This year's family thanksgiving was more festive than it was in it's previous years. Maybe it was because of the family member who was new to hosting. In the home that the Thanksgiving holiday was not held in the traditional way where everyone sits at the table and say grace just before we eat. It was loud music, loud talking, children playing video games, and eating as much food as you like moving in and out of the kitchen. The vibe of constant movement provided more of a lively feel that made everyone feel comfortable. It was a party. At first we weren't sure about how this Thanksgiving would go because of how different it was, it almost foreign even with close family members by your side, but like all natural human beings, we adapt to our new surroundings.
The food that was provided this year was like most of the previous years where each family cooks and brings food to the party and it's up to you to decide what you want eat even though most of my family persuade you in eating what they brought even if you don't want it. Most of the food that is brought to the Thanksgiving, the food I only enjoy would be the food my mom cooked only because I trust what my mom cooks. Each year is like that. I don't know why I do that, and its not because some of the other food taste bad, but its that I just don't feel comfortable eating other people's home cooked meals.
During the festivities, most of the elderly that had join in on the party stayed seated and were cared to by the adults such as getting the food and drinks and how/who they were going home with. They sat in the most comfortable chair, and each and every grand child was introduced and said there hello's to them. The adults made sure we hugged and kissed the grandmothers' and shakes the hands of the grandfather's like if they were not getting enough love by now. Like in my previous blog, this huge association with the sick and dying and the elderly go hand and hand with making sure that the sick and dying are cared for the most because it is something needed.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
Hw - 17 Initial Thoughts on Illness and Dying
My initial thought about illness and dying happen to be nothing at the moment because personally I don't know anyone personal who died or is ill. Experience is the best teacher, and I have no experience with both of these topics but I know that eventually everyone will suffer from one of these topics. So how do I cope with this then? I avoid it. I avoid it as much as possible because of the known sadness is brings to people. I've been taught to see illness and dying as being concerned and aware. I should be concerned for those who are ill and aware of the dying and deceased to be respectful. Being concerned and providing care seems to go hand and hand to be a good solution to aid people who are in need of help. That is another thing our culture has attended too. The association with help and caring for the ill and dying. We have this sense of giving back to those in dire need by providing them with "help" in what worries them most. As messed up as it sounds, another thought I had about illness and dying were the elderly people in our culture. We treat them with a different kind of respect because of this category of illness and dying they fall into. For example, my grandmother is in her 70's now, so I treat her completely different then how I would treat my younger sister who is 13. When my grandmother needs help with anything, I give her my immediate attention making sure she gets what she needs and because she is elderly I make it sort of my job to make sure she gets what she wanted. As for my sister, when she asks for anything, I give her the run around, or I just don't do it. And that's not because I don't love her, but because she is capable, and is not nearly as close to being elderly. What does this even mean then? Is it the fact that I am associating sick and dying with elderly people as a problem, or is it just appropriate to do so? To treat those who are going to meet their end, with ultimate kindness. Is there more than just associating help and kindness with illness and dying? Or is there more illness and dying could be implying?
I've also come to notice that after the passing of someone, there is a period of grief and then coming of moving on. Our culture tends to do this because we accept the lost we have encountered, and we try to make the best out of it. Basically saying, the gain in something we loose. I can't say from experience that I have lost someone dearly and gained a new benefit from it. But I can say something that is relevant to this; When I had lost my iPod there was a period of time that I missed listening to music on bus, later on I figured instead of just sitting on the bus now with no music, read or finish homework which the end result was getting better grades in school. I now own a Zune player. It's interesting now that I see it, I replaced what I had before after "that period of grief and then moving on" which is another thing our culture does. We replace what is missed, for instance a pet that has passed, many people will adopt a new one to cope with their feelings.
I've also come to notice that after the passing of someone, there is a period of grief and then coming of moving on. Our culture tends to do this because we accept the lost we have encountered, and we try to make the best out of it. Basically saying, the gain in something we loose. I can't say from experience that I have lost someone dearly and gained a new benefit from it. But I can say something that is relevant to this; When I had lost my iPod there was a period of time that I missed listening to music on bus, later on I figured instead of just sitting on the bus now with no music, read or finish homework which the end result was getting better grades in school. I now own a Zune player. It's interesting now that I see it, I replaced what I had before after "that period of grief and then moving on" which is another thing our culture does. We replace what is missed, for instance a pet that has passed, many people will adopt a new one to cope with their feelings.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Hw - 12 Final Project 2
Thesis: The dominant practices in our society are large corporations contributing to knightmarish atrocities that are held in secracy furthermore affecting the population.
