The Fashionable Food Stain

Johnny Cupcakes Hoody

What are two things everybody loves and uses daily? Food and clothing. Nobody... very few people sit around the dinner table without dinner or without clothes and same goes for most meals. I say most because breakfast is the exception; it's too early for all that effort but i digress. For the past two decades or so a recent phenomena has occurred. People have started displaying their favorite foods on their clothing. No longer is your love for Cap'n Crunch limited to your Instagram or Twitter followers, now everybody can see your love for the mouth cutters on a t-shirt. We are now even seeing full fledged clothing brands centering their look around food and it is awesome. What's the best the best thing since sliced bread? That would be sliced bread of a t-shirt my friend. Now most people would date the birth of food based apparel at around the 1960's but the existence of food-based apparel dates back to the early history of man.

Food-Based Apparel [food-based apparel]
noun

1. Any article of clothing featuring a food item(s) as the central design of the clothing item.

Food Stain [food stain]

noun

1. Any food item that resides on an article of clothing for an extended period of time (this includes condiments, crumbs, and vomit)

The Beginnings

If we want to find the true beginnings of food based apparel then the best place to start is where food and clothing first existed together. This is actually when the Neanderthals were roaming the earth. The Neanderthals are closest relatives of the modern human and through archaeological findings it has been confirmed that they wore clothing. To be more specific they mostly wore leopard furs or other furs from the animals they killed and ironically enough leopard print is in right now.

This is where many fashionistas and hipsters disagree as to the origin of food-based apparel. If Neanderthals wore clothing then it is inevitable that they spilled either food or drink on their clothing. This is an unavoidable phenomena known as the food stain and everybody is afflicted by it. Based on the definition above a piece clothing with a food stain on it qualifies as food based apparel because "a food item(s)" is the "central design." Also, since any type of clothing cleansing device had not been developed yet then those stains were permanent fixtures of their clothing. Those opposed to this theory argue that a food stain does not qualify as a "food item" because stains are inedible and just nasty in general, especially if it's vomit.

Fortunately the "Neanderthal" theory is widely accepted so let's follow this timeline. Now, one would would think that food-based apparel would start to be intentionally made when screen printing was created but that is not true. The silk screen printing process was first seen in China around 221 AD but was not adapted to clothing until the 1960's by Michael Vasilantone.

Early documentation of food-based clothing (1969)

Before the 1960's most people were on that suit and tie stuff (shout out to JT) and wore t-shirts as undershirts but since then the t-shirt, which is the most popular medium for graphics, has become a staple in casual attire. Once the swing in popularity for t-shirts occurred many screen printing businesses started booming over time. Since then the popularization of graphic t-shirts and food-based apparel has taken off.

Modern Day Food-Based Apparel

Today food-based apparel is more than just a Cap'n Crunch logo on a t-shirt; it has become a sustainable business. The most notable company would be Johnny Cupcakes. Started in 2001 Johnny Cupcakes has popularized food-based apparel with his iconic cupcake and crossbones logo and has inspired the launch of many other food-based apparel brands. Much of the success around food-based apparel today revolves around the explosion in self-expression and acceptance. We are starting to see pop culture embrace looks and people who are not the "ideal American" for example the homosexual community or larger individuals. This open-mindedness plus the creative genius of companies such as Johnny Cupcakes has led to the modern day success of food-based apparel. While the origins of food-based apparel are still hotly debated the future for it is looking bright like sunny-side-up eggs.

The explosion of self-expression has also made it possible for anybody to create. Today, if you have an ideas and just a little bit of cash it is possible to get your ideas out there whether it is food, clothing, illegal drugs, tools, etc. So if you have big ideas start them now because you just might be the next pioneer in your industry.

(This piece is satirical, only slightly based in fact, and not meant to be taken seriously for the most part. If you believed all of the information in this article you probably suffer from gullibility and need a reality check. But seriously, follow your dreams.)

