Agriculture: What GMO's can do for us

Harold Mitchell

Dr. Brown

English 306

Agriculture: What GMO’s can do for us

Humans started modifying foods over 10,000 years ago and Genetically Modified Organisms being introduced in 1980’s. The relentless uneducated opinions about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) have been blow out of proportion. There are three sides that people are choosing when it comes to GMO’s. Those that are for GMO’s, those who are against GMO’s and those that have no opinion on agriculture as a whole or on GMO’s. Jeffery Smith is one of the most significant advocates against GMO’s; Smith says that “organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, accelerated aging, and infertility” (IRT) are all side effects of GMO’s. These kind of irrational and none scientific evidence is one of the reasons why the general public is so misinformed.

A GMO is a genetically changed by scientist to improve on desired traits such as esthetics of a plant, improving on how long a fruit can stay eatable, and improving on plants to grown in a none natural environment such as a laboratory (Co+op). GMO’s are used in more of a scientific way than previously used on agriculture before. The census used to be that farmers would breed the best plants with the most desirable traits, but that came at a risk of hoping that the plant would come out successfully. Today some farmers choose to grow with a GMO seed. These seeds allows for a farmer to increase his yields and to produce wanted produces. The produce might have a sweater taste or be larger than those that do not come from GMO seeds.

I believe that this is a problem because of the lack of education on the Agricultural part. We as Aggies do not educate the public enough to ensure that they get both sides of the story. We allow others to tell the story. We get upset when people talk bad about agriculture but we are not proactive when it comes to educating the public about how we do things. I also believe that the problem is in general people are afraid of change. When there is something that is new people are weary of how well it will work or if it will even work at all. Instead of proving that the science disproves the critics we need to show that science proves there are no negative side effects when it comes to GMO’s. We need to advocate for ourselves rather than arguing against the critics. GMO’s have been around for more than 40 years with no scientific side effects. Smith the advocate against GMO’s has said that there are studies to prove GMO’s are bad for humans but on his website IRT, “there’s a link to a post on a webpage, but there isn’t a peer-reviewed article” (Katiraee, 2015).  In order for a result to be accepted it must be able to replicated if it cannot be replicated it shows that the study is insufficient (berkeley.edu).(1)

 The responsibility of educating the public does not fall on the consumer but rather the Agriculture community. The Agriculture community has to get the word out to the general public about the science behind GMO’s. Once we get the message out to the public people will be more informed and have a more collective identify about why and how GMO’s are used. If we let others tell our story we will be too late to the debate to be able to educate people on the real reasons why GMO’s are used to benefit the growing process. GMO’s are made to improve on agriculture and the general public not to harm.

I would suggest that we do more advocating on where our food comes from. I believe having markets and big box stores such as Fry’s, Safeway, and Albertsons buy most of their produces from local farmers. It not only allows for the consumer to put a face to the product but increase the local economy. It’s awfully hard to imagine a family in the community would want to hurt you. Especially since 96.4 percent of farmers are family owned according to the Washington Post. The photo below is example of how we can advocate for our produces.

People are paying more attention to what they are eating and where it comes from than ever before. Allowing people to put a face to the product allows the consumer to be able to “trust” the product more. They get to see that there are still people running the farmers not some crazy scientist in a lab. Our consumers can be our biggest advocates. Allowing for consumers to be able to get ahold of the farmers by either putting the farmers website or email address on the package and making the website easy to read.

            We do not have to inform the Agriculture community but rather the everyday consumer. Our place of protest will take place urban college campuses of the United States. We will focus on the main cities in the U.S. cities such as Phoenix, Los Angeles California, and New York.  Our symbol will be of a family owned farm that uses GMO’s. The family will consist of Grandparents, Parents and children. Three generations of farmers. Our place of protest is important because of the exposer we will get to non-agriculture people and the amount of people that are misinformed. Our message will be able to get out to many people in the cities. The urban life is a fast moving sector and we will have to capture their attention. We will accomplish this with free food. Samples will draw many crowds. Especially within these cities on college campuses. The students will learn that GMO’s are here to help and not to harm. They will in turn be able to talk to their friends and families about the GMO phenomenon. Naturally the students will more than likely take to social media. We will then get the free advertisement and spokespersons through social media. The students will become advocates for us.