Supporting Claim: The Food industry has become one of the many reasons why our population is suffering in health.
Evidence: The huge recall in meat products in nations history that was infected with E Coli.
"25 million pounds of ground beef was consumed after 35 millions pounds ground beef was recalled."- Food Inc.
Evidence: The cost in health care spending due to America's obesity.
"$147 billion every year to treat obesity. It costs another $116 billion each year to treat diabetes,and hundreds of billions more to treat cardiovascular disease and many types of cancer."(http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=8184975&page=1)
Evidence: The government shielding the public eye from certain meat products.
"Agribusiness interest lobbied the CA state to keep labels off meat that came from cloned animals and they're excuse for doing that was ["it would create unnecessary fright."] - Food Inc.
Supporting Claim:
*TO BE CONTINUED
Supporting Claim: The Food industry has become one of the many reasons why our population is suffering in health.
Evidence: The huge recall in meat products in nations history that was infected with E Coli.
"25 million pounds of ground beef was consumed after 35 millions pounds ground beef was recalled."- Food Inc.
Evidence: The cost in health care spending due to America's obesity.
"$147 billion every year to treat obesity. It costs another $116 billion each year to treat diabetes,and hundreds of billions more to treat cardiovascular disease and many types of cancer."(http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=8184975&page=1)
Evidence: The government shielding the public eye from certain meat products.
"Agribusiness interest lobbied the CA state to keep labels off meat that came from cloned animals and they're excuse for doing that was ["it would create unnecessary fright."] - Food Inc.
Supporting Claim:
*TO BE CONTINUED
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Hw - 11 Final Food Project 1
For my Food Project, I decided to choose an experiment to write about. After watching Food Inc. and reading Fast Food Nation, the confines of where meat was coming from changed the way I looked at food in general. The fast food stores or the corner store Chinese restaurants, etc. had meat which at this point was all questionable. For my experiment I fasted for 24hours with the only exception of having water.
First Hour: I'm pretty much solid as of now, whatever I ate last has still gotten me pretty full but I'm not sure if I'm going to last for the next 23 hours just sitting around drinking water.
Eighth Hour: I'm okay. My mom cooked pasta with marinara sauce on top of beef tonight and I have to only drink water as of now before I go to sleep which is going to be rough.
Fourteenth Hour: I woke up in the middle of the night with my stomach raging in hunger. Compelled to eat oreo's with milk, I toughed it out with a glass of water and stayed up the remainder of the night listening to music and doing homework.
Twenty-First Hour: I couldn't do it, I actually believed I was gonna die if I did not eat anything. I didn't eat meat though, I had a nice bowl of cereal which I felt almost still satisfied my goal of fasting, but I don't know if I could of gone another 4 hours without eating or drinking anything that didn't taste good.
Twenty-Fourth Hour: The end. What have I endured during this 24 hour long experiment. Breaking a trend/process that I have been doing all my life, eating meat, is pretty much harder than what I thought it would be. The constant thought of gnawing down on a Chipotle burrito consumed my thoughts of what my next meal should be. The over-bearing amount of pressure it is on someone who eats meat has to break a trend that is basically second hand to their nature of eating is difficult. I think if I were to continue this experiment once more, it would further heighten my tolerance for meat, but breaking a trend would be something I would miss. I think the only reason why I enjoyed remembering eating meat during my 24 hour fast was because of the sight and the pleasure the type of food I ate gave to me. The food is presented as this tasteful delight that can be easily accessed but unfortunately is rather unhealthy.
First Hour: I'm pretty much solid as of now, whatever I ate last has still gotten me pretty full but I'm not sure if I'm going to last for the next 23 hours just sitting around drinking water.
Eighth Hour: I'm okay. My mom cooked pasta with marinara sauce on top of beef tonight and I have to only drink water as of now before I go to sleep which is going to be rough.
Fourteenth Hour: I woke up in the middle of the night with my stomach raging in hunger. Compelled to eat oreo's with milk, I toughed it out with a glass of water and stayed up the remainder of the night listening to music and doing homework.
Twenty-First Hour: I couldn't do it, I actually believed I was gonna die if I did not eat anything. I didn't eat meat though, I had a nice bowl of cereal which I felt almost still satisfied my goal of fasting, but I don't know if I could of gone another 4 hours without eating or drinking anything that didn't taste good.