THAT'S G

That’s G! You have heard and seen it a million times. Whether it is on a vending machine, in a magazine, on the bottle you are drinking from, or on a commercial Gatorade blasts their slogans and logo all over the place. They are the world leader in sports drink sales and they have made a killing by getting people to believe that it enhances their physical shape and recovery. But does it actually?

I have drank Gatorade as long as I have been playing sports (about 14 years) because of one reason, it tastes good! Let’s be honest, everyone always was a little salty when in little league soccer there would always be that one mom who would bring everyone waters and apples so post-game snacks. Everybody wanted Gatorade and fruit snacks. That is just the way I have been wired since I was little kid. I was taught that Gatorade is healthy and it is great to drink while doing a physical activity or consuming it as a post physical activity refreshment. I was even taught that in any situation it is healthier to drink Gatorade than any type of soda or soft drink.

We see athletes drinking out of Gatorade cups and bottles on the sidelines of all different sporting events and we also see them endorsing the product in all sorts of commercials and advertisements. With all of the advertising and endorsing that Gatorade does you would expect it to be something that is very good for you and a home run for physical fitness. Think again.

Gatorade has more sugar in it than people think. The following quote is derived from an article by Hannah Olson about the effect of Sports Drinks. It shows how much sugar sports drinks have in them and how that relates to the daily intake of sugar by children. “Children are recommended to get just 12 grams of sugar per day. One bottle of Gatorade, then–which, by the way, is four servings–is almost five times as much as a child needs in a day, with little to no nutritional payoff”. That is eye-opening, to think that something I would drink more than once a day as a kid had almost five times my daily intake of sugar in it is something that I wish I would have known a few years ago. This here shows that Gatorade is in fact better to drink than soft drinks but just barely. There are 65 grams of sugar in a 20 fl oz. bottle of Coca Cola and 56 grams of sugar in a 20 fl oz. bottle of Gatorade. Pretty crazy how something we envision fit and muscular world class athletes drinking is so class to being just as bad for your body as something that would complete a supersize meal at a fast-food restaurant.

Most of research that it is done for not only Gatorade but other sports drinks is done on world class athletes at the peak of their career during very high level training and it has shown that at that level Gatorade can help the body recover. But how does Gatorade affect the Average Joe just during an evening workout at their local gym? The Average Joe is not going to be doing the high level strenuous exercises that a top notch athlete would be doing so will it help their cardiovascular system as much or will it simply just be sugar being broken down into fat? The answer is this will simply not help the Average Joe and will just turn out to be a negative form of a hydration for an Average Joe. According to Lisa Sefcik of LiveStrong.com the effects of Gatorade will only have a positive effect if you are partaking in strenuous cardiovascular exercise for more than one hour. If that is the case then the Electrolytes and Carbohydrates in Gatorade can give you more energy and rebuild muscle tissue. This is the reason you will see a lot of professional and world-class athletes especially in high cardiovascular enduring sports (football, basketball, cycling etc.) drinking Gatorade both during and after competition because they are burning enough fat and calories to the point where the science behind Gatorade helps their body replenish what it has lost.

 However, that is the only upside to Gatorade. Unless you are partaking in an hour straight of strenuous exercise it is much more beneficial for you body to rehydrate with water while exercising. Judging by what I see at the RPAC between people sitting on the bench tweeting to walking by mirrors slowly “wiping off their sweat with their shirt sleeve” there are not many college students who would fall into the category of physical exercise that makes Gatorade the optimal beverage. So next time you are working out or playing a sport really think about what you have been doing and realize that water is probably the best choice. Because when it comes down to it, Gatorade really isn’t that “G”. 

Growing Meat





     Perhaps a title better suited for an Onion article, or maybe a horror movie where the scientifically grown meat seeks vengeance against its creators, but certainly a title that will cause a double read. The process of growing meat seems incredibly unnatural to me, but one thing about me personally is that unnatural things attract me. Weird things, weird people, weird innovations, weird meat-growing-processes, all attract my attention like a cat drawn to a laser pointer.

