In his 2009 article “The Omnivore’s Delusion”, Blake Hurst takes a stand against the numerous non-farmers who are attempting, and in some cases succeeding, to degrade and ‘clean’ the farming industry. Hurst’s main points of contention are the lack of true knowledge these intellectuals have on the inner workings of today’s farms and their insistent belief that the farmers themselves “…are too stupid to farm sustainably, too cruel to treat their animals well, and too careless to worry about their communities, their health, and their families” (24). Alice Waters, in her 2007 article “Farmer Bill Should Focus on Healthful Foods”, instead of focusing on the farming techniques themselves, makes a more pointed inspection over the products and produce …show more content…
These changes, from difficult manual labor to chemicals and genetically modified products, are in his opinion a necessary and modern action. When faced with the duty of feeding the world it would be a hard pressed farmer who could be individually responsible for every plant and small field under their care, I agree. Pulling away from nature is not ideal in the least, but with such a large population and so few farmers it feels like we do not really have much of a choice in the matter. These advancements, however, do allow for farmers to made less of an impact on the nature around them, which is a positive since we only have a single world around us to live in. Destroying it is not really a solution to any problem, no matter how large. “…We have to farm ‘industrially’ to feed the world, and by using those ‘industrial’ tools sensibly, we can accomplish that task… while protecting the land, water, and air around us” Hurst explains, pointing out that it is a responsibility that every farmer must undertake to be sensible with these newer and potentially harmful tools and to have some form of forethought of the consequences (The Omnivore’s Delusion, …show more content…
Health habits formed in childhood are incredibly hard to break as they grow into adults, and an unhealthy child population equals an unhealthy adult population before too long. The farm bill’s specific catering to such a small number of crops cuts down on what readily available products there are to feed to the population, especially as the farm bill “…offers little, if any, support to the California farmers who produce nearly half of our nation’s fruits, nuts, and vegetables, despite the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s nutritional guidelines calling for a diet rich in all three” (Farm Bill Should Focus on Healthful Foods, 31). I agree that by ignoring these extremely important farms in the face of making money we are only hurting ourselves in the long run. Most of our population is not a wealthy one, and to remove healthy choices from our reach and yet still expect us to be a healthy, thriving class of people is not only impossible but also
Moreover, this system of mass farming leads to single crop farms, which are ecologically unsafe, and the unnatural treatment of animals (Kingsolver 14). These facts are presented to force the reader to consider their own actions when purchasing their own food because of the huge economic impact that their purchases can have. Kingsolver demonstrates this impact by stating that “every U.S. citizen ate just one meal a week (any meal) composed of locally and organically raised meats and produce, we
The Omnivore’s Dilemma In the book The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Michael Pollan challenges his readers to examine their food and question themselves about the things they consume. Have we ever considered where our food comes from or stopped to think about the process that goes into the food that we purchase to eat every day? Do we know whether our meat and vegetables picked out were raised in our local farms or transported from another country? Michael pollen addresses the reality of what really goes beyond the food we intake and how our lives are affected.
Food, especially meat is such a central part of human society that it cannot be ignored. Just as big minds came together in the 60’s to make a better chicken, they can come together to solve a crisis that harms every person living in this country. Jonathan Safran Foer’s book gives an important look into what goes on behind the scenes of factory farms, and offers logical solutions. However, it will take more than this, and more than just vegetarian encouragement to make any lasting changes. It will take the votes of consumers both in the supermarket and on ballots to evoke a better system. Take a look at what is on your plate next time you sit down for a meal. Did you vote well?
Pollan believes that American factory farms are places with technological sophistication, where animals are machines incapable of feeling pain (368). In other words, factory farms use plentiful of technology where they do not pay attention to animals feelings. For example, beef cattle who live outdoors are standing in their own waste, and factory farmers do not considered that wrong and unsanitary. Hurst alleges that “turkeys do walk around in their own waste, although they don’t seemed to mind”(5). This shows that factory farmers think that animals really don’t have feelings and really don’t care. Pollan also disagrees with industrial farming because he states that, “American industrial farms itself is redefined- as a protein production- and with it suffering” (369). He affirms this because industrial farming cages their animals. Interestingly, both authors believe that animals still die and suffer no matter what circumstances an animal is living. Pollan believes animals should be treated with respect and not be caged. On the other hand, Hurst asserts that “farmers do not cage their hogs because sadism, but because being crushed by your mother really is an awful way to go, as is being eaten by your mother”(6). So Hurst say that he cages animals to protect them. Also both authors believe that there needs to be ways to enrich the soil, so the farms can have bigger harvest, healthy plants, and keep cost down. However, Pollan believes that farmer should use compost. He states that “the finish compost will go to feed the grass;the grass, the cattle; the cattle , the chickens; and eventually all of the animals will feed us” (370). So he thinks compost is good for the farms. Hurst on the other hand, think manure and commercial fertilizer is good for the farms. Hurst spread poultry litter on pasture and this made cattle production possible in areas
In the article, “On Eating Animals,” Namit Arora explains that for much of our settled history--and even today in parts of the world--most people lived in close proximity to farm animals. Animals fertilized our crops, shared our labors, and nourished our bodies, helping us enlarge our settled communities.” (Arora). Animals were once like a family member. People would tend to their animal’s needs and make sure they were well taken care of just like any other member of the family. We would give them names, show them at county fairs and make sure their living conditions were comfortable and as sanitary as possible. Further on in “on Eating Animals,” Arora explains that “In the twentieth century, the inexorable logic of modern economics and the assembly line turned farm animals into number-tagged bodies to be fattened, disinfected, and processed as quickly and cheaply as possible.” (Arora) This led to the factory farming of animal products that we still use today. The ASPCA defines factory farming as, “…a large, industrial operation that raises large numbers of animals for food.” They co...