 The symbol is also important because its hard to imagine 3 generations of farmers becoming so corrupt that they would allow for their good names to be demolished by a bad product. It will also be hard for the consumer to imagine that the farmers would harm them. Especially when there is a face that the consumer can put to the product. Even if the product is in an urban area and the consumer doesn’t know the farmers the consumer at leased sees someone who put in hard work for the food they are about to purchase.

Our goal is not to rage a war on choosing a side of Organically grown produce vs. conventionally grown produce, but rather to educate the public and to come together to create a public sphere where both sides can hear each other out. We want to be able to ensure the general public that farms in America, which are mostly family owned, are in business to produce good, healthy food.  Farms are here to produce a good product that they can put their name on; this is why most farms are family named. The farmers trust their produce enough to put their name on it, so you can trust the farmer.

(1)                   The purpose of this paragraph was to explain what I believe to be the problem with public opinion with GMO’s. As well my frustration on my part and others in the Agriculture community with the lack of education about what GMO’s really are. The main characters are; Aggies, GMO’s, Critics, Smith.The topic string that I used was a mixed topic string.

Works Cited:

Smith, Jeffrey. 10 Reasons to Avoid GMO’s. Institute for Responsible Technology, 2011.

Co+op. What is a GMO. Stronger togethercoop.

Copycats in science: The role of replication. Understanding Science how schience really works.

Dunckel, Mary. Faces of Michigan farmers front and center in grocery stores. Michigan State University Extension.2014.

DePillis, Lydia. Farms are gigantic now. Even the “Family-ownded” ones. Washington Post. 2013

Orme Dam Protest Artifact

            The eagle is found in most Native American Tribes as a symbol of courage, wisdom and strength (Warpaths2peacepipes). When people see an eagle they more often than not will have a reaction to the bird. An eagle is seen as a strong and courageous being. It shows pride. The Orme Dam was to be built on land that was given to the Yavapai Nation and was home to an endangered species; the bald eagle. The Yavapai Nation printed a picture of a bald eagle that is barely floating above water. The eagle represents both the Yavapai Nation and the bald eagle and the water represents the water of the Orme Dam. If the Dam were to be built it would ultimately “drown” both the Yavapai Nation and the bald eagles. Both would cease to exist.

            The Yavapai Nation used this t-shirt as their main symbol of protest. It was used because it was a clear message that if the dam were to be built the water would take over the home of the Yavapai Nation and the nesting places of the bald eagle.  “The bald eagle was listed on the Endangered Species act in 1973 within the lower 48 states, except in Michigan, Minnesota, Organ, Washington and Wisconsin” (National Wildlife 2010). By having the nesting places in and near the Yavapai Nation’s reservation the “environmentalist” also backed the Yavapai Nation in the fight against Orme Dam.

            During the negotiations of the building of Orme Dam the taxpayers were being told that the water that was going to be stored at the Orme Dam were going to be used for public use. However 80% of the water was going to be used for agriculture to grow surplus crops. A surplus crop is a crop that “is not sold but often purchased by the government at a profitable price to the farmer“ (Businessdictionary). This cartoon shows a depiction used to enhance the public’s awareness on how to water from the Orme Dam was going to be used. The farmers would be charged a very low cost for the water in order to farm high yields surplus crops. The farmers that were for the Orme Dam saw the Dam as a lifesaver. They believed that if the Dam were to be built that they would be able to improve their yield and therefor improve their revenue. The water would be sold to them at a discount price the farmers would be able to tap into the source whenever they needed an extra few thousand gallons. Especially if the farmers were to farm rice. Agriculture uses about 70% of fresh water around the world, and rice uses 35%-45% of the 70% of fresh water. If the Dam were to be built it would have only benefited a few people and not the population as a whole. Carolina Butler an activist for the Yavapai Nation explains that an Economic study was done from a professor from Montana on the Orme Dam, the study showed that subsides cotton and alfalfa were the main crops that were going to be grown with the Orme Dam water. However the water would have to travel uphill to the dam, which would be an energy hog. Unlike the Hoover dam which produces energy when the water is released down stream. Down stream is the key word. The Orme Dam would have to travel up stream.

            

Throughout the process of the Orme Dam protest many of the Yavapai Tribal members felt as if the Government were treating the site of the Orme Dam as if there were nobody living there. And that exactly how the Bureau of Reclamation presented the plans to congress, as the main activist for Fort McDowell Carolina Butler remembers the senator of Florida’s reaction when he heard from the Yavapai Nation in their meeting with congress, "We were told there was nobody living at Fort McDowell."

