Today I finished my essay. After I write this, I am going to edit my paper and print it. As painful as it was for me, I was able to find arguments about the positives of factory farming.
When I looked over the first half of my paper, I found that my biases were coming through in my language. I kept saying things like, "slaughter," instead of kill, as well as other poor word choices. I tried to cut as many of those out as I could, but there are probably still a few contaminating my paper.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Paper Update
Unfortunately I was really busy tonight (one-act rehearsal and band concert), and I made no progress. Actually, that's a lie; I deleted parts of it because it was so terrible. So tonight, I have to write 2-3 pages. I've done all of my research, I just need to put it together, so it shouldn't be too hard.
I'm still bothered by Avery's logic. I just realized that he completely ignored the fact that soy has complete protein. As far as amino acids go, tofu and beef are equal. Beans and rice are complete. Peanutbutter and whole wheat bread are complete. It's really not that hard.
I'm still bothered by Avery's logic. I just realized that he completely ignored the fact that soy has complete protein. As far as amino acids go, tofu and beef are equal. Beans and rice are complete. Peanutbutter and whole wheat bread are complete. It's really not that hard.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Another I.C. Update
I found a pro-meat source.
http://www.furcommission.com/resource/perspect991.htm
The author writes about the health benefits of eating meat. He argues that the most efficient way to have complete nutrition is to eat meat. Meat has more of the amino acids humans need to build proteins compacted into smaller amounts than in plant sources. Although all of these are available in plant sources, he writes that it would require paying attention to what you eat to get all of them. He addresses all of the health problems associated with consumption of meat like high cholesterol and hearty disease, but says that these only happen when people over-consume.
"Here's what he has to say about meat and the environment:
What about the heavy human footprint on the Earth that environmentalists keep telling us about? Well, it does take more grain per calorie to produce meat and milk than when humans eat it directly.
But feed-grain yields (like corn) are twice as high as food-grain yields (like wheat and rice).
Cattle, hogs and poultry also eat a lot of stuff we don't, like grass, milling bran, molasses, cottonseed meal and almond hulls. Nearly three-fourths of each pound of U.S. beef is derived from something humans can't eat.
When you combine the forages and by-product feeds with the high food efficiency of livestock products, meat and milk turn out to be a fairly good deal for the planet after all.
Besides, the world is becoming increasingly democratic. There's hardly a parent on Earth who doesn't want his or her kids to be among the strongest, most vigorous, longest-living people on the planet.
If we want to tread more lightly on the Earth, the best solution is to produce a lot more meat, milk and eggs from the land we're already farming. The way to do that is by using chemical fertilizers, confinement feeding and genetically enhanced seeds."
This information seriously confuses me. Yes, feed-grain yields are higher than food-grain yields, but they STILL require maintenance. He also mentions using chemical fertilizers, which have been proven to ruin soil over time, contaminate water supplies, and kill off excessive amounts of bugs (which eventually can damage the workings of the ecosystem). He has ignored manure disposal and greenhouse gas emissions in his argument. Everything he says disagrees with every other source I've found.
However, there's a strong chance that by biases are controlling how I'm reading this article. I'm going to work really hard to not let them get into the way of my paper, but the information he uses still contradicts everything else I can find, which makes me kind of worried about the validity of this source.
http://www.furcommission.com/resource/perspect991.htm
The author writes about the health benefits of eating meat. He argues that the most efficient way to have complete nutrition is to eat meat. Meat has more of the amino acids humans need to build proteins compacted into smaller amounts than in plant sources. Although all of these are available in plant sources, he writes that it would require paying attention to what you eat to get all of them. He addresses all of the health problems associated with consumption of meat like high cholesterol and hearty disease, but says that these only happen when people over-consume.
"Here's what he has to say about meat and the environment:
What about the heavy human footprint on the Earth that environmentalists keep telling us about? Well, it does take more grain per calorie to produce meat and milk than when humans eat it directly.
But feed-grain yields (like corn) are twice as high as food-grain yields (like wheat and rice).
Cattle, hogs and poultry also eat a lot of stuff we don't, like grass, milling bran, molasses, cottonseed meal and almond hulls. Nearly three-fourths of each pound of U.S. beef is derived from something humans can't eat.
When you combine the forages and by-product feeds with the high food efficiency of livestock products, meat and milk turn out to be a fairly good deal for the planet after all.
Besides, the world is becoming increasingly democratic. There's hardly a parent on Earth who doesn't want his or her kids to be among the strongest, most vigorous, longest-living people on the planet.
