Agriculture and Food Production in the Old Kingdom

Agriculture and food production are quite literally the skills that feed a civilization. Old Kingdom Egypt excelled in this area. Egypts high success in agriculture was due to many things, ranging from a near constant climate, to the Nile and its annual inundations causing the land to be inexhaustible, to Egypts vast amount of other natural resources. This paper will only give a general overview of the more popular resources yielded by agriculture and food production in Old Kingdom Egypt.

The Nile is of particular importance, as it was the source of life in Egypt. Egypts crop fields are the product of the fertile kamat soil. Egypts primary concern was on cereal crops thats yields had various functions. Egypts marshlands provided Egypt with plants that could provide oil as well as building materials. It was also a source of a wide range of species of fish. Animal husbandry was particularly important in Old Kingdom Egypt, especially when dealing with cows. Cattle were a source of milk, of meat, and of prize animals.

Both practically and religiously functional, the cow had a special place in Old Kingdom Culture. As previously stated, one cannot look at agriculture in Egypt without first examining the source of life, the Nile River. The Nile waters made farming and food production possible in Egypt. These waters provided the minerals, humidity, and irrigation that the Egyptians needed to grow their fields, as well as the drinking water necessary for animals. Literally speaking, the Nile made life possible in Egypt. The Nile tended to follow a constant cycle of flooding and receding.

This pattern was particularly important for Egyptian agriculture. Inundation was a process pivotal to the success of an Egyptians field crop. Inundation was the annual flooding of the Nile. It was caused by rainfall in Central Africa and melting snow in the Ethiopian highlands. The Inundation could be both a harbinger of wealth or death. If the inundation was too low, there was famine, if the inundation was too high, there was destruction of land and property. An inundation of seven to eight metres was the ideal.

The inundation was very important because it was the vehicle which brought minerals, and thus fertility to the Egyptian soil. As the waters gathered and grew high, more minerals would be picked up. As the waters flooded onto the lands, the minerals would settle on the bottom, and when the water withdrew, the minerals would be left behind. The area that was rich with these minerals was referred to as kemet. Agriculture depended on the inundation in order to be a success. Inundation governed the seasons of agriculture.

There were essentially three seasons, there was inundation which begin in July with the slow rising of water levels and ran through October, going down of inundation, which started in November as the water levels were falling and lasted until February, and drought which happened in March when water levels were the lowest. Inundation also regulated the taxes in Old Kingdom Egypt. Government officials would keep watch up the level of water in order to determine the amount of applicable taxes, one of the ways to do this was through the use of Nilometers. Nilometers were a form of a well that was used to measure the height of the water.

These contraptions could also be used to predict the beginning of the inundation. The Niles flooding did not always reach land that was being cultivated; likewise, towns and villages did not want to partake in this deluge. As a result, a form of irrigation had to be developed to control and utilize the waters of the Nile. The Nile was such a regular river that it influenced the Egyptians concept of stability, truth, order, justice, all that is good in the world maat. The Nile was the source of life in such a harsh land. Without the Nile, life would not have been possible within Egypt.

Campaign for Food Safety and Awareness

The technological changes and innovations during the last 20 years have created a remarkable array of new creations. All living organisms are compromised of a substance called deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which contains genes that are the blueprint for that organism. Scientists discovered that DNA was interchangeable between organisms and created new breeding methods such as crossbreeding, gene injection, and DNA modification techniques. This allowed scientists to take desirable traits from one organism and give that characteristic to another.

A genetically engineered product is one that was developed by modifying DNA. (www. aphis. usda. gov/bbep/bp/overview. html) There has been an increase in generically engineered crops over the years and they continue to rise. In 1996, 4 million acres of land worldwide were planted with these crops versus having 98 million acres with genetically engineered crops in 1999 (Frankmore, p. A-38). In 1998, 77% of the worlds genetically engineered crops were produced in the United States (Batie, 1999).

Currently the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require the labeling of genetically engineered products (Kessler, 1992, p. 1747). However, legislation is now being introduced into congress to determine how these products should be dealt with. In 1998, the United States patent office received 289 applications for patent approval for new genetically engineered crops (Batie, 1999). It is often hard to understand complex technological and scientific concepts when one does not have prior experience in the field. Genetic engineering is a division of biotechnology.

It is something that one encounters in their everyday life, but at the same time its hard to understand what a genetically engineered product is, and what effects it could have on your life. While is has been well documented that the European Union is opposed to genetically engineered foods which they nicknamed Frakenfoods, the thoughts and beliefs of American consumers has not yet been examined (Batie, 1999). The main goal of the biotech community should be to take the complex topic of genetically engineered crops, and make it understandable to Americans to allow them to formulate and make educated decisions on the subject.

Due to the high complexity and scientific nature of genetic engineering, people arent aware of this topic. However, the spectrum of genetic engineering reaches beyond the realm of science, as it is part of each area of general education. For example, it affects globalization because it could have an impact on population rates, provides nutrition, affects people differently and have social and economic impacts. Biotechnology crosses the area of pluralism as it has an effect on public policies and opinions. It is part of the area of aesthetics as it could change the landscapes and food appearance.

Mathematics is involved in the use of forecasting future trends and profits. New genetically engineered products have the potential to drive a large amount of businesses out of business. For example, a genetically engineered product called BgH can increase milk production by 40% and would tend to force about 30% of all dairy farms in the US out of business once introduced into the market (Perlas, 1994, p. 40). In the case of new genetically engineered golden rice which contains high level of beta-carotene (Vitamin A) to combat blindness in malnourished Asian countries.

Instead however, Asians experienced a Vitamin A toxicity which resulted in abdominal pains, nausea, vomiting, dizziness and deformities of the body as well as problems with the depletion of its scarce water resources by using more then the traditional amounts (www. purefoods. com). Genetically engineered products have the potential to be highly destructive creating gene mutations, superweeds, health risks, and unknown effects from lack of research and evidence on safety issues. Consumers should be aware of the foods that they are eating and possible long term effects.

Genetically Modified Food

Science is a creature that continues to advance at a much higher rate than ever before. World of information adds to humans` discovery and smoothens the path for more advances. But never in history science will be able to deeply affect our lives as science of Genetic Engineering does. With all the respects to this new advancement, Biotechnology forces humanity’s power over forces of nature and also carries the risks to human health, the environment, animal and biodiversity.

Therefore, this issue can be looked at various ways, which includes religious views on genetic engineering, cloning human’s genes, transmission of animal and plant genes, scientific and economical views, opponent groups and supporters` views. The first step to understand genetic engineering is to have a rough knowledge of its history and methods. Genetic was first been known when an Austrian monk named Gregor Mendel developed the first discovery of human beings and other scientists studied the characteristics of organisms for next one hundred years.

The basic knowledge about genes is that “Genes are transmitted through chromosomes which reside in the nucleus of organism’s cells. Each chromosome is made up of fine stands of deoxyribonucleic acid DNA. ” (Clarke 10). And this technology of genetic transmission is called “Biotechnology”. But new signs of biotechnology approved when the advert of World War II brought the manufacture of penicillin. The successful use of penicillin made a thought to widen the choices to genetically modified food and crops.

Fairly speaking, the first reason for creating Genetic Modified foods was to help millions of starving people around the world by mass production of GM food with new characteristics, usage and tastes. Nevertheless, this helpful dream did not last long and human’s power changed the whole process of genetic engineering. One of the main needed considerations is to have a religious view on genetic engineering. In the current case in genetic engineering, life can easily created and ruled by one’s liking.

How can a human being break his limits and create and alter living things that only God has had the right to do so? Dont we know that trying to be on a same level as God has a punishment? In an example, builders of nuclear power and atom bomb indicate that God gave us knowledge to discover. If this is true, why they use this discovery for killing other human beings? And why did God give us the knowledge to destroy the world in few minutes? This world is created by God and based on natural basis, and creatures do not have the right to change that basis.

Therefore, they should not decide what sex a baby should have, how intelligent he has to be or how he should look. Genetic engineering is a human made way to change the structures of God’s creatures and to use it as a power over other humans. Biotechnology, commercialized technology of transmitted genes, is worrisome when its been said that this technology can offer cloning of human’s genes. Transferring one’s genes and submit it to another one’s body is the basic process of cloning. The process was first tasted on animals.

For instance, in West Vancouver, Bob Devlin and his team store the living products of their efforts at gene splicing. What they did was, borrowing the growth hormone gene naturally found in trout and then inserted it into fish embryos. The result is that the new fish grows faster and it is as much as thirty-seven times bigger than its normal size. This was a successful result in genetic engineering field but the reality was that “twenty percent of oversized fish have sprouted unexplainable bulous growths, signs of cartilage run awoke. Boyens 28). With the growth rate of biotechnology usage, some whispers have been heard about human cloning and its benefits in future of our children. Their try to clone a human and create an intelligent, beautiful and skinny creature is their long time dream and they advertise the cloning for parents in order to have children with these characteristics. But won’t it be weird for children to find themselves different from their parents? Who will be responsible of unlikeness of children from their own parents?

Who will tell the truth to these children that they have not been created naturally and from DNA transmission but from labratorarical cloning by biotechnology corporations and not by their parents. Without the doubt neither of fair parents will prefer alittle more intelligence of their kids to pure honesty with their beloved children. Another branch of genetic engineering is genetically modified crops that has raised many disagreements in International corporations but a great demand for grain in near future is a strong reason for GM corporations to win public acceptance.

In the recent statistics of Times magazine, “by the year 2020 the demand for grain, both for human consumption and for animal feed is projected to go up by nearly half, while the amount of arable land available to satisfy that demand will not grow much more slowly but also will probably dwindle. “(Time Magazine 40). It is indeed to note that %52 of people eat outside of dinning home and compared to European countries, North American people spend less on their food that makes that only one tenth of their income. (Boyens 4).

Therefore, because of the above reason and many more like: A company like Monsanto started to grow unexpectively fast and profitable to become manipulate of GM corporations. Even though, a huge company like Monsanto can be a big help to provide grain needs for country and also export around the world, but the recent close connection between Monsanto’s management with U. S federal MPs has made it hard for a fair production. Moreover, it has been a long time that Genetic Modified Food producers do not indicate GM good labeling.

Because truly speaking, they do not see any need to indicate it to the public. Interesting point is where Food and Drug Commissioner brought the reason as: “Genetic Modified Food is not a special thing to indicate in labeling. Except some allergic ingredients, all traditional and bioengineered foods have to have a same labeling requirements. “(FDA Consumer Magazine 5). But won’t it be necessary for some people to know what kind of food they are really buying?

As a matter of fact, “%75 of people like to be informed about GM contained food they are buying, while %60 of processed or manufactured food-cookie, ice cream contains Genetic Engineered soybeans. “(Boyens 5). In future, on the dairy shelves, milk is cowdrugged with growth hormone designed ensure huge milk yields. Genetic engineering has a large potential to help problems such as “developing crop varieties with resistance to pests and diseases. “(UNESCO Courier 29).

But the important point is that the impact of this technology on human health and the environment asks for a wide worldwide discussion. As a matter of fact, security of farmlands containing GM crops is concerned, too. If the monopolistic control over crop varieties lead to a situation where large areas are covered with few different crops, then if they get affected by a serious disease because of breakdown of resistance, who will pay for this big loss in the large farmlands?

While in the overall view, people are the ones who get most of the effects by biotechnology, but a complete major information is needed for people before they judge on the effect of biotechnology in their lives. Today and based on modern biotechnology, scientists insert a single or two genes into the crop and that makes a new crop with individual characteristics. Sometimes, testing new characteristics are fairly attractive and useful. For example, gardeners and farmers have crossbred plants to create a prettier flower or productive crops.

However, as the commissioner of Food & Drug Administration indicates, no matter how a new crop is created, these should be a proper conduction for testing quality of the new crops. (FDA Consumer Magazine 2). Also, some genetic modifications have been made to Canola & Soybean plants to produce different percentage of fat in the food. However, with all the respects to the new modern technology, a certain labeling is required for all the genetic modified food to inform people about the way of processing the food.

But in fact, as GM producers admit, they do not see any need to inform people about genetically modified ingredients in the labeling. Is this really a fair response to people’s need for information? Dont people deserve to know the kind and the way of processing the food they eat? How about religious people who strictly avoid GM foods? How will they going to be informed? This is another reason for proving humanity’s power over forces of nature in genetic engineering field.

Along with scientific views of Genetic Engineering, Economical views play a major part in Genetic Engineering field and better to say it the main reason why Biotechnology is discovered. Without a doubt, the important crisis of today’s world is still hunger and this issue has worried International Organization to provide a certain help for solving it. In fact, the basic reason of biotechnology and creating genetic modified food was because of mass production of GM food under control of producers. With this mass production, the same hectares of farmlands can raise double amount of crops in the field.

Therefore, the worrisome about world hunger could be ignored, if GM food was totally healthy to be exported to the poor countries. However, with recent manipulation of giant biotechnology corporations such as Monsanto, AgrEvo and Novartis, less amount of money is spent on researchers and GM labeling test and therefore there will be more profits for these companies. As a matter of fact, however with almost two decades of biotechnology foods in North America, still many poor countries do not have the economical budget for providing biotechnology tools.

Therefore, as time goes on rich countries get richer with more food amount of opportunities and poor countries stay behind the modern technology and hunger still hurt them for a long time that in fact nothing instead of planned process can help them to survive this issue. That is why many scientists disagree with the idea of mass production of crops with the new Biotechnology’s rapid growth. As John Fagn, American Molecular Biologist, states: “science is not the problem, lets go forward on the basis of science, not economics or politics. and also ” The gene therapy techniques are going to put us in the same place that nuclear power did-we got burned not realizing the potential for side-effects. ”

Because the sad thing is according to recent statistics “From review of field testing and commercialization of transgenic plants from 1986 to 1995,it was found that %91 of 2500 field processed of biotech crops occur in industrial countries and only %2 in developing countries of Asia and very few in Africa. “(Boyens 211). It has been well proved even to local scientists that today’s biotechnology is nothing more than forcing human power.

As a Bioethicist, Arthur Shafer blames new technology as “It is so easy to say its going to bandit these poor people. That is not why it is being introduced. It is being introduced to make money. ” The question is should this biotechnology business, continue to grow monilulately or it should find a fair role in the new International market? The new Biotechnology business and marketing manipulation instead of exporting new technology has raised many strong voices of Anti-Biotechnology around the world. While American Gene giant, Monsanto, tries to grow faster and faster, European countries resist from using GM foods.

The main reason that exporters explain is that in the culture of Europeans, food has a key role and Europeans do care fairly a lot about the food they eat. On the other hand, North American people spend great deal of their time in fast food restaurants with cheap quality and low prices. Also, the economical benefits of Genetic Modified foods in future have had an advantage over the safeness of Genetic Modified food. But in Europe it differs, thats why European Union environmental ministers banned any Genetic Modified food import for three years and until 2002.

Moreover, British Medical Association, Friends of earth, Green Peace, Women’s institute and other anti Genetic Modified campaigns has increased From 6 campaign to 50 campaigns and Japan, the leading importer of GM crops from U. S, has urged for labeling of GM food before banning them. In fact, with rising doubts about environmental and health effects of Genetic Engineering. More Anti-biotechnology campaigns raised their voices and hope to save the world’s food sources from any human manipulation or unwise control.

Along with Anti- Biotechnologists, there are quite a lot of businesses and corporations who welcome Genetic Engineering in its new experience. In fact, trying to understand the population of supporters of Genetic Engineering can help to discover more about the new technology. While supporters of Genetic Modified food are businesses and giant and well known corporations, on the other side, Anti-Biotechnoligists are ordinary people, environmentalists and biologists. The conclusion comes up that the main reason for supporting Biotechnology is its huge profit and its capability to grow.

However, indicating some supporters` views is useful to have a correct judgement about the true face of genetic engineering. Supporters complain that genetic engineering creates disease resistant, Generatis vaccines and altering living traits and they hope that in near future, bacterial and viral diseases will face resistant by Genetic Engineering while replaceable parts can be created by human (Clarke 47). Moreover, fast growing of population and reaching to six billion people, it is very necessary to find a proper solution for world’s hunger and starvation of millions of people.

But as mentioned here before, people do not show interest in genetic engineering products, because they know that feeding millions of people with GM food is not as important as the quality, safeness and healthy food that these millions are fed with. From the above facts, it can be concluded that because of the conflicts every new technology and specially Biotechnology can have and because of the proved effort of corporations to force humanity’s power over other creatures, a strong proper research should be done before any broaden action.

But due to the fact that the new human made technology can be very useful in solving today’s agricultural issues, trying to control the technology as best and modernized as possible, will provide great facilities in the future of human life. Because if not, then continued overrule of power by humans will bring many environmental and health issues for people and affects natural existences that can never be replaced again.

Genetic Modified Food: Benefit or Detriment

The most wonderful activity a human being can experience is new flavors and foods. For example, the first time a person tastes a delicious juicy piece of prime rib or a delightful hamburger with cheese and ham, his world is never the same. However, since the beginning of the twentieth century, the production of food has been supplemented by science. This has triggered an angry dispute between the people who support the advances of biotechnology and people who love nature.

In order to understand the controversy, we have to know the meaning of genetically modified foods. With new technological advances, scientists can modify seeds from a conventional seed to a high tech seed with shorter maturation times and resistance to dryness, cold and heat. This is possible with the implementation of new genes into the DNA of the conventional seed. Once these “transgenes” are transferred, they can create plants with better characteristics (Harris 164-165).

The farmers love it not only because it guarantees a good production, but the cost is also reduced. On the other hand, organizations such as Greenpeace and Friends of Earth have campaigned against GMO (“Riesgos”) because they think that they are negatively affecting the earth (Gerdes 26). Both the advocates and the opponents of genetically modified foods have excellent arguments. Advocates claim that the world may benefit greatly from the production and consumption of GM foods, especially those countries with high rates of poverty and starvation.

Experts insist that the GM products will put an end to world hunger. It is estimated that the world population will grow up to 9 billion people in 2050, and a good alternative to feed them is the GM products. Nowadays, in almost all African countries people are dying because of hunger and hunger-related diseases. The estimate of life expectation in these countries is fifty seven years old, and it will decrease to forty seven in 2020 (kwengwere 2-3). The governments of these countries are battling to put a stop to this unfair situation.

Experts have said that the best alternative is the implementation of GM cultures in Africa; it will reduce the deaths, increase the life expectations and nourish the whole continent (Forsberg 1). The future of Africa is uncertain, but it is sure to depend on the hands of GM production. Many people are asking how GMO would prevent all these problems. The key is in the production. The growth of GM crops is faster than the conventional seeds. For that reason, farmers can produce more and more. These seeds are resistant to cold and hot weather and have more chances to resist dryness than the others.

Also, these crops are herbicide resistant; that means that farmers can spray with herbicide and defeat the weeds without altering the crop. For that reason, a lot of money is saved by the reduced use of pesticides, and the cost of production is benefited. Almost 8. 25 millions farmers all over the world planted genetically modified seeds in 2004, compared to 7 million in 2003, said the international Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA)(“Biotech” 1).

In addition to the strong production, as John B. Alfred, a professor in the department of food science and technology at Ohio State University, said, “These foods are as safe and nutritious as their conventional counterparts”(Alfred 1). These GM plants are modified to produce proteins that plants would not produce by natural means. They grow up with built-in Vitamin A that prevents blindness in people who have Vitamin A deficiency. Scientists have also created GM potatoes which absorb less oil when fried. That means less fat in the potato, converting popular french fries from junk food to nutritious and healthy food.

Scientists have also developed an apple with a built-in vaccine which prevents childhood pneumonia (“GM Food” 1). These are only some benefits of the genetically modified foods, but some people are asking themselves, do we want mutant plants, killer tomatoes and other atrocities to replace natural food? The introduction of genetically modified agriculture and foods in our system has caused a number of questions about negative consequences. Is the GM food secured for the health of human beings, and how is this affecting the ecosystem?

The impact of these GM crops on natural ecosystems is uncertain. There are many concerns. If the GM plants mix with another species, they might form an undesired plant or hurt the animals that live in the ecosystem. “Genes can move in pollen by wind or insects. Seeds can get stuck in machinery or mixed in storage and transportation systems. There are very many routes of vulnerability,” said a panel chairman David Andow of the University of Minnesota (“Riesgos”). In 1999, a report said that only 56% of monarch butterflies survived after eating milkweed surfaced with engineered corn pollen.

A study found out that the larvae was poisoned with the toxin on the corn pollen. This pollen could also mix with another relative or unrelated plant and form an undesired plant resistant to herbicides and almost impossible to kill (Dougherty 1). Another determent of GM organisms is that Bio-technology companies are taking commercial control over the farmers through their products. This means that the farmers will depend on the companies, and the production of agriculture products will be in some way monopolized.

Only 1% of GM research is aimed at crops used by poor farmers in poor countries. It can cost up to 200 million dollars and 12 years to develop a GM crop, and that cost has to be recouped by selling to farmers who can pay for it. The price of the food will increase, poor countries will suffer the consequences, and the hunger will still be there (Hazards 1). A good example that proves this is Argentina. This country is in second place of GM production and is the only developing country producing genetically engineering crops on a large scale.

All this production is exported to foreign countries while millions of Argentineans are suffering hunger. Instead of focusing on risky technologies, all that money used should be directed to giving poor people land, credit, resources, and markets so they can feed themselves and sell their surplus crops (“Feeding the World” 1). There are four multinationals that control the seed market. Monsanto, Syngenta Bayer CropScience, and Dupont, but about 91 % of all GM crops grown in the world are from Monstanto (Brown 1). This shows that GM crops are more likely to benefit rich corporations than poor people.

Another consequence of GM crops is that genetic modifications can develop proteins in plants which a consumer could be allergic to. For example, one of the most common allergies is with the peanut. What would happen if peanut proteins interlace into tomato seeds? Then people with peanut allergies would not be able to eat genetically modified tomatoes. There are many reasons to stop the production of GM food. It can produce serious long-term nature accidents, but there is no way to know much about it until is too late (“GM Food” 2). In conclusion, the application of genetically modified food has a lot of pros and cons.

There is so much disagreement about the benefits and risks of GM because there are so many different views surrounding it. This issue is very important today because it will change our future. How would the world be when every single living creature will be in some aspect genetically modified? Would we be more resistant to illness? Or would we be weaker and more vulnerable to diseases? Would this be the beginning of the mutant era? Regardless of the answers to these questions, we will need to consider the implications of genetically modified foods.

Elizabethan Food & Dining

For the well-to-do, eating during the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods was a fancy affair. A king or queen when going abroad could expect banquet tables filled with hundreds of dishes–for just one meal! There was much pageantry and entertainment. At Leicester, Queen Elizabeth I (predecessor of King James VI & I) was greeted with a pageant of welcome displayed on a temporary bridge. There were cages of live birds–bitterns, curlews, hernshaws and godwits. One pillar held great silver bowls piled with apples, pears, cherries, walnuts and filberts.

Other pillars held ears of wheat, oats and barley, gigantic bunches of red and white grapes, great livery pots of claret and white wine, sea fish in quantity laying upon fresh grass, and the last pillar was devoted to the arts. There were arms and music explained by a blue-clad poet. The evenings were marked by entertainments of various sorts like a water pageant with a costumed actor riding in on a dolphin. The food was brought in thousands of crystal and silver dishes served by dozens, sometimes hundreds, of gentlemen.

Rich Elizabethans dined twice a day–breakfast at eleven or twelve and supper between five and six. Of course, the meals of the common man were not so extravagant. The common man ate three meals a day: breakfast in the early am, dinner at twelve and supper at six. The poorer sort, supped when they could. A poem by Thomas Tusser gives a good idea of the break fast of the typical farmer: Call Servants to breakfast, by day star appear, a snatch to wake fellows, but tarry not here.

Let Huswife be carver, let pottage be eat, a dishful each one with a morsel of meat. Rich Elizabethans loved hospitality and had chronic guests. In following the old custome, they gathered in the Great Hall where the host sat at the head of the table and guests were arranged in order of importance. Food was prepared in vast quantities and what was left over went to servants. After the servants ate, the remaining food was given to the poor who waited outside the rich men’s gates–reminds one of Lazarus and the rich man.

Kitchen Equipment: brick ovens, working table, spits, pots, posnetts, chafing-dishes, graters, mortars and pestles, boilers, knives, cleavers axes, dripping-pans, pot-racks, pot-hooks, gridirons, frying pans, sieves, kneading troughs, fire shovels, barrels, tubs, pantry, buttery (wine and other provisions stored here), wet and dry larders, spicery, mealhouse sieving or bolting house, coals kep in squillerie along with brass pots and pans, pewter vessels and herbs, covered dishes, court cupboard, sideboards.

Drinking vessels: gold, silver, pewter, horn, leather, glass, earthenware. Meat: beef, mutton, lamb, veal, kid, port, coney, pig, venison, fish (sometimes salted–pike, salmon, haddock, gurnard, tench, sturgeon, conger-eels, carp, lampreys, chines of salmon, perch, white herring, shrimp, pilchards, mackerel, oysters), sausage, eggs, sheep’s feet, meat pies. Due to lack of refrigeration, techniques for preparing spoiled meat–vinegar, burying, sauces, spices.

Cheese Fowl: domestic and wild–crane, bitter, swan, brant, lark, plover, quail, teal, widgeon, mallard, shelldrake, shoveller, peewit, scamen, knot, olicet, dun bird, partridge, pheasant, sparrows, doves, pigeons, cocks, hens, geese, ducks, peacocks of the Ind, turkeys, pelican, blackbirds,. Vegetables: beans, turnips, greens, parsnips, carrots, cabbage, colewart, beetroot, salsify, artichokes, asparagus, peas, salads, lettuce, onions, leeks, pumpkins, melon, cucumbers, skirret, horseradish, gourds, olives, potatoes, yams.

