Honestly, this unit makes me feel a bit uncomfortable because it's a topic that I think isn't needed to be spoken aloud about. Even if my mom brings up about certain aspects of it, I end up looking away because its a topic that is completely out of my comfort level. When it comes to illness and dying, I see my mother as a stronger figure than I am because she is able to voice her opinion while I tend to turn my back to it.
But, when it comes to how my mother perceives death and illness, it is similar to my views as well. There's only one life to live, and while this is a cliche I take it very seriously at times. While it is true that I use many of my time on electronic use, I don't see it as a negative thing necessarily. I use my phone and go on facebook because I like to keep connected with friends even if they're not with me in person all the time. Even besides electronic use, I take my time helping out with family chores and taking several extra-curricular activities.
For my mom, illness and dying is just something that happens in life. No matter what, death comes to every individual and that is something we all have to accept as we go on in life. As death comes nearer, we become more conscious about our existence and try harder to make our lives more worthwhile. My mother belives that while holistic medicine can make a person more healthier and recommends me to use it for prevention methods, but it isn't effective when a person becomes truly ill. Holistic methods only work only up to the point until the individual becomes really sick. While Allopathis medicine does not always work, my mo turns to that dominant method because it can cure. Even through a friend's friend who turned down surgery because she didn't believe in it, ended up unneccessarily sick. We have to turn to allopathic medicine in times of illness and that is how she (and I) think its the best way to face illness.
My grandma also is more on the allopathic side as well. She is sent to hospitals and goes see doctors because she does think that doctors and hospitals help her. She was a dancer when she was young, so she was originally in good shape which I think is still holistic. My grandpa on the other side is strongly holistic. Even though lately he's body isn't as strong as he wants it to be, every summer I went to Japan I took long tiring walks with him every night. Even in the mornings, I would see him walk out the house before 6AM to take walks. I think because of his strong holistic views, he looks a lot younger than his true age and is able to care for my grandma.
From my understanding of dominant culture perspectives, there were mostly overlaps of ideas from my mother's viewpoint and the culture's viewpoint. The dominant perspective is the allopathic medicine as the solution for illness and dealing with dying. My mother, as already mentioned, agrees with the dominant viewpoint and is only slightly agreeing with the minor holistic methods.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Saturday, November 27, 2010
HW#18: Health and Illness Feasting
For Thanksgiving, usually my mother and I would go to a friend's dinner party to celebrate it. But, because I wasn't feeling too well I decided not to go this time. I instead went to a dinner party on friday my manager from work invited me to. In this dinner party, (like any Thanksgiving feast), the factor of food-pleasure supplement was the main focus of the event. Everyone simply just wanted to eat as much as they can and enjoy their time. This is one main aspect of being 'anti-body' because I doubt anybody (inclusing myself) were too self-conscious about how much we were eating.
There were also other aspects of 'anti-body' when thinking (though I sat with non-drinkers) many of my older co-workers were drinking a lot. I doubt they thought about the after affect of what would happen the next day because it was simply a day to relax and have a good time. This dinner party was also partially anti-body because we were eating at a restaurant and sat on hard chairs.(Even though this didn't bother me at all). We also didn't move around that much, so that aspect was also 'anti-body.' I didn't even think about the chairs or about my body during that time, because the focus was just on eating the food that was being passed around the table and to have a great time with everyone.
It was already 11PM when we decided to leave the restaurant. Ofcourse, I went home but some members were willing to still drink elsewhere. I thought this after-drinking factor was huge when thinking about the illness and dying unit. I don't think over-drinking or over-eating to celebrate a holiday or on one day would necessarily cause illness or dying, but I thought it was something to think about. I guess celebrations/holidays like Thanksgiving goes hand in hand with negative affects to the body and our health, but I still don't think its that much of a big deal.
There were also other aspects of 'anti-body' when thinking (though I sat with non-drinkers) many of my older co-workers were drinking a lot. I doubt they thought about the after affect of what would happen the next day because it was simply a day to relax and have a good time. This dinner party was also partially anti-body because we were eating at a restaurant and sat on hard chairs.(Even though this didn't bother me at all). We also didn't move around that much, so that aspect was also 'anti-body.' I didn't even think about the chairs or about my body during that time, because the focus was just on eating the food that was being passed around the table and to have a great time with everyone.