...armers’ markets, raise your own cow– the list goes on. These methods are all possible. But speaking as a “run-of-the-mill, suburban citizen”, even after knowing all the ills of factory farming, these methods are not appealing to me. We all like convenience and affordability, which these methods cannot offer AYYYY CITE And that is truly the issue here. The meat that we are getting– that convenient meat that none of us seem to want to live without– is quite frankly grotesque and unhealthy. But we keep eating.
The Affordable Care Act is projected to have a net cost of $1.2 trillion over the next ten years, even though we were told it would save money once implemented. The Agricultural Act of 2014, a/k/a the “Farm Bill,” was originally estimated to cost $956 billion over the next ten years [$756 billion dedicated to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as Food Stamps), which has nothing to do with farming], however, several news sources are already stating the Congressional Budget Office projections are too low. The list of programs continues to expand, both in size and scope, as we get further and further away from our founding principles. Our nation is becoming more and more liberal. Our government, more and more secular. The removal of our founding principles and Judeo-Christian values have permeated not just the government but most industries, especially entertainment and academia, and thereby have the ability to affect most public policy decisions. There are those who believe:
...oss’ paper. Therefore, this objection is not sound because the number of naïve people are rapidly dwindling. The second objection stated that one person has no effect on the factory farming industry, so giving up meat is pointless because the industry is too large to feel the effects of someone converting to vegetarianism. I refuted this objection by saying that, yes, one person alone will not make a difference, but when more and more people become vegetarians, the industry will be forced to respond by producing less animals, therefore, preventing more animal suffering. Although these two objections were strong and valid, I believe I was able to successfully defend Norcross’ argument that factory farming is wrong and cruel.
This study shows the importance on how America is being affected in a bad way, because of unsustainable foods. Unsustainable foods are not just hurting America as a whole, but could be affecting you. According, to the CSA “Many children in the US have developed life-threatening allergies to peanuts and other foods”. This is because, of food unsustainability. This study will give an insight on how sustainable foods are helping America rather than unsustainable foods. This idea will help turn America away from heading down the wrong path which is uns...
Henning, B. (2011). Standing in Livestock's ''Long Shadow'': The Ethics of Eating Meat on a
Food Inc. is a documentary displaying the United States food industry in a negative light by revealing the inhumane, eye opening, worst case scenario processes of commercial farming for large corporate food manufacturing companies. Food Inc. discusses, at length, the changes that society and the audience at home can make to their grocery shopping habits to enable a more sustainable future for all involved.
The cutting down on the uses of pesticides and fertilizers is one on the next great step we have to make as a society. It will take a long time to implement these changes and there will be Problems along this journey. The sooner we start this long journey. The longer we have to work out the Kinks in sustainable farming. We at least should think about the future generations that will live on earth. This is the one place we all have to call home and it’s our job to take care of it for the next generations. We can’t give them a problem that take a long time to fix because it could be too late to fix the problems in a generations or two. This is why we need to push the world to a sustainable farm
In the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, the author talks about, not only vegetarianism, but reveals to us what actually occurs in the factory farming system. The issue circulating in this book is whether to eat meat or not to eat meat. Foer, however, never tries to convert his reader to become vegetarians but rather to inform them with information so they can respond with better judgment. Eating meat has been a thing that majority of us engage in without question. Which is why among other reasons Foer feels compelled to share his findings about where our meat come from. Throughout the book, he gives vivid accounts of the dreadful conditions factory farmed animals endure on a daily basis. For this reason Foer urges us to take a stand against factory farming, and if we must eat meat then we must adapt humane agricultural methods for meat production.
And, because food now comes at a low cost, it has become cheaper in quality and therefore potentially dangerous to the consumer’s health. These problems surrounding the ethics and the procedures of the instantaneous food system are left unchanged due to the obliviousness of the consumers and the dollar signs in the eyes of the government and big business. The problem begins with the mistreatment and exploitation of farmers. Farmers are essentially the backbone of the entire food system. Large-scale family farms account for 10% of all farms, but 75% of overall food production (CSS statistics).
In order to feed the growing population of the world, nontraditional farming and ranching techniques have been used to increase food production. For example, animal mass harvesting systems and feed lots used for chickens and cows allow for faster growing and harvesting of the animal. But are these practices moral? In Paul Taylor’s “The Ethics of Respect for Nature”, he illustrates how this treatment of animals is immoral, because of his biocentric view. Bonnie Steinbock would disagree with Taylor due to her speciesic view, illustrated in her article “Speciesism and the Idea of Equality”, that places human needs over animal needs in this case.