If we want to tread more lightly on the Earth, the best solution is to produce a lot more meat, milk and eggs from the land we're already farming. The way to do that is by using chemical fertilizers, confinement feeding and genetically enhanced seeds."
This information seriously confuses me. Yes, feed-grain yields are higher than food-grain yields, but they STILL require maintenance. He also mentions using chemical fertilizers, which have been proven to ruin soil over time, contaminate water supplies, and kill off excessive amounts of bugs (which eventually can damage the workings of the ecosystem). He has ignored manure disposal and greenhouse gas emissions in his argument. Everything he says disagrees with every other source I've found.
However, there's a strong chance that by biases are controlling how I'm reading this article. I'm going to work really hard to not let them get into the way of my paper, but the information he uses still contradicts everything else I can find, which makes me kind of worried about the validity of this source.
Monday, December 8, 2008
I.C. Update Again
I've decided to discuss whether or not the environmental consequences of factory farming are worth the cheap prices and wide-spread availability.
Now I'm having trouble finding sources that aren't extremely radical believers in their cause. The books I'm using, Vegan Freak, Vegetarian Manifesto, Generation Green, and a few others, as well as my web sources, PETA, GoVeg.com, and some others all have an agenda. Their statistics seem to match, but they are all trying to achieve the same thing.
On the other hand, the only pro-meat industry sources I can find only discuss why animal rights activist are stupid or they relate somehow to health. There is nothing that defends that the environmental issues are a necessary evil.
I've written the opening paragraph of my paper and plan on writing at least a full page tonight.
Now I'm having trouble finding sources that aren't extremely radical believers in their cause. The books I'm using, Vegan Freak, Vegetarian Manifesto, Generation Green, and a few others, as well as my web sources, PETA, GoVeg.com, and some others all have an agenda. Their statistics seem to match, but they are all trying to achieve the same thing.
On the other hand, the only pro-meat industry sources I can find only discuss why animal rights activist are stupid or they relate somehow to health. There is nothing that defends that the environmental issues are a necessary evil.
I've written the opening paragraph of my paper and plan on writing at least a full page tonight.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
I.C. Update
I've been trying to find information on the benefits that come from the meat industry, but I'm afraid that what I've found is pretty weak. This is what I came up with:
1. People like the taste of meat, and people need protein. The problem here is that new research has found that only 10% of your daily caloric intake should come from protein sources because carbs are a more efficient energy source.
2. The factory farming methods, which in the meat industry are the biggest polluters and most unethical methods, allow for meat/eggs/dairy to be produced more cheaply, so they're cheaper for the public.
3. If we didn't keep killing cows for food, they'd die off because they wouldn't be making profit, so no one would take care of them? This has almost no weight at all.
Another problem that I'm running into is that none of these things relate back to the effect of the meat industry on the environment. Maybe weighing the ability to make meat cheap and the ethics of the price that comes at would work, but I don't know if that would be too much of a stretch.
1. People like the taste of meat, and people need protein. The problem here is that new research has found that only 10% of your daily caloric intake should come from protein sources because carbs are a more efficient energy source.
2. The factory farming methods, which in the meat industry are the biggest polluters and most unethical methods, allow for meat/eggs/dairy to be produced more cheaply, so they're cheaper for the public.
3. If we didn't keep killing cows for food, they'd die off because they wouldn't be making profit, so no one would take care of them? This has almost no weight at all.
Another problem that I'm running into is that none of these things relate back to the effect of the meat industry on the environment. Maybe weighing the ability to make meat cheap and the ethics of the price that comes at would work, but I don't know if that would be too much of a stretch.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Paper Update
I've decided that the topic I posted earlier will probably be too broad for me to write concisely, so I'm only writing about the impact of the meat industry on the environment.
I checked out a book called "Vegan Freak" from the library. It provides a lot of information about reasons to go or stay vegan, and there is a chapter about the environment. I learned that it takes 16 lbs of grain to produce 1 lb of beef. All of that grain had to be taken care of somehow, so a person who eats that beef is responsible for the pollution and waste associated with those 16 lbs. That means all of the herbicides and pesticides that seep into the soil, all of the water used to grow it, and all of the gas used to transport it are multiplied by 16 for every meat meal consumed instead of a vegetarian meal. There were statistics about exactly how much this was, but I can't remember them right now. One that I do remember is that 260 tons of CO2 emissions are released in the meat process (including transportation) alone, to feed a family of 4 for a year. Also, 80% of all the water used in the Western states goes directly to meat processing. The book also discussed the volumes of methane, ammonia, and nitrous oxide released from animal waste not properly disposed of. All of that waste ruins soil and once it gets into the water supply endangers aquatic life and humans.