It was already 11PM when we decided to leave the restaurant. Ofcourse, I went home but some members were willing to still drink elsewhere. I thought this after-drinking factor was huge when thinking about the illness and dying unit. I don't think over-drinking or over-eating to celebrate a holiday or on one day would necessarily cause illness or dying, but I thought it was something to think about. I guess celebrations/holidays like Thanksgiving goes hand in hand with negative affects to the body and our health, but I still don't think its that much of a big deal.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
HW#17: First Thoughts on Illness and Dying Unit
Illness and dying is always a sensitive topic to me (and most likey for others as well), and is always a topic of discussion that I like to avoid. I see nothing positive in it, and all the emotions involved with these two words is pain and sorrow. I had to deal with the death of my grandfather on my father's side and currently I am worried about the condition of my grandma on my mother's side, and the depression my aunt deals with. It is especially worrisome when most of my family is in Japan, and keeping in touch is not really easy. I think this unit might trigger some of the fears I have surrounding these topics, because I really do not like the idea of loosing people who really mean a lot to me.
I really love my grandparents on my mother's side. My grandma would whine about not wanting to go to the hospital and complain about food. She even ran away and came back home during a period of hospitalization. Someimes I really question if she really values her life. My grandma has a walking stick and a disabled arm. My grandpa would always help put her clothes on and help take her medications. It's surprising how much she acts strong when she is really ill. It's also worrisome. When I heard about the illness and dying unit, I thought about my grandma. My mother had told me that she always told her how scared she is of dying. She basically can't do anything on her own, and I know the doctors would not be very surprised if she died anytime soon. I don't like that idea.
I do not like the idea of being ill and having the idea of dying in the back of people's minds. Is there really nothing I can do for my grandma? Is there nothing people can do to help those who are really ill? What is the point in living a life of consistent pain and the fear of death right by you? I want my grandma to live a really long life, but at the same time I feel as though if I was in the same position as her I would feel really differently. There's only one life: and I want to be able to live it to the fullest. I would not want to live a life of hospitals, medicines, and the sadness of unable to do anything on my own. I want to be a healthy person throughout my life and be able to do a lot of things.
I really love my grandparents on my mother's side. My grandma would whine about not wanting to go to the hospital and complain about food. She even ran away and came back home during a period of hospitalization. Someimes I really question if she really values her life. My grandma has a walking stick and a disabled arm. My grandpa would always help put her clothes on and help take her medications. It's surprising how much she acts strong when she is really ill. It's also worrisome. When I heard about the illness and dying unit, I thought about my grandma. My mother had told me that she always told her how scared she is of dying. She basically can't do anything on her own, and I know the doctors would not be very surprised if she died anytime soon. I don't like that idea.
I do not like the idea of being ill and having the idea of dying in the back of people's minds. Is there really nothing I can do for my grandma? Is there nothing people can do to help those who are really ill? What is the point in living a life of consistent pain and the fear of death right by you? I want my grandma to live a really long life, but at the same time I feel as though if I was in the same position as her I would feel really differently. There's only one life: and I want to be able to live it to the fullest. I would not want to live a life of hospitals, medicines, and the sadness of unable to do anything on my own. I want to be a healthy person throughout my life and be able to do a lot of things.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
HW#11: Final Food Project I
From the whole food unit, I learned that our industrial food system is a much more complicated and nightmarish system than we imagine or wish it to be. Is there a way to escape this nightmare? It was a bit worrisome that there might be even more life-threatening dangers within the food we eat that the government and huge food corporations hide just for their greed for profit. Joel Salatin’s Polyface farm is then mentioned as a ‘sustainable’ and ‘natural’ local farm that would make any reader of Omnivore’s Dilemma and any viewer of Food Inc. want to look up to in amazement. But, I had to ask myself: Is Polyface farm really that great? I decided than to do an Academic Research to see if Pollen and Salatin’s statements hold true.
I wasn't quite sure how to start, so I began by doing simple searches of Polyface Farm. It was a relief to see that many of the people who actually visited the farm were surprised at how much of the things mentioned about the farm was not very exaggerated. However, I knew I needed other people's opinions and came across a blog that caught my attention. Of course, it's not a credible sourse, but it was a start: (http://postconflicted.blogspot.com/2009/05/recent-trip-to-polyface-farms.html) There was a comment that I wanted to confirm:
"The short of it is that pastoral cows are in fact still a major source of greenhouse gases, and they do not solve environmental issues."
Here is some research I found:
"World-wide, there are about 1.5 billion cows and bulls. All ruminants (animals which regurgitates food and re-chews it) on the world emit about two billion metric tons of CO2-equivalents per year. In addition, clearing of tropical forests and rain forests to get more grazing land and farm land is responsible for an extra 2.8 billion metric tons of CO2 emission per year!” (Are cows the cause of global warming? (http://timeforchange.org/are-cows-cause-of-global-warming-meat-methane-CO2)
I’m still on Salatin’s side, but it makes sense that even Polyface farm’s way of doing things isn’t ‘perfect.’ The farm takes up a lot of space so animals are free to roam which may cause more CO2...
