Summary Of Escape From The Western Diet

A Rhetorical Analysis of “Against Meat” by Jonathan Safran Foer The standard way of thinking about vegetarianism has it that you either are one or you are not. While it is rarely discussed between omnivores and herbivores over dinner, vegetarians often fall into a category more accurately described as conscientious meat eaters. In Jonathan Safran Foer’s essay, “Against Meat,” he describes his personal plight to become, and remain, a vegetarian through-out his life.

The Critique Essay of the “Escape from the Western Diet” In his work Escape from the Western Diet Michael Pollan focused on American negative food habits, their place in different spheres of the society and general possible ways to improve the food behavior. “The Western Diet is known for its lack of fresh fruit and vegetables and its strong reliance on fast-food, high sugar beverages, high-fat dairy, refined carbohydrates and red meat” (“Western Diet”). While many experts focus on its content, Pollan suggested to turn the attention to the effect the diet has on social, industrial and medical spheres. The author highlighted they unlikely will completely abandon the Western diet as it promote their development.

Introduction In this article “Against Meat” (2009) Jonathan Safran Foer explains his experience from a young age until the present struggling whether being a vegetarian or an omnivore because he doesn’t want to hurt animals at the same time he can’t resist food because it tasted good. Jonathan Safran Foer is an American novelist (born February 21, 1977) He graduated from Princeton University with a degree in philosophy, in his freshman year he took a writing class from the novelist Joyce Carol.

“Thou shouldst eat to live; not live to eat”, is a famous quote by the well known philosopher Socrates, who believed this is the perspective we should take when we are eating food. Unfortunately, the times have changed and so has the way we eat. We no longer have to go hunting for our food, or grow crops to receive all of our fruits and vegetables. Because we have become a society that has grown into the new world of technology, there would be no need to rely on ourselves for what we need-- we can simply gather our resources from other people. In the book, “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”, written by Michael Pollan, takes us on a journey full of concerns of the “Food Industrial Complex”.

(Pg. 443) his rules would help, if we were some sort of food experts, but that is not the case for everyone. So basically, what Pollan is telling us is to guess on picking the right food and hope for the best. As an example; If I were in a position like this I would just assume that anything that says “Whole food” labeled on it will be the right option, yet Pollan even thinks that “Whole food” is bad since it is processed as well to an extend, so he says. Some consumers do not have the knowledge on picking the right foods for themelves, some people are in need of a concrete menu or rules with more specific food, and Pollan needs to be that person if he wants to proof that his rules are true. The obesity status has greatly increased over the past few decades, Pollan says that obesity is our “greatest threat” (Pg. 423) it is threat, not our greatest but it does have an affect towards us.

In the article, “Is It Possible to be a Conscientious Meat Eater”, the authors argue that processed meat can greatly affect the many things in our everyday life. Sunaura and Alexander’s argument is significantly unreliable because of the certain professions both authors yield. As stated in the article “Sunaura is an artist, writer, and activist in Oakland.” “Alexander’s profession is studying philosophy, and ethics in Athens, Georgia.” This shows that neither of them are qualified to argue in the subject of conscientious meat eaters.

In America, there are many things that are kept in the dark, which sometimes doesn’t come to the light, unless it is exposed. Michael Pollan and Jim Hightower both expose the truths that aren’t always too apparent in the eye of the beholder, which in this case, is Americans. They both unveil lies and tell truths, which in the end, is more than beneficial to the American society. In a letter to the future President of the United States, Michael Pollan acknowledges the troublesome in food in our society.

The intake on “cheap” daily food are slowly killing the human race. As social incomes decrease, obesity increase. Fat is no longer a rich man’s disease (Saletan). William Saletan the author of, “Please Do Not Feed the Humans: The Global Explosion of Fat” tells a vivid story of how the human race allowed themselves to fall into the hands of a pig. His arguments stayed strong next to him side by side.

In “How Junk Food Can End Obesity,” by David H. Freedman, he claims that processed foods can help fix the obesity crisis in a more realistic manner, rather than whole-some foods. The popular opinion emphasizes whole-some foods because they aren’t informed about the similitude between processed and unprocessed foods. The essence of the essay is that people believe processed foods are bad and unhealthy for us, therefore whole-some foods are highly recommended for the health of an individual. Freedman mentions many prominent authors who wrote books on food processing, but the most influential voice in the food culture Freedman makes a point of is, American journalist, Michael Pollan. The media and Michael Pollan indicate that everything should be replaced with real, fresh, and unprocessed foods, instead of engineering in as much sugar, salt, and fat as possible into industrialized foods.

Experts recommend that adults eat just over half a pound of meat per week to help reduce their risk for diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, and/or strokes. “We don’t eat animal products for sufficient nutrition, we eat them to have an odd form of malnutrition, and It’s killing us” (Bittman). There’s a simple way to reduce not only our calorie intake, but our carbon footprint as well: “less meat, less junk food, more plants” (Bittman). While Bittman makes some very compelling points about how much of the meat we produce and subsequently waste, he fails to take into account the affordability of meat because of it’s mass production, as well as the simple facts that most people lack the time needed to produce meals with fruits and

He presents a compelling argument for why we have to recall lowering or casting off our intake of animal products, the use of evidence and records to guide his claims. for example, Foer cites the fact that animal agriculture is chargeable for more greenhouse gas emissions than all kinds of transportation combined. via presenting this statistic in a clean and concise manner, Foer makes a robust case for the environmental blessings of lowering our meat consumption. Foer additionally appeals to our sense of morality and values. He emphasizes the significance of compassion and duty in our food choices, encouraging readers to remember the ethical implications of consuming meat.

In “What You Eat Is Your Business,” Radley Balko tackles the issue of who is responsible for fighting obesity. Balko argues that the controversy of obesity should make the individual consumers culpable for their own health and not the government (467). As health insurers refrain from increasing premiums for obese and overweight patients, there is a decrease in motivation to keep a healthy lifestyle (Balko 467). As a result, Balko claims these manipulations make the public accountable for everyone else 's health rather than their own (467). Balko continues to discuss the ways to fix the issue such as insurance companies penalizing consumers who make unhealthy food choices and rewarding good ones (468).

Finally, the quality of counterargument expressed throughout Garretson’s essay, has also been effected by her biased stance on vegetarianism, because she has been unable to display and acknowledge opposing views in her piece. It is very important for one to present counterarguments in their writing because it shows that the writer is not narrow-minded, and instead, is fair by considering other perspectives. Additionally, the use of counterargument adds credibility to a writing and makes the arguments that one presents more believable and trustworthy. Since Garretson does not display or acknowledge any opposing views in her essay, her arguments lose a great deal of credibility. There are many different approaches that Garretson could have taken

Ambar Delacruz Essay 1: The Omnivore’s Dilemma. Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma addresses a variety of concerns about food production and consumption. One might ask what exactly is the omnivore’s dilemma? And the basic answer to this question is “what should we eat for dinner”?

“I asked myself a question: "Knowing what I know, why am I not a vegetarian?"’ Graham Hill, an inspiring speaker, introduced a new way to eat. During his speech on TED Talk, he explains to his audience how eating meat has affected the world. In a calm and humorous tone, Hill proposes his purpose. He explains to his audience by becoming a “weekday veg” you will live a better live, it’s great compromise that will help people, animals, and the environment.