Twenty-Fourth Hour: The end. What have I endured during this 24 hour long experiment. Breaking a trend/process that I have been doing all my life, eating meat, is pretty much harder than what I thought it would be. The constant thought of gnawing down on a Chipotle burrito consumed my thoughts of what my next meal should be. The over-bearing amount of pressure it is on someone who eats meat has to break a trend that is basically second hand to their nature of eating is difficult. I think if I were to continue this experiment once more, it would further heighten my tolerance for meat, but breaking a trend would be something I would miss. I think the only reason why I enjoyed remembering eating meat during my 24 hour fast was because of the sight and the pleasure the type of food I ate gave to me. The food is presented as this tasteful delight that can be easily accessed but unfortunately is rather unhealthy.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Hw - 10 Food Inc. Response
Food Inc. is a documentary by Robert Kenner who presents a main focus of how large food industries are corrupt. In the documentary which discusses industrialization of food products that affect our daily lives and especially our health, the theories about the rise in obesity, diabetes, salmonella and E Coli are linked back to what is being manufactured in our large food company plants and then being sold off to large fast food companies that we as customers consume. The processed food consist of animals being injected with hormones and chemicals to increase the growth and moderate size to create mass production. Some of the animals, especially cows are fed not grass but genetically engineered corn and grains to increase their size making them fatter later on to be slaughtered and processed as genetically engineered meat. Even though many health violations are shown in this film, a lot of the government turned their heads at this point proving themselves powerless to make a change in how the workers were being treated and how the food was being made. The only thing the government did for these large food corporations were keeping the public eye in the dark about what was actually going on. In the film they showed how agribusiness interest lobbied the CA state to keep labels off meat that came from cloned animals and they're excuse for doing that was "it would create unnecessary fright."
Eric Schlooser's, Fast Food Nation and Michael Pollan's, The Omnivore's Dilemma presents a certain detail without image that is more descriptive than what the film surfaces. In Fast Food Nation, Schlosser explained more about how illegal and female workers in plants were treated unfairly by the managers and that if you were injured in the plant, going to the hospital would result in you loosing your job. The film briefly describes how illegal workers made up a lot of what was being done in the plants but was more focused on the animals were treated.
From the film, one of the more powerful emotional scenes that stuck with me was the mother of the child who got E Coli and later died in result of what Food processing plants had to be blamed for. Even after the huge recall in nations history for E Coli in the meat, the complaint the mother had made was finally answered after 25 millions pounds of meat was consumed after 35 million pounds of ground beef had been recalled. This made me wonder how much our government or the large food corporations actually cared about american citizens and the thought that money weighed more in the decision of recalling meat that was infected with E Coli. Another quote from the film that stuck with me was that "Food has changed more in the past 50 years then in the last 10,000 years." Why hasn't there been a movement to change again? If we could alter the way we eat so drastically in the past 50 years, we should be able to make it possible to drastically change it again?
Eric Schlooser's, Fast Food Nation and Michael Pollan's, The Omnivore's Dilemma presents a certain detail without image that is more descriptive than what the film surfaces. In Fast Food Nation, Schlosser explained more about how illegal and female workers in plants were treated unfairly by the managers and that if you were injured in the plant, going to the hospital would result in you loosing your job. The film briefly describes how illegal workers made up a lot of what was being done in the plants but was more focused on the animals were treated.
From the film, one of the more powerful emotional scenes that stuck with me was the mother of the child who got E Coli and later died in result of what Food processing plants had to be blamed for. Even after the huge recall in nations history for E Coli in the meat, the complaint the mother had made was finally answered after 25 millions pounds of meat was consumed after 35 million pounds of ground beef had been recalled. This made me wonder how much our government or the large food corporations actually cared about american citizens and the thought that money weighed more in the decision of recalling meat that was infected with E Coli. Another quote from the film that stuck with me was that "Food has changed more in the past 50 years then in the last 10,000 years." Why hasn't there been a movement to change again? If we could alter the way we eat so drastically in the past 50 years, we should be able to make it possible to drastically change it again?