This obviously wasn’t convincing though; I read in Omnivore’s Dilemma of Salatin’s method of avoiding his farm animals from eating the same leaf repeatedly to avoid the problems of overgrazing. Polyface farm might be emitting some type of CO2, but obviously its a lot less compared to the CO2 emiited from feedlots and industrial farms.
But, most of the research that came up were positive views of Polyface farm. I tried not to check anything the government or 'specialists' would say, rather people who actually visited the farm and their reactions to it. This is connected to what we've been learning in the food unit has helped me confirm that Polyface farm is indeed an example that other industrial farms and corporations fail to consider. This is important because most people (at least in the U.S) are involved and manipulated into this complex food system, and its important to re-consider if we should still fall under the hands of the government. Polyface farm's method is completely different, so it may not be a complete solution, but it is definitly something to think about.
I wasn't quite sure how to start, so I began by doing simple searches of Polyface Farm. It was a relief to see that many of the people who actually visited the farm were surprised at how much of the things mentioned about the farm was not very exaggerated. However, I knew I needed other people's opinions and came across a blog that caught my attention. Of course, it's not a credible sourse, but it was a start: (http://postconflicted.blogspot.com/2009/05/recent-trip-to-polyface-farms.html) There was a comment that I wanted to confirm:
"The short of it is that pastoral cows are in fact still a major source of greenhouse gases, and they do not solve environmental issues."
Here is some research I found:
"World-wide, there are about 1.5 billion cows and bulls. All ruminants (animals which regurgitates food and re-chews it) on the world emit about two billion metric tons of CO2-equivalents per year. In addition, clearing of tropical forests and rain forests to get more grazing land and farm land is responsible for an extra 2.8 billion metric tons of CO2 emission per year!” (Are cows the cause of global warming? (http://timeforchange.org/are-cows-cause-of-global-warming-meat-methane-CO2)
I’m still on Salatin’s side, but it makes sense that even Polyface farm’s way of doing things isn’t ‘perfect.’ The farm takes up a lot of space so animals are free to roam which may cause more CO2...
This obviously wasn’t convincing though; I read in Omnivore’s Dilemma of Salatin’s method of avoiding his farm animals from eating the same leaf repeatedly to avoid the problems of overgrazing. Polyface farm might be emitting some type of CO2, but obviously its a lot less compared to the CO2 emiited from feedlots and industrial farms.
But, most of the research that came up were positive views of Polyface farm. I tried not to check anything the government or 'specialists' would say, rather people who actually visited the farm and their reactions to it. This is connected to what we've been learning in the food unit has helped me confirm that Polyface farm is indeed an example that other industrial farms and corporations fail to consider. This is important because most people (at least in the U.S) are involved and manipulated into this complex food system, and its important to re-consider if we should still fall under the hands of the government. Polyface farm's method is completely different, so it may not be a complete solution, but it is definitly something to think about.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
HW#12: Final Food Project 2-Outline
Thesis:
Many of the dominant social practices in our society-practices that define a "normal" life-on further investigation turn out to involve nightmarish and industrial atrocities.
Major Claim:
The food industry has negatively influenced our dominant social practices regarding food that we assumed to be 'normal.'
Supporting Claim #1:
The food industry abuses and takes advantage of the overproduction of corn.
Evidence: Farmers forced to produce more corn to make a living.
"A farm family needs a certain amount of cash flow every year to support itself, and if the price of corn falls, the only way to stay even is to sell more corn." -Omnivore's Dilemma page 53-54
Evidence:Our food is not as diverse as we believe
"The great edifice of variety and choice that is an American supermarket turns out to rest on a remarkably narrow biological foundation comprised of a tiny group of plants..."-Page 18 of Omnivore's Dilemma
Evidence: Feeding corn to animals that should be eating grass.
"Switching a cow from grass to grain is so disturbing to the animal’s digestive system that it can kill the animal if not done gradually and if the animal is not continually fed antibiotics. These animals are designed to forage, but we make them eat grain, primarily corn, in order to make them as fat as possible as fast as possible." -What About Grass-fed Beef?
http://www.johnrobbins.info/blog/grass-fed-beef/
Evidence: Giving different names to corn to confuse the consumers what's in our food
The following is a list:
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pdf/foodinc/foodinc_corn_derived_handout.pdf
Supporting Claim #2:
The food industry values massive production over the health of the people and animals when paying closer attention to the treatment of our meat.
Evidence:Feed lot animals live in their manures.
