument on food safety and drawing different opinions and quotes together to support how the government is failing to deliver on the subject. I also got to use more of an opinionated mindset in this paper which I usually do not get to do in the more conventional pf papers.

2. The sorting it out workshop I feel was most useful for its organizational skills. I personally do not enjoy the outlining process and this workshop forced me to sit down and truly think before I wrote a word of my blog. This was an odd experience for me, since I do all the outlines in my head. I found what was most useful was having to look for the passages ahead of time. I usually look for passages to fit my arguments once i reach that part of a paper. In this assignment I had to do the opposite. I shaped the argument around the different key passages I was taking from the articles. This became extremely helpful in this format since I am used to a different and much longer writing style, while these were choppy and to the point.

3. Synthesis was to somehow take different opinions and ideas and shape them into a singular argument. This was a challenge since some of the articles had completely opposing views from the others. For instance, when using Hurst in this article against food safety, I took how although he was for conventional farming, he was bringing other less reviewed safety issues to light. This was a way to use the source and still get valuable information.

4. During this unit I truly feel I have learned so much about food and where it comes from. I never found myself so involved at the grocery store. I usually just went for whatever it was that I usually bought, but I now take a second look. This would have gone on the same if not for this class. I also like the writer’s project. Having to veer from the thesis style writing was something I never thought I would do!

5. My main idea came with the title of this article “Food Safety, Who’s Safety.” I feel this is already honing in on what I wish to convey to my fellow readers. It is important for me to give them the info offhand since this is a blog post. Therefore, I made sure it was right in the audience’s face. The evolution then continued once I began to attack the main topic in the first few paragraphs, most specifically in the 5th when I go on to say exactly how I feel about big corporations and the governments lack of control. This is where my paper truly builds momentum.

6. When I wrote the first draft of this paper I just wanted to get all my ready information out there, so I did. I put all the passages I had ahead of time first. They were what I used to fuel my argument, but I obviously couldn’t start with them. So I worked around these main passages that I really wanted to be center arguments for my paper and went from there. In my later draft we can see that the passages are not right at the beginning but I have put my argument (and sass) at the beginning. This then allows for my point to be set and then the support afterwards.

7. One example of how I synthesized was near the middle of my paper. It shows two similar views and one alternative view, but they all come together for my argument. This then goes back to the main issues in Food, Inc. and Nestle’s article, even though things may be understood to be a certain way that is not always the case, and even Hurst, who is on the ‘other side’ of food safety can see holes in the system in which he works. This came together towards the end of my draft when all these passages were already down.

8. The lede that I had in my first draft was not very enticing, but rather more informative. “The idea of food safety is so common in our day to day lives but it is still not taken seriously enough when both major companies and the government thrive on the fact that they can cover up these safety issues in spite of their ‘publicized efforts’ to help.” That was my first lede, and although it was good for my paper later on, it was not my final lede. It was not until I was in class that I realized how much better it could get. This is when I came up with my new lede, “Do you know where your children are…because I doubt it’s the fruit section of the supermarket. But does that even matter anymore when the entire system has formed its own agenda?”

9. I would like to further work on the writer’s project since it was very difficult to stride from the thesis base paper that has been engraved in my mind. As an ETS major I adore using large vocabulary and make the piece fluid and nice to the ear. It is one of my favorite parts of my writing, but I cannot always get away with it. It isn’t the only writing I will need to do and I have to more easily veer from its coarse.

Matt Nolan

Critical research

The American Food System

                                                                By: Matthew Nolan

Do you ever wonder where that cheeseburger that you picked up at McDonalds for lunch came from or what it is made out? Some do, some don’t but almost everyone is un informed on what they are putting into their bodies on a daily basis.

There are many different views when it comes to the American food system and how it is run. Many of these views are shown in the articles Food Inc., You Are What They Eat, Organic Illusions, and Resisting Food Safety. Theses articles all bring up things that go unseen to the general public that are the ones who are consuming the food and should know what they are putting into their mouths.
You may ask well, what is in jeopardy with the way that the American food system is being run today? The answer, there are many different things. But, the biggest one is the health of the American consumers. Most of the food being consumed on a daily basis in America is not good for the human body due to the practices of the food system.

The food industry is corrupted by big companies that are thirsty for money, forcing farmers to use GMO’s and specific feeds/farming techniques. A great majority of these things are bad for animals, humans, and the environment. The government(FDA,USDA) needs to do a better job at regulating and enforcing their rules on these techniques/practices used by companies and farmers. This leads to many unmoral things and sickness that could all be avoided if things were run correctly and morally. But is there a way to fix all of this and have a healthier food system for all of America or will we keep going down the same path?

Large companies have taken over the American food system single handedly in their desire to make the most money possible. How did they do this?

They have power and control over farmers by paying them good money to do what they want them to and to say nothing about it. If the farmer wanted to leave and be out on his own he would most likely go out of business due to all of the surrounding farmers working for the company that they once did. We see this in the video “Food Inc.” where the farmers talk about how they are controlled like puppets and doing things that they don’t believe in themselves. Companies also make seed deals that the farmers have to use and if you store the seeds or try and sell them you will have a lawsuit coming your way.  The feed that they force their farmers to feed to their animals is mostly GMO’s and other parts of chopped up animals. On top of all of this, most of the government and people above the big companies have money invested in the companies. This makes it almost impossible to change how things are happening now with the massive amounts of corruption.

The corruption, GMO’s, pesticides, etc. are bad for America, consumers, animals, and even the environment. How? There are many studies that have been performed to prove this.

Much of what is in the animals feed is very disgusting. That means that consumers are eating those animals that grew up eating that feed. “Our investigation raises concerns that the federal government isn’t doing enough to protect the feed supply and that as a result the food we eat may not be as safe as it could be”(CR Pg.26). The feed makes the animals unhealthy and many things are being thrown in that should not be like leftover pieces from other butchered animals, waste, and GMO’s.