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Hw - 7d Reading Response
Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser
Chapter Nine: In 1997, around 35 million pounds of ground beef was recalled due to the fact that E Coli was apparent made by Hudson Foods. This was one of the largest recall in America's history and even before they recalled, 25 million pounds had already been eaten. Companies desire to make a profit felt that the safety of their customers came after business had been finished. Large food companies somewhat escape the clutches of the law and even our American government do not have the power to recall or even shut down the plants for health violations.
Quotes:"The safety of the food seemed determined more by the personality of the manager on duty than by the written policies of the chain. Many workers would not eat anything at their restaurant unless they'd made it themselves." (p.222).
Questions/Responses:
1. How is it possible that our government cannot take control of large food companies, when in reality it seems like the government already controls most of the country?
2. Large food companies have committed a crime, why are they getting away with health violations that are damaging American society.
3. What does this say say about the government if they knew they couldn't shut down the plants before to warn the public about the food epidemic?
Chapter Ten: The history of Plauen, Germany began in 1923 when it was the first place outside Bavaria to subscribe to Nazism, in 1990 it had become the first town in east Germany to host a McDonald's restaurant. McDonald's plan to move company overseas is welcome in some countries but not all. Protest have been apparent in some countries such as China, India and Holland with the thought that McDonald's destroys other restaurants and the culture that exist there. In every right, do these countries have the right to believe this because its factual evidence that McDonald's has contributed to putting out neighboring restaurants and re-arranging the culture that was previously there.
Quotes: "In 1996, Indian farmers ransacked a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant in Bangalore, convinced that the chain threatened their traditional agriculture practices. In 1997 a McDonald's in the Colombian city of Cali was destroyed by a bomb." (p.244).
Questions/Responses:
1. Does McDonald's resemble a tactical military scheme of command and conquer since it's move to overseas?
2. From what I realized in this book and trying to shorten it as much as possible is; A business is a business, to be successful in your business you gain and take control of the opportunity to become more powerful but it all starts with how you sell it to the people. McDonald's exceeds in these demands.
3. What is more powerful then the food that is being marketed towards us?
Chapter Nine: In 1997, around 35 million pounds of ground beef was recalled due to the fact that E Coli was apparent made by Hudson Foods. This was one of the largest recall in America's history and even before they recalled, 25 million pounds had already been eaten. Companies desire to make a profit felt that the safety of their customers came after business had been finished. Large food companies somewhat escape the clutches of the law and even our American government do not have the power to recall or even shut down the plants for health violations.
Quotes:"The safety of the food seemed determined more by the personality of the manager on duty than by the written policies of the chain. Many workers would not eat anything at their restaurant unless they'd made it themselves." (p.222).
Questions/Responses:
1. How is it possible that our government cannot take control of large food companies, when in reality it seems like the government already controls most of the country?
2. Large food companies have committed a crime, why are they getting away with health violations that are damaging American society.
3. What does this say say about the government if they knew they couldn't shut down the plants before to warn the public about the food epidemic?
Chapter Ten: The history of Plauen, Germany began in 1923 when it was the first place outside Bavaria to subscribe to Nazism, in 1990 it had become the first town in east Germany to host a McDonald's restaurant. McDonald's plan to move company overseas is welcome in some countries but not all. Protest have been apparent in some countries such as China, India and Holland with the thought that McDonald's destroys other restaurants and the culture that exist there. In every right, do these countries have the right to believe this because its factual evidence that McDonald's has contributed to putting out neighboring restaurants and re-arranging the culture that was previously there.
Quotes: "In 1996, Indian farmers ransacked a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant in Bangalore, convinced that the chain threatened their traditional agriculture practices. In 1997 a McDonald's in the Colombian city of Cali was destroyed by a bomb." (p.244).
Questions/Responses:
1. Does McDonald's resemble a tactical military scheme of command and conquer since it's move to overseas?
2. From what I realized in this book and trying to shorten it as much as possible is; A business is a business, to be successful in your business you gain and take control of the opportunity to become more powerful but it all starts with how you sell it to the people. McDonald's exceeds in these demands.