"Then there's the deep pile of manure on which I stand, in which 534 sleeps. We don't know much about the hormones in it-where they will end up, or what they might do once they get there-but we do know something about the bacteria, which can find their way from the manure on the ground to his hide and from their into our hamburgers."-page 81 Omnivore's Dilemma
Evidence:Animals are forced to eat corn which is unnatural.
"Here, hundreds of millions of food animals that once lived on family farms and ranches are gathered together in great commissaries, where they consume as much of the mounting pile of surplus corn as they can digest, turning it into meat. Enlisting the cow in this undertaking has required particularly heroic efforts, since the cow is by nature not a corn eater. But Nature abhors a surplus, and the corn must be consumed." -Page 64 of Omnivore's Dilemma
"Here the drugs are plainly being used to treat sick animals, yet the animals probably wouldn’t be sick if not for the diet of grain we feed them.” -page 79
Evidence:Burgers are made from multiple cow meat.
"When the results came back, the lab reported at least four cows had been found in each patty -- and sometimes as many as eight. "Unfortunately, I don't think customers realize what goes into a single hamburger," Sarah Klein of the Center for Public Interest told "GMA." "I think we have a fantasy it's still coming from a single cow."-Keep your meat safe from E.Coli
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/meat-safe-ecoli-dr-richard-besser-tips/story?id=9029942
Evidence:Our food contains deadly chemicals.
"Ammonia kills E. Coli."-(Food Inc Film)
(But, ammonia is harmful for the human body)
"Even in low concentrations, inhaling ammonia or getting the solution on your skin can cause burning, fainting, or death, so always use caution when handling this chemical." -What is Ammonia?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-ammonia.htm
Work Cited:
Corn-derived ingredients
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pdf/foodinc/foodinc_corn_derived_handout.pdf
Food Inc. Film
Keep your meat safe from E.Coli
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/meat-safe-ecoli-dr-richard-besser-tips/story?id=9029942
Omnivore's Dilemma By: Michael Pollen
What about grass-fed beef?
http://www.johnrobbins.info/blog/grass-fed-beef/
What is Ammonia?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-ammonia.htm
Many of the dominant social practices in our society-practices that define a "normal" life-on further investigation turn out to involve nightmarish and industrial atrocities.
Major Claim:
The food industry has negatively influenced our dominant social practices regarding food that we assumed to be 'normal.'
Supporting Claim #1:
The food industry abuses and takes advantage of the overproduction of corn.
Evidence: Farmers forced to produce more corn to make a living.
"A farm family needs a certain amount of cash flow every year to support itself, and if the price of corn falls, the only way to stay even is to sell more corn." -Omnivore's Dilemma page 53-54
Evidence:Our food is not as diverse as we believe
"The great edifice of variety and choice that is an American supermarket turns out to rest on a remarkably narrow biological foundation comprised of a tiny group of plants..."-Page 18 of Omnivore's Dilemma
Evidence: Feeding corn to animals that should be eating grass.
"Switching a cow from grass to grain is so disturbing to the animal’s digestive system that it can kill the animal if not done gradually and if the animal is not continually fed antibiotics. These animals are designed to forage, but we make them eat grain, primarily corn, in order to make them as fat as possible as fast as possible." -What About Grass-fed Beef?
http://www.johnrobbins.info/blog/grass-fed-beef/
Evidence: Giving different names to corn to confuse the consumers what's in our food
The following is a list:
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pdf/foodinc/foodinc_corn_derived_handout.pdf
Supporting Claim #2:
The food industry values massive production over the health of the people and animals when paying closer attention to the treatment of our meat.
Evidence:Feed lot animals live in their manures.
"Then there's the deep pile of manure on which I stand, in which 534 sleeps. We don't know much about the hormones in it-where they will end up, or what they might do once they get there-but we do know something about the bacteria, which can find their way from the manure on the ground to his hide and from their into our hamburgers."-page 81 Omnivore's Dilemma
Evidence:Animals are forced to eat corn which is unnatural.
"Here, hundreds of millions of food animals that once lived on family farms and ranches are gathered together in great commissaries, where they consume as much of the mounting pile of surplus corn as they can digest, turning it into meat. Enlisting the cow in this undertaking has required particularly heroic efforts, since the cow is by nature not a corn eater. But Nature abhors a surplus, and the corn must be consumed." -Page 64 of Omnivore's Dilemma
"Here the drugs are plainly being used to treat sick animals, yet the animals probably wouldn’t be sick if not for the diet of grain we feed them.” -page 79
Evidence:Burgers are made from multiple cow meat.
"When the results came back, the lab reported at least four cows had been found in each patty -- and sometimes as many as eight. "Unfortunately, I don't think customers realize what goes into a single hamburger," Sarah Klein of the Center for Public Interest told "GMA." "I think we have a fantasy it's still coming from a single cow."-Keep your meat safe from E.Coli
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/meat-safe-ecoli-dr-richard-besser-tips/story?id=9029942
Evidence:Our food contains deadly chemicals.