 

     My quizzical nature tends for me to digest things differently than most. See most would classify me as the typical meat eating guy. Love sports, love good food, love cut off tee shirts and occasionally will partake in playing country music entirely too loud. To Ohioans who have seen pastures and fields all their lives this technology immidately should be seen as evil, as a scientific monster. Meat is supposed to come from well fed cattle, or a mud wallowing pig. When I cook my bacon, I want to be able to smell the ranch that my Babe came from, not be assaulted by a smell that I would imagine is similar to the doctor's office. However, in vitro meat is worth a further look, in order to at least be educated enough to stay away from.

 

     The pace of science is dizzying, and the fact that less than 100 years ago Alexander Fleming was first beginning to grow simple cultures of mold in order to produce Penicillin, and now incredibly complex animal flesh products that look and supposedly taste like real meat are being grown begs the question how long until Dr. Frankenstein is playing god in lab. I mean while I may be wary of in vitro meat, I can almost guarentee it tastes better than Spam. If people become enraged about this innovation while allowing that abomination to exist, I might lose faith in society.

 

     In vitro meat specialization was originally tested successfully using goldfish, which means that somewhere scientists are consuming goldsfish in claim of science. If that's not unnatural, then slap me. This new technology is currently taking off like an Apollo spaceship leaving the atmosphere, and experts and theorists have been wating for this day. Ever since man felt hunger, he has imagined a way that he could have an unlimited meat supply that would not fall within the constraints of how many animals are available for eating. I feel like if mammoth meat was more available back in the prehistoric days our population would have been higher than 167. But honestly being able to imagine all of the serious famines and tests of human fortitude with this technology being widely diffused would change history. I'm not the only person to imagine this world. During a time of incredible hardhip, Winston Churchill imagined, "Fifty years hence, we shall escape the absurdity of growing a whole chicken in order to eat the breast or wing, by growing these parts separately under a suitable medium". He believed science would save the world, and if Churchill could see the progress that extraordinary men and women have made today his assertion would seem true.

 

 

     Imagine WW2 where scientists in Russia had this technology. 40 million people who died

unnecessarily would still be alive, would have produced brilliant offspring who could have given the world something it hadnever seen before. A symphony, or a new element, something that only human ingenuity could produce. Or imagine a world without the Irish Potato Famine, the implications of such an event could be so drastic that I may not even be here typing this today. With in vitro meat specialization Irish men and women would not have been forced to emigrate to seek out refuge in America, which means half of the broad shoulders that our infrastructure was built on would never have been on U.S soil in the first place.

     The fact is that half of the conflicts in human history, including to this day have revolved around lack of sustinence. While young, in vitro meat deserves a close look by responsible citizens who want to make an impact on their environment. Because here we have a technology that could ultimately provide wave upon wave of endless meat, like endless zombies in an apocolypse, and save a countless amount of lives now and for generations to come.

 

Grass-fed: The Traditional Beef

My family comes from a long line of farmers and I remember many days of my childhood that I spent on my grandparents’ family farm.  It was a stereotypical old fashioned farm that was 100 acres where they raised about 20 to 30 beef cattle at a time.  The cattle were free to graze on the open pastures and were fed a diet of grass and hay in the winter. They were only given cow feed, a mixture of ground corn and dried grasses, in the winter or when there was a drought and grass could not grow quick enough to keep up with each cow’s appetite.  When I got to eat the beef produced from the farm I always noticed a significant taste difference between my family’s grass-fed beef and what we could get at the supermarket. 

