Genetically modified foods are a science project over taking our nation. But what are they? They are fruits and vegetables that have been altered in science labs to carry desired traits. These traits include the size of the plant to pesticide tolerance to a greater nutrition value. However, the ethics of genetic modification in our foods has been a heated global issue since the early 90’s.
The knowledge of genetically modified foods has been a large concept in many countries. In Europe and Japan it is illegal to have foods that are modified go unlabeled. In 2008 there was genetically modified rice found in Europe that had been shipped from China. In April of that year a mandatory certification of all food products containing Chinese rice to be tested for the experimental GM variety called Bt63 was issued (Krista Mahr-Time Magazine: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1714218,00.html)
In the U.S. this is not against the law. Crops that are in large demand, such as soybeans, potatoes and corn are greatly tested on. There has been so much genetic testing done in the U.S. most of the population has been putting the foods in their bodies for years. A company known as Kellogg’s have been using genetically modified grains since 1999.
The lack of labeling in the U.S. brings up the question of government censorship. Most of us like to know what we are eating and the affect it has on our health. Is the government intentionally censoring genetically modified foods so they can continue the tests? Or is the concern not really as important as many think?
Some companies (Silk for example) have started labeling their products packaging as “Non-GMO”. Their customers typically have a greater knowledge and concern for what they are consuming. Organically speaking, products that have been genetically altered cannot be considered organic. Many of the organic farmers test the food that they feed their animals for non-GMO certification.
Another concern of genetically modified foods and their lack of labeling is the act of the alteration itself. The plants can be altered with the genes of other plants that possess the desired traits, but they can also be used with proteins, such as Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) genes, which are lethal to insect larvae. Soybeans that were found to be genetically modified contained animal genes. This occurrence can effect vegetarianism and veganism. Clearly foods that contain animal genetics cannot be considered vegetarian, yet alone vegan.
Of course there are some significant pros to genetic modification. Most of the plants that are altered have a resistance to disease and pesticides. Many of these plants also show a greater nutrition value, which is said to help in countries that have a small amount of crops and nutrition in general.
The result of genetically modified foods is said to help third world countries in their lack of food and nutrition. It is also said to help with the state of nutrition in the U.S., but as Bill Lambrecht says in his book Dinner at the New Gene Café will we in fact need to destroy more land to make space for growing crops that are genetically modified?
The testing on the plants has been linked to some environmental hazards. In 1999 the public became concerned with genetic testing when scientists tested pollen from modified corn. The pollen lead to the result of the death of butterfly’s larvae.
There has not been any evidence of harmful or positive affects of the genetically modified foods on humans. This may be because there has not been enough research done on the genetic modification itself. Or it may be because people have been consuming the products for so long they have built up immunities to the foods themselves.
The necessity of genetic modification has not been determined to be unimportant or a normal progression of scientific development. China’s development of GMO food leads to concerns of the production of altered food to have the potential of getting out of control. (http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1860289_1859808_1859810,00.html).
Hopefully with the precautions other countries and some brands are taking against genetically modified foods will lead to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to take the same precautions in labeling their food, while scientists continue to test the health risks of the altered foods and so the public can determine if they want to put such things in their bodies and help decide if this is the direction the world’s governments will take in future of food production.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Can you bear all that guilt?
I wrote this essay a few weeks ago, and I forgot about you, blogger.
-This was and essay explaining one of the many feelings that the book "The Kite Runner" is based upon.
When someone engages in an act of crime they rarely think about that they are doing while they are in that state of mind. Afterwards, when they are alone they think about what they have done and usually feel the emotion of “guilt”. They feel responsible, and sometimes regret, for what they have previously done, whether it is real or imagined. In the book The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, guilt is a major theme throughout the story.
Amir, the narrator of The Kite Runner feels guilt almost for the whole duration of the book. He feels that he is responsible for his friend Hassan’s hardships that happened while they knew each other. In a way Amir is guilty, he did not always treat Hassan as a friend, sometimes picking on him because he did not have the knowledge that Amir did. The thing that Amir seems to show the most guilt for is that he did not stand up for, and help Hassan when he needed it most. The lack of things that he did for Hassan haunted Amir. Soon that was all he could think of whenever he saw Hassan. It destroyed their friendship. Almost all of his social and emotional relationships were tainted with this burden that Amir had felt since he was a child.
One character in the book, Assef, was a horrid individual. In the emotional use of the word, Assef did not feel guilt. However, by the definition of “guilt” (dictionary.com) “the fact or state of committing an offense, crime or moral wrong-doing” Assef was indeed guilty. This character has engaged in disgusting acts that hurt the people around him, such as murder and rape. From what we can tell in the story Assef does not feel any moral guilt. I think that the author used Assef to show the ways that “guilt” makes people act, whether it is moral or physical.