"Ammonia kills E. Coli."-(Food Inc Film)
(But, ammonia is harmful for the human body)
"Even in low concentrations, inhaling ammonia or getting the solution on your skin can cause burning, fainting, or death, so always use caution when handling this chemical." -What is Ammonia?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-ammonia.htm
Work Cited:
Corn-derived ingredients
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pdf/foodinc/foodinc_corn_derived_handout.pdf
Food Inc. Film
Keep your meat safe from E.Coli
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/meat-safe-ecoli-dr-richard-besser-tips/story?id=9029942
Omnivore's Dilemma By: Michael Pollen
What about grass-fed beef?
http://www.johnrobbins.info/blog/grass-fed-beef/
What is Ammonia?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-ammonia.htm
Friday, October 22, 2010
HW#10: Food Inc. Response
1. The huge food industries and companies are manipulating and controlling this industrial food chain where they hinder the dark truth from the consumers for their profits. We are being neglected of the information in the products sold in the marketplace and fast-food chains so we continue to fall for these cheap subsidized products that are destroying our health and the environment. The animals in the feedlots are treated as things than living things, letting them live in close dirty quarters in their manure, being fed subsidized corn and grain that are not meant to be eaten by these animals. Consumers and farmers who voice an opinion or take an action that can affect these corporation’s sales can get sued-causing many people to give up halfway because of the costs for court fees. The meats we eat are sprayed in ammonia to kill E. coli and the soybeans are being grown in chemical infested soil full of antibiotics. We are also too dependent on a scarce source of petroleum; some already predict that the ‘peek oil’ will be in the years 2011-2012. We need to make more efforts to change the U.S. food policies, for the goal of changing the high hospital rates for obesity and diabetes.
2. I liked both the movie and the book because they provided different ways of helping me become more aware and conscious about our food ways. The book gave a lot of information with lots of details. I liked the book more in ways that there was a little story for some of these chapters that made me feel more upset about the mistreatments of the feedlot animals. The movie on the other hand, provided intense visuals that made me feel disgusted and sick which helped me further realize the dangers we are so involved in. For example, in chapter 4, The Feedlot the book describes in depth about CAFO’s and the process of how the cows are being fed to later be slaughtered. This helped me raise my knowledge, but what really made me sick was when actually watching the factories visually. I’m really glad I read the book before watching the movie though, because it helped me connect the text to the visuals.
3. I always thought I knew how unhealthy fast-foods were, but I didn’t realize this whole industrial system regarding food. It’s a shock that as a society most people don’t give second thoughts about the products on the market’s shelves, because we put other priorities before food-which is exactly what the government and huge corporations wants us to do. The ones in huge powers know the dangerous affects of their mass production and it’s scary how far people are willing to go for huge profits. Even if I watch the movie or read the book many more times I can’t help but ask, “Why?” Why are we so ignorant about food when we should have the right to know what’s going in our bodies? I know the answer is because the huge powers don’t want us to know, but it’s frustrating and hard to believe still. It’s not easy to change the system, but I think that it would work better if more people know what they’re eating and where it’s coming from. There’s nothing in this food system that can be justified, so more people should know and make the right decisions.
2. I liked both the movie and the book because they provided different ways of helping me become more aware and conscious about our food ways. The book gave a lot of information with lots of details. I liked the book more in ways that there was a little story for some of these chapters that made me feel more upset about the mistreatments of the feedlot animals. The movie on the other hand, provided intense visuals that made me feel disgusted and sick which helped me further realize the dangers we are so involved in. For example, in chapter 4, The Feedlot the book describes in depth about CAFO’s and the process of how the cows are being fed to later be slaughtered. This helped me raise my knowledge, but what really made me sick was when actually watching the factories visually. I’m really glad I read the book before watching the movie though, because it helped me connect the text to the visuals.
3. I always thought I knew how unhealthy fast-foods were, but I didn’t realize this whole industrial system regarding food. It’s a shock that as a society most people don’t give second thoughts about the products on the market’s shelves, because we put other priorities before food-which is exactly what the government and huge corporations wants us to do. The ones in huge powers know the dangerous affects of their mass production and it’s scary how far people are willing to go for huge profits. Even if I watch the movie or read the book many more times I can’t help but ask, “Why?” Why are we so ignorant about food when we should have the right to know what’s going in our bodies? I know the answer is because the huge powers don’t want us to know, but it’s frustrating and hard to believe still. It’s not easy to change the system, but I think that it would work better if more people know what they’re eating and where it’s coming from. There’s nothing in this food system that can be justified, so more people should know and make the right decisions.