GMO’s are in a ton of the foods that are being sold to consumers. As it says in the article GMO pig feed “Currently, no GE safety testing is required in the U.S. The long-term study revealed that pigs fed a GE diet suffered higher rates of severe stomach inflammation…”. This causes many problems that go unseen, for example gluten, many people in America do not know that they are gluten sensitive and it causes many different problems throughout the body. Pesticides and animal waste is being spread into fields and other places in the environment that leads to the polluting of water that all life drinks from on a daily bases. Workers are being mistreated in many of the facilities across America. They get paid dirt for doing dangerous and disgusting jobs. These are just some of the many things that are going on behind the scenes that is ignored by the food industry.

The government, USDA, and FDA are not doing their jobs to overlook the food industry and protect animals and humans. For example Nestle says that they have a lack of funding and manpower to do the job and keep up with the growing food system. The lack of manpower leads to a lack of inspections and oversight of practices that in turn are twisted and there is more room for error which leads to food borne illness and other things.

According to consumer reports, about 80% of seafood in the United States is imported and the FDA tests only about 2%. That is a ridiculously low percentage to be testing on all imports that could contain toxins and bacteria that could harm consumers. The FDA and USDA need to find a way to get more funding and employees to keep up with the changes in the food system for the good of the consumers. It is ridiculous that the consumers think that the job is being done in the right way and that they have nothing to worry about when it is being done poorly. The government, the FDA and USDA need to do a better job, its as simple as that.

There are ways to fix this mess that is going on with the food system in America. But no one can seem to agree and points fingers at everyone els for the problems. As Nestle says, the government(FDA,USDA) blames the corporations/companies, which blame the consumers and vice versa. Once we get over that we can start breaking down how to solve this problem.

As seen in the video “Food Inc.” one farmer did everything the natural way. For example the cows were in a field, ate the grass, and went to the bathroom and the cycle continued. “If the animals were on a grass diet would eliminate 75% of E coli in gut”(Food Inc.). If this was done throughout the US there would be less talk about feed and what environment that the animals lived in. Taking away the big companies that control everything would be another good idea.

    If food was bought locally that decreases the chances for bacteria and other things to grow with the less time that it is processed, shipped, and stored. Though some would disagree with this hypothesis like Blake Hurst. Hurst while talking about a study done at Stanford disagrees with the more natural way. “When a study finds no differences in nutritional value after 70 years of hybrid seeds, 60 years of chemical fertilizers, a half century of synthetic pesticide application, and almost two decades of GM seed, its a problem for the narrative of the organic industry”. This is definitely worth looking into but there would need to be more studies done since so many people would be for a more organic old fashioned way of farming. What happened to the old way of farming where there were minimal problems when it came to practices, GMO’s, pesticides, feed, etc. Will there be a day when we revert back to the ways that were less harming?

As you can see the American food system has many underlying problems that is blind to the consumers. American people are uninformed with what goes on behind the scenes and what they are putting into their bodies day after day. Starting with company corruption, GMO’s, poor practices, lack of government funding/manpower are all big problems that have to be looking into. There are many different ideas and ways that it can be changed for the good. But the American people need to step up and make it known that there is a problem that needs to be fixed. The people in charge will not do anything about it if they are making their money. Also having everyone involved with the food system blaming each other for the poor job is definitely not fixing the problem. So it comes back to this question do you believe that the American food system change for the good? Or will it always be in the poor non ethical state that it is now.

Reflection Questions

Unit I / 10%

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

1.) 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.

I believe that the writers project brings attention to what is really going on with a song, writing piece, etc. I always listen to songs and try to figure out what they are singing about, I find that interesting. I look up lyrics and there is a site genius lyrics that kind of interprets the lyrics for you on what they are really trying to say. I think that my project works like this in a way that using the articles brings out what I am really trying to say in a way.

2.)  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?

It helped me know what each articles were talking about with the different words that each of them used. That helped me section different articles together. It also helped by talking about what argument each article was putting forth and so I could also use that to organize them with my own argument.

3.)  Describe your understanding of synthesis. What is its importance? How did it manifest within your drafts and/or final blog article? Provide examples.

At first I had a wide range on what I was writing about. Then after doing some of the exercises that we did in class with the synthesis I got more specific. For example “Consumers do not know what they are eating today” to “When you go to lunch at Burger kind do you know where that burger is coming from and what is in it?” opening sentences early and later. It helped me change to catch the readers attention and be a little more interesting.

4.)  Describe your own accomplishment (of something) during this unit.

Learning how to organize ideas better and how to write a blog compared to a usual essay.

5.) 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?

At the beginning I had a broad idea as there were so many things that I was interested in to write about. But as we went along and did different activities I narrowed down my ideas! All of the exercises that we did really helped me to narrow down my idea and be more specific.

6.) 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.

I liked the activities that we did in class. For example sorting it out. I tried to break down my blog into different parts on what is wrong with the food industry.

7.) 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.

“There are ways to fix this mess that is going on with the food system in the United States. But no one can seem to agree and blames everyone els for the problems. As Nestle says, the government(FDA,USDA) blames the corporations/companies, which blame the consumers and vice versa. Once we get over that we can start breaking down how to solve this problem.

As seen in the video “Food Inc.” one farmer did everything the natural way. For example the cows were in a field, ate the grass, and went to the bathroom and the cycle continued. “If the animals were on a grass diet would eliminate 75% of E coli in gut”(Food Inc.). If this was done throughout the US there would be less talk about feed and what environment that the animals lived in. Taking away the big companies that control everything would be another good idea.

If food was bought locally that decreases the chances for bacteria and other things to grow with the less time that it is processed, shipped, and stored. Though some would disagree with this hypothesis like Blake Hurst. Hurst talking about a study done at Stanford disagrees “When a study finds no differences in nutritional value after 70 years of hybrid seeds, 60 years of chemical fertilizers, a half century of synthetic pesticide application, and almost two decades of GM seed, its a problem for the narrative of the organic industry”. This is definitely worth looking into but there would need to be more studies done since so many people would be for a more organic old fashioned way of farming. What happened to the old way of farming where there were minimal problems when it came to practices, GMO’s, pesticides, feed, etc. Will there be a day when we revert back to the ways that were less harming?

8.) 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?

In the beginning I had a normal introduction. After we did the exercise on the lede I changed it to be more interesting and catch the readers attention. “Do you ever wonder where that cheeseburger that you picked up at McDonalds for lunch came from or what it is made out? Many people are un informed on what they are putting into their bodies on a daily basis.””