Baba, who is Amir’s father, had a major part of the “guilt theme” that is embedded in this book. Baba hid an important fact from his son Amir and Hassan because he was “ashamed of himself”. This was a tie between Amir and Baba because the guilt that they both carried affected them all throughout their lives. Amir says in one of the last chapters of the book that “Baba and I were more alike than I had ever known”. Baba did not know of Amir’s guilt while he was alive, Amir also did not know of Baba’s guilt. This kept a barrier between the father and son. Although, I believe Baba had the greater guilt because he had full knowledge of what he was doing. Amir did not.
In a way the burden of guilt that all of the people in this story have made them the strong or weak characters that make the book what it is. In some cases the guilt leads to redemption, in others the guilt leads to their demise. This book has many other strong themes of redemption, betrayal, loss and forgiveness. However, these themes would not be present if not for the stream of guilt
-This was and essay explaining one of the many feelings that the book "The Kite Runner" is based upon.
When someone engages in an act of crime they rarely think about that they are doing while they are in that state of mind. Afterwards, when they are alone they think about what they have done and usually feel the emotion of “guilt”. They feel responsible, and sometimes regret, for what they have previously done, whether it is real or imagined. In the book The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, guilt is a major theme throughout the story.
Amir, the narrator of The Kite Runner feels guilt almost for the whole duration of the book. He feels that he is responsible for his friend Hassan’s hardships that happened while they knew each other. In a way Amir is guilty, he did not always treat Hassan as a friend, sometimes picking on him because he did not have the knowledge that Amir did. The thing that Amir seems to show the most guilt for is that he did not stand up for, and help Hassan when he needed it most. The lack of things that he did for Hassan haunted Amir. Soon that was all he could think of whenever he saw Hassan. It destroyed their friendship. Almost all of his social and emotional relationships were tainted with this burden that Amir had felt since he was a child.
One character in the book, Assef, was a horrid individual. In the emotional use of the word, Assef did not feel guilt. However, by the definition of “guilt” (dictionary.com) “the fact or state of committing an offense, crime or moral wrong-doing” Assef was indeed guilty. This character has engaged in disgusting acts that hurt the people around him, such as murder and rape. From what we can tell in the story Assef does not feel any moral guilt. I think that the author used Assef to show the ways that “guilt” makes people act, whether it is moral or physical.
Baba, who is Amir’s father, had a major part of the “guilt theme” that is embedded in this book. Baba hid an important fact from his son Amir and Hassan because he was “ashamed of himself”. This was a tie between Amir and Baba because the guilt that they both carried affected them all throughout their lives. Amir says in one of the last chapters of the book that “Baba and I were more alike than I had ever known”. Baba did not know of Amir’s guilt while he was alive, Amir also did not know of Baba’s guilt. This kept a barrier between the father and son. Although, I believe Baba had the greater guilt because he had full knowledge of what he was doing. Amir did not.
In a way the burden of guilt that all of the people in this story have made them the strong or weak characters that make the book what it is. In some cases the guilt leads to redemption, in others the guilt leads to their demise. This book has many other strong themes of redemption, betrayal, loss and forgiveness. However, these themes would not be present if not for the stream of guilt
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Focus on the Animals.
Most people would be astounded to see an animal talk, maybe even pay, to See what would be perceived as "a miracle". In many works of literature it is found that some characters and their actions are used to show a profound view of something that the author would like us to contemplate. In George Orwell's Animal Farm, animals are used to describe the Bolshevik Revolution and Stalin's rise to power. He uses animals such as horses, sheep and pigs to act as Stalin, propaganda and the working class of Russia.
The use of animals to depict the key developments of the Revolution works well for Orwell, their part in the story shows how the people they represent acted, in a blunt and very candid form, like the animals they are being portrayed as. The animals show characteristics of the classes, political figures and concept they were created to represent. For instance, Napoleon the pig meant to be Stalin. In Napoleon's ruthless takeovers of the animal farm, use of numerous scapegoats and high regard of only himself show how Stalin began the communist ruling of Russia. Using these animals helped Orwell in the process of this book by making it seem, at first glance, as an ordinary fairytale. This helped him spread the word of the Revolution discreetly.
Animals as the focal point of the story however, can both add and detract from the presentation of the theme. It adds very much to the plot buy showing the actions of the major problems and causes in the Bolshevik Revolution. The usage helps people understand the basics of the occurrences without too much thought. Although, it does detract from the plot somewhat. The animals can confuse people who do not know much about these happenings in history into thinking that something completely different happened. At times the when reading you may easily forget the hidden context of the book and just think about the forward plot, wondering why the author created a storyline going in different directions at a semi-quick pace. Also, without knowledge of this history in the first place, it can also lead people into thinking that this is, indeed, just another fairytale.