                     

Unfortunately, in this 1950’s traditional farms like my grandparent’s family farm started disappearing in favor of the larger commercial farms. The industries started mass producing corn and many other products, along with cows. The main difference is that cows on a commercial farm are fed mostly corn all of their lives. Cows need to be fed corn for a small percentage of their diet to get certain nutrients but commercial farms have been feeding cows large amounts of corn makes them grow faster. In a study conducted by Quan Li, Jill McCluskey, Thomas Wahl, and Philip Wandschneider, they state that Cow-calf producers would raise their cattle to a weight of approximately 700 pounds and then sell them to a feedlot, where they would be fed grain until they reached a market weight of approximately 1000 pounds, a procedure commonly referred to as ‘finishing.’ 

Currently in the United States, the vast majority of beef is grain-fed in feedlots for at least 90 days. Factory farms have been using these methods to raise animal fat, and therefore productivity, since the 1950’s.The farms may also keep the cows confined in small places and this obviously make them bigger and meatier, and therefore they can be slaughtered at a younger age and the larger amount of meat makes them more profitable to the meat processing companies. This practice takes a serious toll on their health, especially when they are not allowed to graze out on pastures and get exercise. Corn also has a large impact on how the cow’s digestive system processes the food and how the overall health of the cow is impacted. When fed large amounts of corn e-coli cells are created in the process of the digestive system trying to break down the corn and grain. E-coli can sometimes make it to the consumer and cause food poisoning. The other health problem with corn-fed beef is that since they are mostly fed corn, the cows don’t get to graze so they don’t get any exercise. 

                                                        

            Because of these health problems and the high price of corn, most of the other countries in the world that raise cows feed them grass instead of corn because of all the benefits of using grass such as better quality of meat. These countries also still raise cows on grass because it’s a tradition and has been used as long as cows have been raised. Many people who are looking to lose weight benefit from eating grass-fed beef. An article written by Jo Johnson states that if you eat a typical amount of beef (66.5 pounds a year), switching to grass-fed beef will save you 17,733 calories a year—without requiring any willpower or change in eating habits.  If everything else in your diet remains constant, you'll lose about six pounds a year.  If all Americans switched to grass-fed meat, our national epidemic of obesity would begin to diminish. High omega-3 acid levels are mostly found in seafood, certain nuts and seeds, and in animals raised on pasture. Grass-fed beef has two to six times more omega-3 fatty acids than does feed-lot beef, a significant difference.

                                                              
                           

How we get people to start eating more grass-fed beef? The first problem for the consumer is cost. Many people will pay a premium for better tasting beef, but others on a tight budget will most likely still go for the cheaper food. One of the ways many consumers cut down the cost is that they cut out the middle man, the grocery store. Buying grass-fed beef straight from the farmer will greatly cut down on costs. The more people start buying straight from traditional farms, the more farms will appear because starting a traditional farm is financially justified. Once more farms appear the cost will start going down even more. 

While buying straight from the farm will help, one of the big problems with grass-fed beef is that it cannot produce enough to meet consumer demands. One way to fix this problem would be if consumers reduced food waste. Nearly half of the food produced is wasted. Another fix may be looking at other choices to fill in the deficit left by the lower production numbers of grass-fed beef. A good choice may be venison, or deer meat, which is a lot like beef except much leaner and more plentiful because of the overpopulation of deer. 

 Either way the problem is fixed, the only way that grass-fed beef farms will be able to get started at all is with the help of the consumer. Once traditional farms can survive, they will start appearing more and the quality of beef will increase dramatically.

Grocery Stores vs. Shoppers

In the mind of the consumers, grocery stores strive to provide the best service by organizing their products in an “easy to find” manner. They place their products where consumers can find them and offer competitive prices for their merchandise. They have items that are convenient for people to buy and just bring home to eat without any preparation. They have cheaper prices than a drive-through and a restaurant. While grocery stores usually do offer these benefits to consumers, they are also awfully sneaky in the way they place their items to try to make as much profit as possible.