9.) Name a specific writing/researching/revision goal you’d like to work on during the next Unit projects.

I would like to work on making my blog smoother and easier to read. I want to learn how to break it down. For example if you see a blog you see a sentence or two then a space then a sentence or 4 space ect. ect. I want to really learn how to do that better.

What will it take for the USDA to protect the American people? Lately it appears that our government isn’t worried about reforming its safety procedures. The calls for financial profit and economic growth are draining out the nations cries for change.

 

While more people are becoming more inclined to inquire about the food and drug industries, the power that these organizations have over the American people are still overlooked. This is due to the strong ties that these companies have to the US government. These connections are exposed through many mediums of communication, specifically in the documentary Food Inc., and in the piece “Resisting Food Safety” by: Marian Nestle. This impact is pivotal to be aware of, as it directly impacts the nations present state, and future. While the cost effective and efficient nature of using technological and scientific mutations in the food industry is undeniable, the compromise of individual safety through the production of GMO’s and emitted pollution via pesticides are too impactful to ignore. This aspect of the nation’s food industry is enabled by large corporations, often more powerful than the government, that therefore directly influence the health of our people and planet.

One of the most impactful aspects of the food industry is the production of feed for livestock. This is due to the fact that feed that is meant for an animal can be equally as influential on the health of the person eating it. The issue of animal feed divides people, essentially depending on whether they value a greater chance of personal health, or cost and efficiency. In the article “You Are What They Eat” it is noted that there are many potential risks in the production of feed. David Bossman, a former president of the AFIA stated, “feed can become contaminated…people make honest mistakes.” It’s impossible to ignore the inconsistency in the food safety based off this dialogue. Furthermore, corporations have been known to expose feed to clay, potentially increasing the risk of toxic contamination from the farm to the dinner table.

The current governmental systems regulating food and drug corporations are the reasons why we are so susceptible to the contaminations mentioned by Bossman. Mass confusion and danger can be attributed to the divisions of power, and the lack of size of the USDA and the FDA. Marian Nestle delves into these issues in her piece “Resisting Food Safety.” The sectors of separation between the two organizations are complicated and specific. For example, the USDA begins inspections at the slaughterhouse, while the FDA’s inspections end there. Additionally, the USDA inspects meat and poultry, while the FDA does not. These differences in authority can cause mistakes, as the two groups must work together closely, often analyzing products from the same corporation. Even more worrisome is the vast array of industries that they must oversee. Nestle includes, “The USDA has 7,000 inspectors or so, and they oversee 6,000 meat, poultry, and egg establishments.” In a more specific instance, it is also cited that in today’s poultry industry, “each USDA inspector must examine 35 birds per minute.” These statistics are alarming, as the room for error appears large. Clyde Haberman of The New York Times provides a similar take on these practices in his article, “Action and Dysfunction in the U.S. Food Safety Effort.” Haberman focuses on the FDA, as he notes that the organization accounts for the examinations “of roughly 80 percent of the nation’s food supply.” This large amount of responsibility, accompanied with the noted thirteen fractions of power within the FDA, its complexity alone is enough to turn some heads. Ultimately, the calls for reform from Haberman and Nestle are warranted. While the US government invested a combined $995 billion in the USDA and FDA in 2000, it is clear that both organizations are in dyer need of a larger workforce, as well as increased funding.

 

American health is the primary concern of the food industry’s inclusion in government practices. The lack of regulations on food and drug corporations effects future generations. American director and producer Robert Kenner commented in his film Food Inc. that “one in three children born after 2000 will contract diabetes.” This statistic is alarming as it shows how the socioeconomic climate of our nation and the food industry are directly correlated to an American’s health. Another devastating effect of this claim the film is seen through Barbara Kowalcyk’s story. Kowalcyk tragically lost her son to e coli after he had eaten a hamburger from a “Jack in the Box” chain restaurant. It is remarkably terrible that a perfectly healthy toddler can lose his or her life in days after simply eating at a fast food restaurant. Occurrences like this one make it apparent that our food can be lethal. It almost sounds irrational due to the common shared ideology that organizations like the FDA are established to protect people. This often leads people to not look towards the food industry when they are sick, even though their illness may be directly linked to it. This attitude is highlighted in Nestle’s work. Nestle recounts an instance in which she attended a family party decades ago. Many guests had contracted food poisoning from the evening. Nestle states that they “did not report our illnesses to health authorities…we did not try to trace the source of the outbreak.” She additionally goes on to note that she assumed that these minor sicknesses were “a normal part of daily living.” These perspectives are ones held by many in the nation. It is often difficult to have the awareness to trace back a food-borne illness to a specific company, as food poisoning is so common. However, this explained commonality is what is most alarming. While one instance may highlight a minor case of food poisoning, another situation may include an outbreak of listeria or e coli.

On the opposition of individuals like Nestle and Kenner are authors like Blake Hurst. Hurst explains his support of the food industries use of GMO’s in his article “Organic Illusions.” In the work he preaches about the positive influence on production that this practice, among others, enables. He states, “Millions of hands would be needed to produce food on America’s farms without modern technology.” This thesis does have some truth to it. While the use of pesticides in the raising of livestock has received some heat recently, it can be acknowledged that these strategies do save time and money. Another viewpoint that Hurst mentions in his writing is the improper understanding of the word organic in society. One of Hurst’s frequently used sources is a study conducted at Stanford University. The study highlights the finding that organic simply means the product is more environmentally sustainable, rather than it being healthier. He additionally cites that while the organic industry is growing, it’s from an extremely small base. Specifically, organic products account for “only 4% of dollar value of all food sold.” His disdain for a makeover of the raising of livestock is extremely apparent, and one that counters attacks made by Nestle, and Kenner amongst others.

The power of corporations within the food industry has proven to be too powerful for them to sustain, however, strong ties to the US government have prevented them from reforming. The documentary Food Inc., and the piece “Resisting Food Safety” by: Marian Nestle. This influence is important to be aware of, it impacts every citizen in the nation. Ultimately the choice of companies to prioritize cost effectiveness over the safety of their consumers is the primary reason for a call for change that has struck the US as a whole. Moving forward, it is important to be aware of the impact that the food industry can have in daily life. More specifically, what can one do to invoke evolution in the industry, as well as educate others on the current epidemics the nation is facing.

