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.

Food Inc. Part 1

I thought that Food, Inc was a great film in that it provided viewers with tons of testimonials of people that are greatly affected by the food industry. I liked that the movie more showed how our government was doing wrong in basically forcing people into buying and selling certain foods. There were a few sections that stood out to me in particular, the first being how the two farmers were to not speak of their methods of raising their chickens. It always seems odd when a company doesn't want the general public to know certain information. Another part that stood out to me was how the woman who lost her child from bad meat was unable to speak her own thoughts about what had happened. These companies are basically controlling people with fear of a lawsuit. The seed cleaner had to settle with the GM food company for providing a service to farmers as his business. It's sad to see how easy it is for these big companies to own people's lives as if they are slaves. It appeals to the audience's emotions when they hear the stories of people that are simply trying to make a living but are being forced to submit to the demands of multi-million dollar companies. Another part that struck interest to me was the part where they would show a politician and their government role, then show how they were associated somehow with the food industry. This helped viewers realize that this isn't just a food problem, it's a government problem where our country is being run by greed, the same greed that has led to the inhuman treatment of people all around us. The best part of the film, however, is that it doesn't simply state a problem and explain why something is bad. At the end it provided the a segment where the audience could read ways to help fight the monopolizing food companies.

The first reading of the book was a nice supplement to the movie because it not only helped give a little background of the movie, but it also provided things that may have been missed. It talked more about other problems that have risen from foods that are unhealthy. In the interview he mentions how "the obesity epidemic is now costing us $100 billion a year. The medical costs imposed by the fast food industry are much larger than its annual profits--expect the industry isn't paying those medical bill." They are basically accountable for weight problems like diabetes, which people get from "cheap" foods that end up creating huge medical bills. It's almost like an investment for ones health to spend the extra dollar and time on foods that are healthy rather than eating a quick dollar menu burger. I also liked the part where he talks about how Mcdonald's and other meat packing companies were denying any information about their place of business but that "workers at fast foods restaurants and meat packing plants were eager to talk..." This just continued to hit the spot for me in that it only seems like people are sick of the treatment that these companies give their employees because there is something going on that isn't something we, as consumers, want to hear.

Paraphrase This

The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that at least 70 percent of the antibiotics used in America are fed to animals living on factory farms. Raising vast numbers of pigs or chickens or cattle in close and filthy confinement simply would not be possible without the routine feeding of antibiotics to keep the animals from dying of infectious diseases. That the antibiotics speed up the animals’ growth also commends their use to industrial agriculture, but the crucial fact is that without these pharmaceuticals, meat production practiced on the scale and with the intensity we practice it could not be sustained for months, let alone decades.

In order to help sustain the lives of pigs, chickens, and cattle that live in filth, it is necessary that they feed on antibiotics. In fact, nearly 70 percent of the antibiotics used in America are used to feed these animals. Unfortunately, without the benefits of such antibiotics, our meat production could not possibly keep up with our needs because of how the pharmaceuticals aide in speed growth.