Third assignment

Since my topic is food irradiation my audience would be consumers of potential irradiated food. My subject is timely because there's a constant struggle with proper food preparation. You always see in the news about how E. coli or salmonella has been found in different food item. I wouldn't really say I'm invested in this topic is just an issue that is extremely debatable and was recently brought to my attention.

I assume that high school teachers thought that if we included first-person pronouns in our paper and we are surely to also include our own biases. Also as a high school student we were a less credible source for information. Apparently now that achieved a high school diploma we are able to receive some credit for our own bases of knowledge. I guess this is one of the rewards for college students, seeing that we made it past the stereotypes.

So far I have seen three different viewpoints, the first being pro food irradiation, and the second against irradiation both of which being is supplied by Jonathan Prejean. The third would be a completely neutral view which is given by the environmental protection agency.

This week I learned that possibly food irritation is a superior way of sanitizing compared to watching and heating. There are some forms of bacteria that can survive extreme he and also so-called antibacterial chemical. And just because a substance is packaged as antibacterial doesn't mean it kills all bacteria. For example hand sanitizer does not kill bacteria that can be found in your toilet like Serratia marcescens.

Second Assignment

The most interesting source so far is http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/403/Prejeanpap.html. Its a research assignment done by a Jonathan Elliot Prejean a student attending Harvard law school. His research compiles all the information about Food irradiation. He provides the definition of food irradiation and where it is being practiced. Also his paper is argumentative claim that food irradiation is a good way to decrease the risk of food borne illness and should be used in the US.

According to Jonathan Food Irradiation has the potential to reduce the amount of food borne illness in the U.S. It seems to be the only way to remove Salmonella from poultry, which puts consumers at risk of under-cooked food. Irradiation would eliminates that problem. If irradiation were constantly used on ground beef, the problem of E. coli would be no more. Poultry irradiation has been approved for nearly 10 years, but the rate of irradiation for consumer poultry is 0.2%. The economic losses due to Salmonella an estimated $2.4 billion. Basically he believes that the process food irradiation will not only benefit our health, but also our economy.

A few set backs I guess would be that I want to argue the dangers of food irradiation and why it shouldn't be used but, I have yet to find a source to back me up. I the source I have found list the risk and then apply a rebuttal saying that the risk are insignificant. Hopefully I will find someone who is at least skeptical about the topic.

First Assignment

My Inquiry question is why food irradiation is dangerous? Food irradiation the process of passing radiation into food to kill insects and bacteria that cause food borne illness. An example would be E. coli. I chose this question because it was previously talked about in my biology class.I figure since I had previous knowledge on the subject from researching it for a biology assignment I could use their prior knowledge in this case as well. I've found a multitude of website for my topic including a Harvard University Research site that provides background information on food irradiation. It relevant because it is being largely used on the foods that we eat especially beef and pork.