Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why should we be vegetarians
The disadvantages of vegetarian
Pros and cons of becoming vegetarian
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why should we be vegetarians
In our lesson Unit 1: Six Steps to Creating an Effective Argument, I was overjoyed to find all the wonderful statistics for “How to Win an Argument with a Meat-Eater”. My husband and I have recently decided to go totally raw and vegan, so these statistics will come in handy when we are discussing the pros and cons of a vegan lifestyle with others. I found these statistics to be very compelling. I had heard about some of these arguments, but some were brand new to me. I had my thoughts reinforced in some instances, and I was educated in others. The permission statement mentions that the essay was written with information from the Department of Agriculture/Food and Drug Administration. With a little further research I found that the statistics were actually cited in a book “Diet for a New America” by John Robbins who founded EarthSave International and is The Cholesterol Argument against meat-eating Aside from including all of the statistical facts in this section, Satagru sends the loud and clear message that doctors in the U.S. are not particularly educated in nutrition. This is a sad fact that more people should consciously realize. Living in a “magic pill” society is indeed magical until you realize that every pill has an adverse reaction. There isn’t much magical about that. 5. The Natural Resources Argument against meat-eating Within the statistics on this argument Satagru mentions “If this water cost were not subsidized by the government, the cheapest hamburger meat would cost more than $35 per pound.” I do not really see any sources cited for this information. 6. The Antibiotic Argument against meat-eating All of the statistics were used in this section. I was left wishing there had been more information and determination for the steps leading up to the European Union deciding not to use antibiotic fed meat. I’m sure there is more information as they most likely did studies of their own to make that decision. 7. The Pesticide Argument against
He draws attention to his argument by using statistical evidence and methods of persuasion. The methods that the author uses to better explain his argument for this book include that of researched evidence, rhetoric, ethos, and logos. Examples of each can be found throughout the book. For the researched evidence, an example is all the quotes the author uses to better each argument of almost every paragraph of this book.
The hard, logical proof used to persuade is called logos. Authors use this technique to support their propositional statements in an argument. By supporting an opinion with a sufficient amount of data, an audience is able to find the argument believable. Logos, however, goes beyond the abundance of information geared toward swaying an opinion into agreement. Presenting facts also includes decisions such as which ...
Escape from the Western Diet describes Pollan’s primary occupation as an author of food and eating books, not a food scientist, however, Pollan bases his entire article off of his opinion of how Americans should eat (Pollan, 420). Pollan 's rules, “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants,” might serve as a fine setup for a fad diet, but these rules don’t necessarily provide a reasonable solution for America’s obesity problem. The rules don’t provide a solution because they are too vague; you can’t solve a nationwide issue using a system that fails to acknowledge any other factors besides what Americans should supposedly eat. Logical fallacies pop up throughout Escape from the Western Diet and stunt its credibility, such examples being the False Dichotomy, Begging the Question, and the Hasty Generalization. In Pollan’s quote, “people eating a Western diet are prone to a complex of chronic diseases that seldom strike people eating more traditional diets” (Pollan, 421), the Hasty Generalization fallacy is apparent, as not every person who eats a Western diet is prone to chronic diseases. The quote, “the healthcare industry...stands to profit more handsomely from new drugs and procedures to treat chronic diseases than it does from a wholesale change in the way people eat” (Pollan, 422) is a prime example of the Begging the Question fallacy, as this
The following is an analysis of Joe Smith's food intake for one day by using the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP) website using a food tracker program. The analysis addresses the serving sizes consumed, which food groups were represented, and adjustments in consumption that should be made since Mr. Smith would like to loose weight. Visual representations are attached for reference in the appendix.
Making a good and persuasive argument is very much an acquired skill. It requires much practice and perfecting. It takes more than just having passion and making good points. Just because a person is passionate about the topic or has supporting details does not mean they can make a successful argument. Much more thought and skill is required. Gordon Adams, in his letter to the Arizona State University standards committee, demonstrates this quite well. Gordon Adams writes a passionate argument, yet his argument lacks several critical aspects.
As a result, individuals in America have extra income to spend on desired items and help the economy to maintain its economic advantage. An increase in food prices would affect everyone’s level of disposable income and would reduce consumer spending in other industries. Therefore, decreased consumer spending would cause companies to downsize and unemployment would increase. After evaluating the consequences of these regulations it is evident that the success of our economy in America is far more important than ethical treatment of meat.