Herbs: chervil, young sow thistle, corn salad, leaves of clary, spotted cowslip. Bread: wheat, white, rye, barley. In times of dearth bread made of horse-corn, peas, beans, oats, tares, lentils, acorns. Fruit: oranges, cherries, rasberries, strawberries, mulberries, peaches, apricots, cornels, currants, raisins, lemons, gooseberry, plums, pears, apples, grapes.

Eating Disorders in Adolescents

The eating disorders anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa are complex psychosomatic illnesses. Underlying biological diatheses related to the regulation of mood, hunger, satiety, weight control, and metabolism, combined with psychological and sociocultural vulnerabilities, place an individual at risk for developing an eating disorder (Kaplan and Garfinkel, 1993). The American Anorexia Nervosa Association defines anorexia as a serious illness of deliberate self-starvation with profound psychiatric and physical components.

It is a complex emotional disorder that initiates its victims on a course of unsettled dieting in pursuit of excessive thinness (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). The intense fear of obesity that anorexics experience takes on the qualities of an obsession. Anorexics seem to have a greater fear of getting fat than of dying from the effects of their self-imposed starvation (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). Another unusual twist occurs in relation to this fear of growing fat.

The average person concerned about weight gain will feel a sense of relief as he/she loses weight. However, the anorexic is unlike other people in this respect: for them, the fear does not diminish (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). The disturbance of body image in anorexia is an unclear circumstance. Most anorexics have distorted perceptions of themselves. Some insist that their wasted bodies are repulsively over-fleshed. According to some researchers, however, the more distortion present, the worse the prognosis (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983).

Weight loss of at least 25 percent of original body weight or, if under 18 years of age, weight loss from original body weight plus projected weight gain expected from growth charts may be combined to make 25 percent (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). The primary symptom of anorexia nervosa is severe weight loss. While this is one of the major criteria for making the diagnosis, it is believed the 25 percent reduction to be misleading (Neuman, 1983). It is often incorrectly assumed that anorexics were previously obese.

While the disorder is often preceded by normal dieting, only one-third of anorexics have been overweight and most of these only mildly so. Two-thirds have never been overweight, although they may have been the targets of comments regarding their physical development (Neuman, 1983). Anorexia is often preceded by a stressful life situation. This may range from a family conflict or major changes such as a change in schools, a family move, the loss of a boyfriend or girlfriend, or an illness. Change, in general, seems to be particularly stressful for anorexic individuals.

The childhood history of those who develop anorexia typically reveals a model child. Many anorexics describe themselves as people pleasers. As children, they are often described by parents and teachers as introverted, conscientious, and well behaved. They tend to be perfectionists and compulsive, and thus, overachievers (Neuman, 1983). Depressive, obsessional, hysterical, and phobic features are also common with anorexia. Bulimia, also known in the media as bulimarexia, binge-vomiting and gorge-purging, is an eating disorder similar to chemical dependency (Cauwels, 1983).

Bulimia victims regularly fill themselves with food, especially high-calorie food, for periods lasting up to several hours. To avoid gaining weight, they purge themselves after each binge through self-induced vomiting and/or laxative and diuretic abuse (Cauwels, 1983). Some bulimics alternate their gorging with amphetamine-boosted fats or excessive exercise. At some point their concern with weight becomes irrelevant, for they are hooked on the hypnotic effects of gorge-purging.

Most of them eventually learn to vomit by simple reflex action, as though it were normal. They have condemned themselves to a routine cycle of guilt, self-loathing and devastating isolation (Cauwels, 1983). Bulimia is a closet illness a shameful secret from family and friends and most of its victims become expert at hiding it (Cauwels, 1983). As such it contrasts with anorexia nervosa, the self-starvation that glamour-hungry young women inflict upon themselves because of their obsession with thinness.

About half of anorexia victims have bulimia as one of their symptoms and are often referred to as bulimic anorectics (Cauwels, 1983). Very often bulimics alternate fasting with bingeing. Unlike anorexics, those caught up in the syndrome of bulimia usually maintain a normal or near normal body weight, perhaps are even somewhat overweight, with the primary symptom being gorging rather than starvation (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). Bulimia tends to run a chronic course often diffused with periods of remission, while anorexia is more often a single episode (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983).

During periods of remission, however, eating is seldom normal for the individual afflicted with bulimia. The remission is from binge-eating and purging only, not from dieting behavior (Neuman, 1983). While bulimia predominantly affects females, the disorder is not peculiar to women. According to statistics from The National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders (ANAD), 5 to 10 percent of bulimias victims are male. Many of these men are involved in sports or professions in which weight plays an important role, such as wrestling.

Induced vomiting might seem, for example, to be a relative harmless trick for meeting weight requirements, but in vulnerable individuals, this behavior can trigger a vicious cycle which becomes a trap for the victim (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). In a study published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, findings of the development of disordered eating in pre- and early adolescents were presented. Fifth and sixth-grade girls and boys were evaluated on depression, body image, self-esteem, and eating behaviors (Keel, 1997).

Understanding the etiology of eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa requires identification of the precursors to those disorders within the course of normal development. These precursors then can be used as signs in screening for at-risk adolescents. Some research has demonstrated that girls display initial signs of eating disturbances at 11. 7 years. Therefore, it seems advisable that direct investigations begin with pre- and early adolescents. (Keel, 1997).

Several studies of eating disturbances in early adolescence have evaluated the possible contribution of puberty, depression, self-esteem, and body image. Findings for the influence of pubertal development have not been consistent. Some investigations of adolescent females suggest that pubertal status may play a role in the onset of disordered eating patterns (Attie and Brooks-Gunn, 1989). Studies of adolescent girls also suggest that depressive affect may contribute to the development of eating disorders (Allgood-Merten, 1990).

Additionally, low self-esteem has been found to be related to depression and poor body image. Factors that contribute to disordered eating may change in the course of development as adolescents experience physical and cognitive maturation (Allgood-Merten, 1990). It was reported that girls were more likely to experience dissatisfaction, depression, and lower self-esteem, and recommended more disordered eating items than boys (Keel, 1997). Girls also indicated spending significantly more time dieting, wishing they were thinner, feeling pressured to eat, and feeling guilty after eating sweets than boys.

These differences reflect both attitudes and behaviors consistent with disordered eating (Keel, 1997). Further findings also indicate that neither body mass index nor pubertal development is significantly associated with girls body image or self-esteem in early adolescence. However, body image and self-esteem may gain importance in older girls (Keel, 1997). This study indicates that low self-esteem and depression did not contribute directly to disturbed eating patterns for girls or boys.

Results also revealed that how boys feel about their bodies influences their support of attitudes and behaviors consistent with disordered eating (Keel, 1997). Adolescent years are a time when important choices must be made from an overwhelming number of options. There is no one right way of viewing the world and doing things. One of the most common ages for developing anorexia nervosa coincide with points of transition: the 14 year old is often moving from a junior high setting to high school (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983).

Unfortunately, anorexia and bulimia victims are often well-mannered children who take school seriously and who are seemingly successful. As a result, we are shocked to discover that they have such a strange problem. According to Dr. Neuman and Dr. Halvorson, it is essential to educate parents as to (1) the nature of eating disorders, (2) the growing-up needs of their children, (3) healthy modes of family functioning, (4) the importance of building self-esteem (Neuman and Halvorson, 1983). An individual who is confident about him/herself is unlikely to develop anorexia or bulimia.

The Task at Hand

Science is defined as knowledge based on observed facts and tested truths arranged in an orderly system. It has had an extreme effect on technology, which covers production, transportation, and even entertainment. In the past, though, science has always remained distant. However, with the birth of genetic engineering, science has become something that will deeply affect lives. Advancements are being made daily with genetic engineering: the Human Genome Project is nearly done, gene replacement therapy lies within reach, and cloning is on the horizon.

Genetically altered foods have already become an important aspect of life with “new and better varieties” (Bier, 2001, p. 65) and even the possibilities of solving world hunger. There is no doubt of the benefits that genetic engineering can offer society, but can scientists look that far ahead and truly say what is for the good of society? Does the world understand genetics enough to welcome the possibilities with open arms? Society often runs away or hides from problems, but with genetic engineering it cannot ignore the possible outcomes whether good or bad.

Genetic engineering is clearly beneficial to all kinds of people, but it is possible that negative issues exist which could counteract any good results. “In the near term, there are some very interesting and important issues that we all should consider as a society because they raise potentially profound moral and ethical questions” (Bier, 2001, p. 70). Such issues are that of discrimination and the dangers and difficulty in making ethical decisions. It is society’s duty to step back and view these issues before pursuing genetic research and heading down a destructive path.

Since the origin of man, discrimination has found its way into every type of society through forms of sexism, racism, and religious and cultural prejudice. Throughout the years, though, society has worked to reduce such intolerances and give everyone equal rights. However, if genetic engineering is added to the scene, equal rights could possibly plummet into oblivion. Andrew Niccol accentuates such inequality in his movie Gattaca. In Gattaca, Vincent Freeman is a man who is born naturally instead of in a lab.

Because of this he is labeled by the world as an invalid, and no employment, social position, or even love is possible for him except for those assigned specially to invalids. In order to obtain his dream job, Vincent must use another’s identity to pass as a valid. The fact that he must be a “valid” to acquire a decent job points out the possible outcome of discrimination in the employment world if genetic engineering would become a reality. Employers could obtain a sample of a person’s DNA and not give him/her the job solely based on genes.

Like in Gattaca, there would become jobs for those genetically engineered: lawyers, doctors, and businessmen; and jobs for those naturally born: janitors, bus drivers, and garbage men. In short, equality of rights and opportunity would cease to exist. Discrimination, however, would not stop with employment. Prejudice would become an everyday event even in social life. If genetic engineering leads to pre-picking genes to prevent birth defects, “how will we react to children we meet who have that disorder? ” (Baker, 2001). People will see the child and wonder why it was born.

Parents will have the chance to choose whatever genes they see fit for their child, offering it the best of everything. Society, however, will then look down upon those children “naturally” born. If this type of genetic engineering becomes a common occurrence, society is bound to discriminate against those people with defects or even differences. Yet differences are not bad and can be seen as unique and characteristic of the person they belong to. Some people even say that genetic engineering would “undermine the right of every person to be valued for his or her uniqueness” (Baker, 2001).

The argument is that upon entering this life, a person is given certain qualities and inequalities that make him/her unique to each other. These qualities shape experiences, which in turn shape lives. Even the obstacles a person faces are meant to mold him/her and add character. Genetic engineering, however, removes some of these obstacles. Like in Gattaca, people would conceivably become an unthinking mass following the world’s plan of their lives, not their own. Today, however, people are not an unthinking mass, and we live in a society where everyone can become involved in social and political issues.

With genetic engineering on the horizon, society needs to take a firm grasp on this ethics and ask what it truly wants. Ethical questions are constantly being asked, yet no one wants to face the issues at hand. People are so concerned with pleasing the majority that no one wants to take responsibility. If no one speaks up, though, scientists will continue blindly down an uncertain path. The problem here is that technology is so preoccupied with whether it can, that it never even considers whether it should. Take, for example, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Greg Egan’s The Extra.

In Frankenstein, the narrator, Robert Walton, believes that “one man’s life or death were but a small price to pay for the acquirement of the knowledge which [he] sought” (Shelley, 1991, 13). Victor Frankenstein reminds Walton that he was once nave in this statement and proceeds to tell him how his own actions had led to a “hell within [him] which nothing could extinguish” (Shelley, 1991, p. 72). Genetic engineering has acquired this same navet and society could be blinded to the possible consequences if something is not done.

The risks alone are too overpowering to ignore. As in the case of cloning Dolly, it took 277 tries to produce her, and scientists produced many lambs with abnormalities. The techniques are extremely risky and “more often than not unsuccessful” (Baker, 2001). Risks, however, are not the only concern. Societal abuse of genetic engineering also needs to be a great consideration. With all of the possibilities genetic engineering provides, exploitation of its purposes is bound to occur. The Extras, by Greg Egan, examines such abuse.

The main character, Daniel Gray, has created a produce line of genetically engineered humans that lack any form of intelligence. Their only purpose on is to serve as organ donors for their owner. In essence, genetic engineering has become a fixation of indulgence: “The prospect of living for centuries seemed to have made the rich greedier than ever; a fortune that sufficed for seven or eight decades was no longer enough” (Egan, 2001, p. 47). With this kind of thinking, society would become what Thomas Hobbes describes as “a condition of war of every one against every one” (Hobbes, 2001, p. ).

Abuse of genetic engineering could lead people to forget any sort of compassion and humanity because they are living only for themselves. Charles Darwin even states, “Man selects only for his own good: Nature only for that of the being which she tends” (Darwin, 2001, p. 3). It is human tendency to try to obtain the best of everything. However, as society takes on nature’s responsibility of natural selection, Darwin points out that man does not discern between desire and necessity.

Genetic engineering would become that of selfishness and personal gain. In The Extras, Gray even admits, “In the end it came down to longevity, and the hope of immorality” (Egan, 2001, p. 54). Nothing is more self-seeking than the aspiration for eternal life, and with genetic engineering, it could certainly become a possibility. Genetic engineering is indeed a large step into the future of mankind, and it is not necessarily a bad thing. Lives will be saved, diseases will be cured, and new information will be available for all who need it.

It is society’s choice, however, whether to embrace it and continue, or look deeper into the future consequences before rushing headlong into the unknown. We hold the future in our hands and do not want to look back upon our creations as Victor Frankenstein did: “I ardently wished to extinguish that life which I had so thoughtlessly bestowed” (Shelley, 1991, p. 76). The future is now, and it is society’s task to view the prejudicial and ethical issues concerning genetic engineering carefully. “We have landed on the naked shores of the brave new world, and we need to plan for the future we wish to create” (Bier, 2001, p. 78).

Food Processing Essay

Throughout the history of mankind science has searched into the realms of the unknown. Along with it bringing new discoveries, allowing for our lives to become healthier, more efficient, safer, and at the same time, possibly more dangerous. Among the forces driving scientists into these many experiments, is the desire to preserve the one fuel that keeps our lives going; FOOD. As early as the beginning of the 19th century, major breakthroughs in food preservation had begun. Soldiers and seamen, fighting in Napoleons army were living off of salt-preserved meats.

These poorly cured foods provided inimal nutritional value, and frequent outbreaks of scurvy were developing. It was Napoleon who began the search for a better mechanism of food preservation, and it was he who offered 12,000-franc pieces to the person who devised a safe and dependable food-preservation process. The winner was a French chemist named Nicolas Appert. He observed that food heated in sealed containers was preserved as long as the container remained unopened or the seal did not leak. This became the turning point in food preservation history.

Fifty years following the discovery by Nicolas Appert, another breakthrough had developed. Another Frenchman, named Louis Pasteur, noted the relationship between microorganisms and food spoilage. This breakthrough increased the dependability of the food canning process. As the years passed new techniques assuring food preservation would come and go, opening new doors to further research. Farmers grow fruits and vegetables and fatten livestock. The fruits and vegetables are harvested, and the livestock is slaughtered for food.

What happens between the time food leaves the farm and the time it is eaten at the table? Like all living things, the plants and animals that become food contain iny organisms called microorganisms. Living, healthy plants and animals automatically control most of these microorganisms. But when the plants and animals are killed, the organisms yeast, mold, and bacteria begin to multiply, causing the food to lose flavor and change in color and texture. Just as important, food loses the nutrients that are necessary to build and replenish human bodies.

All these changes in the food are what people refer to as food spoilage. To keep the food from spoiling, usually in only a few days, it is preserved. Many kinds of agents are potentially destructive to the healthful haracteristics of fresh foods. Microorganisms, such as bacteria and fungi, rapidly spoil food. Enzymes which are present in all raw food, promote degradation and chemical changes affecting especially texture and flavor. Atmospheric oxygen may react with food constituents, causing rancidity or color changes.

Equally as harmful are infestations by insects and rodents, which account for tremendous losses in food stocks. There is no single method of food preservation that provides protection against all hazards for an unlimited period of time. Canned food stored in Antarctica near the South Pole, for xample, remained edible after 50 years of storage, but such long-term preservation cannot be duplicated in the hot climate of the Tropics. Raw fruits and vegetables and uncooked meat are preserved by cold storage or refrigeration.

The cold temperature inside the cold-storage compartment or refrigerator slows down the microorganisms and delays deterioration. But cold storage and refrigeration will preserve raw foods for a few weeks at most. If foods are to be preserved for longer periods, they must undergo special treatments such as freezing or heating. The science of preserving foods for more than a few days is called food processing. Human beings have always taken some measures to preserve food. Ancient people learned to leave meat and fruits and vegetables in the sun and wind to remove moisture.

Since microorganisms need water to grow, drying the food slows the rate at which it spoils. Today food processors provide a diet richer and more varied than ever before by using six major methods. They are canning, drying or dehydration, freezing, freeze-drying, fermentation or pickling, and irradiation. Canning The process of canning is sometimes called sterilization because the heat treatment of the food eliminates all microorganisms that can spoil the food nd those that are harmful to humans, including directly pathogenic bacteria and those that produce lethal toxins.

Most commercial canning operations are based on the principle that bacteria destruction increases tenfold for each 10 C increase in temperature. Food exposed to high temperatures for only minutes or seconds retains more of its natural flavor. In the Flash 18 process, a continuous system, the food is flash-sterilized in a pressurized chamber to prevent the superheated food from boiling while it is placed in containers. Further sterilizing is not required. Freezing Although prehistoric humans stored meat in ice caves, the food-freezing industry is more recent in origin than the canning industry.

The freezing process was used commercially for the first time in 1842, but large-scale food preservation by freezing began in the late 19th century with the advent of mechanical refrigeration. Freezing preserves food by preventing microorganisms from multiplying. Because the process does not kill all types of bacteria, however, those that survive reanimate in thawing food and often grow more rapidly than before freezing. Enzymes in the frozen state remain active, although at a reduced rate. Vegetables are blanched or heated in preparation for freezing to ensure enzyme inactivity and thus to avoid degradation of flavor.

Blanching has also been proposed for fish, in order to kill cold-adapted bacteria on their outer surface. In the freezing of meats various methods are used depending on the type of meat and the cut. Pork is frozen soon after butchering, but beef is hung in a cooler for several days to tenderize the meat before freezing. Frozen foods have the advantage of resembling the fresh product more closely than the same food preserved by other techniques. Frozen foods also ndergo some changes, however. Freezing causes the water in food to expand and tends to disrupt the cell structure by forming ice crystals.

In quick-freezing the ice crystals are smaller, producing less cell damage than in the slowly frozen product. The quality of the product, however, may depend more on the rapidity with which the food is prepared and stored in the freezer than on the rate at which it is frozen. Some solid foods that are frozen slowly, such as fish, may, upon thawing, show a loss of liquid called drip; some liquid foods that are frozen slowly, such as egg yolk, may become coagulated. Because of the high cost of refrigeration, frozen food is comparatively expensive to produce and distribute.

High quality is a required feature of frozen food to justify the added cost in the market. This method of preservation is the one most widely used for a great variety of foods. Drying and Dehydration Although both these terms are applied to the removal of water from food, to the food technologist drying refers to drying by natural means, such as spreading fruit on racks in the sun, and dehydration designates drying by artificial means, such as a blast of hot air. In freeze-drying a high vacuum is aintained in a special cabinet containing frozen food until most of the moisture has sublimed.

Removal of water offers excellent protection against the most common causes of food spoilage. Microorganisms cannot grow in a water-free environment, enzyme activity is absent, and most chemical reactions are greatly retarded. This last characteristic makes dehydration preferable to canning if the product is to be stored at a high temperature. In order to achieve such protection, practically all the water must be removed. The food then must be packaged in a moisture-proof container to prevent it from absorbing water from the air.

Vegetables, fruits, meat, fish, and some other foods, the moisture content of which averages as high as 80 percent, may be dried to one-fifth of the original weight and about one-half of the original volume. The disadvantages of this method of preservation include the time and labor involved in rehydrating the food before eating. Further because it absorbs only about two- thirds of its original water content, the dried product tends to have a texture that is tough and chewy. Drying was used by prehistoric humans to preserve many foods.

Large quantities of fruits such as figs have been dried from ancient times to the present day. In the case of meat and fish, other preservation methods, such as smoking or salting, which yielded a palatable product, were generally preferred. Commercial dehydration of vegetables was initiated in the United States during the American Civil War but, as a result of the poor quality of the product, the industry declined sharply after the war. This cycle was repeated with subsequent wars, but after World War II the dehydration industry thrived.

This industry is confined largely to the production of a few dried foods, however, such as milk, soup, eggs, yeast, and powdered coffee, which are particularly suited to the dehydration method. Present-day dehydration techniques include the application of a stream of warm air to vegetables. Protein foods such as meat are of good quality only if freeze-dried. Liquid food is dehydrated usually by spraying it as fine droplets into a chamber of hot air, or occasionally by pouring it over a drum internally heated by steam. Freeze-drying A processing method that uses a combination of freezing and dehydration is called freeze-drying.

Foods that already have been frozen are placed in a vacuum-tight enclosure and dehydrated under vacuum conditions with careful application of heat. Normally ice melts and becomes water when heat is applied. If more heat is applied, it turns to steam. But in freeze-drying, the ice turns directly to vapor, and there is little chance that microorganisms will grow. Freeze-dried foods, like those that are dehydrated, are light and require little space for storage and transportation. They do not need to be refrigerated, but they must be reconstituted with water before they are ready to consume.

Irradiation As early as 1895, a major breakthrough in the world of science had arisen; the discovery of the X-ray by German physicist Wilhelm von Roetengen. This technological advancement, along with the soon to be discovered concept of adioactivity by French physicist Antoine Henri Becquerel, became the focus of attention for many scientifically based studies. Of most importance, to the field of food preservation, these two discoveries began the now controversial process of food irradiation. Food irradiation employs an energy form termed ionizing radiation.

In short, this process exposes food particles to alpha, beta and/or gamma rays. The rays cause whatever material they strike to produce electrically charged particles called ions. Ionizing radiation provides many attributes to treating foods. It has the ability to penetrate deeply into a food interacting with its toms and molecules, and causing some chemical and biological effects that could possibly decrease its rate of decay. It also has the ability to sanitize foods by destroying contaminants such as bacteria, yeasts, molds, parasites and insects.

Irradiation delays ripening of fruits and vegetables; inhibits sprouting in bulbs and tubers; disinfests grain, cereal products, fresh and dried fruits, and vegetables of insects; and destroys bacteria in fresh meats. The irradiation of fresh fruits and vegetables, herbs and spices, and pork was approved in 1986. In 1990 the FDA approved irradiation of poultry to control salmonella and other isease-causing microorganisms. Irradiated foods were used by U. S. astronauts and by Soviet cosmonauts. Public concern over the safety of irradiation, however, has limited its full-scale use.

It is still off to a slow start, with only one food irradiation plant open in Mulberry, Florida, but it is seemingly catching the eyes of the producers and the consumers throughout the world. Miscellaneous Methods Other methods or a combination of methods may be used to preserve foods. Salting of fish and pork has long been practiced, using either dry salt or brine. Salt enters the tissue and, in effect binds the water, thus inhibiting the acteria that cause spoilage. Another widely used method is smoking, which frequently is applied to preserve fish, ham, and sausage.

The smoke is obtained by burning hickory or a similar wood under low draft. In this case some preservative action is provided by such chemicals in the smoke as formaldehyde and creosote, and by the dehydration that occurs in the smokehouse. Smoking usually is intended to flavor the product as well as to preserve it. Sugar, a major ingredient of jams and jellies, is another preservative agent. For effective preservation the total sugar content should make up at east 65 percent of the weight of the final product.

Sugar, which acts in much the same way as salt, inhibits bacterial growth after the product has been heated. Because of its high acidity, vinegar (acetic acid) acts as a preservative. Fermentation caused by certain bacteria, which produce lactic acid, is the basis of preservation in sauerkraut and fermented sausage. Sodium benzoate, restricted to concentrations of not more than 0. 1 percent, is used in fruit products to protect against yeasts and molds. Sulfur dioxide, another chemical preservative permitted in most states, helps to retain the color of ehydrated foods.

Calcium propionate may be added to baked goods to inhibit mold. Packaging The packaging of processed foods is just as important as the process itself. If foods are not packaged in containers that protect them from air and moisture, they are subject to spoilage. Packaging materials must therefore be strong enough to withstand the heat and cold of processing and the wear and tear of handling and transportation. From the time the canning process was developed in the early 19th century until the beginning of the 20th century, cans and glass containers were the only packages used.

The first cans were crude containers having a hole in the top through which the food was inserted. The holes were then sealed with hot metal. All cans were made by hand from sheets of metal cut to specific sizes. In about 1900 the sanitary can was invented. In this process, machines form cans with airtight seams. A processor buys cans with one end open and seals them after filling. Some cans are made of steel coated with tin and are often glazed on the inside to prevent discoloration. Some are made of aluminum.

Frozen foods are packaged in containers made of layers of fiberboard and lastic or of strong plastic called polyethylene. Freeze-dried and dehydrated foods are packed in glass, fiberboard, or cans. Research The research activities of processed food scientists are numerous and varied. New packaging materials, the nutritional content of processed foods, new processing techniques, more efficient use of energy and water, the habits and desires of today’s consumer, more efficient equipment, and transportation and warehousing innovations are some of the subjects being studied.