Monday, October 18, 2010
HW 7D
Chapter 17: The Ethics of Eating Animals
Précis:
Philosophers like PETA and Singer argue that most people are ‘speciesist’ for grouping people before other animals, and they use excuses to justify their reasons for causing them suffering and eating them. Some people argued that animals unlike humans, do not feel suffering because of the lack of language-however it is clearly obvious when animals feel suffering (the CAFO’s) and when they are full of happiness (Salatin’s farm). There is a clear debate on the issue of considering if animals can feel suffering and if we are indeed ‘speciesist’ for our actions.
Gems:
“Indeed, it is doubtful you can build a genuinely sustainable agriculture without animals to cycle nutrients and support local food production. If our concern is for the health of nature-rather than, say, the internal consistency of our moral code or the condition of our souls-then eating animals may sometimes be the most ethical thing to do.” -Page 327
“Few will take up such an offer; many of us would prefer to delegate the job of looking to a government bureaucrat or a journalist, but the very option of looking-that transparency-is probably the best way to ensure that animals are killed in a manner we can abide. No doubt some of us will decide there is no killing of animals we can countenance, and they probably shouldn’t eat meat.” -Page 331
Thoughts:
1. I can understand where the animal people are saying, but I must disagree on the value of the individual animal, and not the species as a whole. Organizations tried to save the almost extinct species of the fox at Santa Cruz by rid of as many pigs and golden eagles-I can somewhat understand why the animal people would be upset, but I think their priorities are out of order...
2. I don’t think it really matters whether people are vegans or eat meat. I guess humans don’t have to eat meat, but as long as we have been fine being omnivorous eaters for centuries it’s okay to choose to eat meat. Carnivores kill other animals for food, so humans have the right to eat meat as well. This idea was disagreed somewhere within the chapter, but it hasn’t convinced me to change my ideas.
3. I like Salatin’s farm and the see-through window idea. I agree that CAFO’s and slaughterhouses should also let customers see the brutality and process of how the animals they’ll be eating would get butchered. What the customer decides is up to them, but its strange that we’re not allowed to see how the food we eat gets processed...
Chapter 18: Hunting-The Meat
Précis:
Some hunters like Angelo hunt simply to eat tasty meat. Even though hunting is now mostly seen as a ‘game,’ Ortega believes that the hunting is perhaps the only way to return to nature. Hunting’s purpose is not necessarily for killing, but at the same time people cannot be considered a hunter without the experience of taking responsibility over the meat they kill. It is a controversy whether the pride hunters feel after killing an animal successfully if we are cruel for being happy over ‘murder,’ or if we are simply happy for success.
Gems:
“Killing is one of those requirements. And although Ortega says one does not hunt in order to kill, he also says that one must kill in order to have hunted. Why? For authenticity’s sake. If for me this venture was about taking ultimate responsibility for the animals I eat, their deaths included, well, I hadn’t done that yet, had I?”-Page 349
“Dreams of innocence are just that; they usually depend on a denial of reality that can be its own form of hubris. Ortega suggests that there s an immorality in failing to look clearly at reality, or in believing that the sheer force of human will can somehow overcome it.”-Page 362
Thoughts:
1. Hunting may be a solution to the problems with industrial agriculture, however I don’t think this is realistic. Like most people, I don’t like the idea of seeing the dead bodies of animals I would eat when they’re hunted and killed. It’ll take a lot to convince most people in industrialized areas (like the city) to go back to the ways of hunting.
2. I don’t think hunting itself is bad at all, when comparing it to the treatments of the cows at the CAFO’s and the fattened overweight chickens. I think I would feel more safe eating meat from animals that has been hunted down from where they roam in natural locations, then from industrial factories where cows are cramped together in their feces.
3. Hunting is controversial because of the pride hunters feel after they killed an animal. But, I think as long as humans can eat meat, they’re allowed to. I don’t think hunters necessarily have joy in the process of killing, but rather to the fact that they have done their hunting successfully. It’s natural for humans to feel pride when they are successful.
Chapter 19: Gathering-The Fungi
Précis:
Most people are reassured about mushroom information mostly through other individuals who went through the gathering experience than reading a book about it. Even in today’s sciences, there are still many mysteries surrounding the functions of mushrooms and if we really need to eat them, but they are necessary in nature to break down organic matter and decomposition. ‘Hunting’ for mushrooms is a difficult thing to do with no clear way to do them, so it really depends on the ‘pop out effect.’
