Food, Inc

Food, Inc was definitely an eye-opening film. It made people more aware of how our food is made and what they do to the animals in order to make so many foods that most Americans enjoy. The food issue that stood out to me the most was how much corn is used in our everyday foods. I’m always reading the labels on the back of food because my brother has a peanut allergy. I never realized though that all the words that I honestly didn’t understand were mostly other words for corn. Corn is in more food products than any other food because it is easy and cheap to produce.

 I liked that this film did not shy away from using pathos. The film showed the conditions that they kept the animals under. It made me cringe seeing how they torture these poor animals and put them in rooms where they are all on top of each other. They are truly under the worst and most horrifying conditions. It was even worse to see how humans came to take the animals and kill them in such inhumane ways. Although this film did not keep me away from ever eating meat again, I still feel that the conditions that the animals are kept under in containment should certainly be changed. I also liked that they used pathos when explaining Kevin’s law. It really makes you feel as though you’re in Kevin’s mothers shoes when she fights to get this law passed. I don’t understand why the government will not pass the law so that there can be more E-coli inspections.

A food formula that I would follow is, “Eat food that makes you feel good. After, go for a run.” The best thing you can do for your body is eat food that will make you feel energized. You should try your best to keep fast-food to a minimum. It is not good to feel like you have a brick in your stomach all the time. Eating healthier food will make you feel and look great. After eating this healthy food, you should exercise. People who eat well and exercise about three to four times a week are much healthier than the people who eat McDonald’s and sit on the couch all day.

Combining Methods: What We Eat

Eric Schlosser argues that fast food is taking over our lives whether we actually eat fast food or not. The McDonald’s corporation is expanding day by day. Every year the McDonald’s franchise owns two-thousand more restaurants. This is causing Americans to think that eating fast food is a part of their daily lives. It is no longer just an option but has become a necessity to adults who don’t have the time to cook meals.

The first method Schlosser uses in his argument is description. He shows this method when he says, “Pull open the glass door, feel the rush of cool air, walk in, get on line, study the backlit color photographs above the counter, place your order, hand over a few dollars, watch teenagers in uniforms pushing various buttons, and moments later take hold of a plastic tray full of food wrapped in colored paper and cardboard.” By unfolding the routine of how Americans obtain their fast food he is using description. Almost all Americans are familiar with and can relate to this routine.

The second method Schlosser uses in his argument is definition. He defines the word, “uniformity” by telling his readers that, “The key to a successful franchise, according to many texts on the subject, can be expressed in one word: uniformity. Franchises and chain stores strive to offer exactly the same product or service at numerous locations. Customers are drawn to familiar brands by an instinct to avoid the unknown. A brand offers a feeling of reassurance when its products are always and everywhere the same.” Schlosser explains that uniformity is when people know very well what is going on and how to purchase items because everything is made the same way.

Schlosser also uses comparisons to support his argument. Schlosser compares McDonald’s to other major factors in today’s society such as the Coca-Cola and the Christian Cross. Schlosser explained, “McDonald’s spends more money on advertising and marketing than any other brand. As a result it has replaced Coca-Cola as the world’s most famous brand. McDonald’s operates more playgrounds than any other private entity in the United States. It is one of the nation’s largest distributors of toys. A survey of American schoolchildren found that 96 percent could identify Ronald McDonald. The only fictional character with a higher degree of recognition was Santa Claus. The impact of McDonald’s on the way we live today is hard to overstate. The Golden Arches are now more widely recognized than the Christian cross.” McDonald’s is becoming more recognizable than Christianity. It is also almost as recognizable as Santa Claus.

As I have shown, Schlosser has used many methods in his essay, “What We Eat.” The benefit of combining these methods is to further prove and explain his argument. He gives many examples and points to give us a better understanding of what is going on in American society. It also makes his argument sturdier and easier to relate to by giving readers facts. I find his writing style to be very interesting and graspable. I understood what his argument was and found it to be intriguing. Combing the methods of writing definitely was an excellent idea for this essay.

I fully agree with Schlosser’s argument. Fast food companies and chains are taking over the way we live our lives. All over America people can see fast food chains, especially McDonalds on every corner. Just because fast-food is easy to access does not mean that Americans should be eating hamburgers three times a week. Americans feel as though they must purchase food from fast-food places because it sometimes seems as though it is the only option. Americans need to learn how to eat healthier and to limit themselves to fast-food. Even if people don’t have time to cook, they’re always other restaurants that have healthier options on their menus to choose from.

Compare and Contrast: The Meaning of Life

All people compare and contrast to weigh the pros and cons of a situation and to see the similarities and differences between anything in their lives. In Robert Cohen's essay, "The Meaning of Life," Cohen questions the quality of life for two rhesus monkeys. Canto is 27 years old and Owen is 29 years old. Cohen compares the dietary habits of these two monkeys by showing that Canto has a restricted diet with 30 percent fewer calories than usual and letting Owen eat whatever he wants.