 

1. The writer’s project can be defined, as what the author attempted to convey to the audience is his or her piece. It can include themes and messages included in the writing to get their point across. To identify the writer’s projects in the pieces I analyzed, I looked for key terms and phrases they used. In addition I researched the authors in order to get a better understanding of their viewpoints and backgrounds. My own project in the blog article is to help purport the idea that the food industry needs to be exposed for the wrongdoings they’re enacting currently in the social landscape. I wanted to advance my ideas by using information provided in class through texts and videos.
2. The most helpful section in the sorting it out workshop personally was the section that enabled me to extract key terms from each source. This made it easier to make connections between the sources. In regards to my draft, the section allowed me to organize which sources I wanted to couple together and synthesize further. Specifically, Nestle’s and Habersman’s analysis of the USDA and FDA became clearly connected.
3. Synthesis is defined as the comparison of multiple texts and sources in order to make connections, arguments, and discrepancies. This came alive when I wrote about Hurst. Hurst’s ideas differed greatly from the rest of the sources that were compiled. His opposition made it easier to compare and contrast, and ultimately synthesize.
4. Personally, I feel much like I’m much more knowledgeable of the food industry and the effect that it can have on my family and me. Moving forward, I will be more health conscious, and sympathetic for those falling victim to these large corporations.
5. Initially my focus was on the corruption of lobbyists and the US government as a whole. As I continued to draft my focus became specifically on the corruption of the USDA and the FDA, and the impacts that these organizations have on society.
6. Organizationally I wanted to provide sources that aided my thesis in the beginning of the blog, while providing an alternative perspective at the end. This would show my priority in the work, yet provide an opposing viewpoint.
7. I synthesized works by Hurst, Nestle, as well as the film Food Inc. This was used in order to show the difference in priority of those critical in the food industry, as well as depicts varying opinions on safety.
8. I was told that my previous ledes weren’t opinioned or provocative enough in earlier drafts. As a result I attempted to show clearly what side of the discussion I fell under.
9. I would like to better my synthesizing capabilities even more. I feel like I can do better in that regard.

The key to winning an argument is persuasion. When an argument starts, persuasion stops and winning doesn’t become the priority because without persuasion, arguments are now merely just fights. Throughout the five sources I used, Consumer Reports’ “You Are What They Eat”, Food Inc., “Organic Illusions,” “Frontline, PBS.org” and “Resisting Food Safety,” each writer intentionally uses both statistics and facts in order to persuade the readers’ opinion of either agreeing with or disapproving the customs of the food industry. Even though these articles have different stances and opinions, the writers each are affiliated with a similar theme, how food safety is related to issues of power. Whether it be for/against big businesses, or for/against organic substances relative to conventional foods, the writer’s purposes are all comparative.

In the documentary Food Inc., experts argue for the transparency of the industrial food system, both questioning the efficiency of the system as a whole and the governments’ relation to big businesses involved. Eric Schlosser, author of “Fast Food Nation”, said “They don’t want you to know what you’re eating because if you knew then you may not want to eat it.” With recent outbreaks of E. coli across the nation one can only question how the FDA is handling the cleanliness and preparedness of our foods and the states at which the facilities are being maintained. Tyson, the biggest meat packer in the world controlling 28% of the worlds beef, 18% of the worlds pork, and 25% of the worlds chicken, declined to speak in the documentary when approached by Food Inc.. Food inspections across the nation have dropped from 50,000 to 9,674 from 1974 to 2006. In the decade of 1996-2006, there were a reported 20 E. Coli outbreaks, most of which due to poor facility maintenance for livestock. Carole Moreson, a chicken farmer for Perdue says that now-a-days it isn’t even farming anymore, but inhumane mass production as most chickens never even see sunlight. Due to the decline of tobacco, most farmers turned to the chicken industry but have to borrow nearly $500,000 from big businesses in order to run roughly 2 chicken coupes. This causes farmers to become in debt and have to do whatever the companies ask of them or else they will go bankrupt and lose everything. This causes a shift of power from the farmer to the company. Corruption at its finest.

In Consumer Reports’ “You Are What They Eat,” the writer argues that what our animals are being fed directly affects us as the consumer. With corn being the main ingredient in animal feed, there has been a large increase of Food Borne Illnesses in the last decade. According to Food Inc., 30% of the United States land base is used for corn and 90% of supermarket products would contain either corn or soybean. With an average of 47,000 products in the commonplace supermarket, that means roughly 42,300 of the products would contain Corn or Soy Bean. Larry Johnson, an expert from the Center for Corn Research, says that “so much of our corn is just a clever manipulation of corn, no matter how you write it.” “There is considerable potential for contaminated animal feed or animal-feed ingredients to move between and within countries.” (You are What They Eat) “Cows can take this grass which we can’t digest, very few creatures can digest, and turn it into fuel.” (Michael Pollan, Frontline) Experts suggest that if you cut down the highly concentrated amounts of corn and add in grass-feeding, the risk for food borne illnesses would decrease remarkably. We feed them corn because it’s the cheapest, most convenient thing we can give them. Corn is incredibly cheap; it costs about $2.25 for a bushel of corn, which is about 50 pounds. It actually costs less to buy than it costs to grow (Frontline, PBS.org). The average farmer could process 200 bushels of corn a day.

In the Nestle article, the writer states that there are large amounts of government oversight within the food industry. As cleverly represented in the Food Inc. documentary through the use of flashcards, we see that high end food industry employees of the big businesses have found a home in government with positions that make, enforce, and legislate different laws pertaining to the rules and regulations of the FDA. Some may call this strategy but most would call it corrupt. FDA stands for Food and Drug Administration but after reading these articles and watching videos and documentaries it seems more likely that the FDA is more focused on the Drug portion than the Food section. For example, there used to be over 1,000 slaughterhouses in America; however, today there are 13. One may look at this and say good, now they can regulate the facilities better because there are a lesser amount to check. But the sad reality is that because they don’t properly regulate these 13 slaughterhouses then some acts become more careless and if some sort of illness or disease falls upon the slaughterhouse, 1/13^th of the nation’s meats are put at risk of becoming sickly. Change begins with the oversight of the FDA’s slaughterhouse protocol and to maintain a strong code of ethics in the higher office. Humans are vulnerable to pathogens, drugs, and contaminants consumed by the animals we eat so why would we allow some things to skate by when it could put not only others but yourself at risk.