Have you ever walked into a grocery store with a list of what to buy and then left the store with a cart full of items that you probably didn't need? I sure do. In fact, grocery stores prefer customers to over buy and they even have strategies to persuade their shoppers to buy more. Grocery stores can map a consumer’s path by placing common items that most families buy. By mapping a consumer’s path, they can strategically place other items so their shoppers will buy them. Other ways supermarkets are mapping a consumer’s buying pattern is through the use of store cards. Grocery stores can track what items are popular during which time and adjust prices accordingly. Consumers are slowly catching on to these tricks and tips; however, not everyone realizes the extra money they can save by avoiding the tricks.

I was at the grocery store a while ago and I just happened to be passing by the deli department. I was checking out the deli meats and the daily deals when a certain sign caught my eye. I saw a brightly colored tag on one of the milk sections which read “Managers Special”. I just happened to be needing milk so I walked over there only to see this “Manager’s Special” wasn’t a special at all. In fact, it was a huge rip off and kind of ridiculous. The price read $9.69 for a gallon of milk. $9.69!
                                   

Photo By Carrie Chen

Surprisingly enough, there were actually a few milk gallons missing from the shelf so shoppers might have actually bought one of these overpriced milks. While my experience with an extremely obvious knock off manager special isn’t very common, the idea that grocery stores raise their prices on items and claim them as a sale is reality.

Grocery stores can raise their prices on certain items and claim them as a sale. Consumers usually look for these sale tags and buy the sale tag items thinking they are getting a deal when they aren’t. Usually grocery stores don’t make it as obvious as my experience, but they can add 10 cents here and there and slapped a on sale tab on the item. While 10 cents isn’t a huge deal, 10 cents every week for a year for multiple items can add up.

Photo By The Sarcamist

Another way grocery stores can persuade consumers to spend more money is by placing items like candy, magazines and other miscellaneous items in places like the check out aisle. As a child I was a huge check out aisle candy grabber, especially those baby bottle pops, rings pops and Slim Jims. I honestly don't remember one day of my childhood where I didn't stare at one of the three listed while in the waiting aisle. While I could have probably just walked over the candy aisle to grab the treats for probably half the price, I just had to take it from the check out aisle shelves. These check out aisles don't just cater toward children. They also have miscellaneous items on their shelves that range from flash lights to jumper cables for adults. Shoppers probably wouldn't have gotten a random flashlight while walking around the store getting groceries, but by placing these items in plain sight for consumers when they are waiting, it is easy for them to just grab the item and buy it.

Photo by Erich Vieth

Don't forget those huge grocery carts! No one wants to walk around with only 5 items in a huge cart. However, walking around with a heavy milk jug in your hand isn't very pleasant either. By walking around with the huge shopping carts, people will buy more items just to feel like their cart is full.

Another way stores can trick shoppers into spending more money is by placing their cheaper items on the bottom of the shelf so consumers don't see it. When searching for items, don't forget to look above you and below you! The items that are at eye level are always the brand name products which are more expensive. The products that are on the top or bottom shelf are almost always the cheaper product. 

Lastly, don't buy convenience! It's easy to buy prepackaged apples that have been sliced and look nice, but supermarkets usually over price convenience items. For example, I was at Kroger a while back and I happen to come across peas in the deli section. A can of peas can easily be bought for under 1$. However, Kroger decides to put the peas in a tray and sell them for $6.99. 

Photo by Carrie Chen

It's easy to fall victim to the tricks grocery stores have and it's easy to grab items that you really don't need. However, if a shopper buys their groceries while aware of the the tricks each stores has, they can easily save a few dollars each trip. Every dollar counts for students, mothers, and even families.

The Truth about Fast Food

The Truth about Fast Food. What Can You Actually Believe?

When you see fast food advertisements today it's tough to tell the factual information from the false advertisements. In nearly every advertisement the food is shown in an extremely positive light. Fast food companies show their food to be fresh and healthy, but how much of this can you actually believe?

Let's start with the discrepancies between advertisements and reality on the appearance and freshness of their food. In the ads all of the meat looks fresh and juicy, with all of the vegetables looking fresh and delicious. These perfect ingredients are combined in the commercials to form the perfect fast food meal, whether it be a delicious looking sandwich or salad. Fast food companies emphasize this perfection by showcasing satisfied looking people who are eating this food. This ad below is a perfect example of these tactics. 