            At the confluence of the salt and Verde Rivers is where the dam would be built. Although there were people living on the future site of the Orme Dam the Bureau of Reclamation saw it as more of a moneymaker than choosing a different site. The Bureau of Reclamation were blind to the fact that there were people living there. They didn’t want to believe that people lived there in order to make it easier for them to build the Dam.

            In order for the Yavapai Nation to make them known to congress they needed to get up and go to congress and not wait for congress to come to them. “The Yavapai decided to send a congregation to Washington to argue their cause. Twelve-year-old Kimberley Williams was part of the group”(AZPBS).  If the Yavapai Nation didn’t go to congress, congress would have had the perception that there was nobody living where they wanted the Orme Dam to be built. Carolina Butler explains that most of the Tribal leaders took a back seat when it came time to take a stand, only President of the Yavapai Nation Robert Doka was willing to rally those apposed to the building of Orme Dam. President Doka was the leader of the Yavapai Nation and when it was time to stand up and take a stand he was willing to be the one to help the members of the Nation to realize what was happening and how it was going to affect them.

            In order for the Yavapai Nation to be successful they needed to stand up and not stand-alone. They were willing to bring in others from outside the Nation to help, one of those were activist Carolina Butler, and Bob Witzeman. They both helped the Yavapai Nation to get everything ready for congress, such as the telegrams, travel, directions to congress, and a place to stay. Carolina Butler believes that the Orme Dam was successful because of the relentless fight from the Yavapai Nation and from the Secretary of the Interior James Watt visited the reservation and discovered that there were people living on the site where the Orme Dam was going to be built.

MLB Strike Location

The location of my protest is located throughout the United States of America. Players in Major League Baseball are spread throughout various cities and they stopped playing games as a result. So, it directly affects them as well as fans, cities, and companies associated with the MLB. Although the protest affected fans at the international level, I am focusing on the United States for my research of the Players Union strike.

Places

The place most significant to the Vaccination protest I'm researching is Sacramento, California. If I expand my topic to include anti-vaccine protest more generally, it will include more places.

California in general is seen as a very progressive, liberal state that embraces health and wellbeing as well as various personal freedoms.

California is still very much seen as a progressive state that embraces social change, so the protest failed to change how people understand California.

Gun Control

When America was first established the normal household had at least one gun and anyone who did not have one was considered a fool.  Nowadays a large majority of people do not have guns and guns have both positive and negative light shown on them.  The negative views of guns originate from guns being used in criminal activity and being guns being linked to human deaths.  Gun control is an attempt to bring down both criminal activity and gun related injuries and deaths.  However, a few different studies such as one done by Harvard have pointed to more people carrying guns as being the solution to less crime.           

America has more guns per capita than any other country in the world.  According to GunPolicy.org, currently 270,000,000 to 310,000,000 guns are in the hands of civilians in America.  That’s not taking into account the Government’s firearms which are at least another 4,200,000.  Considering those numbers, it is basically impossible to regulate firearms out of the hands of criminals.  If a criminal is willing to pay enough money, they can buy all the guns they want from the black market with a ban in place or not.  Gun control helps to prevent guns from going into the hands of responsible law abiding citizens by making them harder to obtain legally from stores and other legal firearm institutions.        

What kind of place is your place? - Chicano Student Movement

1. Which place or places are significant for your protest?
- The Chicano Student Movement is significant in high schools and colleges, where it originated.

2. What did people associate with the place(s) prior to your protest?
- Prior to the movement/protests (ex: Tucson High School when MAS were removed) people associated Chicanos in schools to be illiterate; thus, arguing they were not worthy to have equal education experience and opportunities overall.

3. Did the protest change how people understand the place(s)?
- As of right now, without much research to support my response, I would say the movement/protest has changed how some individuals view, understand, and value Chicanos and MAS within the school setting.

What kind of place is your place?

1. When the issue of Net Neutrality is brought up, the two spaces I think are involved the most are the United States of America as a country, and the Internet. 
2. Prior to any mention of Net Neutrality, these two places have usually come with a common connotation, freedom and liberty. The idea of the Internet not being neutral threatened the idea of freedom to all citizens.
3. After the protest the way these places were thought about did not seem to change much. In fact because Net Neutrality was passed I believe what both places stood for was reaffirmed. If it had gone the other way the reputation of those place would have been altered severely, but instead they were kept the same. 

What Kind Of Place Is the U of A?

Ironically, the location of my protest (the Adjunct Walkout Day) is Tucson, but I will scale down to the University of Arizona main campus.