My call to action after reading this unit is that the change needs to begin in government. Put people in power that are rightfully deserving and can uphold the strong code of ethics and morals designed by this nation’s leaders. You don’t need to reinvent the wheel, you just need to simply learn how to steer what’s already shaped for you. Make it so carrots are better priced than a bag of chips or a box of candy. The only thing that should be processed is what’s occurring in our government. It’s not that there is not enough food, it’s that the scales of nutritional value are unbalanced.

 

Works Cited:

“You Are What They Eat.” Consumer Reports, January 2005.

 

Hurst, Blake. “Organic Illusions.” The American, October 1, 2012.

 

Nestle, Marion. Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010.

 

Pollan, Michael. “Modern Meat”. Frontline, September 24, 2013.

 

 

• 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.
  1. Finding the “writer’s project” is vital when it comes to understanding the Point of View of a source. From the examples we went over in class I was able to derive the writers’ project from studying the points presented and by trying to analyze the given arguments to find what side they were trying to argue. In the Kanye West music video we watched in class, by studying the imagery used in the video and breaking down the lyrics I was able to figure out what points Kanye was trying to convey. My personal “project” with this blog article was to bring to light the issues within the food industry today presented by the 5 sources I used in my paper.
• 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?
  1. I did this workshop on my own outside of class due to missing class for personal reasons. Doing it on my own was definitely far more difficult because I didn’t really understand from the get-go what I was supposed to be synthesizing. I had to “Sort it out” on how to do a Sorting it out workshop. Along with this blog article I turned in, these were possibly two of the worst pieces I’ve put my name on when it comes to writing so all I can do for the deration of this class is prioritize better and prepare. I imagine that these workshops would have made it much easier to do the paper as the point was to break down what we were researching and organizing our thoughts.
• Describe your understanding of synthesis. What is its importance? How did it manifest within your drafts and/or final blog article? Provide examples.
  1. The definition from Meriam-Webster for the term synthesis is a complex whole formed by combining. Synthesizing takes a grouping of sources and meshes them into one. By synthesizing, my paper would be more reliable and add both my thoughts and opinions along with those of the outside sources that I referenced.
• Describe your own accomplishment (ofsomething) during this unit.
  1. I’d like to admit that I accomplished something but this paper represented the worst side of my academia as I did everything last minute. I suppose that something I accomplished was turning in each draft. The highest grade I feel that I deserve is a C.
• 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?
  1. When I first began this project I was deep into the documentary Food Inc., and wanted to base my project merely off of that. However, we needed to add 4 other sources, three of which were given, as we dove deeper into this unit. If I rewrote this paper I would lay out each source and go through and physically highlight the main arguments from each so I could have a better understanding of what the Writers Project for each source. When I was done my main idea surrounded the food borne illnesses surrounding corn fed animals.
• 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.
  1. The main organizational strategies I used were simply going article to article and adding synthesis for their arguments and my thoughts. There was no direct strategies other than making sure I covered all of the bases.
• 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.
• 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?
  1. My lede didn’t change from my earlier drafts to the final version. I didn’t receive any feedback from the teacher but I also didn’t reach out to the writing center like I usually would.
• Name a specific writing/researching/revision goal you’d like to work on during the next Unit projects.
  1. I would like to give my actual all for the next units. This unit is a terrible representation of my work ethic and my work attitude. However, it still happened so I need to step up and take responsibility for my lack of trying on this section. My goals for the next three units is to fully take all the necessary steps provided by Professor Barone so that I can be successful in my writing and to gain an understanding and further my knowledge on the topics discussed.

In the grainy video of his deposition, the farmer hunches over the desk in front of him. He intermittently rubs his downcast forehead with a weathered hand. Moe Parr’s posture emulates defeat and heartbreak.

In this scene from the documentary, Food Inc., Monsanto lawyers berate the aged and demoralized farmer with a litany of question about bank reports and business relations. This moment serves as an appropriate analogy for the dynamics between farmers and corporations and the control corporations exact over the conventional farming industry.

Over ninety percent of the soybeans in the U.S. contain Monsanto’s patent gene and, in the above scene, the multinational corporation is suing Parr for saving soybean seeds. Even though the seeds Parr is saving are not Monsanto soybeans, Parr is still dragged through the legal process for merely influencing or “inducing” other farmers to save seed. According to the documentary, a team of Monsanto investigators roams the country monitoring and prosecuting farmers for saving seed and violating patent infringement.

“I can remember when the first prohibitions against seed saving came into being,” says Troy Roush, Vice President of American Corn Growers Association, in an interview in the documentary, “Most farmers were just absolutely disgusted with the whole concept. It’s been interesting over the course of 11 years to watch us go from utter contempt for the notion that we can’t save our own seed to acceptance.”

Corporations have a clout and reach so pervasive and powerful that they can destroy a farmer’s life with a set of charges completely detached from truth. Parr was forced to settle out of court because he couldn’t afford his legal bills.

“I am finished,” Parr’s slow country drawl plays over the footage of his interrogation with the lawyers.

For years, debates over food production and regulation in America have drifted into the national conversation. Documentaries, op-eds, studies, articles and books present arguments defending or condemning conventional farming processes and organic alternatives. Critics of conventional farming repeatedly deconstruct the processes and the environment of the industry while highlighting safety oversights, risks of food contamination and the systemic spread of food-related illnesses. The regular outbreaks of E. coli and listeria provide an example of that as they continue to claim headlines and steal lives. But parallel to discussions over the nutritional value and health risks of mass-produced food, the exploitation of the workers and animals involved in the industry is another jarring facet of this matter.