Some if not all of the meat eater had some form of morals or emotional concerns towards the animals that they are consuming. This led to the paradox of eating meat because some or most people felt emotions such as pity, sympathy, guilty, sad, and disgust towards the animals that they are eating. Even when they felt emotions for certain animals, people still ate it. The article elaborated on this meat paradox controversy, and it focused on the aspects to support why people eat meat. The article connected how people’s rating of animals’ pain related to people’s decisions to whether they eat meat or not eat meat. People’s rating of animals’ pain also related to their moral concerns for that animals. People would more likely rate the animals which
“Misuse of antibiotics could result in selection for resistant bacteria”. This gentle warning mentioned by the inventor of antibiotics, Sir Alexander Fleming, seems to have lost its meaning over the course of years. Antimicrobial resistance is a growing public health concern; antibiotics used in factory farmed animals raised for human consumption contributes to this problem. Scientific evidence confirms that by the consumption of meat that contains antibiotic-resistant microbes, some antibiotic resistant bacteria are transferred from animals to humans ("GAO"). Factory farming has its benefits, but issues arise due to the overuse of antibiotics in factory-farmed animals, and this essay aims to propose a solution by analyzing Denmark’s successful antibiotic banning policies.
Campbell, Colin, and Colin Campbell. The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted And the Startling
In the article, “CDC Shares Data on E. Coli and Salmonella in beef,” Author James Andrews explains how the North American Meat Association held a conference with L. Hannah Gould, Ph.D., explaining her presentation data on beef-related illnesses and how to avoid outbreaks caused by beef. James’s main focal point deals with the presentation because Gould offers a 10-year update summary of E. coli outbreaks from 2003-2012. With this intention, Andrews asserts that many industries need to reduce the number of food borne illness outbreaks caused by beef. Moreover, Andrews supports his claim by using statistical facts from Gould’s presentation when she is discussing E. coli 0157:H7 and how serious this issue leads to cases of illnesses, hospitalization,
Controversy and varying opinions have surrounded animal research in laboratories. Some believe animals should be given the same right as humans. We use these animals to test the possible outcomes new drugs or therapies will have on our body. God created all animals and humans alike, but they don't have the same rights as we do. If animals were to have the same rights as we do those that live in the wild who kill would have to be punished for the act. Animals have no reasoning ability so they shouldn't be afforded rights. I do believe we have a responsibility to treat animals humanely, ethically and with compassion and kindness.
Most people in America live on an omnivorous diet, but with the new vegetarian diet trend, there has become much controversy over if a vegetarian diet is truly as healthy as vegetarians believe. Because both sides make strong arguments, neither side wants to back down and claim defeat, but do they have to? There is a large amount of people who claim there is nothing wrong with the standard western diet, even though there is evidence showing it is quite unealthy, however, many studies show that a low-meat-intake diet can ,along with a vegetarian diet, reduce risk of premature death, as well as show positive impacts on common chronic diseases, reduces risk of certain cancers, and even provides essential amino acids.
Did God create the animals for companionship or food for humanity? God created the heavens and the earth, the waters and the lights, the animals and the human kind. And God saw that it was good. God placed Adam and Eve, the very first two human beings, in a paradise named Eden. Eden was full of plants, seeds, trees, and animals. However, a major conflict has arisen among people on whether the animals were created for companionship or food for humans? The Bible seems to be extremely contradictory about this specific topic by providing supportive biblical texts for both sides of the argument. Vegetarians use biblical texts to support their vegetarianism but, there is in fact more evidence supporting that God created animals for food rather than companionship.
Many people don’t believe think anything of what they eat or how it got there. But the harsh truth is the meat that you eat was once a living, breathing creature that had feeling and emotions. Maybe next time you order a steak or chicken nuggets you should think about the animals that went through extreme pain and conditions for you to eat. Not only is it inhumane to put animals through such pain, not eating meat and having a vegetarian lifestyle can have huge benefits to animals, the environment, and your health.
According to the Human Research Council, the percentage of the United States population surveyed in 2014 that claimed to be vegan or vegetarian was 1.8% (“Reasons for Choosing Vegetarianism or Veganism,” 2016). Vegans are individuals who do not eat any animals products including meat and dairy products, whereas vegetarians are individuals who do not eat meat products. Vegetarians, as well as vegans, are considered minorities in society because they choose to eat a certain way and stray from social norms. They are made fun of and are constantly harassed by sensitive meat eaters and people who think it is “weird.” Vegetarians are thought to be crazy for not wanting to eat meat. This evolving era of vegetarianism is an ethical issue because majority