3. What is more powerful then the food that is being marketed towards us?
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Hw - 9 Freakanomics
Correlations are the concepts of mutual relation between two or more things. Causation is the concept of anything that produces, what it produces has an effect; the cause. Together, correlation versus causation emphasizes that between two variables, one may not imply the exact cause(s) of the other even though it may indicate possible causes or areas for further investigation. In the movie, Freakanomics study a group of children giving them the opportunity to earn $50 if they were to have good grades. In the movie they focused on two kids in the same grade and how this incentive would either prove positive or negative. In the end, the only one kid took advantage of this opportunity and the other failed at it. This example in this part of the movie represented that not all correlations and causation's are connected. The kid that failed at keeping his grades up choose to not fall through with the $50 reward that was offered and the other kid choose to have the $50 reward. I think the authors chose to address this problem because they wanted to show that the relationship between two things (correlation) does have an effective outcome (causation). The authors also touched base on how this experiment worked and did not work based upon how the child reacted to the reward. Each child's character, their motives were all different, and the reward that was offered was only apparent to those who found relevance what was offered. This would explain why a lot of the other children had failed because the reward was not relevant to them and if they were to try this experiment again, they would have to find many different rewards that all the kids would have found relevant to find a positive answer.
The most used source of evidence in the film would be statistics. The organized system of grouping tons of information and then putting it in numbers that represents one or multiple specific meanings based upon what type statistic evidence were being studied. Statistics can show patterns in the data collected as well as predict future outcomes due to the amount of evidence they collected that would result in the possible outcome. For this type of evidence, they chose to study the cheating aspect of the wrestling sport of Japan, Sumo wrestling and the crime rate in the U.S. Statistically the data recorded proved one thing, but apparent variables provoked different thoughts about what the data "actually" showed. In the U.S the years when the crime rate had shot down, there were many different ideas of what actually caused it to go down, and one of them was the law to have the right to an abortion, and during the years that this law was passed the crime rate went down. Other variables that also affected the crime rate that were also beneficial were the gun control and police presence which indeed effected the crime rate. Were these variables significant to the crime rate of the U.S. or were they all coincidences? What if the Sumo wrestlers did cheat, what are the other variables that may effected how Sumo wrestling was judged? All missing information that really can or cannot prove the exact reason as to why these things played out this way.
Freakonomics serves as an inspiration and good example to our attempt to explore the "hidden-in-plain-sight" weirdness of dominant social practices. I would be contradicting myself if I were to disagree with this quote because it indeed showed an examples into our attempt to understand the unknown in our dominant social practices, but did it serve as an inspiration and a good example? I would have to disagree. In the film they explained a lot of both sides of the fence not really giving us a complete one sided answer that would define the dominant social practices that exist. But maybe this true for our social practices, it is meant to be complex, but in the film they barely make that reference. For example, the study of what names were beneficial to your child argued two sides of the story, but if you weren't carefully listening it would of seemed that both sides argued the same thing. But maybe that is just what life is, not really noticing and understanding what the two issues are and just acknowledging the fact that the problem is there, is all we have to know.
The most used source of evidence in the film would be statistics. The organized system of grouping tons of information and then putting it in numbers that represents one or multiple specific meanings based upon what type statistic evidence were being studied. Statistics can show patterns in the data collected as well as predict future outcomes due to the amount of evidence they collected that would result in the possible outcome. For this type of evidence, they chose to study the cheating aspect of the wrestling sport of Japan, Sumo wrestling and the crime rate in the U.S. Statistically the data recorded proved one thing, but apparent variables provoked different thoughts about what the data "actually" showed. In the U.S the years when the crime rate had shot down, there were many different ideas of what actually caused it to go down, and one of them was the law to have the right to an abortion, and during the years that this law was passed the crime rate went down. Other variables that also affected the crime rate that were also beneficial were the gun control and police presence which indeed effected the crime rate. Were these variables significant to the crime rate of the U.S. or were they all coincidences? What if the Sumo wrestlers did cheat, what are the other variables that may effected how Sumo wrestling was judged? All missing information that really can or cannot prove the exact reason as to why these things played out this way.
Freakonomics serves as an inspiration and good example to our attempt to explore the "hidden-in-plain-sight" weirdness of dominant social practices. I would be contradicting myself if I were to disagree with this quote because it indeed showed an examples into our attempt to understand the unknown in our dominant social practices, but did it serve as an inspiration and a good example? I would have to disagree. In the film they explained a lot of both sides of the fence not really giving us a complete one sided answer that would define the dominant social practices that exist. But maybe this true for our social practices, it is meant to be complex, but in the film they barely make that reference. For example, the study of what names were beneficial to your child argued two sides of the story, but if you weren't carefully listening it would of seemed that both sides argued the same thing. But maybe that is just what life is, not really noticing and understanding what the two issues are and just acknowledging the fact that the problem is there, is all we have to know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)