The challenge of the food researcher is to discover better and more efficient ways to process, transport, and store food. Processed foods have changed the world. In developed countries they are part of almost everyone’s diet. The United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom all produce large quantities of processed foods, which they sell domestically and abroad.

In the United States in the early 1980s, annual production of fruit was 1. billion kilograms canned, 1. 4 billion kilograms frozen, and 1. 1 billion kilograms in fruit juice; production of vegetables was 1. 4 billion kilograms canned and 3. 2 billion kilograms frozen. From the modest canning industries in 1813 to the sophisticated food rocessing plants of today, food processors have provided the world with more healthful diets, food combinations never before possible, and a convenience unimagined 200 years ago.

We as consumers can only imagine what further achievements will be made in the field of food preservation. But one thing is for certain; it is all for the general good of mankind… to reduce starvation levels globally and insure the availability of nutritive foods to all. It is through this way that man survives… and fits in Darwin’s hypothesis of the survival of the fittest. For it is only the fit who will prevail in the end.

Essay on Eating Disorder – Dying to Be Thin

Seeing an empty box of over-the-counter diet pills in the bathroom at school a couple of weeks ago really got me thinking: what is the ideal body image that we throw at teenagers today? More and more we see people equate success and popularity with beauty and, especially, with being thin. The media, one of the biggest influences on young people, is crammed with images of “the perfect body,” and American life seems to revolve around health clubs, diet pills, and fat-free foods.

As contributing factors to eating disorders continue to rise in everyday life, so do the statistics. Fifteen percent of the teenagers diagnosed with Anorexia Nervosa will die this year, and as many as 1 in 5 college students are engaging in some form of bulimic behavior. Anorexia is found chiefly in adolescents, especially young women, and female anorexics outnumber males 15 to 1. With numbers this high, someone you know, literally, may be dying to be thin.

In medicine, Anorexia Nervosa is a condition characterized by an intense fear of weight gain or becoming obese, as well as a distorted body image. An anorexic will claim to “feel fat” even when emaciated, and will refuse to maintain a normal, minimal body weight. Visible signs of Anorexia include:

* fear of food and situations where food may be present;

* rigid exercise regimes;

* dressing in layers to hide weight loss;

* use of laxatives, enemas or diuretics to get rid of food.

Treatment techniques for Anorexia include family therapy, group therapy, support or self-help groups, and individual psychotherapy. Given the proper treatment, approximately 50% of diagnosed anorexics will recover completely within 2 to 5 years.

Bulimia, characterized by compulsive binge-eating and purging, is very closely related to Anorexia Nervosa. Victims of these two disorders may share many of the same behaviors and concerns, especially the intense fear of becoming fat. For bulimics, food becomes an obsession and an addiction. Some visible signs include:

* strict dieting followed by eating binges;

* disappearing after a meal;

* excessive concerns about weight;

* expressing guilt or shame about eating.

Bulimia predominantly affects young women, although 5-10% of its victims are male, and is more widespread than Anorexia. Bulimia is treated in much the same way as Anorexia, but has a higher success rate for recovery.

With proper treatment, teenagers can be relieved of the symptoms of Anorexia and Bulimia and can be helped to control these disorders. Help from family members, early detection, and especially an acceptance of people of all shapes and sizes by society will help lower the statistics and lead to fewer teenagers with these terrible conditions.

Constraints on the Expansion of the Global Food Supply

In the early ages people were hunters, or predators; they had to survive by killing other species. Although predators are supposed to be the strongest in the food chain, people were vulnerable because they had to depend on the same species below them. Our senses were not developed as well either; hearing, smelling, eye sight were and still are not as good as of those below us.

We cant kill with our teeth or nails, like some alligators could. So after 4 ice ages, only 25,000 people were left. Thats when they realized that they had to change their loosing strategies and thats when they came up with Subsistence Agriculture. People domesticated animals, plants, and according to the number of the population today, we are doing real well.

The world population grew slowly over much of the historic past; it was not until after 1900 that growth accelerated. The 1992 population was 5.5 billion. Now the world population is increasing at about 1.7% yr, corresponding to a doubling time of 40 years.

In the early 1960s, most nations were self-sufficient in food; now only a few are. Except for parts of Africa, production exceeded population growth throughout the world. Per capita production has now slowed and appears to be declining.

In line with recent studies, we estimate that with the world population at 5.5 billion, food production is adequate to feed 7 billion people a vegetarian diet, with ideal distribution and no grain fed to livestock. Yet possibly as many as two billion people are now living in poverty, and over 1 billion in utter poverty live with hunger. Inadequate distribution of food is a substantial contributing factor to this current situation.

Less than one half of the worlds land area is suitable for agriculture, including grazing. Nearly all of the worlds productive land, flat and with water, is already exploited. Most of the unexploited land is either too steep, too wet, too dry, or too cold for agriculture.

Water Shortages:

Pressures from growing population have strained water resources in many areas of the world. Worldwide, 214 river or lake basins, containing 40% of the worlds population, now compete for water. If we improve conservation of water, it would enhance rainfed and irrigated crop yields.

A major difficulty arises simply from the rate with which food supplies would have to be expanded to pace or to exceed population growth rates in those countries experiencing high growth rates. In order to stay even with population growth it will be necessary to expand food supplies, globally, by the rate of population increase.

For many countries the rate of population expansion is in the range 2-3% per year. If the historical record is any guide, no nation with a population growth rate above 2% yr has much hope of improving its per capita supply of food unless it receives very substantial external aid and support. Of course these rates of increase for both population and food production, if achieved, cannot be sustained indefinitely.

So what do we do?

Projections of future production depend on a host of variables most of which are uncertain. As an alternative we consider three scenarios, for the period to the year 2050.

1)Business As Usual

The first assumes a continuation of present trends, patterns, and activities. This is referred to as BAU, Business- As- Usual. Population is assumed to follow the UN medium projection leading to about 10 billion people by 2050, soil erosion continues to degrade land productivity.

The consequences of greenhouse effect and of ultraviolet injury are ignored, and the developed world does not provide more aid to the developing world than at present. In general, it appears that Africa, China and India will face severe problems in expanding food supplies in the coming decades. The US appears to have the potential of generating food surpluses for some years, a potential that it shares with parts of Europe, including Eastern Europe, Canada, and possibly other regions. The longer-term prospects are unknown in view of difficulties which may appear later.

2)Pessimistic Scenario

It adopts most of the assumptions in BAU, but includes several other factors which may decrease the rate of grain production in the years ahead. If the population growth rate continues only slightly lower than it is today to the year 2050, the world population will rise to about 13 billion, more than double the present population. The grain production in 2050 would increase only 30% from 1991, which means that per capita production would be down over 40%. There is, in this scenario, little hope of providing adequate food for the majority of humanity by the middle or later decades of the period we consider.

3)Optimistic Scenario

Assumes rapid population growth stabilization with a 2050 population of 7.8 billion, significant expansion of energy-intensive agriculture and improved soil and water conservation with some reclamation of now-abandoned land. The developed countries would have to help finance these changes and also provide technology to the developing nations. At the same time, with diet shifts in the developed world, the 2050 population of 7.8 billion might be fed an adequate diet.

Rice – the main food for about one-third to one-half of the world’s population

Rice is the main food for about one-third to one-half of the world’s population. A mature rice plant is usually two to six feet tall. In the beginning, one shoot appears. It is followed by one, two, or more offshoots developing. There are at least five or six hollow joints for each stalk, and a leaf for each joint. The leaf of the rice plant is long, pointed, flat, and stiff. The highest join of the rice plant is called the panicle. The rice grains develop from the panicles. (Jodon, 300) Rice is classified in the grass family Gramineae. Its genus is Oryza and species O. sativa. It is commonly cultivated for food in Asia.

Some varieties of rice include red rice, glutinous rice, and wild rice. (Jodon, 303) The kernel within the grain contains most of the vitamins and minerals (298). The kernel contains thiamine, niacin, and riboflavin (299). Rice has many enemies that destroy a majority of the rice crops. The larvae of moth, stem borers, live in the stems of the rice plants. Some insects suck the plant juices or chew the leaves. Birds, such as bobolink, Java sparrow, or paddybird, would eat the seeds or grains. Disease causing factors such as fungi, roundworms, viruses, and bacteria also destroy the rice plants.

Blast disease is caused by fungi which causes the panicles containing the grains to break. (Jodon, 300) There are various types of rice grown all over the world. A majority of rice grown is cultivated rice. When rice is grown with water standing on the fields, it is called lowland, wet, or irrigated rice. Rice plants grown in certain parts of Asia, South America, and Africa are called upland, hill, or dry rice because they are raised on elevated lands that cannot be flooded, but with plentiful rainfall. Wild rice is grown along lake shores of Canada and the Great Lakes. It is usually eaten by people in India.

Scented rice is the most expensive because is has long grains and tastes like popcorn when cooked. Glutinous rice is waxy rice consumed by Asians. It is cooked to a sticky paste and is used for cakes and confections. (Jodon, 299) Rice was thought to have originated in southeast Asia when Alexander the Great invaded India in 326 B. C(Jodon, 303). Further research revealed that rice was cultivated around or at the Yangtze River in China, around 4000 to 11,500 years ago. One archaeologist, Toyama, surveyed data on 125 samples of rice grains, plant remains, husks, and other factors from numerous sites along the length of the Yangtze River.

He reported that the oldest samples. . . are clustered along the middle Yangtze in Hubei and Hunan provinces. Samples from the upper and lower portions of the Yangtze River were found to be younger, around 4,000 to 10,000 years old. This pattern. . . suggests that rice cultivation originated in the middle Yangtze and spread from there. Archaeologists see more than a decade of excavation of the Yangtze River and nearby sites to confirm that the Yangtze River is where rice was first cultivated. (Normille, 309)

The Greeks learned of rice when Alexander the Great invaded India around 326 B. C. Spain was introduced to rice when it was conquered by the Moors during the 700’s A. D. Spain then introduced rice to Italy, around the 1400’s. The Spanish also introduced rice to the West Indies and South America, around the 1600’s. Rice was introduced to the United States when a Madagascar ship docked in the Charleston, South Carolina harbor. The ship captain presented the governor with a sack of seed rice. It was then grown in states south of the Ohio River and east of Mississippi. (Jodon, 303)

Rice is usually grown in lowland fields divided by dirt walls (Jodon, 300) A majority of the rice crops are grown with water standing on the fields (Jodon, 299). On level land, these paddies and dirt walls are built in wavy or straight lines. On hill-like land, they follow the slopes and form paddies that rise like steps. The dirt walls are used to hold in water for the fields. (300) Cultivation of the rice plant requires controlling the water supply and weeding the rice fields. Water must be two to six inches deep for the seeds to germinate properly. After the grains germinate, the water is drained.

The rice plant is then cultivated by hand. (Jodon, 301) Besides steaming the rice for consumption, it is also used for other products. Enriched rice is regular kernels and vitamin and mineral coated kernels mixed together. The Japanese use the fermented rice kernels to make sake, rice wine. Rice is sometimes used in making beer in the United States and Europe. Powdery by-products, bran and polish, are used to feed livestock. Starch from the rice plant is used in laundry starch. The Japanese usually use the rice hulls to prevent breakage of fragile objects during shipping.

Rice hulls also serve as fuel for steam engines. The dried stalks of rice are used to make sandals, hats, raincoats, and thatching roofs. In the Philippines, farmers grow mushrooms on beds of rice straw. (Jodon, 298-99) The purpose of the Super Rice challenge is to create rice plants that are disease resistant, insect resistant, and produces twenty-five percent more food per acre. The International Rice Research Institute has been working on this challenge. It is competing with many various factors that are pushing the International Rice Research Institute to try and complete the challenge as soon as possible.

Factors such as growing population, limited areas for growing rice, and the common farmer’s philosophy of get anything to grow are pushing researchers to complete the project as soon as possible. Also, the new varieties of rice has raised a question of the farmer’s health because of the uses and effects of agricultural chemicals. Since normal rice grown in paddies produces high amounts of methane, the International Rice Research Institute must also find a way to create rice plants with a low methane production. Gurdev Khush believes that the super rice will be ready for farmers to plant them around the end of the century.

Bioscience, 239) Researchers were able to develop a type of rice during the 1960’s. This type of rice, called miracle rice, because of its high yields. Researchers were able to develop it by combining a short variety of rice with a tall variety. This crossbreeding resulting in a rice plant that can withstand wind and rain and have a high production yield. This new breed was thought to have been to reduce the food shortages that depend on rice as a staple food, but because of various conditions in other countries, this rice plant was not very successful.

Jodon, 299) Blight, caused by bacteria, spreads rapidly through rice fields in water droplets. The rice plant would develop lesions and die in a matter of days. This disease could destroy about half of a rice crop. Through genetic engineering, the author and her colleagues have been able to introduce isolated disease-resistant genes into the rice plants. (Ronald, 100) The gene, called Xa21, was discovered by the International Rice Research Institute, and Ronald attempted to clone Xa21 from the International Rice Research Institute variety. 01)

The Cornell group created a genetic map which showed the location of hundreds of markers on the twelve rice chromosomes. Ronald and her colleagues used this genetic map to locate gene Xa21 by examining over one thousand rice plants to see how often known DNA markers showed up in conjunction with resistance to blight. They used chromosomal swapping and rearranging that goes on during sexual reproduction. The more often they saw resistance in the next generation of rice plants, the closer they were to locating the gene. (102)

Since rice plants are defiant in accepting outside DNA, they used a gun that shoots microscopic particles into intact cells, which was developed by John Sanford of Cornell. After using this procedure to introduce Xa21 into an old, but susceptible, rice plant they exposed the plants to blight. They found that the plants were resistant to the blight. Ronald and her colleagues current goal is to introduce Xa21 into rice varieties that are agriculturally important. (102-03) Current studies showed that rice plants introduced to the cloned Xa21 gene have become blight resistant.

Since farmers prefer to grow plants that have adapted to the various climates and conditions, Ronald stated that the genetically engineered versions will be identical to the original plants except for the addition of the single cloned gene…. Ronald and her colleagues still have to field-test the new varieties for yield, taste, and hardiness to confirm that the original adaptations have remain unchanged. (104) The success of this project has reached into testing the process and the gene on other plants. Scientists hope that Ronald’s process of making the rice plant blight resistant will work on other plants.

They hope that this process will be successful on valuable crops, such as citrus crops. They plan to combine the gene Xa21 and other disease resistance genes to enhance the plant’s resistance to disease. The problem with cloning the Xa21 gene is that it is still vulnerable to other diseases such as grassy-stunt and ragged-stunt viruses. (Ronald, 104) The purpose of Japan’s rice genome project is to fully map the twelve chromosomes of the rice plant. Low funding of this project has hindered the progression of this project.

Since Japan has increased its funding to its genome project, the rice genome division can now complete mapping the twelve chromosomes of the rice plant. (Normille, 1702) Rice is one of the world’s most important crops because a majority of the world depends on this as a staple food. The number of rice plants planted, however, are greater than the number of rice consumed. This is because of various factors that destroy the rice plants before they can be harvested for commercial use. Various factors, such as insects, birds, and disease, destroy the rice crops.

Projects are being conducted to improve the rice plant, but researchers encounter various obstacles. Making the rice plant disease-resistant to blight may be useful and valuable, but they must also find a way to make the rice plant resistant to other diseases and viruses such as ragged- stunt. Since Japan has increased its funds to its genome projects, they have been able to increase the work on mapping the twelve rice chromosomes. Scientists hope that these projects will be finished, and that farmers will be using the enhanced genes on their rice plants by the beginning of the next century.

Corn Consumer Report

Corn is the common name for the cereal grass widely grown for food and livestock fodder. Corn ranks with wheat and rice as one of the world’s chief grain crops, and it is the largest crop of the United States. The Cultivation of corn in exists in the United States southwestern for least 3000 years. There are many varieties of corns with widely different characteristics; some mature in 2 months; others take 11 months. In the US sweat corn is commonly grown for human consumption as a vegetable.

World output of corn in the early 1990s stood at more than 469 million metric tons annually; in volume of production, corn ranked third behind wheat and rice. A net gain of about 11 percent in production was realized during the 1980s; intensive cultivation with heavy use of fertilizer and herbicides was responsible for the increase. The United States is the leading corn-growing country, with more than 40 percent of the world’s production. Most of its crop is grown in the Midwestern region known as the Corn Belt, comprising Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska.

The other leading corn-growing nations are China, Brazil, and Mexico. Approximately 61 percent of the corn sold by farmers in the United States are used as livestock feed. About half of that amount is fed directly to hogs, cattle, and poultry, and the rest is used in mixed feeds. Another 22 percent of U. S. corn is exported; the remaining 17 percent is sold as food and taken by commercial users for the production of alcohol and distilled spirits, syrups, sugar, cornstarch, and dry-process foods.

Actions and Effects of Creatine

Throughout time, humans have had a fascination with being excellent at what they do, and athletics have been no exception. Many substances exist, and many have been criticized and analyzed for their safety, legality, and morality for athletes. With the banning of steroids from competitive sports, and the implementation of random drug testing in most sports, most athletes, professional, recreational, and would-be professionals are hoping to gain an edge.

More recently, one such edge has been discovered, and it has found itself in locker rooms across the country, in the hands of these athletes, and all the while, and probably more importantly, in the media’s direct line of fire. Although legal, creatine has it’s proponents and it’s opponents, through this paper, I’ll discuss some of the factors that make creatine such a hot topic in sports and the health industry. To understand why people use creatine, we must first understand what it is. Creatine is a naturally occurring nutrient that is found in the body (Sahelian, 2000).

It is also found in meat and fish, usually at a concentration of about 4 grams of creatine per kilogram (Sahelian, 2000). As a general fact, we consume around 1 gram per day from out daily diet. Vegetarians have a much lower intake of creatine than most meat eaters, and will usually have a noted reaction to creatine supplementation due to this fact (Sahelian, 2000). To apply creatine to the muscle building process, we must understand what it does. When we use our muscle everyday for any activity, we use oxygen to make energy.

This energy is created by breaking down a chemical that exists in our body known as adenosine triphosphate (ATP), into another chemical, adenosine diphosphate (ADP), but using oxygen to make energy is a very slow process (Sahelian, 2000). This is the part of the process where creatine makes itself known. Current studies show that creatine supplementation can increase the amount of creatine in muscles, which in turn, speeds up the ATP refueling process (Murphy, 2000). This enhances performance by producing more energy for brief, high-intensity exercise such as sprinting, and allowing for more strenuous workouts (Gutfeld, 1997).

All of these factors are crucial to athletes who are searching for their legal “magic bullet”. Creatine was first discovered by a French scientist in 1832 (Bamberger, 1998). This scientist discovered a naturally occurring organic compound that could be produced by the kidneys, liver, and pancreas. The compound was named “creatine”, the Greek word for flesh (Bamberger, 1998). It has been found that most people consume 1 gram per day, along with naturally producing 1 gram (Bamberger, 1998).

In 1981, the potential medical benefits of creatine were published in the New England Journal of Medicine in, seven years later, two Swedish doctors, Paul Greenhaff, and Eric Hultman, recorded performance-enhancing effects of creatine in athletic subjects, and their results were published in the journal Clinical Science in 1992 (Bamberger, 1998). Most of the current creatine “buzz” surfaced and intensified after the 1992 Olympics when several athletes such as runner/sprinter Michael Johnson, reported using creatine to prepare themselves for the games.

In more current trends, exact numbers regarding athletes who use creatine do not exist, but when Brady Anderson, a professional baseball player and creatine user/endorser began supplementation, he was one of very few who knew about the product, but numbers suggest now that approximately 50% of all NFL players use creatine (Bamberger, 1998). Creatine is most commonly used by athletes of all kinds, namely recreational, high school, college, and the more scrutinized professional athletes. These athletes use creatine because of what creatine supplementation does.

The reliable and valid research studies support the benefits of creatine supplementation. Mainly, that it can have a positive impact on the following aspects, 1) Expediting recovery between workouts, 2) increase the amount of exercise that can be performed during workouts, 3) increase muscle size and strength, 4) improve anaerobic power and endurance, and 5) increase body weight (Arapoff and Riley, 1998). These are all very attractive and positive factors that an athlete would love to be able to attain legally, not compromising their safety with illegal substances such as steroids, but through essentially, natural and relatively safe means.

Luring to some users are reports that results are quick and consistent, along with increased muscle mass, and a prolonged pump during strength training (Sahelian, 2000). Although touted and highly regarded among some professional strength trainers, there are some that are skeptical. For instance, the San Francisco 49er’s, have an estimated three quarters of the team using creatine, while the Tampa Bay Buccaneers strength coach will not allow creatine in the Bucs’ locker room (Bamberger, 1998).

The creatine economy is booming, Experimental and Applied Sciences, have a stranglehold on the creatine market, since they were instrumental in it’s introduction to the sports supplement arena, they have such athletes as Shannon Sharpe as a paid user/endorser in EAS apparel at public appearances, and this is a great way for them to increase exposure and their marketability, along with having a phenomenal skyrocket in sales (Suggs, 1998). There is a simple explanation for the explosion of creatine, it’s effective, legal, in most cases affordable, and it works.

It helps muscles get bigger and stronger faster, which is the basis of the strength-training regimen of some athletes. The IOC or International Olympic Committee has not banned creatine, and actually considers it a food, since it cannot realistically be placed in the same categories of substances such as anabolic steroids, this provided the ruling that it should not be banned (Nutrition Forum, 1999). The form that is most likely and most commonly consumed is that of creatine monohydrate in a white powder form, it comes in a canister or tub, and can be purchased at stores such as General Nutrition Centers (GNC).

A canister of the EAS creatine has a price of roughly $60 (Bamberger, 1998). Creatine is usually ingested in dosages of around 3 to 5 grams per day, and is recommended to be preceded by a loading phase that consists of ingesting up to 20 grams a day of the powder daily for 5 days (Gutfeld, 1997). This ensures that the muscles are efficiently saturated with creatine. After this loading phase, a reduction to the 3-5 gram a day dose, is recommended. Any more than what is recommended will be excreted through the urine. Also, recommendations include ingesting the creatine with a liquid that is high in carbohydrates.

It is believed that the high glycemic index will shuttle creatine into the muscle very quickly, and have a higher absorption rate (Gutfeld, 1997). Also, users and researches alike recommend checking the supplement is of high purity. Most manufacturers will provide a laboratory analysis upon request (Gutfeld, 1997). Some users question, what the best time of day to take creatine is, but reports show that any time of day is acceptable, but most users chose to take it in the time preceding their workout (Sahelian, 2000).

There have been cases of non-responders to creatine, but the reason is not known at this time (Sahelian, 2000). Some reported side effects of creatine include, loose stools, which can occur with relatively small doses such as approximately 4 grams (Sahelian, 2000). Higher doses have side effects such as nausea, upset stomach, dizziness, weakness, and doses in the 20 gram and above category have seen side effects such as kidney damage (Sahelian, 2000).

The reported feelings of dehydration can be diffused by consuming large quantities of water, more than a gallon a day (Bamberger, 1998). The result that is noted as most siginificant is that of weight gain. This can be definitely a negative or positive aspect, considering which sport the athlete is training for. For any sport where bulking up is required creatine would provide an advantage, but any athlete trying to lose or maintain weight will be offset by creatines reported effects.

The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), has issued a statement that although creatine is an effective aid in performance enhancement, there have not been nearly as many field studies as there have been laboratory studies conducted, also, the ACSM notes that the jury is still out on the safety and effectiveness of long term creatine use (Rose, 1998). Since there have been no studies conducted about the long term safety of creatine, it is not currently recommended to supplement for long periods of time, rather cycle creatine use, by stopping or significantly reducing usage for a month’s time (Sahelian, 2000).

Although the long term consequences of creatine are not known at this time, it has, to this point, proven to be safer than any illegal performance-enhancing aid, such as anabolic steroids. Creatine supplemenation through a powder is also a viable way to obtain the amount necessary to provide results. To obtain the recommended dosage through our diet alone, one would have to consume anywhere from 5 to 25 pounds of meat daily (Gutfeld, 1997). Someday, maybe creatine research will conclude that it really is nature’s very own steroid.

Genetic Engineering – Genetically Modified Food

Genetic engineering is vastly becoming the hot topic of debate, not only in the science world but also on a global scale. It is becoming increasingly evident that with our population trends continuing to rise, there either simply isn’t enough food production from agriculture to sustain the world’s requirements or the distribution of consumption of primary production from this agriculture is greatly unequal.

Genetically modifying food is one possible solution that is already being heavily researched and tested, and is receiving its fair amount of praise for growing crops and raising livestock more efficiently and effectively as well as environmentally friendly ideals and management of natural resources. But there are also serious concerns over the safety of genetically modified foods on humans and other organisms, and ethics behind the genetic practices.

Also issues that need regarding include the impact of genetically modifying food on the natural balance of the environment, possible harsh market domination and the dependence of poorer countries on the larger industrialized nations. So can genetically modifying food really be considered a likely contender in the race to feed the ever-increasing population when there are such heavy cons associated with the social, ethical and scientific implications. A major environmental concern is that transgenic plants could pass their new genes to close relatives in the nearby wild.

Campbell, 2003) This could become a serious problem if traits such as pesticide resistance embedded into GM crops where to pass onto wild species through cross-pollination, the resulting plants becoming very difficult to control. This is just one example of how GM organisms could alter more so the natural balance and biodiversity of the environment. It would be very difficult to segregate the GM organisms from other organisms and there is no possible way of determining the effects of introduction of new synthetic genes into the natural context.