Gems:
“The field guides contain our culture’s accumulated wisdom on the subject of mushrooms. Curiously, though, the process of imparting and absorbing this life-and-death information works much better in person than it does on paper, whether through writing or even photography.”-Page 372
“Mushrooms behave unpredictably, and theories can go only as far in pushing back their mystery. ‘It’s a lot like gambling,’ Ben said. ‘You’re looking for the big score, the mother lode. The conditions might be perfect in every way, but you never know what you’re going to find around the next bend-it could be a sea of mushrooms or nothing at all.” -Page 384
Thoughts:
1. I didn’t know there were only theories about mushrooms, and not actual facts. I just thought I had little knowledge of the functions and nutrients of the mushroom, so I was surprised there’s not much that has been found out yet of the oddness of the species.
2. Maybe mushrooms don’t contain a nutrient that we necessarily need to take in, and their importance only lies in their role in their natural habitats. Mushrooms help life keep going, but they don’t need to be eaten.
3. I didn’t think gathering mushrooms was so difficult to do. I wonder why mushrooms tend to appear a lot after fires?
Chapter 20: The Perfect Meal
Précis:
It’s a huge challenge to create the ‘perfect meal’ because of the seasons each food is grown naturally and the effort to gather all these natural foods on our own. However, cooking is also a way to honor our food that’s been sacrificed to be eaten by us and to thank the producers. (I.e. the farmers and the hunters) A perfect meal involves the help of many people, and the knowledge of where all the food we eat comes from.
Gems:
“Putting a great dish on the table is our way of celebrating the wonders of form we humans can create from this matter-this quality of sacrificed life-just before the body takes its first destructive bite.” -Page 405
“The meal was more ritual than realistic because it dwelled on such things, reminding us how very much nature offers to the omnivore, the forests as much as the fields, the oceans as much as the meadows. If I had to give this dinner a name, it would have to be the Omnivore’s Thanksgiving.” -Page 410
Thoughts:
1. The book in general provided a lot of knowledge and helped me raise more awareness of how clueless most people are about where our food comes from. It’s a bit disappointing that the government only cares about profit more than the people’s health and awareness, but it’s also sad that most of us did not even question the food labels and how these products were being made.
2. I don’t think I’ll be able to eat fast-food in a long while, but I’ll probably eat it again once in a while. It’s unrealistic to eat completely healthy because the society we live in is so industrialized and manipulated by the higher powers. But, it’s always an option that I’m a bit interested in trying at least once.
3. Is there a way to avoid both extreme ways of feeding ourselves?
Précis:
Philosophers like PETA and Singer argue that most people are ‘speciesist’ for grouping people before other animals, and they use excuses to justify their reasons for causing them suffering and eating them. Some people argued that animals unlike humans, do not feel suffering because of the lack of language-however it is clearly obvious when animals feel suffering (the CAFO’s) and when they are full of happiness (Salatin’s farm). There is a clear debate on the issue of considering if animals can feel suffering and if we are indeed ‘speciesist’ for our actions.
Gems:
“Indeed, it is doubtful you can build a genuinely sustainable agriculture without animals to cycle nutrients and support local food production. If our concern is for the health of nature-rather than, say, the internal consistency of our moral code or the condition of our souls-then eating animals may sometimes be the most ethical thing to do.” -Page 327
“Few will take up such an offer; many of us would prefer to delegate the job of looking to a government bureaucrat or a journalist, but the very option of looking-that transparency-is probably the best way to ensure that animals are killed in a manner we can abide. No doubt some of us will decide there is no killing of animals we can countenance, and they probably shouldn’t eat meat.” -Page 331
Thoughts:
1. I can understand where the animal people are saying, but I must disagree on the value of the individual animal, and not the species as a whole. Organizations tried to save the almost extinct species of the fox at Santa Cruz by rid of as many pigs and golden eagles-I can somewhat understand why the animal people would be upset, but I think their priorities are out of order...
2. I don’t think it really matters whether people are vegans or eat meat. I guess humans don’t have to eat meat, but as long as we have been fine being omnivorous eaters for centuries it’s okay to choose to eat meat. Carnivores kill other animals for food, so humans have the right to eat meat as well. This idea was disagreed somewhere within the chapter, but it hasn’t convinced me to change my ideas.
3. I like Salatin’s farm and the see-through window idea. I agree that CAFO’s and slaughterhouses should also let customers see the brutality and process of how the animals they’ll be eating would get butchered. What the customer decides is up to them, but its strange that we’re not allowed to see how the food we eat gets processed...