The video footage surfing the internet of baby chicks being thrown into machines or pigs being electrocuted or cows being beaten is often fodder enough to convert people to vegetarianism or convince them to shop at local farmers’ markets. But in addition to the unsightly abuse of animals, these corporations also exploit humans. This is revealed in the working conditions in slaughterhouses, notorious for being physically dangerous and emotionally exhausting. According to the food justice organization, Food Empowerment Project, of the 500,000 people working in these meat-processing facilities, many are undocumented workers or people of color from low-income communities. Most of these workers are “at-will” employees, meaning the threat of immediately termination from a supervisor is always present.

“Supervisors use a variety of intimidation tactics to suppress workers’ concerns and make it clear that other people are always available to replace them. As a result, workers are conditioned to accept a hazardous and demeaning work environment if they want to remain employed,” the Food Empowerment Project website reads.

Marion Nestle mentions in her book, “Food Politics,” that large corporations often employ illegal immigrants specifically because they are unlikely to vie for better working conditions or wages. The industry strategically constructs an employee demographic of immigrants, teenagers and other often ignored people groups because they are less likely to know their rights and more willing to endure minimum wages with no benefits or chances for pay raises.

Corruption between corporations and government agencies also makes them involved in establishing the very regulations that are supposed to leash and monitor them. Corporations often determine, or at least influence, the rules and government agencies fall in line. Without real accountability and consequences, these corporations repeatedly prove irresponsible with health and safety measures while solely perseverating on their own profit. They can introduce new methods of production that risk the safety of people and animals, but weld enough money and shady connections to silence pushback.

In the abovementioned documentary, there is a scene where the jolly and portly chicken farmer, Vince Edwards drives the documentarians to his farm. Proud of the production of his poultry, Edwards seems eager to showcase his coups to the camera crew. But his employer, Tyson, steps in before and informs Edwards he is not allowed to show the inner workings of his own farm. Edwards give a sheepish shrug and a toothy grin. He doesn’t know why he can’t. But those are his orders. Moments like this again illustrate the reach and power of these corporations.

While company authorities intimidated Edwards’ enthusiasm to showcase his coups, Carole Morison said she felt compelled to speak on the topic. “I understand why farmers don’t want to talk because the company can do what it wants to do as far as pay goes since they control everything. But it has just gotten to the point that it is not right what is going on,” said the chicken farmer. “This isn’t farming. This is mass production like as assembly line in a factory,” she continued as she toured the documentarians through her coups, expressing disgust at the conditions.

That scene shows bloated chickens pumped up on drugs to fatten them up and to increase profits. Their bulging bodies are deformed with tumors of extra and abnormal fat from the antibiotics. Their spindly legs cannot support their extreme weight so their short lives are mostly sedentary.

Some corporations require that the chickens be kept in huts that are completely enclosed. So in addition to crammed courters and malformed bodies, these animals are also sentenced to a life of pitch black. Morison refused to enclose her open-windowed coup. The film reported that her contract with Perdue was later voided for her actions.

Amid the critiques and negativity though, Blake Hurst heralds conventional farming practices in his article, “Organic Illusions.” In fact, he frames the current conditions as not repressive but as almost liberating for the workforce. With experience and insight as an actual farmer, Hurst harkens back to the olden days emphasizing that conditions today are less physically draining on workers and demand less labor from them.

“Those of us who grew up with a hoe in our hand have absolutely no nostalgia for days gone by,” Hurst remarks, “People love to talk about traditional agriculture, but I’ve noticed that their willingness to embrace the land is often mostly metaphorical.”

Hurst also believes that conventional farming methods serve an even more grandiose purpose for humanity. In a world without the pesticides and slaughterhouses that make farming easier and more efficient, Hurst notes that more people would be sweating and slaving in fields right now. But, now those people are enable to be elsewhere in the world becoming playwrights and philosophers and doctors.

But the reality of the socioeconomics of food industry workers, a collection of mostly disenfranchised laborers working meager wages and often in unsafe conditions, dulls the romanticism which Hurst paints. Although fewer people may be hoeing potato fields right now, many are being exploited and abused by corporations. And while unemployment has almost returned to pre-Great Recession rates, jobs are always welcomed in the States. So Hurst’s lofty argument that contemporary farming liberates more people from the monotony of farm work to find more artist or altruistic endeavors seems to fall flat as well.

In a Consumer Reports article analyzing conventional farming methods and how there is contamination and oversight in that process, some of the potential sicknesses animals can contract were listed. The article reads, “Regulatory loopholes could allow mad cow infection, if present, to make its way into cattle feed; drugs used in chickens could raise human exposure to arsenic or antibiotic-resistant bacteria; farmed fish could harbor PCBs and dioxins.”

This catalog of health risks present to animals (and the humans that consume them) points to these procedures not being the cleanest and healthiest means of farming. These diseases evoke a picture of these animals’ condition as clearly insufficient. No longer does the image of American farming conjure up a scene of healthy animals in green pastures. But now the snapshot of farming equates to hordes of animal bodies, pumped up on drugs or standing in feces or crammed in cages and pens. And although the condition of farmers and workers is different, many argue is just a different manifestation of abuse.

1.) The idea of a “writer’s project” is sort of like a thesis, but more expanded with more exchange and breath. Instead of summing up the writer’s whole collection of work with one statement or idea, the idea of a project tracks the process of communication and thought to encompass the whole idea with its uses and shortcomings. My own “project” is to show examples and moments of abuse and exploitation of farmers, workers and animals. These moments collectively help to inform my “thesis” that corporations are the abusers with unmatched and unrestrained power and influence.

2.)  I was actually sick during the day the class completed this workshop. But I found all the charts we made during class to be very helpful in writing my article. I was able to pull detailed and specific information from multiple sources and see how the projects in several sources parallel or contradicted each other. This was extremely helpful when synthesizing my own project. Several themes had been reiterated in different ways and I was able to construct my own narrative from that.

3.)  My understanding of synthesis is that is it the understanding of a writer’s project and being able to mesh multiple projects or perspectives together to construct a dominate message or to communicate an idea. I do this is my own piece when I use the different insights from the Food Empowerment Project and Nestle’s book to discuss the injustice of the socioeconomics of farmers and labors. I do this in another way when I pieced together Nestle or Hurst show different opinions about that same topic.

4.) I learned to collect different sources together to prove one concise point that was solidly backed up and convincing.