-research institution
-basketball school (NCAA)
-Wildcat pride (and hating Phoenix because of it)
-party school (strong Greek community)
-liberal and politically active

I think one of the biggest factors about this protest is the idea that U of A has a LOT of school pride. The protest took place on the Alumni Plaza, where the words of "All Hail Arizona" are physically inscribed into the staircase. Some of the language used around the Adjunct protest is the idea of "Wildcat Family" and doing that in the Alumni plaza ties into the theme nicely.

 Lots of protests and demonstrations happen at the Alumni Plaza--that's where Brother Dean/Jeb do the hate preaching, that's where the short-lived Zonathon movement had their flashmob, and that's where the African American Student Affairs have their annual Trayvon Martin Memorial Silent protest. A standstill gathering in that space typically indicates a protest of some sort is happening, and since that space has a lot of traffic as well between classes, it's a pretty good way to get the message out.

1. Since my protest topic is about Proposition 8, which was a law in California, my main location is the state of California. But since Proposition 8 and the case against it was brought all the way to the Supreme Court, a large part of that focus is in the Washington D.C. area, and as this case came to D.C. it became a large national headline and issue across the United States. So, it started in California, moved to D.C., and then moved to the rest of the US.

2. I think that California has always had this stigma of being "laid back" and a more progressive state in terms of getting things passed, for example it was one of the first states to legalize medical marijuana. When Proposition 8 was passed, it was a shock to the rest of the states because California had been the leading state and the poster child for legalization of gay marriage, and then all of a sudden out of nowhere this Prop 8 was passed which all of a sudden banned marriages of same-sex couples. I think it shifted people's viewpoints on what they thought the state of California was vs. what it really is.

3. I sort of already touched on that in the previous point but I would say that yes, the protest definitely changed how people understood California and also the Supreme Court of D.C. At the time in 2008, the Supreme Court was much more conservative and much less likely to rule in favor of those who had filed a lawsuit against Prop 8. In my own personal opinion I think it made people think less of California for passing Prop 8 and more for the Supreme Court for ruling in favor of striking down Prop 8 and making same-sex marriage in California legal again.  

What kind of place is your place?

Which places are significant to your protest?
Pakistan.


What did people associate with the place(s) prior to your protest?
Predominantly Islamic, oppression of women, desert, Middle East, terrorism


Did the protest change how people understand the places?
Shows political tension as well as protecting the rights of people.

My Place - Research Topic

1. Well, Germany is probably the most important place for German anti-Nazi protest. It is the only place, really, and the movement encompasses almost all of Germany. Though it expands into all the countries that Germany invaded, I am focusing mainly on the home-town protest.

2. Prior to World War II was World War I, where Germany was the aggressor and scapegoat for the tragedies faced by other countries. Before World War II, Germany was poor and destitute, trying to scrape up enough money for the debt from the Treaty of Versailles, leading the country into an economic depression. Before World War I, Germany was a country that, like most European countries, was simply doing its part. The country wasn't much of a powder-keg, except for the big wage disparities; but those were never exclusive to Germany. The protest of Nazism is almost expected by the rest of the world, since outside of the Axis Powers, most citizens of the world saw a lot wrong with Hitler's intentions and methods.

3. The protest certainly made a statement that not all Germans were Nazis, which seems like it was a hard pill for outside countries to swallow, since the Nazis were such a large military force. That, and they stood for humanitarian efforts more than anything. Once the protest gained more attention, it became painfully obvious that the German people were anything but on board Hitler's and the Nazi's plans.

Purple Rain Protest -- Questions of Place

• Cape Town, South Africa and England are important to my protest--I'm focusing mostly on Cape Town.
• People associate Cape Town with beautiful landscape and an urban city. Most people know that it is a South African city, and an important one (as the legislative capital of the country).
• The protest most likely changed the way people viewed Cape Town--the protest gave air to an existing problem that people generally associate with government. Protesters used the love Cape Town residents have for their city to perpetuate their message. The Purple Rain protest probably changed the way people saw how their city was being run, and gave them motivation to change that.

Protest Place

1. New Zealand specifically, also tied to England and America.
2. New Zealand is associated with England and colonialism.
3. New Zealand was the first country that allowed women to vote, however New Zealand is not well known country at this time, being originally a colony of Britain on the other side of the world. New Zealand is very proud of their status in the suffrage movement, however today this is not a very well known fact, so I do not believe it changed how New Zealand was associated.