Chapter 18: Hunting-The Meat
Précis:
Some hunters like Angelo hunt simply to eat tasty meat. Even though hunting is now mostly seen as a ‘game,’ Ortega believes that the hunting is perhaps the only way to return to nature. Hunting’s purpose is not necessarily for killing, but at the same time people cannot be considered a hunter without the experience of taking responsibility over the meat they kill. It is a controversy whether the pride hunters feel after killing an animal successfully if we are cruel for being happy over ‘murder,’ or if we are simply happy for success.
Gems:
“Killing is one of those requirements. And although Ortega says one does not hunt in order to kill, he also says that one must kill in order to have hunted. Why? For authenticity’s sake. If for me this venture was about taking ultimate responsibility for the animals I eat, their deaths included, well, I hadn’t done that yet, had I?”-Page 349
“Dreams of innocence are just that; they usually depend on a denial of reality that can be its own form of hubris. Ortega suggests that there s an immorality in failing to look clearly at reality, or in believing that the sheer force of human will can somehow overcome it.”-Page 362
Thoughts:
1. Hunting may be a solution to the problems with industrial agriculture, however I don’t think this is realistic. Like most people, I don’t like the idea of seeing the dead bodies of animals I would eat when they’re hunted and killed. It’ll take a lot to convince most people in industrialized areas (like the city) to go back to the ways of hunting.
2. I don’t think hunting itself is bad at all, when comparing it to the treatments of the cows at the CAFO’s and the fattened overweight chickens. I think I would feel more safe eating meat from animals that has been hunted down from where they roam in natural locations, then from industrial factories where cows are cramped together in their feces.
3. Hunting is controversial because of the pride hunters feel after they killed an animal. But, I think as long as humans can eat meat, they’re allowed to. I don’t think hunters necessarily have joy in the process of killing, but rather to the fact that they have done their hunting successfully. It’s natural for humans to feel pride when they are successful.
Chapter 19: Gathering-The Fungi
Précis:
Most people are reassured about mushroom information mostly through other individuals who went through the gathering experience than reading a book about it. Even in today’s sciences, there are still many mysteries surrounding the functions of mushrooms and if we really need to eat them, but they are necessary in nature to break down organic matter and decomposition. ‘Hunting’ for mushrooms is a difficult thing to do with no clear way to do them, so it really depends on the ‘pop out effect.’
Gems:
“The field guides contain our culture’s accumulated wisdom on the subject of mushrooms. Curiously, though, the process of imparting and absorbing this life-and-death information works much better in person than it does on paper, whether through writing or even photography.”-Page 372
“Mushrooms behave unpredictably, and theories can go only as far in pushing back their mystery. ‘It’s a lot like gambling,’ Ben said. ‘You’re looking for the big score, the mother lode. The conditions might be perfect in every way, but you never know what you’re going to find around the next bend-it could be a sea of mushrooms or nothing at all.” -Page 384
Thoughts:
1. I didn’t know there were only theories about mushrooms, and not actual facts. I just thought I had little knowledge of the functions and nutrients of the mushroom, so I was surprised there’s not much that has been found out yet of the oddness of the species.
2. Maybe mushrooms don’t contain a nutrient that we necessarily need to take in, and their importance only lies in their role in their natural habitats. Mushrooms help life keep going, but they don’t need to be eaten.
3. I didn’t think gathering mushrooms was so difficult to do. I wonder why mushrooms tend to appear a lot after fires?
Chapter 20: The Perfect Meal
Précis:
It’s a huge challenge to create the ‘perfect meal’ because of the seasons each food is grown naturally and the effort to gather all these natural foods on our own. However, cooking is also a way to honor our food that’s been sacrificed to be eaten by us and to thank the producers. (I.e. the farmers and the hunters) A perfect meal involves the help of many people, and the knowledge of where all the food we eat comes from.
Gems:
“Putting a great dish on the table is our way of celebrating the wonders of form we humans can create from this matter-this quality of sacrificed life-just before the body takes its first destructive bite.” -Page 405
“The meal was more ritual than realistic because it dwelled on such things, reminding us how very much nature offers to the omnivore, the forests as much as the fields, the oceans as much as the meadows. If I had to give this dinner a name, it would have to be the Omnivore’s Thanksgiving.” -Page 410
Thoughts:
1. The book in general provided a lot of knowledge and helped me raise more awareness of how clueless most people are about where our food comes from. It’s a bit disappointing that the government only cares about profit more than the people’s health and awareness, but it’s also sad that most of us did not even question the food labels and how these products were being made.
2. I don’t think I’ll be able to eat fast-food in a long while, but I’ll probably eat it again once in a while. It’s unrealistic to eat completely healthy because the society we live in is so industrialized and manipulated by the higher powers. But, it’s always an option that I’m a bit interested in trying at least once.
3. Is there a way to avoid both extreme ways of feeding ourselves?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)