The genetic structure of any living thing is very intricate and complex, and the GM crop tests that are carried out only look at the short-term effects, and doesn’t allow for the possible effect of the future. Who determines that humans are superior to all other species and that the earth is here for our exploitation and manipulation? Is this just the natural (but intelligent) human instinct to survive as a species? To breed and become overwhelmingly abundant and rape the land of all possible resources without any regard of how much we are hurting and inevitably changing our own backyard.

Playing around with systems as complex as genetic codes is not something that should be rushed into as it very well seems to be. The consequences of entering GM organisms into the existing environment cannot be known until it is already done and I would rather be safe than sorry and propose that they should not be allowed to grow in conjunction with the environment at all. With the possibility of genetically engineering foods comes the idea of market domination.

The obvious expenses of running and maintaining a company large enough to not only research GM foods but to also produce them, will create a market of large dominating companies, leaving small agricultural practices in no position to compete but forcing them to sell there land or be taken over by the new genetic techniques and practices. In 2001 an AgBio World Foundation petition was passed for multinational seed producers Aventis CropScience to donate 3000 tons of GM experimental rice to the needy rather than destroying it as usual.

This brings up doubt as to the agenda of these particular big companies. One of the major pushes of genetic engineering is to aid and secure a means of providing foods for generations to come, and yet they are putting their own political agendas ahead of helping those who need it most at the present. To me this is the most important of all the issues surrounding the production of GM foods. The idea that the results are not matching the proposed aims and objectives set out by the scientific community, but rather it just opens up another new field of science which can be exploited by consumerism.

It seems to be that everybody is looking to solve tomorrow’s problems. But wouldn’t we be more beneficial by helping out some of the current situations of starving countries before we even think about protecting ourselves from the future. Why there aren’t laws stopping companies from disposing of perfectly good produce is completely beyond me. It just further enhances my belief that our consumer-based world would inevitably end up with serious market domination over GM foods, even if possible restraints were put in place.

I agree that simplistically, genetically modifying foods is a “possible” solution for feeding tomorrows generations, but when you look at our current consumer based society, I don’t believe it would get very far at all. Biotechnology can help countries that are resource poor by providing larger more stable crops. (worldgrowth. org) It is believed that GM crops can now not only reduce potential constraint, seasonal planting problems and costs, but can also increase the nutritional quality of agricultural products. GM crops can be produced to be herbicide resistant.

This means that farmers could spray these crops with herbicide and kill the weeds without affecting the crop. This in turn means that the amount of herbicide used in one season would be reduced, with a reduction of costs for the farmer and consumers. Pest resistance is another means by which crops, in particular cotton, can remove the need for pesticides, which are harmful to the environment. There is also experimentation on producing crops that are drought and salt tolerant and less reliant on fertilisers, which will open up new areas to be farmed and increased productivity.

So in the initial stages of research the costs for genetically modifying foods may be expensive with many large companies investing laboratories, equipment and human resources. But in the end it is a much cheaper option for farmers because of the reduction in pesticide and herbicide and high yields of quality product. Controversy over labelling laws and their effect on GM foods have gotten many people suspicious as to how exactly GM foods can be contained and traced.

The idea that big companies could be using genetically modified organisms in their products without the need to inform there customers is not one that many would like to hear. The European Commission has started a means of control by putting forth two legislations that require the traceability of GMO’s throughout the food chain and to provide consumers with information by labelling all GM foods. These strict rules however will imply a heavy burden on the food industry as it significantly tightens the use of genetic engineering and will be introduction of new costs.

By also informing publicly on labels that this particular food contains genetically modified organisms could potentially scare the consumer into buying another product without the genetically modified food, particularly those who are against such practises. So it will have a great impact on the companies employing these methods as to whether it will be beneficial. Certainly the manufacturing costs will lesson, but is this enough to sacrifice possible consumer reduction. Allergens and toxins are feared to be transferred from one food to another during the process of genetic engineering.

For example people allergic to peanuts might unrepentantly find themselves allergic to GM foods that contains a peanut gene. () This is inadvertently a problem because of the diversity of allergies, and to eliminate this problem would mean all genes being used for genetic modification would have to be cleared of allergenic characteristics. This would prove a very tedious task and not one that companies would like to employ. On the other hand, genetic engineering can tailor-make specific foods that don’t trigger allergic reactions in people.

The advantages of genetically modifying food include pest and disease resistance, selective herbicide tolerance and higher yields and quality. However, until further studies are carried out to determine the effects on human health and the stability of the environment then there will be causes for concern. Genetic engineering is a plausible solution to our growing population and demands on food, but is necessary to take precaution before any action is taken or we could find ourselves worse off then we already are.

Origanum Vulgare Essay

The culinary herb oregano is mostly used in foods. Oregano also known as the pizza herb is used in a number of Italian dishes as it goes especially well with tomatoes. All the flavors of oregano are prominent in Italian cooking and in robust dishes of certain other cuisine, such as Mexicans chili con carne. Italians call oregano the mushroom herb but use it with many other foods as well. The Spanish word oregano means marjoram. Oregano is also known as marjoram in northern and central Europe. In Greek, Oregano means Joy of the Mountains from where it is gathered.

Before modern day medicines were invented for stomachaches, oregano was used for minor food poisonings and convulsions. Externally, oregano was used on skin irritations to cease the itch. The French included it in soaps and pomades. The Greeks crowned newlyweds with oregano and planted it on graves as well as using the herb medically. Oreganos German name, wurstkraut, reveals its use of seasoning sausages. The English used oregano for perfumes, washing waters, and used it for dyes to turn wool purple and linen reddish brown.

In good health and quality, oregano should have good color, even sized leaf pieces and a fresh aromatic aroma. The leaves of oregano are very aromatic, slightly pointed and hairy. The flowers are white, and bloom from late July to September. Oregano grows to be 2 feet tall, and rich, moist soil makes the aroma and flavor of oregano weak. Oregano has been used for many other things in the past, and has been very helpful and constructive to humans. It has been essential in cooking and an important ingredient in types of medications.

Genetically Modified Foods

Monsantos downfall could be attributed to several reasons. The passion of Alan Shapiros vision blinded the Company into making rash decisions and the large amounts of money spent pursuing the objective prevented any U-turns later. The companys unshaken beliefs that it was correct had made it arrogant and not listen to the outrage all around. Monsanto underestimated consumer resistance.

There was no obvious benefit in the products introduced. It may have been a different story if the products were introduced in developing counties where transport is poor or people starving from crop failures.

Monsanto also ignored cultural differences. Canada and US were indifferent to genetically modified products but there was anger in Europe and the UK. Recent blunders by government handling the BSE and Mad Cow outbreaks dampened peoples confidence in genetically modified products.

Selling the idea of genetically modified crops is not easy. The industry needs to persuade people of the benefits and the companies must be seen to be socially responsible, socially responsive and ethical. Companies mission statements must not seem to be solely profit driven.

Introduction – Monsanto and Alan Shapiro’s Vision

“It’s about the earth, it’s about the environment, and its about food. It’s about health and nutrition. Those are deep, ancient things for civilisation, and they are for the people.” – Alan Shapiro

The Monsanto Company in 1995 led by Alan Shapiro was involved in agriculture, pharmaceuticals, food and chemicals. Shapiro’s passionate vision was the application of biology to food, nutrition and human health. He believed that people would want the products offered by Monsanto. The products themselves are protected by patents, thus restricting competition. All Monsanto needed to do was dominate and position all their products as either number one or two in their respective markets.

Consolidation started in the seed market that was already concentrated in the hands of a few companies. By 1999 Monsanto spent more than $8 billion making acquisitions. Four corn seed companies had controlled 87% of the US market in 1996. Monsanto acquired two of them, Holden’s Foundation Seeds and DeKalb. Delta & Land Pine controlled 75% of the cottonseed market and Monsanto made a bid for that company too.

It was a simple winning strategy preached by Jack Welch at GE, dominate your market or get out.

(a) The downfall on Monsanto.

Mission Statement Did Not Include All Stakeholders V Ethical Issues

All entities, individuals and companies should have a mission statement, a set of beliefs and priorities that guide actions and ethics in decisions. Typical mission statements include paying particular attention to the demands and requirements of certain, if not all stakeholders. For an individual, it may be the family and employer, for a company, it can include shareholders, customers etc. The term stakeholders for a company can be narrowly defined to include only shareholders, customers and employees or a wider definition to encompass the community and society generally.

Mission statements or objectives are an integral part of any organisations culture. These beliefs are so deeply entrenched into staffs disposition that they would act automatically on them. I have no doubt that Shapiros passionate belief in genetically modified (GM) products would have had a strong influence on the Companys corporate objective. Shapiros passion and having $8 billion committed (sunk cost factor) to this strategy would have effected his decisions. Their confidence on the technology may even have promoted arrogance within the organisation.

With hindsight, it can be seen that Monsanto’s mission or corporate objective did not include listening to the community and society generally. As Shapiro confirmed at a Greenpeace conference in 1999 Because we thought our job to persuade, too often we forgot to listen. If Monsantos mission statement included care for the society and the community it operated in, it is unlikely that it would have suffered the fate it did. A poorly defined objective resulted in the Companys unethical behavior anad ultimately its demise.

Incorrect Product and Target Market V Social Issues

Monsanto targeted the wrong segment of the market. Developed countries, especially Europe did not appreciate, or need genetically modified foodstuffs. These products offered no obvious benefit, solved no problems but posed possible risks.

R&D has been focused on the needs of the U.S. society. Hence, the largest segments of GM products are seeds that are herbicide tolerant. Unfortunately, developing countries cannot afford herbicide whilst European consumers prefer organic produce.

Many commentators believed that the range of GM seeds and products introduced were unsuitable for developed nations. Consumers who were not starving and health conscious would appreciate a cholesterol free egg more than a delayed ripening tomato. If Monsanto introduced a rice with increased pro-vitamin A to underdeveloped countries, where vitamin A deficiency was a major cause of child blindness, Shapiro would be placed on the same stage as Fred Hollows and not treated as an outcast.

Will the World Starve

Looking out a window upon a barren desert, a dry wasteland unfolds as a carpet to nowhere. Abandoned cities dot the horizon, as the ruins speak volumes to the once populated extravagance of a country which lived on wealth and opportunity. The vision just described is not one out of a Hollywood movie script, but one that is not only possible but probable. Currently, the world population numbers over six billion, with China alone cradling over one-sixth of the worlds total population. With the world population increasing at a rate of one hundred million a year, the numbers are expected to hit ten billion by the end of 2040.

Most scientists agree that the maximum number of people that the earth can sustain is fifteen billion, leaving the earth in a quandary before the end of the twenty-first century when the total world population is expected to reach a staggering sixteen to eighteen billion. The consumption of the worlds natural resources due to this exponential growth could result in worldwide famine, a complete breakdown in the world market, uncontrollable outbreaks of disease, and widespread crime and disorder. Currently, the ratio of land which can be used for agricultural endeavors is estimated to be one in nine acres.

The worlds produce producer is only a small sliver of a total land mass apple pie sliced into nine equal, yet tiny slices and as the amount of soil suitable for agriculture dwindles, the slice with which the world relies on continues to shrink. Considering the little amount of available farmland, it should be expected that there would be more of an effort to conserve this vital resource, but unfortunately the issue has not yet risen to a level of global importance. The amount of fertile topsoil is becoming more and more unusable for agriculture.

Water, used for the irrigation of the worlds life iving crops, contains naturally dissolved minerals and over time the minerals from the irrigated water supply collect in the topsoil. After many years of constantly farming a particular region, the soil begins to become less and less fertile. This process, known as salinization, has affected many of the farms around the world. Once this process is complete, the soil becomes totally useless for any kind of farming. Over long periods of time, salinization, combined with the erosion of the topsoil due to wind and rain, starts to cause the worlds farmlands to exponentially dissipate.

Ethiopia is a prime example of ow salinization, combined with overgrazing and erosion, has affected every aspect of the economy. Food shortages, lack of domestic trade products, and low incomes for farmers and agricultural workers are all bi-products of a land ravaged by overuse and abuse. With the people scrambling to find a quick fix solution to this problem that has been building for decades, the economy along with the peoples only domestic food source, is slipping further and further into a seemingly unrecoverable disaster.

The earths industry is expected to produce enough manufactured materials to support the worlds current six billion people. The list of finished products includes food (from agriculture), clothes and all other luxuries which most of the world has become accustomed. If most scientists are correct, the maximum capacity of which the world can sustain is estimated to be fifteen billion people. Maximum capacity is described as the amount of people that can be sustained without causing a complete breakdown in society.

Numerous scientists have speculated that many of the worlds natural resources used to support current life such as clean water and air, gasoline, oil, and even coal will almost be completely depleted up by the end of the century. With decimated natural resources, a lack of topsoil, and a completely over-populated planet, anthropologists have agreed that the end of the century, if not before, will culminate in a complete breakdown of industry in the world market. With this extinction of resources looming, it is obvious that new methods of energy and topsoil conservation need to be discovered.

Speculation has been made that it is too late to turn back the dependence which humans have developed for natural resources. How can anyone be expected to turn away from their gas-powered cars and their electric houses? If, however, the current rate of consumption continues, then here is no doubt what the future will hold. Since 1950 half of the worlds trees have been cut down and every day six square acres of rain forest are lost to the hum of a loggers chainsaw. With the complete destruction of the worlds forests due to over-population and over-consumption, a complete lack of the worlds naturally made medicine will also be prevalent.

Nearly all of the currently prescribed medicines are, in fact, naturally made from plants. Antivirus medicines are produced from animals and even fish. If the worlds ways of making medicinal products for many of the most extreme diseases such as AIDS are completely radicated, disease will spread rampantly into most major societies. Almost all of the worlds industrialized countries are very dependent on the treatment of many deadly diseases. In Africa, one in every five persons is infected with HIV, with fifteen hundred new cases discovered daily.

Without medicines, diseases like tuberculosis and malaria will become plagues across society, infecting all who come in contact. With the complete breakdown of civilization, which could occur based on the basic overpopulation of the world; crime and disorder would surely follow. Famine and poverty tricken economies have been known to cause the people to revolt, resulting in a coup detat. Looting and robbery just to survive and feed ones family have been shown to become the most prevailing crimes, followed by a tremendous spike in the amount of murders that would occur due to internal strife and frustration of a hopeless situation.

With society in such a breakdown, no resources for the military or food for its people there is no way in which a government could control the revolting population. A prime example of this occurred this summer in Mozambique. The rains, which flooded the land, eft the country at a standstill. There was no way for people to obtain food. Many were trapped in their household due to the floods. Farm animals, washed away by the rains, lay rotting in the now barren, stripped fields.

The results were ones of violence in the streets and mass emigration to Mozambiques bordering countries, thus putting a strain on the boarder patrols of South Africa as they tried to control the influx of refugees. Now the water has receded, but the problem of too many people, too little food and way too much frustration plague Mozambique. Could one small African country provide the real life xample for what could happen if the people are left without hope and a complete breakdown of the civilization occurs?

Maybe the more prevalent question should be; will the world learn from Mozambiques tragedy? A bleak, desolate world where the inhabitants live on substance pills instead of natural food? A military struggling to maintain the order within its own boarders? The land laying fallow for decades upon decades? Plagues without hope of a cure? Is this the vision that the future holds for this great, blue planet? If steps are not taken by the time the world reaches maximum capacity, society as a whole could come crashing down before he populaces eyes.

Many scientists need to ask and answer the question of how the exponentially increasing population will be handled. The end of the century may seem a far way off, but from the chair which sees the big picture, the closeness of the new age is only around the corner. Hopefully, with scientific and social awareness, the problems which overpopulation creates will be at the best solved and at the very least resolved. The world in which the children should grow and develop should be one of hope, joy and light, not a place of barren, dry wastelands, plagues riveting the society and abandoned cities.

Maintaining A Healthy Weight

Data collected from more than 20,000 people by the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey reveal a distressing picture of excessive weight and obesity in American Society( These increases have been caused by greater daily caloric consumption and a relatively low level of consistent physical activity. Today the average American man consumes 2,684 calories per day compared to 1,531 calories in 1980. Additionally only 22 percent of adults engage in thirty minutes of moderately intense activity for the recommended number of days per week.

This increase in weight occurs, however, only when the body is supplied with more energy than it can use and the excess energy is stored in the form of adipose tissue, or as we know it fat. The continuos buildups off adipose tissue leads to excess weight and eventually turns into obesity. Obesity is so closely associated with chronic conditions, that medical experts now recommended that obesity itself be defined and treated as a The most prevalent forms of malnutrition in the more affluent countries of the world are overweight and obesity.

Most people think of malnourishment as a shortage of certain types of essential nutrients. In developing countries, food deprivation forms the basis of malnutrition. However, malnutrition can also be a disease of plenty. Due to the fact that our food supply exceeds the needs of our population, people are able to eat more than is required for healthy living. They often consume more calories than they expend. They can then become overweight and eventually may become obese.

There is one big question that people ask a lot and really do not understand, when obesity and overweight are discussed. That is, How can people tell the difference between obesity and being overweight? Nutritionist have said that obesity is apparent when fat accumulation produces a body weight that is more than twenty percent above an ideal or desirable weight. On the other hand, people are said to be overweight if their weight is between one percent and nineteen percent above their desirable weight, the more likely they are to be labeled obese.

The word obesity requires further refinement. When people are between twenty percent and forty percent above desirable weight, their obesity is said to be muled, whereas excessive weight in the forty- one percent to ninety nine percent above desirable weight is defined as moderate obesity, and finally, weight of one hundred percent or more above desirable weight is defined as severe, gross or morbid obesity. Experts continue to question the origins of obesity. As you might expect, the many theories focus on factors within the individual, as well as from the environment.

Recently the role of genetic contribution has been defined, somewhat by the discovery of fat genes in mice and an obesity gene in humans. Research reveals that this protein, leptin, would be found in lower levels of overweight mice, than normal mice. They also suspected that leptin would be found in lower levels in obese humans compared with those of average weight. It is now said that faulty receptors for leptin might exist in the some obese people, causing a second gene to restrict the production of GLP-1, a protein that also plays an important role in the signaling of society, or fullness ( ).

Due to this new information about genetic genes, researchers have identified centers for the control of eating within the hypothalamus of the central nervous system (CNS). These centers, which consist of the feeding center for fullness, tell the body when it should begin consuming food and when food consumption should stop. These centers are thought to monitor continuously a variety of factors regarding food intake, including factories and visual cues, the bodys store of stomach distention, information regarding basal metabolic rate, gastrointestinal hormone level and as mentioned before, GLP-1 levels.

An inheritance basis for obesity could involve the interplay of somatotype (body build up) and other unique energy- processing characteristics passed in from parents to their children. In the ectomorphic body type, a tall slender body seems to virtually protect individuals from difficulty with excessive weight. Ectomorphs, usually have difficulty maintaining normal weight for their hieght. The shorter, more heavily muscled, athletic body of the mesomorph represents a genetic middle ground in inherited body types.

Mesomorphs have their greatest difficulty with obesity during childhood, when eating habits fail to adjust to a decline in physical activity. Finally , endomorphs have body types thst tend to be round and soft. Many endomorphs have excessively large abdomens and report having had weight problems since childhood. Any calories consumed beyond those that are used by the body are converted to fat stores. People gain weight when their energy input exceeds their energy output. Conversely, they lose weight when their energy output exceeds their energy input.

Weight remains constant when caloric input and caloric output are identical. In such a situation, our bodies are said to be in caloric balance. Each persons caloric activity requirements vary directly according to the amount of daily psyical work completed. Even within a given general job type, the amount of caloric expenditure will vary according to the psyical effect required. For example, a police officer who walks a neighborhood, will usually expend many more calories than the typical police dispatchik or motorcycle officer.

Jamaican Food and Style

Jamaica is a beautiful island south of Cuba, between North and South America. The island has a great deal of “rich agricultural land, and although much of the mountainous are is not very fertile, here and there in the hills are pockets of land which can bear abundantly” (Buisseret, 1969, i). Jamaica’s uniformities and diversities concerning their food, as well as their unique religious functions, geography, economics, and technology contribute to their distinctive food culture. Most Jamaicans are able to produce their own food, such as sugar crops, bananas, and citrus fruits (Buisseret, 1969, 58).

They use these products in trade, as well as for themselves. Also, they grow a great deal of domestic crops, such as “corn, vegetables, fruits, cassave, yam, cocoes, dasheeen, and sweet potatoes” (Bent, 1966, 44). Though rice is an important food to Jamaicans, they are forced to import it from Guyana, mainly (Bent, 1966, 45). Also, beef cattle, pigs, poultry, fish, and sheep are a significant part of the Jamaican food consumption. They raise them themselves, though sheep rearing is a great deal less successful. Most of the meat consumed in Jamaica is imported or grown by a few local livestock owners.

Jamaicans buy their goods at markets in the largely populated cities (Bent, 1966, 75-78). Planters are well respected in Jamaican society, since they tend to be more well-off than most (Stewart, 1971, 126). Most food preparation involves pepper and the cook’s “special ingredients”; however, much of the cooking of meat is done in small drums on charcoals (Johnson, 1982, 25). Jamaicans are much like Americans concerning their food storage. They keep dried foods in pantries and keep milk, etc. in refrigerators (Johnson, 1982, 84). The act of eating itself is also “modernized just like the United States” (Johnson, 1982, 86).

Also, they dispose of food in the generalized dumps, though mainly, food is not wasted in the Jamaican culture. The only unique function of the Jamaican food culture is the drinking that occurs during the reggae concerts. The concerts occur almost everywhere in smaller, more rural areas, and the Jamaicans drink a great deal of rum. Rum is an alternative income for the estates when the sugar production is not good. No religious feasting seems to occur in Jamaica, oddly enough, since a great deal of feasting tends to occur on holidays. Rum consumption is the Jamaican’s main way to celebrate a festive occasion (Phillipo, 1975, 115).

Geography very obviously influences the Jamaican food ways: bananas, sugar cane, and citrus fruits are the main exports due to the warmer Jamaican climate (Buisseret, 1969, 55). Though the terrain is very rugged, farmers have worked past the scrubby area (Buisseret, 1969, 56). Also, Jamaican economics influence the food ways. Since Jamaica is still considered to be an underdeveloped country, most of the economy revolves around the import and export of food. Though imports are a great deal more expensive, Jamaica export money has increased a great deal in the recent past, making food cheaper and easier to obtain (Johnson, 1982, 96).

Jamaican technology has also made it possible to store food more efficiently (Johnson, 1982, 94). Jamaican food culture is an interesting collection of diverse and exotic foods. Their society places a great deal of importance on food due to their importing and exporting. Their food ways are much like America’s in their storage and preparation. Though they do not really have much religious association with their foods, alcoholic beverages are a major part of their culture as well. A Jamaican’s way of life is defined by the foods and the types of foods they eat.

Genetically Modified Foods: To Eat Or Not To Eat

Genetically modified (GM) foods have been around for quite some time. Chances are, just about everyone has eaten some type of GM food product. With the new and developing technologies that the biotechnology industry has to offer, the GM food market has risen in leaps and bounds. A genetically modified food is a food that has had its genetic make-up altered in some way by DNA technology. It can involve the transfer of genes from one organism to another or be sprayed with a genetically designed pesticide. The characteristics of the product may or may not emain the same depending on which genes have been altered.

Some changes that are often seen include their color, flavor, texture, and their ability to resist insects and tolerate herbicides. The use of this science has given rise to much conflict in the public sector and has scared many consumers. As biotechnologists, it is our job to educate the public and inform them of the risks or lack of risks in genetically modified foods. Introduction With a growing world population and the race to be the first to develop the next technological break through, the area of genetic manipulation has ecome a popular area for discovery.

The agricultural industry is very open and excited for the introduction of new technologies that will provide them with a much higher yield and an overall better quality product. Many of the suppliers that use these agricultural products have become skeptical and cautious when buying from the farmers due to the media and government regulating bodies. The most powerful body that will make or break this field is the consumers. If people will not buy the products at the store, then the market for GM food will dissolve.

In this paper we will discuss ome of the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods and hear positions in favor of, and in opposition to such products. Positions and Discussion To eat or not to eat, that is the question. How often do you think of genetics or biotechnology as you are enjoying your favorite foods? Does gene splicing ever cross your mind as you slice tomatoes, or do you ever think about growth hormones as you sink your teeth into that juicy steak? Not very often if you are like most people, but perhaps you should. Many of the items you eat have been genetically modified by using biotechnology in ome way.

These products are often referred to as GMOs (genetically modified organisms). There are several different types of modified foods. Designer foods are processed foods that are supplemented with ingredients rich in disease preventing substances by genetic engineering. Functional foods are any modified food that may provide health benefits. Biotechnology and the human understanding of it have allowed for great advances in the world of agriculture. Perhaps one of the best advances is GM foods. By altering one or a few genes scientists can create a more user friendly and elpful organism.

The first genetically modified plants were introduced experimentally in 1982. Since then, different combinations and varieties have been tested and the first of these crops became commercially available in 1996. Some people are frightened by this new technology and feel these foods are unsafe. ” The ability to splice genetic sequences into living organisms where they would not normally be found raises fears that we are somehow creating Frankenstein-like versions of corn or unleashing something that we will not be able to control”. (Mainschein, J. (01-01-2000).

Who’s in Charge of the Gene Genie?. The World & I, 84. ) The main reason that genetically engineered food could be dangerous is because there has been no adequate testing to ensure that altering genes that perform an apparently useful function as part of that plant or animal is going to have the same effects if inserted into a totally unrelated plant or animal. Cross- breeding by farmers and evolution by Nature, has always involved gene transfer between similar species, not completely different species like a fish and a potato, which is alarming to the public.