5.) The main idea started with inspiration. I was so disturbed after watching Food Inc. that I knew I wanted to talk about the human side of the issue. How cruel people are treated. I started with emotion and refine it to be a concise argument. I jotted down in my notebook how jarring the scenes from the documentary were and then I revisited those notes and created the narrative aspect of my article, like the anecdote with Morison and Edwards and Parr.

 

6.) The way I write in general sort of lacks organization or method. I just sit down and try to become inspired and just kind of feel when the piece is making sense or not. I write and then edit and refine and edit and refine. I think in my first drafts though, my piece was academic and wordy and as I edited I tried to water all that down and make it more conversational. Here is a paragraph from my first draft and then the final version that show this transition: ” Hurst harkens back to the olden days showing that although conditions aren’t ideal now, they might be less physically draining and involved for farmers and workers. He says conventional farming gives time and space to people that would have spent hours in a field to become playwrights and philosophers and doctors. But in her book, “Resisting Food Safety,” Marion Nestle mentions that the food industry hires mostly immigrants and teenagers at meager wages.”

“Amid the critiques and negativity though, Blake Hurst heralds conventional farming practices in his article, “Organic Illusions.” In fact, he frames the current conditions as not repressive but as almost liberating for the workforce. With experience and insight as an actual farmer, Hurst harkens back to the olden days emphasizing that conditions today are less physically draining on workers and demand less labor from them.”

I think in the second example, my point and language are more concise and direct.

 

 

7.)In discussing the work conditions of laborers in the industrial farming industry, I used Nestle and another outside source (the Food Empowerment Project website) to show how arduous working conditions in farming are today. But I also included Hurst and his positive outlook on how modern methods of farming actually benefit the workers. I did this to add balance and give two opinions on the matter.

8.)  Initially, my lede was dry and wordy. And in the passive voice. The first two sentences in my first draft were: “For years, debates over food production and regulation in America have drifted into the national conversation. Documentaries, op-eds, studies, articles and books have constructed arguments defending or condemning conventional farming processes or organic alternatives.” I tried to be creative, but it was sort of dull and dispassionate. After reading the article in class about ledes, I decided to do something more interesting and something I thought would grip the reader. I got good feedback from my peers during groups edits, so I just revised and used that: In the grainy video of his deposition, the farmer hunches over the desk in front of him. He intermittently rubs his downcast forehead with a weathered hand. Moe Parr’s posture emulates defeat and heartbreak.

In this scene from the documentary, Food Inc., Monsanto lawyers berate the aged and demoralized farmer with a litany of question about bank reports and business relations. This moment serves as an appropriate analogy for the dynamics between farmers and corporations and the control corporations exact over the conventional farming industry.

 

9.) I would like to improve my writing overall with a more developed vocabulary and concise way of communicating my intent. I want my writing to be fluid and punchy. I don’t just want to provide information, but to provide narrative and evoke emotion. Basically, I want to become a more powerful writer.

The food industry is one of the most overlooked industries there is. The safety and regulation of the food is in the hands of big businesses that dominate certain areas of the industry. The consumer knows what the big businesses want them to know and it is very hard to find answers to questions as simple as where their food is produced. Anything that goes wrong is blamed on the consumer. The lack of knowledge and government regulation raises many concerns within the industry, and more needs to be done to make the system more transparent. The everyday human has countless things to worry about, wondering if their food is safe should not be one of them.

 

Food is defined as any nutritional substance that people or animals eat or drink in order to maintain life and growth. This means that food is a necessity. Often when it comes to food, people go grocery shopping, order in, or go out to dinner whenever they feel slightly hungry. A lot of times people get food not even because they are hungry but because they are bored and it is something to do. It is natural to want to eat food because a person spends so much of their life doing it.

However, it is very uncommon for people when deciding where to eat or what to buy, to consider where that restaurant or supermarket, gets their meat and produce from. Rarely do people when ordering a salad ask where the lettuce or tomatoes are from, or what the diet of the cow that became their hamburger was. People do not question their food and assume that since they need it to survive, it is safe.

Marion Nestle, a nutrition and public health professor at New York University, sums this up completely in Part One of her book Food Politics, when she says that most people view food poisoning as an “uncomfortable inconvenience” and “random bad luck” rather than “industry and government indifference and outright obstructionism.” They simply do not feel well for a day or two and then go about their lives like nothing happened.

She is entirely right when she says that people do not take food poisoning seriously and it is a serious problem. The numbers of cases of food poisoning cannot be completely accurate because a lot of times people do not report them. Since it is seen as not a big deal, many people will just not return to the restaurant that gave it to them, or will stay away from whatever food made them ill. Nestle states, “The most authoritative estimate of the yearly number of cases of foodborne disease in the United States defies belief: 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, 5,000 deaths.” Foodborne illnesses are nothing to be taken lightly. Bacteria such as salmonella and E. Coli can have serious negative effects on the human body and may even be life threatening.

Food Inc., a documentary by Robert Kenner and Eric Schlosser, featuring Michael Pollan, shows some of the corruption within the food system. The journalists interview a woman whose life was personally affected by the damage done by E. Coli. Barbara Kowalcyk’s whole world came crashing down after a vacation she went on with her family. While away, her two-year-old son, Kevin, consumed a hamburger that was contaminated with E. Coli 0157:H7. Blood was found in his stool and his kidneys started to fail. This little boy went from being perfectly healthy to passing away in just twelve days. Kowalyck is a Food Safety Advocate and was fighting for what happened to her son. She would schedule appointments with government agencies such as the USDA, but they would only see her for about five to ten minutes. Nothing was ever done by the government in regard of her son, and the meat company was never held responsible.

