| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Fifth pbworks upload

Page history last edited by Katherine Soule 12 years, 5 months ago

Pbworks Upload Guidelines

 Use the table below to upload your link/title, name, and a short paragraph explaining why you chose the article/video you selected, and how it relates to the class reading or discussion.

 

To sign in, register your email (if I haven't already done so) and wait for a response, then go from "view" to "edit" above and fill in the relevant info in the boxes below. If you are going to require more than a few minutes to upload your comments, please draft your comments in a word processing program and paste them here, as only one person at a time can be editing a page. Also be sure to click on the "add link" button (above right) to hotlink your selected url. Once you are done, click on the "Save" button on the bottom left. Be sure to save your work when you are done, otherwise you will stay logged in and someone else will probably steal your lock. I will go over the mechanics for doing this in class -- if you are having difficulty uploading anything, just send me your link and comments, and I'll do it for you (but I would prefer that you figure it out eventually...).

 

I also would strongly prefer that you get your uploads in by the evening (i.e., not the middle of the night) before they are due, so I can have a chance to read them and integrate them into our discussion the next day.

 

 

Link and Title
Student Comment
 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/magazine/11foer-t.html?pagewanted=all
 Anya Price
 This is an excerpt from Jonathan Safran Foer's book, Eating Animals.  It's a great book and I highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it, but you can get a good feel for his message by this article.  Basically, Foer explains that we all have a strong emotional and cultural connection to our food, and sometimes moral, dietary, or economic beliefs aren't enough to deter people from eating the food to which they are accustomed.  He mentions his experiences with vegetarianism, including how he often "pushed questions out of his mind" due to whatever social or intellectual vicissitudes he was encountering at the time.  This is an interesting supplement to our readings about factory farming and the pros and cons of raising animals for food production, because our attitudes toward this industry goes beyond the industry itself.  Eating animals is a very personal issue for many people, and Foer brings this to light.
 http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/10/food-day-working-to-reform-our-food-systems-from-farm-to-fork/246904/
 Megan Wyllie
This is an article about the new implemention of Food Day/ Week and how the founder invisioned it. His goal is for a week where opposite organizations--agriculture organizations and welfare activists, hunger activists and environmentalists alike--can work together to actually make progress and see eachother's sides. This collaboration is the only thing that will help the current food system. His overall goal for the day is to "accelerate ongoing initiatives aimed at reforming the food system from the farm to the fork". To his surprise it seems to be actually working. National Museums, schools, small communities, and more are all running programming for the week in hopes to spread knowledge of the issue further. This article discusses not only the animal welfar changes that must be made i nthe farming industry but other issues that need to be discussed--like where our food comes from, what is in it, health benefits and problems, food security and more. It well roundedly touches on ALL the problems that need to be changed in our agricultural system.
 http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8184.pdf
 Michelle Lapointe
Genetically modified food is common in the US, at least with regards to crops. Hurst addresses this when he admits to using “biotech crops,” saying they are beneficial to the environment since they decrease the need for chemicals while increasing “food safety.” What is not mentioned in any of our readings, though, is the connection between genetic engineering and animals. Thus, I picked an article that briefly looks at the current development and possible future of this relationship within the food industry. As of right now, no genetically engineered animals have been approved by the FDA; however, genetic engineering is being used to modify food animals. One major example of this is the use of recombinant bovine somatotropin in cows, a genetically engineered protein that increases milk production. Also, while they are not on the market, genetically engineered animals have been produced. The example mentioned here is a pig that has been engineered to produce “low-phosphorus manure.” When it comes down to it, though, the article concludes by saying it is doubtful that genetically engineered animals will become food anytime soon due to the extensive testing, environmental risks, and ethical questions involved. I think it is interesting to consider, though, what the world would be like if this were to occur and how people would react to it. Also, should we even be acting as we are now, modifying animals using genetic engineering? Organizations like the OCA certainly don't think so.
 

http://www.foodsecurity.org/PrimerCFSCUAC.pdf

And here’s a funny video about Whole Foods:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UFc1pr2yUU


 Melissa Rothstein
 

One small part of the future of American food and sustainable agriculture may be the urban agriculture and food justice movements. Urban agriculture is a growing source of healthy, sustainable, and local food for communities that may not otherwise have access to food outside of products supplied by big agri-business. As farmers’ markets grow in presence and popularity, programs that support urban agriculture allow citizens in cities, as well as suburbs, to participate and feel empowered. I think one fallacy of Hurst’s argument, and something that I hear a lot when talking to people about agriculture, is that intensive farming, large mono-crops, and factory farms are necessary to feed the world's population, when in fact these systems are vulnerable, unsustainable, and externalize costs to the environment, human health, and animal welfare. On the other hand, organic farms are often as bad as conventional farms when it comes to animal welfare and intensive production. While I doubt that urban agriculture will have the capacity to address world hunger, I think it will be an important part of the future of American food culture. Here’s a great book about food justice and community-driven agriculture: http://www.foodjusticebook.org/