It may be that in the ong term, genetically modified food could provide us with benefits and be a safe alternative, but we cannot know that at this time due to the lack of safety testing. All over the world, scientists, ordinary citizens and farmers have raised concerns about the rush of Genetic Engineering technologies in our food chain. While some are completely against it, others are urging more cautious approaches. Regardless, they all want the ability to actually determine that GE technologies are proven safe for consumption.

There have been all sorts of campaigns and actions around the world in rotest of GMOs. Britain has taken measures to stop anti-GM protests by creating two political commissions to advise and monitor the effects of genetically modified foods and crops. After investigation by the British government GM foods were found to be non-harmful. They did inflict a “public health surveillance network. ” This group will report any problems, such as things from allergic reactions to deaths.

As the government prepared and released this information the British Medical Association released an anti-GM report. They were concerned about long term health problems GM foods could cause. This group called for a moratorium on planting GM crops until there is scientific proof of effects of GM products. In this report they also called for strict labeling of all GM products. The Mexican Senate has also taken measures to ensure the public knows what they are eating. The Mexican government has passed a bill that requires all genetically modified products to be labeled.

This bill does not require a halt in producing these GM foods and products. It asks manufactures to identify and provide information about their product. Another country that is requiring labels on GM foods is the United Kingdom. Since 1998 and before, campaigners in the UK have been putting increasing amounts of pressure on supermarkets and trying to raise awareness with consumers. The new bill now requires restaurants and supermarkets to identify any products, meals, or foods that have been genetically modified.

This gives consumers the right to boycott such products as they wish. In Australia, a panel of people who did not have prior knowledge about genetic engineering, delivered a report to the president of the Australian Senate. After hearing views of experts on both sides of the argument, the Senate is ow acting to require labeling of GE Food and to generally take a more precautionary stand on genetically modified foods being sold to the consumer. I think the US could learn from the policies of other countries.

A committee like the one in Britain would allow authorities to get involved with the details of biotechnology and they would become very educated on the details of how things work. Based on this new system, better, more educated decisions could be made on behalf of the general population. The long term effects of eating these genetically modified foods are truly unknown. Even if there was some way of testing the long term affects to humans, animals and the environment, we still may never know the total benefits or problems which may come from these modified foods or organisms unless we take a chance to try them.

It may be that genetically modified food can benefit us a great deal, but we cannot know that at this time because not enough testing has not been done. Most scientists do claim that GE food may be very safe, but mention that the long term effects are still unknown. So the question given to the consumer is “To eat or not to eat” these genetically modified products. Next to human risks, which I will address later, are the issues surrounding the environment. There are many potential risks on the environment posed by genetic modification of food products.

GM food critics say that releasing GM food crops could cause cross- pollination between non-GM foods creating new “dangerous” types of plants. One such possibility has been called a “super weed. ” This super weed with its genetic novelty could become more resistant to herbicides and pesticides. Independent studies have shown that cross-pollination occurs at distances greater than 10 meters (AgrEvo ’99). Some scientists recommend sterility to keep this issue under control, but long-term sterility can never be 100% (Holden ’99).

Super weeds could wipe out natural flora by competing and disturbing the natural biodiversity. Wiping out plants that animals rely on could lead to species dying out. New crops, such as, roundup ready soy beans have been designed to accept heavier doses of pesticides. These chemicals and other harmful farming treatments could find their way into our water and food supplies. This could lead to resistant insects and/or the extinction of useful insects that we rely on for our balanced ecosystems. At an extreme perspective, this could turn our land into a biological desert.

In the future, our genetic engineering will provide food quality improvements. These improvements may include better tasting and healthier foods. Crops can now be produced with fewer pesticides while increasing the crop’s abilities to fight pesticides and disease. Genetically modified crops encourage new farming techniques preserving precious topsoil, reducing greenhouse gases, soil erosion and runoff. GM crops increase yield, food production on farmlands and provide more for the increasing population globally. This increase can be felt tremendously by starving third world countries.

Developments can also allow for agricultural development in areas that have been difficult in the past. GM foods can suit Australia’s climate and tolerate water, temperature, and saline extremes. The modified food products can also be an effective tool for cancer research and vaccines. With these new improvements, new foods could be introduced (Monsanto ’99) to compete in domestic and export markets. Risks and benefits need to be outlined for the public to see to promote a sense of honesty and build an educating trust.

The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism

“The greatest of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. ”(Mahatma Gandhi Quotes) Gandhi said this in his book, The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism, this belief is still valid in today’s modern society. At the present time in the United States, the concern for the health and well being of animals is drastically increasing. And one of the most substantial indications of this is the increasing number of vegans and vegetarians in our nation. Today there are over half a million vegans and countless millions of vegetarians in the United States alone.

There are several different kinds of vegetarians following this practice. A vegan consumes no foods of any kind produced by animals. An ovo-vegetarian eats eggs, but no dairy foods or animal flesh. A lacto-vegetarian eats dairy foods, but no eggs or animal flesh. A lacto-ovo-vegetarian eats dairy foods and eggs, but no animal flesh. These people are most commonly referred to as just vegetarians. A semi-vegetarian eats dairy food and egg and occasionally includes fish or chicken but no other animal flesh. (Seameons,p2) Aside from dietary habits, a vegan also has several more rules to follow.

A vegan cannot use any product made from the body parts of an animal such as leather, ivory, fur, and even pearls. They also cannot use products which have been tested on animals. Vegans are sometimes referred to as an animal’s greatest ally. Veganism originally started in India in the first century A. D.. Hindus did not become vegan because of deep religious reasons or for personal health reasons, “but because of environmental pressures. It became both uneconomical and unsanitary to raise animals in so crowded an environment”. (Seamen p. 5).

Through the centuries veganism never really caught on due to lack of modern medicine and improper understanding of the functions of the human body. Around the beginning of the twentieth century, it is thought that the discovery of vitamins and minerals gave birth to the idea of eating for optimum health and fitness, and thus, the rediscovery of veganism. Up through the 1900’s, more and more people started to say stop to the unfair torture of animals. Since the dawn of man, humans have used animals to their advantage. Animal flesh has been a good source of vitamins and protein.

The skin was used for warmth and shelter. Before several of the modern advances made by mankind, animals were needed to sustain human survival and prosperity. In today’s society, many of the products on our store shelves are tested on animals for safety reasons. Even with all the great uses there are for dead animals, modern nutrition and science has made so many new advancements in research that it has become completely unnecessary to kill any animal for any reason. Humans can survive solely on vegetation and supplementation. Animal testing is unnecessary due to new DNA and computer graphic research.

In this paper three major issues dealing with veganism will be discussed. Whether or not the vegan life style is healthier then the average way of life? Is animal testing necessary or should it be banned? And should animals be used in the entertainment industry? There is no reason to injure or kill animals for any reason. Americans as a society should be vegan. One major issue is whether or not the vegan lifestyle is healthier than the average way of life. The average way of life consists of the four major food groups: meat, dairy, grains, and fruits/vegetables.

In the vegan lifestyle, meat and dairy foods are cut out of the diet. From a nutritional standpoint, “animal food does have its advantages. For one thing it is nutrient-dense; it is a concentrated source of calories, protein, iron, zinc, copper, and in the case of dairy products, calcium. ” (Seameons p. 4) Veganism is actually much healthier than consuming meat and dairy products. Most people who become vegans use improper supplementation and will eventually make themselves sick. It is not denying the body meat that vegetarians and vegans have roblems with, but instead a lack of calories.

The human body needs a certain balance of vitamins and minerals to sustain proper health. Usually, when a person decides to become a vegan, they make the transfer automatically. The transfer to veganism must be made slowly and in parts. First, it’s good to give up red meat, next give up all meats, poultry and fish. After about one year of this, eggs and dairy foods are given up. Through all of this, vegans should take vitamins and protein supplements. The B-12 vitamin is essential and can naturally be found in only meat.

Deficiencies of B-12 “can lead to pernicious, megaloblastic anemia, loss of appetite, fatigue, pallor, dizziness, numbness or tingling in the extremities, and impairment of brain and nerve tissue that may result in permanent neurologically damage. A major concern with B-12 deficiency is that it is not easily recognized before it has already caused physiological damage. ” (Seameons p. 4) As long as a person watches their vitamin intake, they will retain proper health. But even without monitoring vitamins and minerals, a person who leads a vegan lifestyle will still be healthier than a person who consumes meat.

John Robbins, in his new book May All Be Fed, suggests that the hazards of using animal foods, even the so- called healthier ones, are considerable: I am frequently asked what I think of eliminating red meat and substituting chicken and fish, cutting the skin off poultry and cooking it in oil without fat, eating primarily low- or non-fate dairy products, and restricting egg-yolk intake to two or three a week … the data leads me to the conclusion that such a strategy is the equivalent of cutting smoking down to one pack a day. (Seameons p. 2)

When someone makes the switch to the vegan life style then must understand that: it is essential to eat a wide variety of yellow and green fruits and vegetables and different grains. If you do that plus make sure that you have an adequate source of vitamin B12 … from fortified cereals, soy beverages, and nutritional yeast, or from a multi-vitamin and mineral supplement, you will be meeting all your nutritional needs. It really is not that hard. (Seameons p. 3) The next major issue involved in veganism is whether or not animal testing should be banned.

Animal testing is experimentation, using a variable and a controlled group in which household products and pharmaceuticals are given to animals to observe what results are obtained. Another form of animal testing is dissection; this is the cutting apart of already dead animals for study in the classroom. The proponents to animal testing and dissection say that there are not enough proven alternatives to ensure the safety of new ingredients and products. Proponents say that in the classroom nothing can teach the realistics of anatomy as well as dissection.

The major companies say that animal testing is necessary to ensure the safety of all people. The truth is, every year “more than 14 million dogs, cats, rabbits, rats, monkeys, and other animals suffer in products tests that lead to blindness, severe burns, and eventual death. ” (Newkirk p. 10) Out of all of the companies which subject their products to animal testing, Procter & Gamble Inc. is the largest and kills the most animals: In Procter & Gamble (P&G), cosmetic and household product testing, caustic chemicals are forced into rabbits’ eyes and applied to their raw, shaved skin.

Laboratory workers lock the rabbits in restraining devices so they are unable to move while chemicals burn into their eyes and skin. The rabbits are given no sedatives or pain killers to ease their suffering. They sometimes break their necks and backs in a desperate struggle to get away. Those who survive are used again … until they are finally killed. P&G’s innocent victims include rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, and ferrets. Even though these tests are not required by law, P&G insists on continuing their torture. (Newkirk p. )

Many of the finest biologists in the country say that dissection is of valid importance in learning anatomy. But they are wrong, dissection is murder. All different kinds of animals such as cats, frogs, and pigs are either raised, stolen, or caught in their own habitat, this unbelievable amount of deaths often leads to a large decrease in the population of a particular species. Since the intent is to kill a large number of specimens as fast as possible, they are all shoved together into small containers and gassed to death.

Some of the animals do not die immediately, but the animals die when they are injected with the preservative formaldehyde, this causes an intense burning sensation. Dissection is not necessary to learn anatomy, there are alternatives to dissection such as computer simulation and video tape of past dissections to prevent more in the future. Some states, “such as California have laws ensuring that students are given alternatives. Many states are still behind the times on this issue. ” (Hepner p. 23) All of the companies which conduct animal testing claim to be trying to cut down and possibly eliminate the testing altogether.

P&G claims to be a world leader in researching humane testing methods. But the reality is that P&G spends more money in seven days on advertising than it has spent in eleven years on alternatives to painful and lethal animal tests. These “cruel and unnecessary experiments are paid for with profits from the sale of P&G products. Every bottle of Pantene, every tube of Crest, every pack of Tampax tampons, and every box of Tide, Bounce, or Bold that is purchased means more money for painful experiments. ” (Newkirk p. )

The three other major companies which conduct animal experimentation are Colgate-Palmolive, Johnson & Johnson, and Lever Brothers. Another major issue concerning the treatment of animals is whether or not it is humane to use animals in the entertainment industry. The definition of the word humane is “characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy of other beings, especially for the suffering or undistressed. ”(Webster Dictionary) The entertainment industry includes television, radio, movies, and theatrics. Proponents argue that the use of animals for entertainment purposes is perfectly valid.

The owners and trainers will argue that all of the animals used are not harmed and are treated quite well. They say that the animals enjoy working and they enjoy their homes and are well cared for. However, the complete opposite is true. “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that animals do not enjoy being electrified, kept in tiny spaces and burned. Amazingly enough, these practices are commonplace in the entertainment industry. Wild animals are kept in unnatural environments and usually fear and pain are their primary motive to perform. (Kiley p. 15)

Famous animal stars such as in “Free Willy”, “Babe”, and “Flipper” seem to have a good life in which no one mistreats them, but in reality Willy was held in captivity for seven years in tanks an average of three times his body size until he was finally released into the wild once the movie production was completed. That is hardly a natural or enjoyable environment for a mammal. Babe, the pig, was confined to a small cage. He was often beaten into submission and was finally rewarded by being sent to a nice house owned by his trainer.

Flipper was also kept in a small tank and he died in captivity. In all fields of animal related work ,the animals suffer, “Animals do not escape abuse even when they are used for entertainment. Circus animals suffer the most from the harsh conditions during training, transporting, and captivity. Meanwhile, animals used for television and films are also maltreated during filming. ” (Derly p. 5) There are many different types of abuse animal actors must endure when they are voted into being actors. When an animal is captured in the wild usually tranquilizer darts are used which induce nausea.

Once an animal is captured the hardships it endures is onnected with the field of entertainment it works in. For example,”horses are fitted with painful bucking straps in rodeos, and the front paws of circus bears are burned to make the animals stand on their hind legs. Elephants are often beaten until they follow their trainers’ instructions. ” (Kiley p. 15) Elephants are possibly the most abused animal in the entertainment industry. Animal rights activists are trying to improve the living conditions of circus elephants and to “stop the practice of making them do humiliating tricks.

Inhumane treatment has led any circus elephants to become aggressive often causing death or injury to people. ” (Derly p. 10) Even though America’s entertainment industry is the greatest in the world, we have always been willing to do anything in order to achieve this. Animal torture is not entertainment, it is sick. Americans must not allow themselves to be entertained by such gruesome atrocities. However, the average American is totally unaware of the abusive treatment that entertainment industry animals go through. It will take a great deal of education to bring this problem to the attention of the American public.

Americans as a society should be vegan. We have discussed whether or not veganism is healthier than the average way of life, whether or not animal testing should be banned, and finally, whether or not it is humane to use animals in the entertainment industry. Many people “view veganism as simply a restrictive diet, a list of products and ingredients to avoid. Actually, it is part of an affirmative, compassionate philosophy of life. Veganism is the embodiment of ahimsa — non-violence towards and respect for all sentient beings. ” (Braunstein p. 30) Mankind can do something about animal cruelty.

First everyone must become vegan in order to save the lives of countless animals. When meat and dairy products are consumed, the industry sees that they must kill more and more animals. If nobody ate these products, no animals would have to die for the sake of being consumed. Many of the products of today’s market are tested on animals, and we must put a stop to this. When in a supermarket, buy products that bear the label “cruelty-free” and boycott all of the companies which use animal testing. A boycott is when a group of people refuse to buy a product or service for a particular reason.

Four of the largest companies which use animal testing are: Procter & Gamble 1-800-543-7270, Colgate – Palmolive 1-800-221-4607, Johnson & Johnson 1-800-526-3967, and Lever Brothers 1-800-451-6679. Another way to put a stop to animal testing is to alert the companies that we are partaking in the worldwide boycott. Animals in captivity need to be released into the wild where they can live their lives free from abuse. As consumers, we have power: “a circus will not come to town if no one will attend the show.

Choose to attend entertainment events which are not dependent on animal fear and distress. Kiley p. 16) Founded by veterinarian Dr. Elliot Katz, In Defense of Animals(IDA) is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to ending the exploitation and abuse of animals by defending their rights, welfare, and habitat. Through protests, boycotts, lobbying efforts, lawsuits and civil disobedience, IDA promotes justice and compassion for all creatures. Many people have joined the IDA in hopes of making their friends and communities more aware of animal abuse in every day life. Many people our age are overwhelmed by problems the world faces and don’t feel that we have the power to affect real change.

Fortunately, there are things we can do to make a significant and lasting difference. By adopting a compassionate lifestyle, we can directly help animals and the ecological state of the earth: The most powerful tool we have in working for a better world is our positive example. If you do not think we are making a difference, just compare the world currently to that of only twenty years ago. Vegans used to be extremely rare, but today almost everyone knows at least one vegan. Society is becoming more vegan friendly all the time. (Braustein p. 50)

The issue of bio-ethics

The issue of bio-ethics presents a myriad of new dilemmas; all of which have arisen in the recent past, and must be addressed in the near future. The majority of these questions stem from the introduction of new, genetically-engineered organisms. These organisms, or at least many of them, are created in laboratories, by gene splicing, swapping, etc. and essentially, these scientists are playing god, creating biological entities as they want them.

This is the main source of the controversy. In more developed countries where genetically engineered disputes may ensue, the trend is total protection through patents and other regulatory and monitoring agencies. These problems come about from identification of the new bio-engineered organisms, and this approach allows the industries and entrepreneurs to recover the enormous costs involved in the research and development of genetic engineering.

It promotes the development of products to benefit society, and it allows access for a larger genetic bank for analyses, experimentation, and investigation. There is a second side to this coin-it means that the researchers can assert an excessive price to their product’ while eliminating any competition for a given period of time. It allows for copies of living things to be made easily and inexpensively.

This happens outside the United States, where strict regulations are not in continuity with those pirating compact discs in Japan, bottling Coca Cola in India, etc. No countries spend any monetary amount comparable to the over 300 million dollars to run the patent and trademark office, as the U. S. does. Another observation can be made that because of the time involved and the cost that the free flow of information is inhibited between researchers. These arguments all take place under the umbrella that “Life forces can be controlled by ownership.

Many countries take the view that these genetic products are not intellectual property, and as such, not subject to the conventional patent laws. These properties should not be protected and belong to society as much as any organism which has naturally evolved through normal processes. GATT (General Agreement on Trade and Tariff) has attempted to address this issue through a larger commercial / trade package; however, this is a position in which very little agreement among parties is found.

In this case, the outcome will most likely be the elimination of the issue in favor of reaching a trade agreement which has acceptability throughout the economic community. No matter which aspect of the bio-ethical issue is being analyzed, the controversy continues throughout the field. The numbers of these problems mounts exponentially as science evolves; however, it is not soon that we will see the resolution of but a very small percentage of these problems regardless of the constantly augmenting quantities of them.

Genetic Engineering In Food Production

Over the past couple of decades much debate has been going on about the use of advanced technology in the field of biology. Ever since the first gene was cloned in 1973, genetic engineers have been pursuing at break-neck speed the “unlimited possibilities” promised by biotechnology (Davidson 1993). Their excitement, which has generated billions of investment dollars for the industry, is understandable. Bioengineering allows scientists to identify specific gene sequences responsible for particular characteristics and then to transfer the genes — and the specific trait — into entirely different species.

One of the more current and controversial issue in the field of biotechnology is the use of bioengineering in food production. Scientists are experimenting with many different plants, but the genetic engineering of the tomato, dubbed “Flavr Savr” has been the most highly publicized project by far. The new tomato is supposed to boast more “flavor” and be tastier due to its longer staying time on the vine, thereby giving it more time to accumulate sweetness; yet, it will not rot or spoil because of its new genetic makeup. (Davidson 1993).

With this advanced technology scientists argue that it could offer the reatest hope in the aid to stop hunger in Third World countries. This new technology could be used to make bulk levels of food production more efficient and less costly. However, despite all of its advantages in creating better crops, many people are very skeptical about its safetiness and possible long-term health effects. Moreover, the social issue lies deep in the realm of ethical and moral concerns. Do people really want to eat meat that is leaner and tastier but contains genes from humans?

Or, would individuals (like vegetarians) be able to eat certain vegetables that may contain genes from animals? Personally, I would not support the use of genetic engineering in food production based on moral and ethical reasons: I do not think that scientists should be able to use their knowledge and social prestige in society to be able to play the role of “God” in creating new or better living things even if their justification is for the purpose of serving mankind. Although we still have much to learn about genes, recently developed techniques have already given rise to a new technology of molecular genetics.

Genetic engineering, also known as “gene splicing/manipulation” and “recombinant DNA echnology” is a set of techniques for reconstructing, or deliberately manipulating, the genetic material of an organism. Operating at the molecular level, this process involves the addition, deletion, or reorganization of pieces of an organism’s DNA (known as genes) in order to alter that organism’s protein production (Arms et al. 1994). The use and applications of genetic engineering range from medical and pharmaceutical to industrial crops and food products. Its applications, today or in the future, include… creating improved strains of crops and farm animals (Arms et al. 994). ”

All of these applications rely on the ability to transplant genes into a cell’s makeup, or genome. The new gene may come from another organism, of the same species, or it may contain DNA produced in the laboratory. One example, the new “Flavr Savr” tomato, developed by Calgene, a biotechnology company based in Davis, California, was subjected to years of scrutiny before the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) agreed that it was safe to eat.

They found, copied, and rebuilt a gene that lets these tomatoes stay on the vine without softening and spoiling. That means that the fruit can develop more of the sugars and acids that make a home-grown tomato taste so sweet and rich. Conventional tomatoes sold in the stores are often hard and flavorless because they are picked while green and firm enough to transport, then ‘ripened’ by spraying with ethylene (Wood 1995). This turns the tomato red but does nothing to develop a riper flavor. Ethylene, a colorless, odorless gas that once kicks in, so do all the problems of perishability (Wood 1995).

Since tomatoes have a “softening” gene, it produces RNA (Ribonucleic Acid) to help manufacture a protein that causes rotting. To stop the tomatoes going soft too soon, the researchers devised a way to block production of the enzyme polygalacturonase, which breaks down cell walls and eventually causes the fruit to rot (Miller 1994). The Calgene scientists inserted a mirror image of the softening gene that produces a reverse copy of the RNA. This reverse RNA blocks the action of the regular RNA and helps to preserve the fruit.

All in all, Calgene seems to have produced a good but hardly outstanding tomato using “antisense” technology, given all the propaganda and advertisements. A couple of the reasons for why the tomato failed ere because: (a) the manipulation of the ripening gene had unintended consequences (soft skin, weird taste, compositional changes); and (b) the high price — they tried selling it at first for $2. 99 a pound (as expensive as organic tomatoes), then later dropped the price to $2. 49, then $1. 99, then . 99. Furthermore, the general public does not seem persuaded or have caught up with this “trend” yet.

For one, people are greatly concerned about the safety of the product since the FDA does not insist that genetically engineered foods carry a special label, even though the FDA assured consumers that they can e “confident” in knowing that “foods produced by genetic engineering are as safe as food in our grocery stores today,” stated FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler, MD (Miller 1994). However, critics have cited a case in which at least 31 people died and 1500 contracted a fatal blood disease after ingesting a genetically engineered batch of L-trytophan, a dietary supplement (Davidson 1993).

Without proper labeling it will be impossible for consumers to exercise their right to choose what kind of foods they eat. Another issue among consumers and environmental activist groups is that of moral and thical concerns. Many people feel that scientists might have gone too far in terms of experimentation. We have now come to the end of the familiar pathway of leaving everything to the creation of “Mother Nature. ” With the rise of advanced technology in genetics, scientists now possess the ability to manipulate genes, and redirect the course of evolution.

They can reassemble old genes and devise new ones. They can plan, and with computer simulation, anticipate the future forms and paths of life. Hence, the old ways of evolution will be dwarfed by the role of purposeful human intelligence. However, just as nature stumbled upon life billions of years ago and began the process of evolution, so too would the new creators of life find that living organisms all have a destiny of their own. To evaluate the validity of the “benefits” of this technology, we need to answer three simple questions: Is it safe, is it wise, is it moral? Sinsheimer 1987).

To answer the first question about whether it is safe, if the technological developments are kept open to public knowledge and scrutiny, I think in the short term it could be. This way the general public can monitor the hazards of any new product ntroduced into the biosphere, and can probably cope with any immediate problems or consequences. In answering the second question of whether it is wise, I would say that it is not. Through decades of research, scientists have learned of the different pathogens that prey on humans, animals, and major crops.

But I believe that their knowledge is still very limited in trying to understand what led to these organisms’ existence and modes of adaptation. Thus scientists cannot really predict whether all their new “discoveries” and creations might somehow lead to a new and unexpected group of harmful species since potential rganisms that could be converted by one or more mutations be transformed from harmless bugs to serious risks. Finally, to answer the question of the advantages of genetic engineering in terms of morality and ethics, I can only say that the more we create, the more problems we will have in the long run in trying to solve them.

Life has evolved on this planet into a delicately balanced and fragile network of self-sustaining interactions and equilibrium (Sinsheimer 1987). If we try to change or replace the creatures and vegetation of this earth with human-designed forms to conform to human will, I believe we will forget our rigins and inadvertently collapse the ecological system in which we were found. Moreover, do we really want to assume the full responsibility for the structure and make-up of our world?

I think that we seriously need to intervene between the scientists and engineers to consider a solution that will help slow down all of these experiments so that we could step back and look at what we are doing. If not, I think that these practicing scientists and researchers should be more broadly educated in our humanistic values and traditions. They need to understand the implications of what they are doing in order to be able to alance the concerns of the natural environment and that of society’s humanistic needs; to bear in mind that technology exists only to serve and not create.

Human beings, are of course, sprung from the same DNA and built of the same molecules as all other livings things. But if we begin to regard ourselves as just another group of subjects to test our experiments on by altering or tampering with the foods we eat, just like another crop to be engineered or another breed to be perfected, we will surely lose our awe of humanity and undermine all sense of human dignity.

