Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Cattle Farming: The Truth Behind the Burger

Cattle Farming: The Truth behind the Burger
                Many Americans eat beef, but do they know where it comes from? How about the conditions on the farms? It’s probable the average Americans have no idea what animals go through before they end up on our plates. The reality of a cattle farm is much more grim that the picture painted by the media of a happy cow. The Conditions on farms affects more than just the animals and the workers alike, they effects the environment. What is the government doing about this? Not much, But I believe the government should make the big industrial farming companies pay for their mistreatment of animals and the environment. I will explain why and how this should be accomplished.
                First let’s begin with the cattle. Cows are bred for our meat, milk, and other food products. From the moment they are born cows are predestined to head to the slaughter house. The cattle live in horrendous conditions until they get to the slaughterhouse.  Cattle are packed tightly in pens with little or no room to move. Since there is no room the cows tend to urinate and defecate where they stand. These two factors alone are serious threats to animals and workers because these conditions breed germs and viruses.  To prevent disease antibiotics is used in the feed given to these animals. According to Nicolette Hahn Niman “About 80 percent of antibiotics used in the United States each year are in the daily feed of farm animals, mostly to enable keeping animals in densely crowded conditions, which reduces costs”. Due to this over use of antibiotics super strains of viruses are created. These viruses are resistant to antibiotics and pose a threat to anyone who encounters them.
                The feed given to the cattle are mostly made of corn. “We have come to think of ‘cornfed’ as some kind of old-fashioned virtue; we shouldn’t. Granted, a cornfed cow develops well-marbled flesh, giving it a taste and texture American consumers have learned to like. Yet this meat is demonstrably less healthy to eat, since it contains more saturated fat”(Pollen  4). Cows eat grass, so their bodies cannot process the feed given to them. This creates many problems for cows such as heartburn and liver failure, some cases so severe the cow would eat dirt and scratch at their stomach. Many other chemicals like proteins from pigs, fish, and chicken manure, as well as antibiotics for heart burn and pain medications are put in the feed.  The end result is a steak full of saturated fats which is no good for people.
                This is why the government should do two things limit the use of antibiotics in cattle feed and instead of over subsidizing corn, the government should subsidize grass. By limiting the amount of antibiotics used the factory farming industry will have to separate the cattle so the risks of viruses spreading are lowered also providing comfort to the cattle. If grass and hay are subsidized this will further lessen the need for antibiotics as well as keep the cattle healthy which in turns gives us better meat. Of course this will slow down meat production times because a corn- fed diet causes the cattle to gain weight twice as fast,
                Next is on to the environment. The factory farming industry acts without thinking about the environment, and the EPA seems to be too lenient on the industry. The waste from the factories contaminates water in rivers and lakes. Most towns near factory farms usually have the highest rate of illness. The EPA reevaluated it laws on dumping the waste in rivers. “Under the rules, a feedlot would not automatically have to obtain a pollution discharge permit and could be certified as voluntarily complying with the ‘zero discharge’ standard. Operators would determine whether their facility is releasing or will release pollution into waterways based on the design of the facility and its operation. If they conclude no discharges will take place, they can operate without applying for a federal permit.” (Hebert)What about land dumping? The manure dumped on land contaminates soil and underground rivers.
                I think the EPA should tighten the laws on waste dumping and actually fine the big industrial farming companies for their wrong doings. If the industrial farming companies were to utilize the waste in a more innovative way there wouldn’t be a need for dumping. Such as “Israel and Korea are among the countries experimenting with using animal waste to generate electricity. Some of the biggest hog operations in the United States are working, with some success, to turn manure into fuel.”(Bittman 2) If these technologies are applied to cattle farms, much advancement can be made in the industry.
                So as you can see the technology and methods are there to improve the welfare of cows. As well as lessen the effects on the environment.  If the industrial farming industry does not attempt to improve the welfare of cattle and their effects on the environment, then it is up to the government to make laws to make them change. It is also up to the government to enforce the laws it create and put big business in its place. That’s really the only way anything is going to get done. Hopefully the people can convince the government to make a change and right the wrong created by industrial farming.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

ten things i want to write about for the final

1. the laws restricting government control in cow farming
2. Contraversal chemicals used in energy drinks allowed by fda
3. pesticides used in food
4. Government subsidizing of farms and price of food
5. Pet food and fda
6. local farms and government
7. Traditional  methods of farming vs new wave
8. saturated fat and effects on the body
9. rights of the farm workers
10. link between soda and diabetes

ban on soda using food stamps

The purpose of food stamps is to buy food. They are meant to help people who cant afford to buy foods. Though you cannot buy cigarettes, beer, and liquor with them you buy pretty much every food product out there. Soda is linked to diabetes and obesity due to its high sugar and high calorie content and it is not neccessary for the body. So i agree with the first author Anemona Hartocollus, even though people should limit their sugary beverage intake we should not make a full out ban on buying the products with food stamps. At the end of the day food stamps are practically money and its up to the person to decide how to use them. Telling people what they cant or cant buy...   