One thing every part of the food industry has in common is that they fail to take responsibility when something goes wrong. This is present in every step of the farm to fork process. Nestle puts it simply when she says, “producers blame processors for foodborne illness, and processors blame producers; government regulators blame both, and everyone blames the consumers.” The lack of taking responsibility is the first thing that needs to change in order for bigger changes to be made. In an article written my Michael Moss of New York Times, Food Companies Are Placing the Onus for Food Safety on Consumers, Moss informs readers about how big companies try to dodge taking the blame in any way they can. In 2007, a product of ConAgra Foods, frozen pot pies, contaminated about 15,000 people with salmonella. The company tested the ingredients to find out what exactly caused the illness in so many people, however, they could not pinpoint which of the ingredients was responsible. Instead of doing more tests and finding out exactly where the food that goes into their products comes from, ConAgra decided to avoid all accountability by making anything that happens the consumers fault. The company wrote food safety instructions on the pot pie packaging saying, “Internal temperature needs to reach 165 degrees Fahrenheit as measured by a food thermometer in several spots.” Therefore if a person gets sick because the actual pot pie was contaminated with bacteria, the company can argue that the consumer did not follow the instructions and heat the product right. This was also seen when General Mills had recalled about five million frozen pizzas in 2007. The instructions on the box now suggest to “avoid microwaves and cook only with conventional ovens.” Other major companies including Nestlé, and The Blackstone Group are also guilty of shifting the burden to consumers. These food giants make up most of the brands that fill the shelves of supermarkets, yet they are “unable to guarantee the safety of their ingredients.”

The food industry is a very delicate system and should have more government regulation. Although agencies such as the FDA and USDA exist, they are not as thorough as they could and should be. It is very easy for good ingredients to get contaminated at some point in the production process, as seen in the article You Are What They Eat. Starting at the farm, it is important that the animals are fed and taken care of properly. What is most important is that they eat feed that is safe and uncontaminated. Consumer Reports exposes what items go into the feeds that farmers give to cattle, chickens, and fish. While the feeds consisted of some disturbing things, such as poultry litter, feathers, feces, bone meal, and waste from coops, they were all FDA approved and said to contain nutritional benefits to the animals. With this array of ingredients it is incredibly easy for the feeds to get contaminated, “simply by being stored in the wrong bin.” When meat from contaminated animals is produced and sold throughout the world, it can do a lot of damage to a lot of people. This is why it is important that everyone at each stage of the process must take responsibility for his or her actions.

There are constant debates about the nutritional value of organic farming versus conventional farming. Organic is believed to be better nutritionally because it does not contain chemical pesticides. Blake Hurst raises some concerns in his article “Organic Illusions”, by questioning that declaration. Hurst, who is a third-generation farmer, explains how easy it is for pesticides from neighboring conventional farms to drift and pollute organic farms. Products are labeled organic due to the producer’s claim of following organic procedures. “No testing is done to check the veracity of these claims,” according to Hurst. If organic foods are not really what they are said to be, this is another way for businesses to take advantage of the consumer. Organic products are often more expensive because they are produced in a more natural way. If the products are not actually produced by organic procedures, the consumer is once again in the dark and held subjective to the food system.

This is another issue within the food system that could easily be fixed with more government regulation. People should not have to guess or be unsure if their spinach is actually organic or if the chicken they are planning on making for dinner was stored improperly and now contains bacteria. More emphasis needs to be put on food safety practices and big businesses should not be allowed to find loop polls out of taking responsibility for the foodborne illnesses that arise from their products. In the words of Barbara Kowalcyk, “We put faith into our government to protect us and we’re not being protected.”

Food safety is a very important issue and more people need to become aware of it. By laying back and being uninformed about the severity of foodborne illnesses and the effects that bacteria’s such as salmonella and E.Coli can have on individuals and their families, people are prolonging the changes that the food industry, and more importantly, the consumers, desperately need.

 

Reflection

• 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.

The writers project is the main point that the author is trying to get across in his or her piece. You can identify it in a piece because it is the main claim the author makes and what other parts of the piece are trying to support. My project in this piece was to show people that there is a lack of government regulation in the food industry and that there are many issues that arise because of that.

• 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 workshop was beneficial because it made it easy to see what the main point of each piece was and how they related to each other. Also listing important themes and people in each made it helpful to not forget anything important that you wanted to include.

• Describe your understanding of synthesis. What is its importance? How did it manifest within your drafts and/or final blog article? Provide examples.

Synthesis is when you analyze multiple texts and then relate them to each other. You talk about each piece, but you do not summarize them, and you make connections using direct quotes and important ideas. I got a better understanding of synthesis after Amy showed us her paragraph from the four quotes of the VMAs. I tried to do that in my piece, using direct quotes that really supported what I was arguing in a major way.

• Describe your own accomplishment (ofsomething) during this unit.

During this unit I think I became better at arguing one thing and sticking to it. In past papers I have written, sometimes I would jump all over the place and argue multiple things at one time. With this paper I think I really stuck to my main argument and used the sources to support it very well.

• 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?

When I began this project, I was a little overwhelmed because there were so many sources that portrayed so many different aspects of the food system. My main idea was rather broad at first but what still mostly about how many people do not know where their food comes from and the secrecy of the system. As I wrote my first draft, I focused a lot on who hold the power in the system and how big businesses such as Monsanto, contribute to the lack of knowledge of the consumer. When I sat down to write my final paper, I sort of combined the two but focused more on how more government regulation could fix both of these issues. Each source we had to use gave examples of issues that could be fixed with more government involvement.

• 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.

For my blog article I started off with trying to inform people about how serious foodborne illnesses can be and why it is important to be informed about the issues. I then took arguments from each source that supported why more people need to be more concerned when it comes to their food and how more regulation could fix these problems.

•  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.

“Marion Nestle, a nutrition and public health professor at New York University, sums this up completely in Part One of her book Food Politics, when she says that most people view food poisoning as an “uncomfortable inconvenience” and “random bad luck” rather than “industry and government indifference and outright obstructionism.” They simply do not feel well for a day or two and then go about their lives like nothing happened.” In the next paragraph I then talk about Food Inc. and how the little boy, Kevin, was affected by a foodborne illness. I also then talk about my outside source, which deals with how big companies are trying to not be held accountable for illnesses by making it the consumer’s responsibility.

• 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?

In my earlier drafts I did not even include a lede. I did not know what he term was or how it would affect my paper. In my later drafts I worked on making a lede that was informative and concise but also creative enough to get the reader to want to continue reading my paper. In my final blog post, I tried to relate to the everyday person and grab their attention, while stating facts about how little people know about the food system.

• Name a specific writing/researching/revision goal you’d like to work on during the next Unit projects.

I would like to work more on my writing and making it stand out. I want people to want to read what I have to write about and make it more fun, creative, and informative, rather than just dry and informative.