The Brief History of French Cuisine

French cuisine has been famous for centuries. It has been the international standard of taste, excellence and tradition. Even today, should there be a show on television of a book where a man takes a woman out on an incredible date, the are usually going to Chez Pierres or Chez Francoise or some other French clich for a restaurant name. But aside from its magnificent taste, French cuisine is also the symbol for richness, extravagance and decadence. And it is not surprising to find out that those traditions came from the forefathers of self indulgence themselves, the Romans. Before France was France, it was Gaul, a Roman province.

In great many respects Gaul benefited immensely from the civilization that the Romans brought with them from the first century BC on. Not only did the Romans organize the administrative part of governing this land and imposed, with time, a much needed written law, but Roman soldiers, merchants, and other citizens that were far from familiar surroundings, naturally longed to retain the customs which they were used to in the Eternal City. And of these traditions the refined pleasures of the table were undoubtedly what represented to the displaced citizens, the essence of being Roman.

Roman food habits continued to live in Gaul, at least to the extent that the usual foodstuffs were available or could be obtained, during the five centuries that the Empire lasted. In the Area of Roman cookery one name stands out as representative of custom and tradition in the most glorious age of the Empire. M. Gavius Apicius (c. 25 BC 35 AD) was a notorious gourmet whose self inflicted death was induced by his realization that his wealth had been so squandered as to have declined to a level at which he was unable to keep up his lifestyle.

Apicius was the author of De re coquinaria, the first complete compilation of roman recipes, 450 to be exact, 138 of which the author was responsible for himself. The book outlasted its Empire, was copied by monks through out the Middle Ages and was first printed in 1498. Another name, which stands out, is not as famous but in no way less influential. It is the Letter of Anthimus to Theodoric. This letter, written about 520A. D. , embodies medical and culinary advice about foods offered by a Greek physician to and Ostragoth ruler. It is a practical dietetic, often resembling an informal cookery manual.

This letter embodies two very important aspects of medieval cookery. Firstly, the Frankish tribes which broke across the frontiers of the Roman Empire looked to Roman usage for the standards they would adopt in their own social practice. And secondly, the best advice that could be given about food in this period was given by a physician and founded on medical concepts. Copies of this letter continued to be made into the twelfth century. The Franks themselves, for whom the advice was written, ultimately established themselves in the land to which they gave their name, France.

In matters of food the French continued to respect the doctrines of medical science all the way to the end of the middle ages. This in no way denied them the decadence, which the social class rift of the Middle Ages brought with it. The cooking was not so much about taste as about the preservation of the product. Spices are critical and of great value. Not so much to cover the taste of spoiled meat as the popular wisdom has it, but more to counteract all the salt and the bland taste of shoe-leather quality meat boiled in the pot all day.

Medieval people did not value “taste” in quite the same way that we do – food was appreciated more for its appearance, its symbolic value, or its rarity. When the great noble feasts are described, a great deal of narrative is spent on the clever inventions constructed to look like castles or unicorns, boars covered in gold leaf, and peacocks dressed in their own feathers, but nothing at all on how the food tasted. The sign of a great cook was the ability to make something look like something else: fish that looks like venison or vice versa.

Those silly little fruit-shaped marzipans that are consumed at Christmas are a vestige of this tradition. However, this was an age of transition, as it was for so many arts. These times were beginning to see the development of what we consider a modern sensibility about cuisine — food valued for itself and its taste, where spices and cooking methods are used to bring out its intrinsic qualities. These new tendencies had appeared earlier in Italy, where so many of the fine arts of the Renaissance were born. The influence of Italian-born Catherine de Medici brought about the development of the culinary arts in France.

Arriving in 1533, she had her staff introduce delicacies previously unknown to the French. Over the next couple of centuries, the royal families employed chefs who developed and prepared the finest cuisine, and dining became an art form. How much impact this had on the everyday cook is hard to say. One thing she did bring over that not only influenced the cooks, but still in considered important today is the fork. Table utensils had been used only as tools of extreme measure in the Middle Ages now a proper table etiquette was beginning do develop.

And so was what we today know as Haute Cuisine, The rich yet subtle taste which we associate with French cooking. Haute cuisine enjoys the reputation of being considered the finest cuisine in the world. Literally meaning high cooking or high-class cooking, the rich sauces, fine ingredients and exquisite taste of haute cuisine typifies classic French cooking. Through the efforts of the great French chefs, haute cuisine first came to the attention of the rest of the world at the time of the French Revolution.

Before 1789, chefs were employed by the richest families to prepare food similar to what was being served at court. These chefs provided the training ground for the elaborate recipes that formed the basis of haute cuisine. The style at the time was elegant food served in many courses, often with rich sauces to accompany the many meats on the menu. Although the food was unfamiliar to common citizens and beyond their reach, it soon emerged to popular consumption after the revolution. The fall of the aristocracy meant the great chefs were out of work, and resulted in the opening of restaurants.

Before the revolution, there were at least 100 restaurants in Paris, which increased to over 500 after the social changes. Customers who had never tasted a truffle now were able to visit the emerging restaurants to sample new delicacies, such as tripe cervelle de conut and foie gras. Restaurants became temples of haute cuisine. Chefs depended on the recipes created by the masters, such as Marie-Antoine Carme (1784-1833) and his successors: Duglr, Urbain, Dubois and Escoffier. Sauces are synonymous with haute cuisine, and Carme was responsible for classifying them into four families, each headed by a basic sauce.

In 1902, Escoffier listed in his book, Guide Culinaire, more than 200 different sauces not including those used in desserts. He described haute cuisine being directly related to its sauces. The most important French cookbook however, was Francois Pierre de la Varenne’s Le Cuisinier Francois, which signals the end of the anarchy of the medieval age and Renaissance fantasy, and methodically organizes cooking. It starts with bouillon or stock, the base ingredient for sauces, etc. The goal was a harmonious blend of ingredients so that not one predominates.

The cookbook continued to be reprinted in France until 1815. It went through an estimated 250 editions with over 250,000 copies published. This alerted publishers to the financial possibilities of cookbooks. La Varenne worked for the marquis d’Uxelles. He founded the classical French cooking school. There is, however, a name that stands out in all of French culinary history as probably the most important and the most revolutionary. Georges-Auguste Escoffier was born in the Provence region of France in October 1846.

When he turned 13, his father took him to Nice where he apprenticed at a restaurant owned by his uncle, thus beginning the illustrious career that he enjoyed for the next 62 years. In 1870, when the Franco-Prussian War began, Escoffier was called to duty in the army where he served as Chef de Cuisine. It was during this period that he came to consider the need for tinned foods and was thus the first chef to undertake in-depth study of techniques for canning and preserving meats and vegetables. After returning to civilian life, Escoffier resumed his career in several Parisian restaurants where he steadily moved up the ladder of success.

It was during his years in Monte Carlo that Escoffier met Cesar Ritz. The pairing of Escoffier and Ritz brought about significant changes in hotel industry development throughout the ensuing years, raising the standards of hospitality to considerable heights. Both went to the Savoy Hotel in London where Escoffier served as Head of Restaurant Services. Later, Ritz opened several of his own hotels, such as the Hotel Ritz in Paris and the Carlton in London, where Escoffier was the key player in the restaurant end of the establishments.

Three of Escoffier’s most noted career achievements are revolutionizing and modernizing the menu, the art of cooking and the organization of the professional kitchen. Escoffier simplified the menu as it had been, writing the dishes down in the order in which they would be served (Service la Russe). He also developed the first la Carte menu. He simplified the art of cooking by getting rid of ostentatious food displays and elaborate garnishes and by reducing the number of courses served. He also emphasized the use of seasonal foods and lighter sauces.

Escoffier also simplified professional kitchen organization, as he integrated it into a single unit from its previously individualized sections that operated autonomously and often created great wasted and duplication of labor. Throughout his career, Escoffier wrote a number of books, many of which continue to be considered important today. Some of his best-known works include Le Guide Culinaire (1903), Le Livre des Menus (1912) and Ma Cuisine (1934). The French government recognized Escoffier in 1920 by making him a Chevalier of the Legion d’ Honneur, and later an Officer in 1928.

The honors due Escoffier can be summed up by a quote from Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II when he told Escoffier, I am the Emperor of Germany, but you are the emperor of chefs. The cult of food was at its height at this time. The turn of the century was a time of excess – something the Victorians were known for embracing. In an era of wealth, idealism and luxury, those who had the resources wanted only the best of everything in food and wine. Menus for the wealthy were full and lush, and combined the haute cuisine of the time with fine regional wines that accompanied every course.

The preferred method of dining was service la Russe, where each dish was prepared and served on individual plates and placed before the diner. The meal was composed of a series of courses served in succession. The average menu would begin with an hor doeuvre, followed by a soup, main course, salad, cheese, and dessert. The amount of food depended on how elaborate the dinner. Large meals might consist of as many as ten courses, spread out over several hours. Oysters were a favorite hor doeuvre to start a meal. The second course might include two soups, a clear consomm and a cream soup.

Fish was featured in the third course, often with a rich sauce. The next course, or two if it was a grand meal, would include several meat selections. Chicken, beef, lamb, and roast duckling were accompanied with several vegetable dishes. Creamed carrots, boiled new potatoes, rice, and green peas as well as any seasonal vegetable available regionally would be served. The meat dishes were often dressed with sauces. Salads then followed the meat and vegetable course. The French custom was to serve the douceur, or sweet, after the cheese course. Common choices were bombes, mousses, or iced parfaits.

Of course, one sweet would never do in the era of indulgence. Several choices were standard for a large meal. The French have always believed that there is an appropriate beverage for every food. Wine has always been an important beverage, always drunk with the meal, but rarely on its own. An aperitif, or light alcoholic beverage preceded the meal. A different wine accompanied each succeeding course, and port or cognac followed the meal to aid digestion. On the other side of the dining experience, the bourgeois menu was simpler and more directly in touch with foods available regionally.

Seafood was often the heart of a meal, and fresh vegetables combined with simple bread and wine completed it. In place of rich meats, which might not be available, local sausages, kidney, brain or tripe served as a substitute. But in reality, though the rich class was becoming larger with time, the gap between classes was still huge and so it was respectively in the ability to obtain fine foods. It took a world war at the beginning of the twentieth century to halt the gross inequality of wealth at the table, and to bring about a more even distribution of the nation’s produce.

In fact, the general expectation of good eating is a relatively new experience for the French. At the time the Bastille was stormed in 1789, at least 80% of the French population were subsistence farmers, with bread and cereals as the basis of their diet, essentially unchanged since the time of the ancient Gauls nearly two millennia before. In the mid-nineteenth century, following the demise of the aristocracy, food was a conspicuous symbol of social position, swiftly adopted by a new ruling class of bourgeoisie, who recreated the sumptuous meals of the very aristocracy they had once criticized.

At the same time, two-thirds of Parisians were either starving or ill fed, five times more likely to be nourished from vegetable proteins than from any meats or dairy products. The golden age of haute cuisine benefited only those at the very top of the social ladder. The advent of improved transportation, especially by train, brought culinary revolution to the regions, and slowly the spreading affluence could put a chicken on every peasant’s table.

Eventually, tourism fanned the flames of change in France’s commercial kitchens, as chefs were obliged to create dishes appealing to an ever-widening audience of British, Japanese, Middle Easterners, and Americans, as well as French travelers hungering for new experiences. In some instances the reasons for change in regional products were a pragmatic reaction to a decline in other industries (such a silk) or to the economic disaster brought about by the Phylloxera pest, which wiped out most of France’s grape vines at the turn of the century.

French cooking has always been known as traditional. What is perhaps less widely recognized is that France’s reputation for fine food is not so much based on long-held traditions but on constant change. What was probably the greatest change in French cooking history was the advent of nouvelle cuisine and the newly modern fusion cooking. Becoming popular in the 1970’s, Nouvelle Cuisine took traditional French cooking and gave it a fresh look. Its advent was a reaction to the typically rich and time-consuming recipes of haute cuisine.

Emphasizing lighter tastes and healthier fare, Nouvelle Cuisine introduced fruit-based and reduction sauces in its recipes as alternatives to the heavier cream and flour based sauces that were found in many dishes. Fresh ingredients, prepared in ways that optimized their natural aromas and flavors, were essential to Nouvelle Cuisine dishes. This style of “freeform” cooking strayed from the structured system of rules previously in place in French culinary philosophy.

Nouvelle Cuisine’s presentation, however, transformed cooking to an art and the chef to the status of artist, with the bite-sized portions of food being carefully and artistically arranged on large plates. Essentially taking us back to the middle ages where the chef was chosen for his presentation of the food. Michel Gurard, Jean and Pierre Troisgros and Alain Chapel all worked to pioneer Nouvelle Cuisine as a way of simplifying French cooking. It is Paul Bocuses name, however, that is most often associated with the trend’s upsurge on the French culinary horizon in the late 1960’s and early 70’s.

While the height of Nouvelle Cuisine’s popularity was enjoyed during the 1970’s and 80’s, the effects of this trend can be seen to this day with a strong emphasis on eating healthier dishes with lighter and fresher ingredients. Today with influence from Asia, India and Latin America the concept of fusion cooking is very popular mixing the traditional ingredients with more exotic ones. But the love of traditional haute cuisine has in no way been compromised. It is still the symbol of tradition refinement taste and status.

Eating Disorders Essay

Anorexia Nervosa: A condition characterized by intense fear of gaining weight or becoming obese, as well as a distorted body image, leading to an excessive weight loss from restricting food intake and excessive exercise. Bulimia Nervosa: An eating disorder in which persistent over concern with the body weight and shape leads to repeat episodes of bingeing (consuming large amounts of food in a short time) associated with induced vomiting. These are the clinical definitions for eating disorders, the definitions that most people think of when they hear one of the two names.

Unfortunately, that’s as far as their thoughts go. Almost no one thinks about what causes them, how the disorders are treated, or, most importantly, what it’s like to have one. My report is meant to cover all aspects of eating disorders… and that’s what it’s going to do. Although, I’m going to offer a more in-depth look into the biological, psychological and sociological aspects of these diseases. Needless to say, the physical effects of an eating disorder are nothing to sneeze at… but that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Imagine a thirteen-year-old girl who weighs 60 pounds because she is starving herself. Every time she looks in the mirror, she sees herself as fat. Picture her parents watching their daughter literally disintegrating into thin air. This is the life of a family dealing with an eating disorder. Eating disorders are a major problem with the young people of today’s society. While anorexia and bulimia are socio-logical problems plaguing the world’s youth, there are also other eating disorders.

This “fat phobia”, or fear of being over-weight, disturbs people to the point where they are in a way, committing suicide. Eating disorders have been termed the disease of the 1980’s. Even though it has been found that 95% of people who suffer anorexia or bulimia are woman, mostly from white, relatively affluent families, the pre-occupation and obsession with food are not limited to women. Although some men also deal with eating disorders; most research has been done on women.

In 1985, 95% of women felt they were overweight, while only 25% were actually considered medically overweight. By the age of thirteen approximately 53% of females are unhappy with their bodies, and by the age of eighteen approximately 78% are unhappy. Our culture could be seen as a narcissist society. Narcissism is a preoccupation with one’s self, a concern with how one appears to others, and with living up to an image. It seems that appearance is an important factor in our everyday life. While all women want to look as perfect as “Barbie”, for some it just isn’t possible.

For women, being slender is almost synonymous with being successful. It is also thought that 40% of the adult U. S. population is significantly overweight. Some experts feel that eating disorders are reaching epidemic proportions and estimate the national rate to be as high as 12% of women. In fact, according to the Phoenix Gazette on November 7, 1985, “Almost one out f three women diet once a month, and one in six considers herself a perpetual dieter”. It is considered that 54-86% of college women binge eats.

They do this and still research shows that most college aged women: 1) widely accept the idea that “guys like thin girls”, 2) think being thin is crucial to physical attractiveness, and 3) believe that they are not as thin as men would like them to be. While in fact most college women want to be thinner then most college men say women should be. In the United States alone, our society spends $33 billion on the diet industry, $20 billion on cosmetics, and $300 billion on plastic surgery. This just proves the fetish Americans have with their looks.

Unfortunately being thin does play a role in our society. It is a fact that attractive defendants seem to receive more positive courtroom judgments and a company is more likely to hire a tall thin man then a short pudgy man. These factors are just increasing the chance of eating disorders throughout society. The most common eating disorder being experienced in today’s youth is anorexia nervosa. Anorexia is usually defined as: willful starvation-deliberate and obsessive starvation in the pursuit of thinness. This “willful starvation” is seen as the only way to lose weight.

Anorexics who are close to their deaths will show you the spots on their body where they feel they need to loseweight. An estimated 10- 20% of anorexics will eventually die from complications related to the disorder. Some signs and symptoms of anorexia are: noticeable weight loss, becoming withdrawn, excessive exercise, fatigue, always being cold, muscle weakness, excuses for not eating, guilt or shame about eating, mood swings, irregular menstruation, evidence of vomiting, laxative abuse, or diet pills, and the frequent checking of body weight on a scale.

Some theorists believe that these disorders may be caused by the mass media’s presentation of the ideal body. But according to the ABNFV or the Anorexia and Bulimia Nervosa Foundation of Victoria it is over simplification to blame the mass media’s presentation of the ‘ideal’ shape; though western society’s increased emphasis on the slim, fit body places pressure on many people. So there is no conclusive evidence on exactly what causes anorexia. Another common eating disorder seen in society is bulimia.

Bulimia involves binge eating accompanied by induced vomiting to inhibit weight gain. The average women in the United States between the ages of 19 and 39 periodically go on food binges where they eat extremely high quantities of high calorie foods in a short space of time. Bingeing varies for all people, for one person a binge may range from 1000 to 10000 calories, for another, one cookie could be considered a binge. Bulimics are usually people that do not feel secure about their own self worth, and usually strive for the approval of others.

Food becomes the only source of comfort for a bulimic, and usually serves as a function for either blocking in or letting out feelings. Unlike anorexics, bulimics do realize they have a problem and are more likely to seek help. The likely hood of a bulimic seeking help decreases the percentage of people who die from this disorder. A third eating disorder experienced in our society is body dimorphic disorder. This is defined as “imagined ugliness”, or where the person sees herself/himself as ugly no matter what.

This disorder is much harder to recognize then anorexia or bulimia. Clues to this disorder are slight and often subtle but they indicate an estrangement from the body and a distorted self-image that reflects an underlying mental illness. Some people feel this is a new disorder because they haven’t heard about it as much, but the truth is that in 1891 an Italian physician named Morselli discovered it, the root word dysmorfia literally means ugliness, so this disorder is actually the fear of one’s own ugliness.

This pre-occupation with ones looks tends to be persistent and eventually leads to marked social dysfunctional and, occasionally, behavioral extremes. This disorder can liter-ally drive people crazy. The number of eating disorders in athletes is on the rise, especially in sports like gymnastics, figure skating, dancing, and swimming. According to a 1992 American College of Sports Medicine study, eating disorders affected 62% of females in sports like figure skating and gymnastics.

Famous gymnasts such as Kathy Johnson, Nadia Commence, and Kathy Rigby, a 1972 Olympian who fought eating disorders for 12 years, have come forward and admitted to fighting eating disorders. It got so bad for Rigby that she went into cardiac arrest twice because of it. Many female athletes fall victim to eating disorders in a desperate attempt to be thin in order to please coaches and judges. Many coaches are guilty of pressuring these athletes to be thin by criticizing them or making reference to their weight.

Those comments could cause an athlete to resort to dangerous methods of weight control and can do serious emotional damage to the athlete. For example, in 1988, at a meet in Budapest, a US judge told Christy Henrich, one of the world’s top gymnasts that she had to lose weight if she hoped to make the Olympic Squad. Christy resorted to anorexia and bulimia as a way to control her weight and her eating disorders eventually took her life. On July 26, 1994, at the age of 22, Christy Henrich died of multiple organ failure. It had gotten so bad for her that at one point she weighed as little as 47 pounds.

Athletes with eating disorders can be at a higher isk for medical complications such as electrolyte imbalances and cardiac arrhythmia. Coaches need to educate them-selves on the dangers and the signs that an athlete may be suffering from an eating disorder, and not only coaches, but athletes, need to remember no gold medal is worth dying for. There are many ways of helping someone with an eating disorder. If you suspect that your child or anyone you know has an eating disorder you should never: tell them their crazy, blame them, gossip about them, follow them around to check their eating or purging behavior.

You should also never ignore them, reject them, and tell them to quit the ridiculous behavior, or feel you need to solve their problems. Some things you should do are to listen with understanding, appreciate their openness and the risk they took to tell you, support them and be available. Two of the most important things you should do are to always give her hope, and continuously, but gently suggest counseling. Through medical treatment, there are also many ways to help a person with an eating disorder. One method is by psychological counseling.

A problem with treating anorexia is getting the victim to first admit that they have a problem, and to not deny their illness any longer. Through counseling, the root of the victims’ problem is found. They are helped to find and recognize their distorted view of their body. Also any form of abuse they may have been through is brought up and often family members are in counseling sessions to help the victim. It has been found that group-counseling sessions have been found to be useful because a common perception of the problem is found. For the physical aspect of anorexia, weight gain is the first step to recovery.

Rice – The Main Food

Rice is the main food for about one-third to one-half of the world’s population. A mature rice plant is usually two to six feet tall. In the beginning, one shoot appears. It is followed by one, two, or more offshoots developing. There are at least five or six hollow joints for each stalk, and a leaf for each joint. The leaf of the rice plant is long, pointed, flat, and stiff. The highest join of the rice plant is called the panicle. The rice grains develop from the panicles. (Jodon, 300) Rice is classified in the grass family Gramineae. Its genus is Oryza and species O. sativa. It is commonly cultivated for food in Asia.

Some varieties of rice include red rice, glutinous rice, and wild rice. (Jodon, 303) The kernel within the grain contains most of the vitamins and minerals (298). The kernel contains thiamine, niacin, and riboflavin (299). Rice has many enemies that destroy a majority of the rice crops. The larvae of moth, stem borers, live in the stems of the rice plants. Some insects suck the plant juices or chew the leaves. Birds, such as bobolink, Java sparrow, or paddybird, would eat the seeds or grains. Disease causing factors such as fungi, roundworms, viruses, and bacteria also destroy the rice plants.

Blast disease is caused by fungi which causes the panicles containing the grains to break. (Jodon, 300) There are various types of rice grown all over the world. A majority of rice grown is cultivated rice. When rice is grown with water standing on the fields, it is called lowland, wet, or irrigated rice. Rice plants grown in certain parts of Asia, South America, and Africa are called upland, hill, or dry rice because they are raised on elevated lands that cannot be flooded, but with plentiful rainfall. Wild rice is grown along lake shores of Canada and the Great Lakes. It is usually eaten by people in India.

Scented rice is the most expensive because is has long grains and tastes like popcorn when cooked. Glutinous rice is waxy rice consumed by Asians. It is cooked to a sticky paste and is used for cakes and confections. (Jodon, 299) Rice was thought to have originated in southeast Asia when Alexander the Great invaded India in 326 B. C(Jodon, 303). Further research revealed that rice was cultivated around or at the Yangtze River in China, around 4000 to 11,500 years ago. One archaeologist, Toyama, surveyed data on 125 samples of rice grains, plant remains, husks, and other factors from numerous sites along the length of the Yangtze River.

He reported that the oldest samples. . . are clustered along the middle Yangtze in Hubei and Hunan provinces. Samples from the upper and lower portions of the Yangtze River were found to be younger, around 4,000 to 10,000 years old. This pattern. . . suggests that rice cultivation originated in the middle Yangtze and spread from there. Archaeologists see more than a decade of excavation of the Yangtze River and nearby sites to confirm that the Yangtze River is where rice was first cultivated. (Normille, 309)

The Greeks learned of rice when Alexander the Great invaded India around 326 B. C. Spain was introduced to rice when it was conquered by the Moors during the 700’s A. D. Spain then introduced rice to Italy, around the 1400’s. The Spanish also introduced rice to the West Indies and South America, around the 1600’s. Rice was introduced to the United States when a Madagascar ship docked in the Charleston, South Carolina harbor. The ship captain presented the governor with a sack of seed rice. It was then grown in states south of the Ohio River and east of Mississippi. (Jodon, 303)

Rice is usually grown in lowland fields divided by dirt walls (Jodon, 300) A majority of the rice crops are grown with water standing on the fields (Jodon, 299). On level land, these paddies and dirt walls are built in wavy or straight lines. On hill-like land, they follow the slopes and form paddies that rise like steps. The dirt walls are used to hold in water for the fields. (300) Cultivation of the rice plant requires controlling the water supply and weeding the rice fields. Water must be two to six inches deep for the seeds to germinate properly. After the grains germinate, the water is drained.

The rice plant is then cultivated by hand. (Jodon, 301) Besides steaming the rice for consumption, it is also used for other products. Enriched rice is regular kernels and vitamin and mineral coated kernels mixed together. The Japanese use the fermented rice kernels to make sake, rice wine. Rice is sometimes used in making beer in the United States and Europe. Powdery by-products, bran and polish, are used to feed livestock. Starch from the rice plant is used in laundry starch. The Japanese usually use the rice hulls to prevent breakage of fragile objects during shipping.

Rice hulls also serve as fuel for steam engines. The dried stalks of rice are used to make sandals, hats, raincoats, and thatching roofs. In the Philippines, farmers grow mushrooms on beds of rice straw. (Jodon, 298-99) The purpose of the Super Rice challenge is to create rice plants that are disease resistant, insect resistant, and produces twenty-five percent more food per acre. The International Rice Research Institute has been working on this challenge. It is competing with many various factors that are pushing the International Rice Research Institute to try and complete the challenge as soon as possible.