Monday, April 25, 2011

spring break reading and supersize me thoughts


    The movie supersize me was a very interesting movie. It was a documentary in which a guy went on a McDonalds binge over thirty days and he documented the change in his body.
It also brings to light why and how McDonalds is bad for you and show why you should slow down if not stop eating McDonalds. The part I liked about the movie was when they talked about the two obese teens suing McDonalds. I totally agree with Morgan Spurlock because he says that it is not the company’s fault but it is up to the person to eat the food. Personally I think it’s ridiculous that a person can even sue for being obese. I’ll tell you about McDonalds customers. I work at McDonalds, so one day this lady walks in and orders a big mac, quarter pounder, mc chicken, two large fries, fish o filet, and a large diet coke. No one expected her to sit in the lobby and eat it all by herself but she did and came back every two or three days for the same thing. So at what point is it the customers fault not the company, because ultimately it’s up to the customer what they eat.
    Chapter two of fast food nation was about the relationship between Walt Disney and Ray Kroc. Apparently they knew each other since they were young and served in the military together in ww1. The both had similar business styles and focused on selling their products to children.it also stated similarities in between the two businesses and the antiunion sentiment between the two men. I think that even though Walt Disney and Ray Kroc have a survival of the fittest mentality, they should have cared more about their workers and their customers.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

self review of revised essay


1. Introduction- the introduction was factual but it was a bit boring, try to keep reader interested.
2. Thesis- the thesis was easy to understand and clearly pointed out.
3. First paragraph is about chicken. There could have been more details about production of chicken and more quotes should be added to prove your opinion better.
Second paragraph is about vegetables. Add more information about t taste and more about health benefits. Again like first paragraph add more proof and use more sources.
Last two body paragraphs are about preparation.  Description of food was good but more detail on how the 1900’s recipe is more nutritious.
Conclusion restated the main arguments clearly and wrapped up the essay well.
4. There were no major grammar or spelling error but the ay could be a bit more interesting. More facts could have been given and more sources could be used.
5. Your source was not cited correct by MLA standards but there was a bibliography.
6. Your essay was very factual, could be a bit interesting. More proof must be used to back up claims, and more very vague.
Conclusion- I need to spend more time working on proving my point and backing up my arguments.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

The five sources i will use.

These are the five sources i will use towards my revised essay.
1. Food inc.., the part of the movie about the chickens.
2.http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/tyson-foods-lied-to-consumers-about-drugs-used-to-raise-their-chickens/
This article is about the drugs used on the chickens and the effect on the environment.
3.http://jas.fass.org/cgi/content/abstract/81/2/553.
This article states the results of using drugs on animals
4.http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxification-diet/pesticides.htm
This article talks about the pesticides banned in America is used in other countries.
5.http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs225/en/
This article is about the dioxins used on vegetables and their effects on humans.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

food inc. review

     Yesterday in class we viewed a movie called food Inc. here is my opinion on the movie. First let’s point out the fact that the movie was well composed and pointed out facts really well. It had an anti-industrial food standpoint, which brought out many good arguments against big food companies. I myself can’t say I’m anti big business but what these companies are doing is wrong. Food should be good for you, but after all the biological alterations what’s left is better off in the garbage.
            Corn is the biggest crop currently farmed in America. It is used to make most snacks and beverages. Practically most if not any product you buy has corn in it. Corn is good creamed or on the cob, but all these byproducts created from it is not good for you. The government is the one who caused this because they pay farmers to over produce and subsidize according to the amount of corn produced. This same corn is fed to livestock. Corn is not natural for these animals to eat. Cows are supposed to eat grass, as to chickens and grain, but these big companies use this feed to fatten up the livestock and with the help of their chemicals make them grow faster. So of course they can be sent to the slaughter faster.
I’m not even going to tell you about the anomalies cause by these diets and the physical suffering these animals go through. Just like the movie says the government needs to take a stand against big business and make them change their ways, because they may not be eating the food they produce but we are. We also should have the right to know what’s in our food. All and all this is a great movie and I’m looking at food in a whole new perspective.