 http://smallfarmersjournal.com/on-farm-meat-processing
 Katherine Nittmann
 This article discusses changes over the last few decades in what it means to farm, what it means to be a small farmer in rural areas, and what it means to process meat in this context.  I found it interesting and applicable to the Hurst piece about just the essential nature of farming and slaughter (relating to Grandin's pieces as well in this regard) in the face of consumer demands.  This article questions the true effect of regulations, including "organic" certification and how to deal with this in the midst of a growing demand for certified organic products.  It also focuses on the changes in mobile slaughtering units which in theory help consumers realize their desire for local meats.    
 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nil-zacharias/its-time-to-end-factory-f_b_1018840.html  Kate McPherson
 This article by Nil Zacharias examines the main reasons behind the movement to end factory farming. In addition to being cruel and inhumane to the domestic animals involved, factory farming is also very detrimental to the environment and human health, as well as native wildlife species. While some may argue that factory farming is necessary in today's world, others promote the idea that smaller, sustainable farms are actually a better alternative. The author also mentions the upcoming National Conference to End Factory Farming, organized by Farm Sanctuary, which will bring together animal welfare, health, and environmental specialists. Zacharias stresses that it will take collaboration, not just among environmentalists and animal rightists but meat-eaters as well, to come up with successful sustainable alternatives to our current factory farming methods.

 http://animalrighter.blogspot.com/2011/04/states-to-outlaw-factory-farm.html
http://www.eatwellguide.org/i.php?pd=Home

http://www.organicconsumers.org/toxic/factoryfarm.cfm

Victoria Koehler 

 This article is addressing potential legislation that would outlaw undercover invetigations of factory farms. The basis is that factory farms would be "terrorized", animal cruelty would be staged and just overall claiming these investigations shed false negative light on factory farms. This goes to show that legislation is at the root of these problems and it can be used to perpetuate or stop practices like those at factory farms. These investigations are crucial, as some of the interviewees note, because the public is often unaware of where their food comes from or the conditions in which the animals are kept. Factory farms need to be held accountable, and stopping these investigations make it more difficult to educate the public on the harsh reality of factory farms. The fact of the matter is that meat-eating is not going away any time soon, so the best thing to do is establish the most humane ways of keeping and and slaughtering farm animals.
The second is an interesting search engine that tells eco and animal-friendly restaurants, markets etc in specific areas.

The third are some interesting facts about factory farms. Shocking facts: 90% of the nation's poultry production is controlled by 10 companies. In 1970, there were approximately 900,000 farms in the United States; by 1997, there were only 139,000.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=inside-the-meat-lab&page=5 / 

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/why_in-vitro_meat_is_good_for_you/P2/

 

And a very shocking look into factory farming from Mercy For Animals:
http://www.chooseveg.com/animal-cruelty.asp

 

Hanna Ehrlich
 These articles outline the concept, history, social debate, and contemporary research regarding cultured meat. In vitro (or cultured) meat is maybe the most advanced, outlandish idea in biotechnology solutions for the agricultural/meat industry. Although it is an authentic alternative to livestock meat, it could take anywhere from a couple years to many decades to see this type of food on our shelves. Bartholet refers to in vitro as “the only choice left,” in that it will soon be the only way to sustainably satisfy the world’s carnivorous appetite. Although there are many barriers to seeing this product reach consumers, including funds and technical limitations, a large debate stems from social acceptance. Some people believe that cultured meat would be unnatural and unappealing to consumers, while others feel that the negative response would be fleeting once people get the information. As Grandin says, “attitudes can be changed;” cultured meat is a sensible, guilt-free way to get the meat that so many consumers enjoy—and can even be genetically modified to “prevent heart attacks instead of cause them.” And in the same way that most meat-eaters are so removed from their food that they are unaware of the horrors of factory farming, consumers would be still be far from the source of their cultured meat and thus (eventually) pay little attention to it. And if successful, it would transcend all issues of factory farming. 

 press.princeton.edu/books/stanford/chapter_7.pdf  Katherine Soule
This excerpt deals with meat eating as a masculine quality. In the article by Carol Adams that we read for today, she asserts that meat is patriarchal and "a symbol of male dominance." This sentiment is echoed in the excerpt, which suggests that meat is used as social currency, enhancing the status of those who have it. The author uses an example of chimpanzees in a biological anthropological example of where the tendency to use meat in this fashion began. In the example, one male chimp caught meat and while lots of chimps hovered around him, hoping for a taste, he shared only with the female mating with him and his close friend. The author claims that this behavior mimics human behavior. He also notes that the "value of meat is a matter of perception by group members," so it is possible to change the influence of meat in society.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
 
 
 
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.