Factors such as growing population, limited areas for growing rice, and the common farmer’s philosophy of get anything to grow are pushing researchers to complete the project as soon as possible. Also, the new varieties of rice has raised a question of the farmer’s health because of the uses and effects of agricultural chemicals. Since normal rice grown in paddies produces high amounts of methane, the International Rice Research Institute must also find a way to create rice plants with a low methane production. Gurdev Khush believes that the super rice will be ready for farmers to plant them around the end of the century.

Researchers were able to develop a type of rice during the 1960’s. This type of rice, called miracle rice, because of its high yields. Researchers were able to develop it by combining a short variety of rice with a tall variety. This crossbreeding resulting in a rice plant that can withstand wind and rain and have a high production yield. This new breed was thought to have been to reduce the food shortages that depend on rice as a staple food, but because of various conditions in other countries, this rice plant was not very successful.

Blight, caused by bacteria, spreads rapidly through rice fields in water droplets. The rice plant would develop lesions and die in a matter of days. This disease could destroy about half of a rice crop. Through genetic engineering, the author and her colleagues have been able to introduce isolated disease-resistant genes into the rice plants. (Ronald, 100) The gene, called Xa21, was discovered by the International Rice Research Institute, and Ronald attempted to clone Xa21 from the International Rice Research Institute variety. 01)

The Cornell group created a genetic map which showed the location of hundreds of markers on the twelve rice chromosomes. Ronald and her colleagues used this genetic map to locate gene Xa21 by examining over one thousand rice plants to see how often known DNA markers showed up in conjunction with resistance to blight. They used chromosomal swapping and rearranging that goes on during sexual reproduction. The more often they saw resistance in the next generation of rice plants, the closer they were to locating the gene. (102)

Since rice plants are defiant in accepting outside DNA, they used a gun that shoots microscopic particles into intact cells, which was developed by John Sanford of Cornell. After using this procedure to introduce Xa21 into an old, but susceptible, rice plant they exposed the plants to blight. They found that the plants were resistant to the blight. Ronald and her colleagues current goal is to introduce Xa21 into rice varieties that are agriculturally important. (102-03) Current studies showed that rice plants introduced to the cloned Xa21 gene have become blight resistant.

Since farmers prefer to grow plants that have adapted to the various climates and conditions, Ronald stated that the genetically engineered versions will be identical to the original plants except for the addition of the single cloned gene…. Ronald and her colleagues still have to field-test the new varieties for yield, taste, and hardiness to confirm that the original adaptations have remain unchanged. (104) The success of this project has reached into testing the process and the gene on other plants. Scientists hope that Ronald’s process of making the rice plant blight resistant will work on other plants.

They hope that this process will be successful on valuable crops, such as citrus crops. They plan to combine the gene Xa21 and other disease resistance genes to enhance the plant’s resistance to disease. The problem with cloning the Xa21 gene is that it is still vulnerable to other diseases such as grassy-stunt and ragged-stunt viruses. (Ronald, 104) The purpose of Japan’s rice genome project is to fully map the twelve chromosomes of the rice plant. Low funding of this project has hindered the progression of this project.

Since Japan has increased its funding to its genome project, the rice genome division can now complete mapping the twelve chromosomes of the rice plant. (Normille, 1702) Rice is one of the world’s most important crops because a majority of the world depends on this as a staple food. The number of rice plants planted, however, are greater than the number of rice consumed. This is because of various factors that destroy the rice plants before they can be harvested for commercial use. Various factors, such as insects, birds, and disease, destroy the rice crops.

Projects are being conducted to improve the rice plant, but researchers encounter various obstacles. Making the rice plant disease-resistant to blight may be useful and valuable, but they must also find a way to make the rice plant resistant to other diseases and viruses such as ragged- stunt. Since Japan has increased its funds to its genome projects, they have been able to increase the work on mapping the twelve rice chromosomes. Scientists hope that these projects will be finished, and that farmers will be using the enhanced genes on their rice plants by the beginning of the next century.

Fast Food Demand

Analyze the fast food industry from the point of view of perfect competition. Include the concepts of elasticity, utility, costs, and market structure to explain the prices charged by fast food retailers. Firms within the fast food industry fall under the market structure of perfect competition. Market structure is a classification system for the key traits of a market. The characteristics of perfect competition include: large number of buyers and sellers, easy entry to and exit from the market, homogeneous products, and the firm is the price taker.

Many fast food franchises fit all or most of these characteristics. Competition within the industry as well as market supply and demand conditions set the price of products sold. For example, when Wendys introduced its $. 99 value menu, several other companies implemented the same type of changes to their menu. The demand for items on Wendys value menu was so high because they were offering the same products as always, but at a discounted price. This change in market demand basically forced Wendys competition to lower prices of items on their menu, in order to maintain their share of the market.

The previous example illustrates the elasticity of the fast food industry. Supply and demand set the equilibrium price for goods offered by franchises within the industry. Competitors of Wendys must accept the prices established by the consumer demand for the value menu. If consumers didnt respond so positively to Wendys changes, other firms wouldnt have had to adjust prices. On the flip side of this concept, there is no need for franchises to further reduce prices below the current levels. At the current prices, firms may sell as much product as they ant, thereby maximizing profits.

This industry has a very high utility value. Utility is a measure of satisfaction or pleasure that is obtained from consuming a good or service. If consumers feel as if they get a good meal, at a good price, then theyre satisfied. This customer satisfaction coupled with relatively low prices keeps the industry profitable. Another quality of perfect competition that may be overlooked, but is vital to this industry is the ease of entry into the market. Start-up franchises within this market structure can egin operating with relatively low initial investments (compared to other industries).

This is not the case where monopolies are concerned. There are numerous barriers to entry into monopolistic market structures, capital being one of the most prominent barriers. If a new franchise an offer the consumer a quality product at a reduced price, then the chances of success are greatly increased. For example, Chanellos and Little Caesars offer discounted pizza prices, and maintain the same quality as other pizza chains. These companies spend less on advertising and more on the actual product.

Thats very important concept in this industry, because their quality product at this discounted price gives them a niche in the market. Once a company establishes a niche, they become more visible to the consumer, thereby creating more demand, which leads to greater revenue. 2. Analyze sports franchises from the point of view of a monopoly. Sports franchises fall within the market structure of monopolies. Most professional sports teams fit most or all of the characteristics of a monopoly. For each sport, there are a limited number of teams and new entries into the league are few and far between.

Also, there are many barriers to entry into the market, including large initial capital investment, dominance by one or few firms, and other legal issues that must be considered. An investor would initially need cash for payroll of players, payroll for management, advertising, playing facility, and many other miscellaneous costs. The new franchise owner would need to be very wealthy and have the backing of other wealthy individuals just to purchase the franchise. Once a franchise eventually enters the market, they have the ability to set the prices for that particular market.

Monopolies are price makers and the products offered are not sensitive to changes in the market. The demand curve of a monopoly is not elastic, as is such in a perfectly competitive market. The monopolistic demand curve is the same as the curve for the industry since there is only one firm within the industry. This allows the franchise owner to maximize profits by setting the price of tickets and concessions at an amount that creates the most revenue. Consumers will pay the price, if they want to attend a particular sporting event, no matter how outrageous the price.

This price setting is allowable, because unlike perfect competition, there are no substitutes. Cities may have two or three teams of different types of sports (i. e. baseball, hockey, football), but few cities have more than one professional team of the same sport. Sports franchises, although theyre monopolies are not all bad. These teams bring million and millions of dollars in revenue to the city in which theyre located. First of all, jobs are created in the construction of the sports facility. Then there is revenue to the city from taxes, consumer spending at hotels and restaurants, ourist visits and numerous other avenues.

Sports franchises are similar to the fast food industry in the respect that they also have a very high utility value. Fans are pleased when they witness a very competitive, hard fought sporting event, and they are willing to pay to do so. Just look at the price of Super Bowl or NBA finals tickets. Spectators pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars to witness these events year in and year out. As long as the teams are competitive and there are superstar players, consumers will continue to watch and attend events regardless of the price.

Transgenic Rice Plants

For centuries, rice has been one of the most important staple crops for the world and it now currently feeds more than two billion people, mostly living in developing countries. Rice is the major food source of Japan and China and it enjoys a long history of use in both cultures. In 1994, worldwide rice production peaked at 530 million metric tons. Yet, more than 200 million tons of rice are lost each year to biotic stresses such as disease and insect infestation. This extreme loss of crop is estimated to cost at least several billion dollars per year and eavy losses often leave third world countries desperate for their staple food.

Therefore, measures must be taken to decrease the amount of crop loss and increase yields that could be used to feed the populations of the world. One method to increase rice crop yields is the institution of transgenic rice plants that express insect resistance genes. The two major ways to accomplish insect resistance in rice are the introduction of the potato proteinas e inhibitor II gene or the introduction of the Bacillus thuringiensis toxin gene into the plant’s genome.

Other experimental methods of instituting insect resistance include the use of the arcelin gene, the snowdrop lectin/GNA (galanthus nivallis agglutinin) protein, and phloem specific promoters and finally the SBTI gene. The introduction of the potato proteinase inhibitor II gene, or PINII, marks the first time that useful genes were successfully transferred from a dicotyledonus plant to a monocotyledonous plant. Whenever the plant is wounded by insects, the PINII gene produces a protein that interferes with the insect’s digestive processes.

These protein inhibitors can be detrimental to the growth nd development of a wide range of insects that attack rice plants and result in insects eating less of the plant material. Proteinase inhibitors are of particular interest because they are part of the rice plant’s natural defense system against insects. They are also beneficial because they are inactivated by cooking and therefore pose no environmental or health hazards to the human consumption of PINII treated rice. In order to produce fertile transgenic rice plants, plasmid pTW was used, coupled with the pin 2 promoter and the inserted rice actin intron, act 1.

The combination of the pin 2 promoter and ct 1 intron has been shown to produce a high level, wound inducible expression of foreign genes in transgenic plants. This was useful for delivering the protein inhibitor to insects which eat plant material. The selectable marker in this trial was the bacterial phosphinothricin acetyl transferase gene (bar) which was linked to the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S promoter. Next the plasmid pTW was injected into cell cultures of Japonica rice using the BiolisticTM particle delivery system.

The BiolisticTM system proceeds as follows: Immature embryos and embryonic calli of six rice materials were ombarded with tungsten particles coated with DNA of two plasmids containing the appropriate genes. The plant materials showed high frequency of expression of genes when stained with X-Gluc. The number of blue or transgenic units was approximately 1,000. After one week, the transgenic cells were transferred onto selection medium containing hygromycin B. After two weeks, fresh cell cultures could be seen on bombarded tissue. Some cultures were white and some cultures were blue.

Isolated cell cultures were further selected on hygromycin resistance. However, no control plant survived. Then twenty plates of cells were bombarded with the PINII gene, from which over two hundred plants were regenerated and grown in a greenhouse. After their growth, they were tested for PINII gene using DNA blot hybridization and 73% of the plants were found to be transgenic. DNA blot hybridization is the process by which DNA from each sample was digested by a suitable restriction endonuclease, separated on an aragose gel, transferred to a nylon membrane, and then finally hybridized with the 1. kb DNA fragment with pin 2 coding and 3′ regions as the probe.

The results also indicate that he PINII gene was inherited by offspring of the original transgenic line, that the PINII levels were higher among many of the offspring and that when PINII levels rose in wounded leaves, the PINII levels in unwounded leaves also rose. However, the PINII gene is not 100% effective in eliminating insects because it does not produce an insect toxin, just a proteinase inhibitor. Yet, greater insect resistance can be achiev ed by adding genes to produce the Bacillus thuringiensis or BT toxin.

Bacillus thuringiensis is an entomocidal spore-forming soil bacterium that offers a way of controlling stem boring insects. Stem borers such as the pink and striped varieties are difficult to control because the larvae enter the stem of the plant shortly after hatching and continue to develop inside the plant, away from the toxins of sprayed insecticides. Therefore, the stable institution of the BT gene into the rice plant’s genome would provide a method of reaching stem borers with toxins that are expressed in the plant tissues themselves.

Bacillus thuringiensis is comprised of so-called cry genes that encode insect specific endotoxins. Recently some lower varieties of rice, such as Japonica, have been successfully transformed ith cry genes, but the real challenge lies in transforming Indica rice, an elite breeding rice that composes almost 80% of the world’s rice production. In order to transform Indica rice, the synthetic cry IA gene must be used because it is the only cry gene to produce enough of the BT protein. Next, the synthetic cry IA gene under the control of the CaMV 35S promoter is attached to a CaMV cassette for hygromycin selection of transformed tissues.

Following the linkage of the cry IA and the CaMV 35S cassette, the DNA is delivered to the embryonic cells by particle bombardment with a particle inflow gun. More specific transformation includes the following: Immature Indica rice embryos were isolated for ten to sixteen days after pollination from other greenhouse plants and were plated on a solid MS medium containing sucrose (3%) and cefotaxime. After twenty four hours, embryos were transferred to a thin layer of highly osmotic medium containing a higher percentage of sucrose (10%), were incubated, and then were bombarded with plasmid pSBHI and gold particles by the particle inflow gun.

After bombardment, the thin layer of 10% sucrose was placed on the layer of 3% sucrose. This sandwich technique allowed continuous adaptation of the target tissue to the osmotic conditions, which was shown to be optimal for callus induction. After twenty four hours, the 10% sucrose layer was removed and the embryos were cultured on the 3% sucrose layer. After one week, they were transferred to a 3% sucrose medium that was selected for hygromycin B resistance. After a further three to four weeks, regenerated plants were transferred to soil and placed in the greenhouse under appropriate conditions.

The results of this process were eleven transgenic plants out of a total of thirty six. Transgeneicy of the rice plants was confirmed by similar banding patterns in Southern blotting. The presence of the BT protein was also demonstrated in Western blot analysis, where a protein with the expected size of sixty-five kilobases was found in all plants tested. Interestingly enough, the BT protein levels were higher in older plants than in younger plants, possibly questioning the role of inheritance of BT gene. Yet, inheritance was determined by using DNA blot hybridization, which revealed a segregation ratio of 3:1.

This indicates the integration of all copies of transgene at a single locus. To assess the mortality rate among different insects, both petri dish assays and whole plant assays were performed. In petri dish assays, mortality rates were as follows: European corn borer = 85-95% Yellow stem borer = 100% Striped stem borer = 100% Cnaphalocrocis medinalis (leaffolder) = 67% Marasmia patnalis (leaffolder) = 55% In whole plant assays, no surviving insects were found on any BT expressing plants, although insects still survived on the control plants or non expressing BT plants.

In addition to this recent insertion of the BT gene into Indica rice, a similar procedure was conducted on Shuahggei 6, a variety of Indica rice. Transgeneicy of Shuahggei 36 was achieved by taking plasmid P41ORH, which contained the coding region of the BT gene with the marker CaMV 35S-HPI-NOS plus 1. 0 kb of DNA fragment, and inserting it into the pollen tube pathway. More specifically, the plasmid DNA was applied at the cut ends of rice florets from one to four hours after pollination. Next the seeds that were harvested were germinated under hygromycin B resistance.

However only 3% of the plants survived hygromycin resistance. After this, the seedlings from the second generation were again segregated for hygromycin esistance. From these seeds, seventy plant lines were screened for transgeneicy and fifteen displayed the BT protein. These results and the inheritance of the BT gene into offspring were confirmed by Southern blotting. Nevertheless, the question remains whether the BT gene was really integrated into the genome or whether it was expressed only as a plasmid.

The use of the arcelin gene is another experimental method of creating transgenic rice plants. The arcelin gene is a translationally enhanced Bacillus thuringiensis toxin construct that is effective on the rice water weevil. The rice water weevil or RWW is the ajor pest of the Texan rice crop. Previously, the RWW was combated by granular carbofuran, an insecticide that kills the RWW but has deleterious effects on water fowl that live in the crop area. So environmentalists have forced the cessation of the use of granular carbofuran and therefore, new methods have to be developed.

One of the major genes that confer resistance to the RWW is the arcelin gene. Arcelin is a lectin that was originally discovered in the seeds of bean cultivators that showed resistance to the Mexican bean weevil. Next, researchers isolated a genomic clone encoding arcelin from the bean eed and then placed it under regulation of a rice actin promoter. Then the clone with the rice promoter was introduced into rice protoplast s. Transgeneicy and inheritance was then confirmed by genomic DNA blots and immunochemical blots.

In two separate experiments, six transgenic rice plants were subjected to RWW infestation under controlled conditions. The results of the first experiment are that similar numbers of RWW larvae were recovered from each set of six plants, but the size of those from arcelin expressing plants were significantly smaller. In the second experiment, although many normal larvae were recovered rom control plants, only three small larvae came from arcelin expressing plants. This would indicate the benefits of inserting the arcelin gene into rice plants for RWW resistance.

Another experimental method of creating transgenic rice plants that are insect resistant includes the use of snowdrop lectin or galanthus nivallis agglutinin (GNA). Snowdrop lectin helps to control the sporadically serious pest the brown planthopper (BPH), which has developed a resistance to many pesticides. Luckily for the environment, snowdrop lectin provides high levels of toxicity to BPH but not to other animals. BPH is a member of the order Homoptera and feeds by sucking the phloem sap from the stems of rice plants.

The major problem with combating BPH is that rice plants can not be engineered for BT toxin resistance against this pest because BT toxins that effect Homopterans have not yet been discovered or reported. Therefore, other types of genes had to be manipulated in order to produce insect resistance against BPH. The best plant protein that provides resistance to BPHs turns out to be snowdrop lectin, and this was first confirmed by artificial diet bioassays. To create the transgenic rice lants, embryonic cell suspension cultures were initiated from mature embryos from two Japonica rice varieties, Taipei 309 and Zhonghua 8.

Next, the protoplasts isolated from these cell suspension cultures were transformed by using the plasmid pSCGUSR, containing the nos-npt II gene as a selectable marker. Plasmid uptake was then induced by the PEG process and geneticin was used as a selection agent. Geneticin was added to the protoplast-derived colonies during the four and eight cell stages. From this, more than fifty putative transgenic plants have been regenerated from one thousand resistant colonies. Another way of combating the brown planthopper is by producing phloem-specific promoters.

These promoters are necessary because phloem is the exact site of feeding for the BPH. Although the CaMV promoter is active in phloem tissue, the possibility exists to institute a promoter from a gene that is specifically expressed only in phloem. This would be advantageous if there are other parts of the plant that may be negatively affected by the promoter and in this scenario, they would be unaffected. Recently, a phloem specific promoter has been obtained from the rice sucrose synthase gene RSs 1. RSs 1 promoter was used to drive the snowdrop lectin or GNA protein.

The results were confirmed by the use of immunological assays and they indicated that not only is the gene being expressed in the phloem tissues, but that the protein product has been successfully transported to phloem sap. Unfortunately, RSs 1 is heavily expressed in the seeds of rice plants, so an alternative promoter called PP2 is currently under study. So far, PP2 has been purified and partially sequenced. Also, a full cDNA library has been created for the gene and it has been used to probe a genomic library to obtain the corresponding gene. The promoter region form the PP2 gene is now being assayed.

One final method of creating insect resistance in rice plants is the use of the SBTI gene. SBTI gene is a trypsin inhibitor that acts against pests such as the yellow stem borer and the gall midge. Greater insect resistance can be created by introducing the Kunitz soybean trypsin inhibitor (SBTI) gene into varieties of Indica rice plants. First, a PCP product corresponding to the protein was isolated by oligonucleotide primers. Then, the resulting fragment was cloned, sequenced and expressed in E. coli cell cultures. The results were a recombinant SBTI gene that effectively fought off gall midges and yellow stem borers.

Presently, the SBTI gene is being cloned into vectors and is being used to transform other types of embryos using the particle gun technique. In conclusion, through the use of new technologies such as the introduction of potato proteinase inhibitor II gene, the establishment of the Bacillus thuringiensis toxin gene and the experimental methods of using the arcelin gene, the snowdrop lectin/GNA (galanthus nivallis agglutinin) protein, and phloem specific promoters and finally the SBTI gene, rice plants have become almost completely resistant o insects that used to destroy much of the crop.

This has been an important step in biotechnology because the improvement of rice plants is a major concern that could potentially effect almost all of the populations of the world. Biotechnology has become an increasingly accepted method of solving some of the major problems in agriculture, medicine, and industry. Potentially, with the advancements of many techniques, almost whenever people eat, drink, take medicine, or go to work, they will be touched in some way by the many complicated processes of biotechnology, that are striving to make our world a bette r place to exist in.

Golden Rice

At one time, golden rice was just a wild idea that Ingo Potrykus thought up. Optimally, golden rice would improve the lives of millions of the poorest people in the world. The rice would contain beta-carotene which is the building block for vitamin A. However, imagining golden rice was one thing and bringing it into existence was another. He struggled for years with his colleagues to deal with the finicky growing habits of the rice they transplanted to a greenhouse near the foot hills of the Swiss Alps. Potrykus and his colleagues became successful in the spring of 1999.

By creating golden rice, Potrykus wanted to be sure it would reach malnourished children of the developing world; those for whom it was intended. He knew that would not be easy because of the fact that the golden grains also contained snippets of DNA borrowed from bacteria and daffodils. Being a product of genetical engineering, Potrykus’s product was entangled in a web of hopes, fears, and political baggage. Until now, genetically engineered crops were created to resist insect pests or to control the growth of weeds by using herbicides.

However, in this circumstance the genetically engineered rice not only benefits the farmers who grow it, but primarily the consumers who eat it. These consumers include at least a million children who die every year because they are weakened by vitamin-A deficiency and an additional 350,000 people who go blind. In addition to this concern, there is another. It is prospected that by the year 2020, the demand for grain, both for human consumption and for animal feed, is projected to go up by nearly half, while the amount of farmable land will probably dwindle, thus introducing a whole new series of problems.

There is only a short four step process that enables one to produce golden rice. The genes that give golden rice is its ability to make beta-carotene in its endosperm come from daffodils and a bacterium called Erwinia uredovora. These genes, along with promoters (segments of DNA that activate genes), are inserted into plasmids that occur inside a species of bacterium known as Agrobacterium tumefaciens. These agrobacteria are then added to a Petri dish containing rice embryos. As they “infect” the embryos, they also transfer the genes that encode the instructions for making beta-carotene.

The transgenic rice plants must now be crossed with strains of rice that are grown locally and are suited to a particular region’s climate and growing condition. There are a few concerns with product such as golden rice. All foods created through genetic engineering, are potential sources of allergens. The genes that are transferred contain instructions for making proteins, in which all proteins are not created equal- some proteins cause allergic reactions. “Genetic pollution” is another major concern.

Pollen grains from wind-pollinated plants as corn and canola, for example, are carried far and wide. Transgenic canola, for instance, grown in one field can very easily pollinate nontransgenic plans grown in the next, obviously causing problems. Ecological concerns also exist. Entomoligist John Losey performed an experiment by dusting Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn pollen on plants populated by the monarch butterfly caterpillars. Many of the caterpillars died. Bt has different strains of which produce toxins that target specific insects.

Bt is claimed to be a safe and effective natural insecticide that is popular with organic farmers. Like anything, genetically engineered rice will have it’s pros and cons. Bina Robinson stated “the Food and Drug Administration seems to have left safety considerations up to biotech companies, who see nothing wrong with snipping genes out of one species and inserting them into a completely unrelated one, thus blurring distinctions between plants and animals. This constitutes a nightmare for people with food allergies or religious or ethical concerns about eating animals.

We need to evaluated genetic engineering’s products more carefully before turning them loose in the environment and in people’s stomachs. ” In my opinion, genetical engineering is wrong. It is a radical new technology, one that breaks down essential genetic barriers- not only between species, but between humans, animals, and plants. By blending the genes of unrelated species, permanently transforming their genetic codes, organisms are created and will pass the genetic changes onto their offspring. Consequently, it will alter the entire species.

The genetic engineering of crops and food-producing animals can produce toxic and allergic reactions in humans. Scientists are combining unlike organisms to create the perfect product. Consumers are not completely aware of what is being used or replaced in the product they are ingesting. By continuing to alter plants and animals genetically, it will essentially endanger species and defiantly reduce biological diversity. In addition to these concerns, there is a moral issue. If we proceed to allow genetic engineering to prosper, it will only be a matter of time before we are choosing what our children will look like.

Sofa Wars

The soft-drink battleground has now turned toward new overseas markets. While once the United States, Australia, Japan, and Western Europe were the dominant soft-drink markets, the growth has slowed down dramatically, but they are still important markets for Coca-Cola and Pepsi. Globalization has become an important word in the 90s and Eastern Europe, Mexico, China, Saudi Arabia, and India have become the new “hot spots. ” Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi are forming joint bottling ventures in these nations and in other areas where they see growth potential.

As we have seen in the Japanese video dealing with Cokes business in class, international marketing can be very complex. As I begin to examine the international soda wars this will become very evident. The domestic cola war between Coca-Cola and Pepsi is still raging, as we clearly know. However, these two soft-drink giants also recognize the opportunities for globalization in many of the international markets. Both! Coca-Cola, which sold 10 billion cases of soft-drinks in 1992, and Pepsi now find themselves asking, “Where will sales of the next 10 billion cases come from? The answer lies overseas, where income levels and appetites for Western products are at an all time high. Often, the company that gets into a foreign market first usually dominates that country’s market. Coke patriarch Robert Woodruff realized this 50 years ago and unleashed a brilliant ploy or in a way a very simple global strategyto make Coke the early bird in many of the major foreign markets. At the height of World War II, Woodruff proclaimed that Wherever American boys were fighting, they’d be able to get a Coke.