When these types of characterization are used it can help add meaning to a story, explain things and unfortunately, at times, be confusing. With animal farm it was all three of these things. For the people who did not know about the Bolshevik Revolution at the start of the story may have thought this a dull and extensive book to read. When explained the meaning of the allegory, readers may now feel more comfortable with learning about this time in history because of the details that Animal Farm gives. People with knowledge about these events before hand, may enjoy this book and find it to be a good source of outside information on Stalin's rise to power. Overall George Orwell made the use of animals being portrayed as historical events and people work for his story, and in doing so making this a very famous book.
The use of animals to depict the key developments of the Revolution works well for Orwell, their part in the story shows how the people they represent acted, in a blunt and very candid form, like the animals they are being portrayed as. The animals show characteristics of the classes, political figures and concept they were created to represent. For instance, Napoleon the pig meant to be Stalin. In Napoleon's ruthless takeovers of the animal farm, use of numerous scapegoats and high regard of only himself show how Stalin began the communist ruling of Russia. Using these animals helped Orwell in the process of this book by making it seem, at first glance, as an ordinary fairytale. This helped him spread the word of the Revolution discreetly.
Animals as the focal point of the story however, can both add and detract from the presentation of the theme. It adds very much to the plot buy showing the actions of the major problems and causes in the Bolshevik Revolution. The usage helps people understand the basics of the occurrences without too much thought. Although, it does detract from the plot somewhat. The animals can confuse people who do not know much about these happenings in history into thinking that something completely different happened. At times the when reading you may easily forget the hidden context of the book and just think about the forward plot, wondering why the author created a storyline going in different directions at a semi-quick pace. Also, without knowledge of this history in the first place, it can also lead people into thinking that this is, indeed, just another fairytale.
When these types of characterization are used it can help add meaning to a story, explain things and unfortunately, at times, be confusing. With animal farm it was all three of these things. For the people who did not know about the Bolshevik Revolution at the start of the story may have thought this a dull and extensive book to read. When explained the meaning of the allegory, readers may now feel more comfortable with learning about this time in history because of the details that Animal Farm gives. People with knowledge about these events before hand, may enjoy this book and find it to be a good source of outside information on Stalin's rise to power. Overall George Orwell made the use of animals being portrayed as historical events and people work for his story, and in doing so making this a very famous book.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Imperialism representation in The Jungle Book
The story of The Jungle Book is an allegory based on Imperialism in India. When Europeans come to "civilize" they seem to neglect how it's damaging the natives, animals and environment. This plot provokes the ideas of Imperialism by showing the relationship of the Europeans desire to conquer and the distaste of this expressed by Mowgli and the animals.
A key point in this work was "Jungle Law vs. Man's Law". In a distilled form Jungle Law is only killing to keep yourself alive, whether
to eat or be eaten. Man's Law on the other hand is bluntly selfishness, or rather, killing for their desires instead of to keep themselves alive.
The characters have a strong effect on the representation of Imperialism as well. They are seemingly divided into good vs. evil. The "evil" characters, who are William and his cohorts, can be considered Imperialistic. They show the disregard of the environment and creatures that they have taken from. Mowgli and the animals, the "good" characters, represent the smaller-less powerful countries that are the process of being extracted from during this time. Mowgli himself represents the Independence of these countries, the fighting of what is rightfully their own.
All of these points relate to Imperialism through the representation of Nationalism and Racism. Racism is observed through the Europeans thinking the natives, and the country itself, need to be civilized. They have justified this thought through the philosophy of "Survival of the Fittest", thinking that if they have the ability to conquer, then the land and it's rights were their own. Nationalism is shown through Mowgli and the animal's desire to do what they believe is right and remain loyal to themselves through traditional beliefs.
A key point in this work was "Jungle Law vs. Man's Law". In a distilled form Jungle Law is only killing to keep yourself alive, whether
to eat or be eaten. Man's Law on the other hand is bluntly selfishness, or rather, killing for their desires instead of to keep themselves alive.
The characters have a strong effect on the representation of Imperialism as well. They are seemingly divided into good vs. evil. The "evil" characters, who are William and his cohorts, can be considered Imperialistic. They show the disregard of the environment and creatures that they have taken from. Mowgli and the animals, the "good" characters, represent the smaller-less powerful countries that are the process of being extracted from during this time. Mowgli himself represents the Independence of these countries, the fighting of what is rightfully their own.
All of these points relate to Imperialism through the representation of Nationalism and Racism. Racism is observed through the Europeans thinking the natives, and the country itself, need to be civilized. They have justified this thought through the philosophy of "Survival of the Fittest", thinking that if they have the ability to conquer, then the land and it's rights were their own. Nationalism is shown through Mowgli and the animal's desire to do what they believe is right and remain loyal to themselves through traditional beliefs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)