In Cohen’s essay there is more of a focus on the differences between the two monkeys because Owen looks much happier and healthier than Canto, meanwhile Canto is the monkey on a "restricted diet. Cohen explains why this is. The argument of the essay is that even though scientists say, "caloric restriction slows aging in a primate species," the primates who have the caloric restrictions are not happy which results in not having any desire to live. Experiments on monkeys, such as this one, are done so that scientists can compare the monkeys to humans since humans are genetically similar. 

I agree with Cohen’s argument because in order to be happy in life you must live the way you want to. If living a happy life includes eating a cheeseburgers instead of apples then so be it. If a person restricts themselves to only eating certain foods that they don't necessarily like the person will become unhappy. This will not only put a mental toll on a person’s health but also a physical toll. As shown in the essay, Owen, "is a happy camper with a wry smile, every inch the laid-back simian, plump, eyes twinkling, full mouth relaxed, skin glowing, exuding wisdom as if he's just read Kierkegaard and concluded that "Life must be lived forward, but can only be understood backward." Whereas Canto, "looks drawn, weary, ashen and miserable in his thinness, mouth slightly agape, features pinched, eyes blank, his expression screaming, "Please, no, not another plateful of seeds!" Owen clearly is filled with much more life than Canto. Cohen argues that doing what you want in life will give you a longer life span. Being depressed, like Cohen’s mother was when she passed away, will only shorten your life. I feel that this essay can be summed up into a very popular motto: Live life to the fullest. Everyone only has a short amount of time on this earth so why not live your life the way you want to!

Web of Lies

Stephanie Ericsson categorizes the lies humans tell properly. I think it is human nature to tell lies. We tell them for a number of reasons in which Ericsson listed for her readers. This essay makes you more aware of the lies that we consider very small and insignificant, to lies that are rather quite big, and even to the lies that we trick ourselves into believing.

            Two other types of lies that Ericsson does not mention in her essay are broken promises and plagiarism. A broken promise is when you tell someone you are going to do something when you have no intention of actually doing it. An example of a broken promise would be if I didn't go to a show that my friend is in even though I told her I would be there. I had no intention of actually going to the show, but I just told her I would so she wouldn't feel bad.

Plagiarism is another type of lie. Whenever someone copies another person’s exact words and ideas it is plagiarism. An example of this would be if Suzy decided to copy and paste a paragraph that she got offline into her essay without citing the source. By not citing the paragraph, Suzy is lying that it was all her work.

Ericsson wrote this essay to explain the different types of lies that people of all ages tell in their everyday lives. This essay was published because it makes people think about the lies that they have told all throughout their lives. It also makes them think how they can stop saying those types of lies in the future.

I liked that she gave examples in her essay when describing the different types of lies. The examples she gave in her essay were very relatable. She gave readers’ a better understanding of what each particular category of lies means. I also liked that before each of her explanations, Ericsson quoted a scholar who discussed that type of lie. This gave readers an even better ability to grasp the meaning of the lie.

I disliked that Ericsson did not explain in her essay why people lie in the first place. Ericsson gave many examples of people who have lied. Even though these examples were very helpful in understanding the meaning of the type of lie, it never explained why these people decided to lie and be deceitful from the very beginning. If Ericsson explained this in her essay it would have made it much stronger.  

How in the World Do You Get a Goose Untangled from Tree Vines?

Connors’ essay is titled with a question because throughout the personal narrative, Connors tries to figure out that exact problem. The title grabs the readers’ attention and makes them think how they would get the skunk out of the bottle themselves. Personally, before I read this narrative I didn’t think it was going to actually be about getting a skunk out of a bottle. I thought the title was either a metaphor I had never heard of or was symbolic of an event in the narrative. I was very surprised when the narrative was about getting a skunk out of a bottle. This is definitely a situation that I will probably never have the opportunity to encounter.

Connors writes a process analysis essay about completing such an unlikely task because this is a situation that actually occurred during his life. Sure, people may never encounter a skunk in a bottle, but maybe they will encounter plastic from a pack of soda cans wrapped around a bird’s neck or maybe a boy in the park who’s crying because he lost his mother. Whether it is a person or an animal, readers’ should learn from Connors’ essay to try their best to help others out when they’re in a dangerous situation.

I actually was in a similar type of situation as Robert Connors. I was about thirteen years old and was with two of my friends at Wolfs Pond Park. We were walking around when we saw a goose entangled in vines from a tree. The goose was struggling to get out but he couldn’t get unstuck. We all knew that it would be dangerous as kids to try and get the goose out ourselves so two of us stayed with the goose and the other girl went to get an employee who works for the parks department. The parks department employee called Animal Control to get the goose free. Shortly after, Animal Control came to rescue the goose and was quickly untangled from the vines.

Even though, we did not untangle the goose from the vines ourselves, we still helped the goose get unraveled by getting the parks department employee and Animal Control. People in our society need to look out for each other and help everyone out, including animals. This will make people feel safer if they are in dangerous situations and make the world a better place for all living things.