By the time Pepsi tried to make its first international pitch in the 50s, Coke had already established its brand name and a powerful distribution network. During the last 40 years, many new markets have emerged. In order to profit from these markets, both Coke and Pepsi need to find ways to cut through all of the red tape that initially prevents them from conducting business in these markets. One key movement for the soda wars occurd in Europe in 1972, Pepsi signed an agreement with the Soviet Union which made it the first Western product to be sold to consumers in Russia.

This landmark agreement gave Pepsi the first advantage. Presently, Pepsi has 23 plants in the former Soviet Union and is the leader in the soft-drink industry in Russia. Pepsi outsells Coca-Cola by 6 to 1 and is seen as a local brand, similar to Cokes reputation in Japan. However, Pepsi has also had some problems. There has not been an increase in brand loyalty for Pepsi since its advertising blitz in Russia, even though it has produced commercials tailored to the Russian market and has sponsored television concerts. On the positive side, Pepsi may be leading Coca-Cola due to the big difference in price between the two colas.

While Pepsi sells for Rb250 (25 cents) a bottle, Coca-Cola sells for Rb450. For the economy size, Pepsi sells 2 liters for Rb1,300, but Coca-Cola sells 1. 5 liters fo! r Rb1,800. Coca-Cola, on the other hand, only moved into Russia 2 years ago and is manufactured locally in Moscow and St. Petersburg under a license. Despite investing $85 million in these two bottling plants, they do not perceive Coca-Cola as a premium brand in the Russian market. Moreover, they see it as a “foreign” brand in Russia. Lastly, while Coca-Cola’s bottle and label give it a high-class image, it is unable to capture market share.

Another country in the hot battleground for Coca-Cola and Pepsi is Romania. When Pepsi established a bottling plant in Romania in 1965, it became the first US product produced and sold in the region. Pepsi began producing locally during the communist period and has recently decided to reformat its organization structure and retrain its local staff. Pepsi entered into a joint venture with a local firm, Flora and Quadrant, for its Bucharest plant, and has 5 other factories in Romania. Quadrant leases Pepsi the equipment and handles Pepsi’s distribution.

In addition, Pepsi bought 500 Romanian trucks which are also used for distribution in other countries. Moreover, Pepsi produces its bottles locally through an investment in the glass industry. While the price of Pepsi and Coca-Cola are the same (@15 cents/bottle), some consumers drink Pepsi because Pepsi sent Michael Jackson to Romania for a concert. Another reason for drinking Pepsi is that it is slightly sweeter than ! Coca-Cola and is more suited for the sweet-toothed Romanians. Lastly, some drink Pepsi because, in the past, only top officials were allowed to drink it, but now everyone can.

Coca-Cola only began producing locally in November 1991, but it is outselling all of its competitors. In 1992, Coca-Cola saw an increase in Romania of sales by 99. 2% and outsold Pepsi by 6 to 5. While Pepsi preferred to buy its equipment from Romania, Coca-Cola preferred to bring equipment into Romania. Also, Coca-Cola brought 2 bottlers to Romania. One is the Leventis Group, which is privately owned. Coca-Cola has invested almost $25 million into 2 factories. These factories are double the size of the factory Pepsi has in Bucharest.

Moreover, Coca-Cola has a partnership with a local company, Ci-Co, in Bucharest and Brasov. Ci-Co has planned an aggressive publicity campaign and has sponsored local sporting and cultural events. Lastly, Romanians drink Coke because it is a powerful western symb! ol which was once forbidden. Finally as far as European markets are concerned there is Poland. Poland with a population of 38 million people, is the biggest consumer market in central and eastern Europe. Coca-Cola is closing in on Pepsi’s lead in this country with 1992 sales of 19. 5 million cases versus Pepsi’s sales of 26. million cases.

The main problems in this area are the centralized economy, the lack of modern production facilities, a non-convertible local currency, and poor distribution. However, since the Zloty is now convertible, Coca-Cola realizes the growth potential in Poland. After a company called Fiat, Coca-Cola is now the second biggest investor in Poland. Coca-Cola has developed an investment plan which includes direct investment and joint ventures/investments with European bottling partners. Its investments may exceed $250 million, and it has completed the infrastructure building.

Coca-Cola has divided Poland into 8 regions with strategic sites in each of these areas. It has o! rganized a distribution, which Coca-Cola has spent a lot of money organizing, extremely important to challenge Pepsi’s market share and to maintain a high level of customer service. All of this has helped Coca-Cola to close in on Pepsi’s lead in Poland. Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi are trying to have their colas available in as many locations in Eastern Europe, but at a cost which consumers would be willing to pay. The concepts which are becoming more important in Eastern Europe include color, product attractiveness visibility, and display quality.

In addition, availability, acceptability, and afford ability are the key factors for Eastern Europe. Basically if you think about it, the four bottom line practices of managers and companies are being practiced, Quality, Cost, Innovation, and Speed. Both companies hope that their western images and brand products will help to boost their sales. Coca-Cola has a universal message and campaign since it feels that Eastern Europe is part of the world and should not be treated differently. As for the rest of the world, Mexico is another large factor in the soda wars.

Mexican government recently freed the Mexican soft drink market from 40 years of price controls in return for a commitment from bottling companies to invest nearly $4. 5 billion and create nearly 55,000 jobs over the next 7 years, which many feel was a result of NAFTA. Naturally, Mexico has become another battleground in the international cola wars. In Mexico, Coca-Cola and Pepsi command 50% and 21% of the market respectively. The cola war is especially hot here because the per capita consumption of Coca-Cola and Pepsi exceeds that of the United States (Murphy, 6). Mexico is the only soft-drink market in the world that can make this claim.

The face off in Mexico is between Gemex, the largest Pepsi bottler outside the United States, and Femsa, the beer and soft drink company that owns the largest Coca-Cola franchise in the world. Femsa, however, may be at a disadvantage. Despite being part of ! the conglomerate group Vista, Femsa lacks financial punch because it plays only a small part in the conglomerate’s overall interests. The challenge in Mexico is to win market share through distribution efficiency (Murphy, 6). Keeping this in mind, each company is undertaking strategic efforts designed to sustain their shares of the Mexican market.

Pepsi is moving in on the Coke-dominated Yucatan peninsula while Femsa, the Coca-Cola franchisee, is planning to invest $600 million more for 3 new Coca-Cola plants next to Gemex’s Mexico City facilities. The parent companies have joined the battles as well. Coca-Cola has made a $3 billion long-term commitment to the Mexican market, and Pepsi has countered with a $750 million investment of its own. Another important country in the soda war is China. Coca-Cola originally entered China in 1927, but left in 1949 when the Communists took over the country. In 1979, it returned with a shipment of 30,000 cases from Hong Kong.

Pepsi, which only entered China in 1982, is trying to be the leading soft-drink producer in China by the year 2000. Even though Coca-Cola’s head start in China has given it an edge, there is plenty of room in the country for both companies. Currently, Coca-Cola and Pepsi control 15% and 7% of the Chinese soft-drink market respectively. The Chinese market presents unique problems. For example, 2,800 local soft-drink bottlers, many of whom are state-owned, control nearly 75% of the Chinese market. Those bottlers located in remote areas have virtual monopolies (The Economist, 67). The battle for China will take place in the interior regions.

These areas are unpenetrated as most of the foreign soft-drink producers have set up in the booming coastal c! ities. China’s high transportation and distribution costs mean that plants must be located close to their markets. Otherwise, in a country of China’s size, Coca-Cola and Pepsi risk pricing their products as luxury items. In China, it is easier and politically safer to expand through joint ventures with local bottlers. It is expected that, in China, the company that wins the cola war will win based on the locations of their bottling plants and the quality of the partners they choose (The Economist, 67).

Coca-Cola is bottled at 13 sites across China; five of these are state-owned. Also, Coca-Cola owns 2 concentrate plants in China. By next year, Coca-Cola and its joint venture partners will have invested nearly $500 million in China. Pepsi is planning a $350 million expansion plan that will add 10 new plants. Both companies are dumping profits straight back into expansion. Both companies have there sites clearly set on not seeing a return in profits until the next cent! ury. In Saudi Arabia, another important country, Pepsi is the market leader and has been for nearly a generation.

Part of this is due to the absence of its arch-rival, Coca-Cola. For nearly 25 years, Coke has been exiled from this country. Coca-Cola’s presence in Israel meant that it was subject to an Arab boycott. Because of this, Pepsi has an 80% share of the $1 billion Saudi soft-drink market. Saudi Arabia is Pepsi’s third largest foreign market, after Mexico and Canada (The Economist, 86). In 1993, almost 7% of Pepsi-Cola International’s sales came from Saudi Arabia alone.

The environment in Saudi Arabia makes the country very conducive to soft-drink sales: alcohol is banned, the climate is hot and dry, the population is growing at 3. % a year, and the Saudis’ oil-based wealth “make it the most valuable market in the Middle East” (The Economist, 86). Coca-Cola, long known as “Red Pepsi”, has finally started to fight back. The battle for Saudi Arabia actually bega! n 6 years ago, when the Arab boycott collapsed and Coca-Cola began to make inroads into the Gulf, Egypt, Lebanon, and Jordan. The start of the Gulf War, however, temporarily stunted Coca-Cola’s growth in the region. Pepsi’s 5 Saudi factories worked 24 hours a day to keep the troops refreshed.

The most significant blow to Coca-Cola’s return to the desert, however, came at the end of the war, when General Norman Schwarzkopf was shown signing the cease-fire with a can of diet Pepsi in his hand. Coca-Cola aims to control 35% of the Saudi market by the year 2000. Coca-Cola, which plans to pour over $100 million into the Saudi market, is focusing on marketing to get there. Also, Coca-Cola put $1 million into sponsoring the Saudi World Cup soccer team. This alone has doubled Coca-Cola’s market share to almost 15%.

America’s Reynolds Company is among the investors looking to cash in on Coca-Cola’s return to Saudi Arabia. The company is among the investors in a new factor! y which, by 1996, will be producing 1. 2 billion Coca-Cola cans per year. This equates to nearly 100 cans for every Saudi in the country. Pepsi, trying to fight off the Coca-Cola onslaught, has responded with deep discounting. Now on to one of the largest economic growing markets in the world, India. Coca-Cola controlled the Indian market until 1977, when the Janata Party beat the Congress Party of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

To punish Coca-Cola’s principal bottler, a Congress Party strong and longtime Gandhi supporter, the Janata government demanded that Coca-Cola transfer its syrup formula to an Indian subsidiary (Chakravarty, 43). Coca-Cola refused and withdrew from the country. India, now left without both Coca-Cola and Pepsi, became a protected market. In the meantime, India’s two largest soft-drink producers have gotten rich and lazy while controlling 80% of the Indian market. These domestic producers have little incentive to expand their plants or develop the country’s potentially enormous market (Chakravarty, 43).

Some analysts reason that the Indian market may be more lucrative than the Chinese market. India has 850 million potential customers, 150 million of whom comprise t! he middle class, with disposable income to spend on cars, VCRs, and computers. The Indian middle class is growing at 10% per year. To obtain the license for India, Pepsi had to export $5 of locally-made products for every $1 of materials it imported, and it had to agree to help the Indian government to initiate a second agricultural revolution.

Pepsi has also had to take on Indian partners. In the end, all parties involved seem to come out ahead: Pepsi gains access to a potentially enormous market; Indian bottlers will get to serve a market that is expanding rapidly because of competition; and the Indian consumer benefits from the competition from abroad and will pay lower prices. Even before the first bottle of Pepsi hit the shelves, local soft drink manufacturers increased the size of their bottles by 25% without raising costs.

In conclusion, the new battleground for the soda wars is in the developing markets of Eastern Europe, Mexico, China, Saudi Arabia, and India. With Coca-Cola’s and Pepsi’s investments in these countries, not only will they increase their sales worldwide, but they will also help to build up these economies. These long-term commitments by both companies will raise the level of competition and efficiency, and at the same time, bring value to the distribution and production systems of these countries. Many issues need to be overcome before a company can begin to produce its goods in a foreign country.

These issues are of the marcoenvironment (see Appendix, page 2) which include political, social, economic, operational, and environmental topics which must be addressed. When companies like Coca-Cola and Pepsi effectively analyze and solve these problems to everyone’s liking, new foreign markets can translate into lucrative opportunities in the long run. Currently, it is difficul! t to say who is winning the cola wars since the data from the relatively new market research firms focuses on major cities.

Pepsi had a commanding 4 to 1 lead in 1992 in the former Soviet Union. Without this area, Coca-Cola has a 17% share versus Pepsi’s 12% share in the soft drink industry. Coca-Cola and Pepsi are in a dogfight, but both will end up as winners as the continue to expand globally, using the basic management skills consisting of: continued effort for total quality, trying to be the most efficient and cost affective, a continued effort to innovate their products, and finally speed, get their product on the shelves first and keep it there.

Food Processing And Preservation

Throughout the history of mankind science has searched into the realms of the unknown. Along with it bringing new discoveries, allowing for our lives to become healthier, more efficient, safer, and at the same time, possibly more dangerous. Among the forces driving scientists into these many experiments, is the desire to preserve the one fuel that keeps our lives going; FOOD. As early as the beginning of the 19th century, major breakthroughs in food preservation had begun. Soldiers and seamen, fighting in Napoleons army were living off of salt-preserved meats.

These poorly cured foods provided minimal nutritional value, and frequent outbreaks of scurvy were developing. It was Napoleon who began the search for a better mechanism of food preservation, and it was he who offered 12,000-franc pieces to the person who devised a safe and dependable food-preservation process. The winner was a French chemist named Nicolas Appert. He observed that food heated in sealed containers was preserved as long as the container remained unopened or the seal did not leak. This became the turning point in food preservation history.

Fifty years following the discovery by Nicolas Appert, another breakthrough had developed. Another Frenchman, named Louis Pasteur, noted the relationship between microorganisms and food spoilage. This breakthrough increased the dependability of the food canning process. As the years passed new techniques assuring food preservation would come and go, opening new doors to further research. FOOD PROCESSINGFarmers grow fruits and vegetables and fatten livestock. The fruits and vegetables are harvested, and the livestock is slaughtered for food.

What happens between the time food leaves the farm and the time it is eaten at the table? Like all living things, the plants and animals that become food contain tiny organisms called microorganisms. Living, healthy plants and animals automatically control most of these microorganisms. But when the plants and animals are killed, the organisms yeast, mold, and bacteria begin to multiply, causing the food to lose flavor and change in color and texture. Just as important, food loses the nutrients that are necessary to build and replenish human bodies. All these changes in the food are what people refer to as food spoilage.

To keep the food from spoiling, usually in only a few days, it is preserved. Many kinds of agents are potentially destructive to the healthful characteristics of fresh foods. Microorganisms, such as bacteria and fungi, rapidly spoil food. Enzymes which are present in all raw food, promote degradation and chemical changes affecting especially texture and flavor. Atmospheric oxygen may react with food constituents, causing rancidity or color changes. Equally as harmful are infestations by insects and rodents, which account for tremendous losses in food stocks.

There is no single method of food preservation that provides protection against all hazards for an unlimited period of time. Canned food stored in Antarctica near the South Pole, for example, remained edible after 50 years of storage, but such long-term preservation cannot be duplicated in the hot climate of the Tropics. Raw fruits and vegetables and uncooked meat are preserved by cold storage or refrigeration. The cold temperature inside the cold-storage compartment or refrigerator slows down the microorganisms and delays deterioration. But cold storage and refrigeration will preserve raw foods for a few weeks at most.

If foods are to be preserved for longer periods, they must undergo special treatments such as freezing or heating. The science of preserving foods for more than a few days is called food processing. Human beings have always taken some measures to preserve food. Ancient people learned to leave meat and fruits and vegetables in the sun and wind to remove moisture. Since microorganisms need water to grow, drying the food slows the rate at which it spoils. Today food processors provide a diet richer and more varied than ever before by using six major methods.

They are canning, drying or dehydration, freezing, freeze-drying, fermentation or pickling, and irradiation. CanningThe process of canning is sometimes called sterilization because the heat treatment of the food eliminates all microorganisms that can spoil the food and those that are harmful to humans, including directly pathogenic bacteria and those that produce lethal toxins. Most commercial canning operations are based on the principle that bacteria destruction increases tenfold for each 10 C increase in temperature. Food exposed to high temperatures for only minutes or seconds retains more of its natural flavor.

In the Flash 18 process, a continuous system, the food is flash-sterilized in a pressurized chamber to prevent the superheated food from boiling while it is placed in containers. Further sterilizing is not required. FreezingAlthough prehistoric humans stored meat in ice caves, the food-freezing industry is more recent in origin than the canning industry. The freezing process was used commercially for the first time in 1842, but large-scale food preservation by freezing began in the late 19th century with the advent of mechanical refrigeration.

Freezing preserves food by preventing microorganisms from multiplying. Because the process does not kill all types of bacteria, however, those that survive reanimate in thawing food and often grow more rapidly than before freezing. Enzymes in the frozen state remain active, although at a reduced rate. Vegetables are blanched or heated in preparation for freezing to ensure enzyme inactivity and thus to avoid degradation of flavor. Blanching has also been proposed for fish, in order to kill cold-adapted bacteria on their outer surface.

In the freezing of meats various methods are used depending on the type of meat and the cut. Pork is frozen soon after butchering, but beef is hung in a cooler for several days to tenderize the meat before freezing. Frozen foods have the advantage of resembling the fresh product more closely than the same food preserved by other techniques. Frozen foods also undergo some changes, however. Freezing causes the water in food to expand and tends to disrupt the cell structure by forming ice crystals. In quick-freezing the ice crystals are smaller, producing less cell damage than in the slowly frozen product.

The quality of the product, however, may depend more on the rapidity with which the food is prepared and stored in the freezer than on the rate at which it is frozen. Some solid foods that are frozen slowly, such as fish, may, upon thawing, show a loss of liquid called drip; some liquid foods that are frozen slowly, such as egg yolk, may become coagulated. Because of the high cost of refrigeration, frozen food is comparatively expensive to produce and distribute. High quality is a required feature of frozen food to justify the added cost in the market. This method of preservation is the one most widely used for a great variety of foods.

Drying and DehydrationAlthough both these terms are applied to the removal of water from food, to the food technologist drying refers to drying by natural means, such as spreading fruit on racks in the sun, and dehydration designates drying by artificial means, such as a blast of hot air. In freeze-drying a high vacuum is maintained in a special cabinet containing frozen food until most of the moisture has sublimed. Removal of water offers excellent protection against the most common causes of food spoilage. Microorganisms cannot grow in a water-free environment, enzyme activity is absent, and most chemical reactions are greatly retarded.

This last characteristic makes dehydration preferable to canning if the product is to be stored at a high temperature. In order to achieve such protection, practically all the water must be removed. The food then must be packaged in a moisture-proof container to prevent it from absorbing water from the air. Vegetables, fruits, meat, fish, and some other foods, the moisture content of which averages as high as 80 percent, may be dried to one-fifth of the original weight and about one-half of the original volume. The disadvantages of this method of preservation include the time and labor involved in rehydrating the food before eating.

Further because it absorbs only about two-thirds of its original water content, the dried product tends to have a texture that is tough and chewy. Drying was used by prehistoric humans to preserve many foods. Large quantities of fruits such as figs have been dried from ancient times to the present day. In the case of meat and fish, other preservation methods, such as smoking or salting, which yielded a palatable product, were generally preferred. Commercial dehydration of vegetables was initiated in the United States during the American Civil War but, as a result of the poor quality of the product, the industry declined sharply after the war.

This cycle was repeated with subsequent wars, but after World War II the dehydration industry thrived. This industry is confined largely to the production of a few dried foods, however, such as milk, soup, eggs, yeast, and powdered coffee, which are particularly suited to the dehydration method. Present-day dehydration techniques include the application of a stream of warm air to vegetables. Protein foods such as meat are of good quality only if freeze-dried. Liquid food is dehydrated usually by spraying it as fine droplets into a chamber of hot air, or occasionally by pouring it over a drum internally heated by steam.

Freeze-dryingA processing method that uses a combination of freezing and dehydration is called freeze-drying. Foods that already have been frozen are placed in a vacuum-tight enclosure and dehydrated under vacuum conditions with careful application of heat. Normally ice melts and becomes water when heat is applied. If more heat is applied, it turns to steam. But in freeze-drying, the ice turns directly to vapor, and there is little chance that microorganisms will grow. Freeze-dried foods, like those that are dehydrated, are light and require little space for storage and transportation.

They do not need to be refrigerated, but they must be reconstituted with water before they are ready to consume. IrradiationAs early as 1895, a major breakthrough in the world of science had arisen; the discovery of the X-ray by German physicist Wilhelm von Roetengen. This technological advancement, along with the soon to be discovered concept of radioactivity by French physicist Antoine Henri Becquerel, became the focus of attention for many scientifically based studies. Of most importance, to the field of food preservation, these two discoveries began the now controversial process of food irradiation.

Food irradiation employs an energy form termed ionizing radiation. In short, this process exposes food particles to alpha, beta and/or gamma rays. The rays cause whatever material they strike to produce electrically charged particles called ions. Ionizing radiation provides many attributes to treating foods. It has the ability to penetrate deeply into a food interacting with its atoms and molecules, and causing some chemical and biological effects that could possibly decrease its rate of decay. It also has the ability to sanitize foods by destroying contaminants such as bacteria, yeasts, molds, parasites and insects.

Irradiation delays ripening of fruits and vegetables; inhibits sprouting in bulbs and tubers; disinfests grain, cereal products, fresh and dried fruits, and vegetables of insects; and destroys bacteria in fresh meats. The irradiation of fresh fruits and vegetables, herbs and spices, and pork was approved in 1986. In 1990 the FDA approved irradiation of poultry to control salmonella and other disease-causing microorganisms. Irradiated foods were used by U. S. astronauts and by Soviet cosmonauts. Public concern over the safety of irradiation, however, has limited its full-scale use.

It is still off to a slow start, with only one food irradiation plant open in Mulberry, Florida, but it is seemingly catching the eyes of the producers and the consumers throughout the world. Miscellaneous MethodsOther methods or a combination of methods may be used to preserve foods. Salting of fish and pork has long been practiced, using either dry salt or brine. Salt enters the tissue and, in effect binds the water, thus inhibiting the bacteria that cause spoilage. Another widely used method is smoking, which frequently is applied to preserve fish, ham, and sausage.

The smoke is obtained by burning hickory or a similar wood under low draft. In this case some preservative action is provided by such chemicals in the smoke as formaldehyde and creosote, and by the dehydration that occurs in the smokehouse. Smoking usually is intended to flavor the product as well as to preserve it. Sugar, a major ingredient of jams and jellies, is another preservative agent. For effective preservation the total sugar content should make up at least 65 percent of the weight of the final product.

Sugar, which acts in much the same way as salt, inhibits bacterial growth after the product has been heated. Because of its high acidity, vinegar (acetic acid) acts as a preservative. Fermentation caused by certain bacteria, which produce lactic acid, is the basis of preservation in sauerkraut and fermented sausage. Sodium benzoate, restricted to concentrations of not more than 0. 1 percent, is used in fruit products to protect against yeasts and molds. Sulfur dioxide, another chemical preservative permitted in most states, helps to retain the color of dehydrated foods.

Calcium propionate may be added to baked goods to inhibit mold. PackagingThe packaging of processed foods is just as important as the process itself. If foods are not packaged in containers that protect them from air and moisture, they are subject to spoilage. Packaging materials must therefore be strong enough to withstand the heat and cold of processing and the wear and tear of handling and transportation. From the time the canning process was developed in the early 19th century until the beginning of the 20th century, cans and glass containers were the only packages used.

The first cans were crude containers having a hole in the top through which the food was inserted. The holes were then sealed with hot metal. All cans were made by hand from sheets of metal cut to specific sizes. In about 1900 the sanitary can was invented. In this process, machines form cans with airtight seams. A processor buys cans with one end open and seals them after filling. Some cans are made of steel coated with tin and are often glazed on the inside to prevent discoloration. Some are made of aluminum.

Frozen foods are packaged in containers made of layers of fiberboard and plastic or of strong plastic called polyethylene. Freeze-dried and dehydrated foods are packed in glass, fiberboard, or cans. ResearchThe research activities of processed food scientists are numerous and varied. New packaging materials, the nutritional content of processed foods, new processing techniques, more efficient use of energy and water, the habits and desires of today’s consumer, more efficient equipment, and transportation and warehousing innovations are some of the subjects being studied.

The challenge of the food researcher is to discover better and more efficient ways to process, transport, and store food. Processed foods have changed the world. In developed countries they are part of almost everyone’s diet. The United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom all produce large quantities of processed foods, which they sell domestically and abroad. In the United States in the early 1980s, annual production of fruit was 1. billion kilograms canned, 1. 4 billion kilograms frozen, and 1. 1 billion kilograms in fruit juice; production of vegetables was 1. 4 billion kilograms canned and 3. 2 billion kilograms frozen. From the modest canning industries in 1813 to the sophisticated food processing plants of today, food processors have provided the world with more healthful diets, food combinations never before possible, and a convenience unimagined 200 years ago.

We as consumers can only imagine what further achievements will be made in the field of food preservation. But one thing is for certain; it is all for the general good of mankind… to reduce starvation levels globally and insure the availability of nutritive foods to all. It is through this way that man survives… and fits in Darwin’s hypothesis of the survival of the fittest. For it is only the fit who will prevail in the end.