Wish To Eat More Fish

In Bottomfeeder, by Taras Grescoe, the author brings up some interesting ideas. He talks about how we’ve hunted all the largest of the sea predators, and that the smaller fish and organisms at the bottom of the ocean have exploded in number. He also tells us that in order to try to restore this balance, we have to start eating more of the “bottom feeders”. I agree with his view on us eating more of the ocean’s bottom feeders, as he has a lot of evidence; however, I disagree with some of the arguments he uses to push his idea of a seafood-rich diet forward, specifically his stating that humans grew bigger, more complex brains because of a seafood-rich diet.

Firstly, he makes a good point in his stating we should eat the fish that live at the bottom of the ocean. He says that 90% of the world’s big sea-predators have already been hunted. That is an obvious sign we’ve over-consumed these large predators, and that we should start to eat other seafood sources. It is our job as inhabitants of this earth to take care of it; after all, it’s the only one we have. Not to mention, seafood found at the bottom of the sea is just as nutrient dense as the larger sea-predators, so it’s not like you’ll be missing anything from your diet. They’re full of protein and vitamins just like all other seafood. So not only will you be helping to maintain large-sea predator populations and the ecosystem, you’ll be healthy as a seahorse as well.

He does make very logical points; however, I believe a lot of the facts he tells us to convince us to eat seafood do come from his personal love for seafood and decision to be a pescatarian, and are slightly biased. Specifically, his stating that increased brain size in early humans, and our eventual evolution into modern homo sapiens, was caused by incorporating seafood into our diet. Christopher Wanjek, a columnist on http://www.livescience,com, states that it was man becoming carnivorous that led to their growth in brain size, not Omega-3’s from fish. He is not the first person I’ve seen speaking of this, this concept is quite common. Taras Grescoe puts up many strong points, but the evolution of our brains being caused by fish is nonsense. Even though Omega-3’s are healthy, it was an increase in early man’s caloric intake which led to an increased brain size. This was caused by eating meat, not oysters and caesar salads.

To conclude, I believe Taras Grescoe has an obviously valid argument and strong points to back himself up. However, he tries too hard to push his opinions of seafood onto the reader with a few nonsense facts. “Bottomfeeder” is great, and with a few trimmings here and there, could be a book that you just can’t argue against.

– Stamatis D.

Advertisements

Victorious In Defeat

By Khaled Fawal

Los Angeles has, for quite some time now, been renowned around the continent for its multicultural foundations. After the tragic L.A. riots, the city of Los Angeles advocated the opening of a 14 acre community garden in South Central Los Angeles; a decision that has only brought hope and unity to a neighbourhood ravaged by violence and poverty.

The documentary “The Garden” depicts the inspirational efforts of a Latino-dominant population to preserve what was at the time the largest community garden in the country. A barren, wasted chunk of land in the middle of the city quickly became one of the brightest landmarks in South Central L.A., largely due to the tenacity of the Hispanic community. A little over a decade after its inauguration, a powerful entrepreneur rises out of the shadows and demands that they be evicted. Some shady discussions behind closed doors had controversially brought Horowitz ownership of the land for the same price he had previously sold it.

However, the farmers are not willing to go down without a fight. Several local leaders admirably lead a fight against City Hall, but their efforts bring them little more than sympathy. Fortunately for them, their spirit and unwillingness to leave the garden has made noise around the country, and a fund-raiser is swiftly put in place to raise the money asked by the landowner. Thousands of people around the country, even celebrities such as Willy Nelson and Joan Baez show their support. Against all odds, with the intervention of environmental foundations, the community had finally reached their goal of $16.3 million.

Over the duration of their dispute for the land, however, Horowitz had shown absolutely no compassion for their cause. He quickly becomes a vicious nemesis who lacks both empathy and awareness, an individual whose despicable pursuit of revenge becomes more pressing to him than financial gain. After deliberately demanding a practically unachievable figure for low-income farmers, he turns his back on them at the very end, and the evictions begin.