However, these ads are definitely far from the truth. When was the last time you ordered food from McDonald's and got something that actually looked like the product on the menu? I honestly can't ever remember a time that the ads were the truth. When you get your sandwich it is always a greasy, old beef patty with some cheese on top along with some sad looking vegetables. It is always far from the shining images shown just above the counters or in the television ads. 

Advertised McDonald's Big Mac

Store Bought McDonald's Big Mac

The appearance isn't the worst part about the advertising falsehoods portrayed by these companies. They also tout their food to be always fresh and never frozen. However, many of their products contain artificial flavors and preservatives that are unhealthy for human consumption.

• Pink Slime: basically the leftover scraps of meat that are combined and then treated with harsh chemicals like ammonia and citric acid to kill off bacteria
• Some McDonald's salads contain propylene glycol alginate, which is a product that is "safe" for human consumption but is not legal as an additive in cat food, for fear of unhealthy side effects. This compound is also used as a poison to kill beetles.
• Subway sandwiches contain azodicarbonamide, which is a compound that is banned in Australia and the UK because it can cause respiratory problems
• Countless fast food products contain MSG, which can be linked to many brain diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Disease.

Now I don't know about you, but seeing these ingredients that these products contain doesn't exactly conjure up images of fresh food. These additives also bring up the next topic of the healthiness of fast food. Many companies are now pushing the concept of healthier meals to the public. Is this food actually healthier though?

It seems to be common knowledge that if you are looking to eat a healthy diet you should stay away from fast food items. When looking at the nutritional content of popular fast food items it is even more obvious about the unhealthy nature of this food. The USDA set daily recommended guidelines for the average person of around 2,000 calories, no more than 65 grams of fat and no more than 2,400 milligrams of sodium. McDonald's Nutrition Facts show that a Big Mac has 550 calories with 29 grams of fat and nearly 1,000 milligrams of sodium. This alone would represent a significant amount of your daily intakes. But this alone doesn't comprise a meal at McDonald's, this is usually combined with an order of fries and a drink. Adding just a small Coke and fries brings the calorie content up to 830 calories, with 40 grams of fat and over 1100 milligrams of sodium. This comprises a large part of your daily intake and eating this food multiple times a week can be very damaging to your health. The large amount of fat and salt can cause obesity, which can lead to heart disease and diabetes. The very real effects of eating too much of this food is shown in the documentary Supersize Me, where a filmmaker only eats McDonald's for a month straight to demonstrate the consequences.

In conclusion fast foods are not at all what they appear to be. They aren't fresh or healthy as they are claimed to be, they are loaded with artificial preservatives and flavors that are potentially harmful to your health. They also have very high calorie and fat contents which can cause serious health problems if let unchecked. All in all my advice would be to cook your own meals at home instead, you know for sure what is in them and the home cooked food will almost always have a higher nutritional content than the fast foods. The best tip for a healthy lifestyle is to avoid these foods as much as possible.

Don't Give Up On Giving It Up

As a generally sheltered individual for the majority of my childhood, I found myself oblivious to various important issues in the world. Despite my concern for environmental problems, I was not sufficiently aware of them. The term "factory farming" was foreign to me until my senior year of high school. My AP Environmental Science teacher introduced our class to industrial agriculture; of course, her goal and job was to make us aware of all the consequences that come from factory farming. With the help of many videos, including the "Food, Inc." movie, and our class textbook, she emphasized the suffering of the farm animals and the effects that factory farming has on our own human health. Although the class was solely for educational purposes, it was pretty obvious that my teacher was using her time with us as an opportunity to shape our views and create well-educated teenagers. Mrs. Thaxton
understood that as high school students, many of us ate fast food and other food produced from factory farms. She knew she could not put an immediate halt to that, but she at least wanted us to think for more than a second before eating a McDouble, even if the thoughts were not going to stop us. The thought of giving up certain eating habits was now on our minds, and she wanted us to persist with these thoughts.