I checked out a book called "Vegan Freak" from the library. It provides a lot of information about reasons to go or stay vegan, and there is a chapter about the environment. I learned that it takes 16 lbs of grain to produce 1 lb of beef. All of that grain had to be taken care of somehow, so a person who eats that beef is responsible for the pollution and waste associated with those 16 lbs. That means all of the herbicides and pesticides that seep into the soil, all of the water used to grow it, and all of the gas used to transport it are multiplied by 16 for every meat meal consumed instead of a vegetarian meal. There were statistics about exactly how much this was, but I can't remember them right now. One that I do remember is that 260 tons of CO2 emissions are released in the meat process (including transportation) alone, to feed a family of 4 for a year. Also, 80% of all the water used in the Western states goes directly to meat processing. The book also discussed the volumes of methane, ammonia, and nitrous oxide released from animal waste not properly disposed of. All of that waste ruins soil and once it gets into the water supply endangers aquatic life and humans.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Proposal Update
So, I just found out today at morning meeting that my original argument is actually already being done. Instead, I've decided to discuss factory farming.
The goal of the meat industry is to cheaply produce meat, obviously. However, to obtain this goal, many sacrifices are made, including the welfare of the animals. Poultry are confined in areas so small they cannot walk, crammed in with other birds. Chickens, injected and fed growth hormones and never having room to exercise their legs, become so weak that they are unable to lift themselves on their own legs. They are kept in such tight quarters that occasionally, factory farmers cut off the ends of their beaks to prevent them from pecking each other to death. They, as well as pigs and cows, often spend their entire lives with no sunlight. They are also typically kept in such unclean areas that huge amounts of waste pile up, and the animals are given extensive exposure to harmful things like ammonia.
This is not only inhumane, but also unhealthy for the humans who eat these animals. Growth hormones injected into cows, whose milk later goes on sale, are believed to be the reason for developmental problems in small children. All development happens too rapidly: getting teeth at younger ages, growing too fast for bones to become strong enough, and young girls starting their periods as young as 8 or 9.
There are also harmful environmental effects associated with the factory farming. The meat industry is the source of 18% of greenhouse gas emissions. Fertilizers and pesticides used in crops to feed the animals contaminate the water supply through the soil and animal waste. The meat industry uses far too much water, and between that and the land degradation, biodiversity is at risk.
The goal of the meat industry is to cheaply produce meat, obviously. However, to obtain this goal, many sacrifices are made, including the welfare of the animals. Poultry are confined in areas so small they cannot walk, crammed in with other birds. Chickens, injected and fed growth hormones and never having room to exercise their legs, become so weak that they are unable to lift themselves on their own legs. They are kept in such tight quarters that occasionally, factory farmers cut off the ends of their beaks to prevent them from pecking each other to death. They, as well as pigs and cows, often spend their entire lives with no sunlight. They are also typically kept in such unclean areas that huge amounts of waste pile up, and the animals are given extensive exposure to harmful things like ammonia.
This is not only inhumane, but also unhealthy for the humans who eat these animals. Growth hormones injected into cows, whose milk later goes on sale, are believed to be the reason for developmental problems in small children. All development happens too rapidly: getting teeth at younger ages, growing too fast for bones to become strong enough, and young girls starting their periods as young as 8 or 9.
There are also harmful environmental effects associated with the factory farming. The meat industry is the source of 18% of greenhouse gas emissions. Fertilizers and pesticides used in crops to feed the animals contaminate the water supply through the soil and animal waste. The meat industry uses far too much water, and between that and the land degradation, biodiversity is at risk.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Proposal Progress
For my paper, I'm going to write about how University should have lunch options other than fast food, for multiple reasons. First of all is health. America is combatting a nation-wide obesity problem, and evidence points to heat-and-eat and fast food meals as the primary culprits. Fast food meals have high calorie and fat counts with low nutritional value, and often come in servings far larger than normal people should eat. Second is for environmental reasons. When you order a meal at a fast food restaurant (or have it delivered to you), you also receive tons of unnecessary wrappers, packaging, silverware, and napkins. 170 kids eating fast food every day for lunch generates way too much waste. Lastly, it is more costly to get fast food every day than it would be for University to have a lunch program. Although it may require hiring a lunch staff, the food would cost a fraction of the price for students, and the pay for the new staff, if included in the lunch program, would easily be covered, while the students would still have to pay less than before.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
