FrankenFoods

Koh's Blog Thoughts

Koh’s Blog Thoughts

After reading my blogs from the beginning of the course, I realized that I started to have more to say in the later ones. At first, I was sort more reserved and sort of held things back. I think that I was simply aware that other students would be reading my blogs and had to comment on them, so I sort of stayed away from expressing my actual point of view on certain subjects. As I got more into the books, I start to show more interest in the subject because of my increasing knowledge and growing opinion. I really liked my blog on David Maywhoor because I was really irritated with his presentation. During his whole lecture, I kept getting tired of him telling us the problem that exists and never giving a solution. I was just so annoyed with his complaining about something and lack of action because talking to us about it wasn’t going to fix the logging issue that he presented to us, so why would he be wasting his time with us when he could be looking for an alternative. This really got me going and my opinion is shown in the post. My least favorite blog is my post on the first reading of Lost Mountain. I mostly didn’t like it because of how it didn’t seem to spark any interest in my readers. Everyone that commented simply said, “I agree…” and didn’t have much else to say that I didn’t already say. I think that this sort of reflected my lack of depth in the post. They weren’t discussing much because I don’t think I wrote anything very noteworthy. However, as the reading of Lost Mountain progressed and we started to have more discussions in class, my blogs started to develop more and I began including more of my own thoughts in the blogs. I think that this is because I started to become more comfortable with the people that would be reading my blogs. In my later comments, I started to include my opinion more on the subjects that people talked about in Lost Mountain. In the second section of reading Lost Mountain, I commented on a few people’s posts how I thought really thought on the issues. Specifically, on Chelsea Stoner’s blog, it is apparent that I have a pretty solid opinion on the matter of the people staying in their hometown that is being destroyed from mountain top removal. I feel like others have had a similar experience as I have had in that comments in later posts seem more opinionated and offer further discussion on the blogs. After watching the movie “Food, Inc” and then blogging about it along with the first part of the reading, I noticed that people were really getting into the subject matter and thinking more into the problems that were presented in the film. It was good to see that others were getting just as interested as I was about the food industry and how much is actually affects us indirectly. This was cool because the comments began to become more of a discussion because people’s opinions were more prominent than previous posts. This most certainly helped with the course readings because it allowed for me to see other people’s opinions and even raised awareness to things I missed in the reading. The film, I think, should have been shown after the reading because I started to lose motivation to read supplement to something that I just watched. It would be better if we’d watched it after reading because the whole time we would read the book, we’d want to watch the movie that it hypes up. Overall, the blogs were a good learning tool that enhanced my learning of the environmental issues covered in class. It took a different route in teaching us how to form and express our opinions.

Argument Bibliography

Argument Bibliography

Avasthi, Amitabh. GM Crops: Pest Resistant Crops better Than Insecticide Use, Analysis Says. 07 June 2007. Web. 7 Feb 2010. <http://www.gmofoodforthought.com/2007/06/gm_crops_pestresistant_crops_b.html>.

Domingo, Jose. “Toxicity Studies of Genetically Modified Plants : A Review of the Published Literature,” Critical reviews in food science and nutrition, 2007, vol. 47, p. 721-733.

Roseboro, Ken. Scientist: GM food safety testing is “woefully inadequate”. January 2009. Web. 7 Feb 2010. <http://www.thenon-gmoreport.com/articles/dec08/gm_food_safey_testing_inadequate.php>.

Sakko, Kerryn. The Debate Over Genetically Modified Foods. Web. 7 Feb 2010. <http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/sakko.html>.

Smith, Jeffrey. Spilling The Beans. May 2009. Web. 7 Feb 2010. <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=2989>.

Weintraub, Arlene. “Salmon That Grow Up Fast.” BusinessWeek (2006). Web. 31 jan 2010. < www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_03/b3967111.html>.

Argument Outline

Thesis: Although biotechnology companies have posed a solution for “world hunger,” GM foods have not proven to be healthy to humans. With such little evidence to show their safety, they should not be used to feed humans until further testing has been done.

I. Introduce to the audience the methods used to alter genes of different species

A. transgenic plantation

B. beneficial claims

II. This paragraph will talk about the lack of research there is on GM foods and make the assumption that biotechnology companies are hiding the negative effects from the public.

A. Biotech Companies do not allow for independent studies

B. Why can’t we study what we eat?

III. Appealing to the audience is going to be the goal here in revealing that two-thirds of the food that is sold in the stores has GM ingredients in them. How can we continue to eat foods that have not been proven to be healthy? Are we okay with simply eating whatever poison is put in front of us?