More importantly, she wanted us to know what we were getting ourselves into and understand that we could all potentially pay a price much greater than the 99 cents we enjoy spending. Looking back, her intentions were very advanced in a way, and definitely had the content to point us in the right direction. I mean, when we consider the effects of industrial agriculture, they can all be eliminated with a single action, right? If everybody in every single city around the world were to stop eating anything and everything produced from factory farms, all fast food restaurants would go out of business, and the entire industry would lose their customer demands, thus running factory farms out of business. Unfortunately, it doesn't take a genius to realize how ridiculous of a request that would be.

Mrs. Thaxton's family is one of few who strictly stay away from such products, eating only the food produced from their farm or other local organic products. If we are honest with ourselves, we know that it would be hard to meet the expectations of the above solution because a lot of us find all those foods to be appealing. I will be the first to admit that I would definitely struggle to adjust to such a lifestyle. So, what exactly are we facing, in terms of consequences, by choosing to eat from factory farms? In a direct manner, we are significantly more susceptible to foodborne illnesses and diseases. The specifics of these illnesses are described by Tim O'Brien in his article "Factory Farming and Human Health."  From the meat produced by animals who endured factory farm conditions follows the possible risks of illnesses such as salmonella poisoning. A survey of commercial turkey flocks in Canada showed that 86% of the flocks had salmonella, and such statistics should not be surprising when we consider the conditions that farm animals live in, a "haven for disease" (as O'Brien describes), where infections are easily spread. Anyone who sees images such as the one below could not feel comfortable about consuming products from pigs who live in these conditions.

The mere images of the suffering farm animals and knowledge of what exactly you are intaking should alone make you second-guess yourself the next time you go to put a McDouble in your mouth. Additionally, you are putting yourself at risk to an outbreak of E. Coli, which is more likely to survive through the cramped conditions of factory farms as animals are moved to a slaughter house. Between these two potentially fatal illnesses, along with others such as listeria, and the increased likelihood of food poisoning, we are asking for nothing but trouble when we eat from the current meat industry.

Factory farming cannot sit well with us from a moral standpoint either, can it? It is difficult, at least for me, to see images such as the ones in "Food, Inc." that display the gruesome conditions of the poor animals, smashed together in their gestation crates with numerous open wounds, lacking sunlight and space. If we take away the appealing part of factory farming, being that it makes food that tastes good to some of us, we really cannot argue that it has any legitimate benefits, however, we continue to support the industry by buying its products.

So when and how will we develop the "giving up" of these products? It could be many years before we reach an effective solution, and it may be a dire situation that forces the world to turn its back on factory farm products. Personally, I would rather reach the solution in a gradual process rather than watch the world suffer from factory farm consequences until it reaches the breaking point. One small way to start changing is explained in the video at the right, displaying the idea of "Meatless Mondays." As the president of the United States Humane Society, Wayne Pacelle, claimed in his TED Talk, "Animal Factories and the Abuse of Power," the ultimate solution will be found through "human innovation and creativity." I am definitely not offering any innovation or creativity that will suffice, but I believe that we will overcome the issues of factory farming with our resources and intelligence, and nobody should give up on the future goals that we need to achieve in order to improve our world, from a personal health standpoint as well as an environmental perspective. With the awareness that most of us have at this point, I think we are all mature enough to start being more conscious about our food intake and consider more than just taste. Allow yourself to make adjustments in your eating habits and think about what you can give up for the betterment of the world.


Tim O'Brien's article can be found at the following link: http://www.fao.org/prods/gap/database/gap/files/1209_FACTORY_FARMING_AND_HUMAN_HEALTH_1997.PDF

Wayne Pacelle's TED Talk video can be seen at the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2pMlY2sJts