What happens over the course of the movie is appalling, and the nature of the conflict is extremely aggravating. Serious questions about the justice system in what is supposedly one of the most enlightened countries around the world begin to scratch the surface. The filmmaker profiles a cultural group admirable for their fighting spirit and for their passionate desire to raise food for themselves and their family. “The Garden” is a poignant yet inspiring film that perfectly illustrates the bitterness of defeat and the triumph of a community rising up against all odds to make its voice heard.

YES to Prop 37!

By Monique Ruiz

Michael Pollan’s article Vote for the Dinner Party suggests that Food Companies should label GMO nutrients. Don’t we all have the right to know where our food comes from and what does it contain? By labeling our food, we will gain confident and knowledge to what we eat every day. This also gives the people a choice to eat healthier food that contain non-genetically modified organism and develop a better lifestyle.

We often ask ourselves where most of the food we eat comes from and what it contains. Most people will overact and will refuse to buy food in supermarkets. Numerous media broadcast stories concerning food that contain certain chemicals. This created a big issue on whether people should trust what they eat. If we start labeling GMO food, industries will gain people’s trust back. This also prevents false information to spread. Instead of leading people to false beliefs, it is better to tell them in person by labeling GMO food. We will no longer have the fear to eat the food we purchase. In addition, we are well informed to what we eat. In that case, we have the likelihood to develop a healthier lifestyle.

Before reading Michael Pollan’s article Vote for the Dinner Part, most of us probably didn’t know that food industries put massive amount of pesticides on the food we eat. We are not longer talking about food and its labeling. We are talking about a more important issue; our health. It is hard to convince people on putting GMO labels on food. We adapted a lifestyle that we eat whatever we want regardless what it contains. But it is never too late! If companies put GMO labels on food, there is a possible chance that people would start buying non-GMO nutrients. If this occurs, farmers will no longer have the authority on how they should process food and people would eat less non-GMO food.

Polland tells us that we have the right to know what is in our food. We depend so much on food industries that we forget that we have rights as well. We will gain trust by educating ourselves. We will decide for our own and develop a newly improve lifestyle. If there is nothing wrong with GMO labels, then why numerous companies are against it? This tells me that they have something to hide, and we have the right to know about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyKGn20Ifhk

Let’s do it the delivery way!

The alternative that is proposed by George Monbiot is a good one. George Monbiot suggests that supermarkets should be replaced by warehouses. Thus, they would come to reduce traffic on roads caused due to shopping. As well, this alternative will reduce the lightning that is used in supermarkets. But not only that, George Monbiot also promotes that it will reduce the heating that is used in those supermarkets and their packaging system.

Geroge Monbiot argues that if we replace our supermarket by warehouses, people will be able to take advantage of our delivery system. So people would no longer need to walk to these big store or even lose their time in these stores for choosing what products they want or and need. By replacing our current system of shopping by the delivery alternatives, companies will be able to reduce their packaging resources. They will be able to do so because, the packaging will no longer be important. People will see their product online via the internet. The products would no longer require to be packed in boxes that will usually be transported to these supermarkets where all the products will be unpacked and then put on shelves.

George Monbiot also says that our traffic on roads could diminish by up to 70%, since 1 delivery car will replace three usual cars. Not only that the traffic will be reduced, the carbon emission that is presently caused by usual cars can also be reduced by 80% to 90%.

Warehouses, as George Monbiot presents in his article “Virtual Shopping”, will have no need for product display, which means no need for shelves. Because all the products will be put in warehouses, there will be no need for stock rooms, which will cut the static energy consumption. Because products will no longer require displays, the fancy packaging will be eliminated as well. This gives a rise to a more “green” production business for supermarkets.

In over all, this proposition to switch supermarkets to warehouses and create the delivery alternative is seemingly the best one. This suggestion will reduce the energy consumed due to heating reduction; the traffic on our roads and its carbon emission; and the packaging system will require fewer trees to be dropped on our grounds. By implying such a system, it will be the first step into becoming a more green society!

Topic 3: “Virtual Shopping”  

Words: 392

By: Karina Vakhroucheva