A. Appeal to logos on why we would eat something we have no idea what it really is

IV. Reveal how genes that produce toxins are put into plants. When we eat these plants, we are not only eating those unhealthy toxins, but the genes can also alter ours.

A. Bt gene is put into crops to fight off insects

B. We are eating toxin producing genes that could potentially be harmful

V. Studies done on animals

A. Studies done on female and male rats and livestock have shown to mutations to their reproductive systems and the cause of infertility.

VI. Pose the idea that by altering the genes of the food we eat, we are altering our own genes. By eating something that is meant to kill off something else we will end up killing ourselves.

A. If we cannot prove that GM foods are healthier, how do we know that they aren’t killing us?

VII. Make the claim that biotechnology companies are controlling what we eat with their monopolizing growth in our economy. Eventually everything we eat is going to be altered with who knows what. In order to stop this we need to support local markets, grow our own food, etc.

A. Monsanto nearly owns the entire corn market and controls the prices

B. Support local businesses to keep them from monopolizing with altered foods

VIII. Conclude that we can make a difference in a few different changes in our lifestyle. Nothing gets changed without individual change, so we can either submit to a monopolizing biotechnology company, or we can be healthy contributors to not only ourselves but to our economy as well.

Food Inc. Part 3

The third readings were interesting in that they sort of gave us different perspectives. They were aimed at different audiences to help the reader understand more clearly what is going on within the food industry. I liked the part where he talks about “questions for a farmer” because it immediately tied me into the text as he sort of leads me to think of questions that I should consider when purchasing foods from the store. He suggests that I buy local foods, foods in season, grow my own food, and to just question where the foods come from and how they are raised. This strategy of putting me on the spot makes me feel like I can make a difference without having to really reach out to extreme measures. However, something that could be a bad strategy to the reading was that at some points it seemed too fact based. Sometimes I would lose interest in the amount of facts presented to me with my little amount of background knowledge of the subject. This specifically happened in the “Sustainable Table” section for me. I didn't really like Joel Selatin's section because I felt like I was being talked down to or like I was living an awful life. At times, he seemed like he was better than me, which was a turn off in the reading because I lost interest in what he had to say. He does make a good point, however when he mentions how these huge food industry companies have no incentive to stop monopolizing over smaller farmers and markets. This was done to make the audience believe that there is no stopping them without us decreasing our consumption of the products that they produce. Although some parts of the reading get dry and boring, I find that it is a good supplement for those who are really interested in subjects covered in the movie. It’s offers many persuasive essays about a problem, and actually gives ways that we, as consumers, can help without having to be a radicallist.

My Side of The Argument

In my argument essay I will be writing about my opinion against GM foods. I will explain the negative effects that genetically modified foods have on humans and the environment. I will also cover how there hasn’t been proper testing done before released into the public market. Since the majority of the foods we eat contain GM products or ingredients, it is important that we make sure that they are healthy. I will provide examples of some testing that has been done along with their results, and then mention how many have had trouble in conducting further research. The logic behind “you are what you eat” may also be a point that I may try to cover in my essay as well, being that if we are eating cows that eat GM corn, then we are essentially eating an altered food that hasn’t been proven to be healthy. My argument will focus on appealing to pathos and logos as I try to expose the less appealing side of GM foods.

Food Inc. Part 2

The second part of the reading is very informative but extremely boring, which is why the movie, to me, was way more effective than this book. However, these pages brought to my attention things that I hadn't necessarily thought of before or had seen in the movie. At the beginning of the reading, he talks about how our government manipulates the oil industry with the use of ethanol, which derives from corn. It was interesting to see how they would rather use more ethanol in motor fuel than the corn to feed those in need. It surprised me to see that "the grain required to fill a 25 gallon SUV gas tank with ethanol would feed one person for a full year." This is outrageously inefficient and immoral when you think about the many starving children there are in this world. Another part I liked about the reading was when he talked about how our food industry gives off tons of greenhouse gasses and harmful pollutants to our environment. Animals, that eat fertilized grains, come from farms that are constantly sprayed with insecticides and other chemicals that contaminate our water. Making these chemicals is also terrible for our environment in that gasses are released into our air, which leads to global warming. Then, once the farm animals are slaughtered, the meat gets transported from one place to another, using diesel-fueled trucks that emit tons more of greenhouse gasses. Buying from these big companies rather than a local market contributes to several different ways that destroy our environment. He provides us with multiple ways to help prevent this from happening: purchase foods from local markets; buy in bulk; use reusable bags; and avoid foods that have been processed. As someone who doesn't really know much about the subject, I feel like I can be an environmentally friendly consumer by doing a few simple things when shopping for groceries.