Vegetable Soup Recipe!

Diana and I will be making Vegetable Soup for the Potluck!

(Sorry this is late both of us were sick when it was assigned. Diana is still sick and will most likely not be back this week, appendicitis.)

Ingredients:
2 table spoons olive oil
1 large yellow onion, chopped
2 carrots, chopped
2 celery stalks, chopped
3, 14.5-ounce cans low-sodium chicken broth (sub vegetable broth)
1/2 pound Yukon gold potatoes, cut into 1-inch chunks
1 table spoon fresh thyme leaves (1 teaspoon dried)
1/2 teaspoon kosher salt
1, 14.5-ounce can diced tomatoes
1/4 pound green beans, cut into 1-inch pieces
1 cup chopped broccoli
1 baguette, sliced and toasted (optional)
Grated Parmesan (optional)
Recipe courtesy of Meals Made Easy by REAL SIMPLE.

We want to buy all organic, and local if possible.

Food Inc. Reflection

Food Inc. showed me exactly what I did not want confirmed but already thought about the modern food industry. The thing that struck me the most was how machine-like and untouchable the food system seems today. Scientists are so obsessed with how much science they can do and not about what they are actually doing to the animals and people.

The specific scenes that hit me square in the heart were when we saw what one of the more ‘humane’ Tyson^® chicken coops look like, the E. Coli amount inside corn fed cows stomachs, the amount of children with type two diabetes now, and finally the promising future in organics.

I have been a member of PETA since I was in the 7^th grade, give donations to the humane society, and just love animals with every ounce of my being (I really try not to be ridiculous about it though.) Seeing any animal, from the cuddliest kitten to the gnarliest looking spider, harmed in any way, pulls heavily upon my heartstrings. Nature is one thing, but chickens caged and packed with growth hormones so strong that they can’t walk, which are then beaten and killed, tears apart my soul. I wouldn’t even wish treatment like that upon the sick, money hungry monsters that created such a system. There is no humanity at all in big meat companies today.

One of the few memories I have of my mom is when our family friends took us to Jack-In-The-Box in the mid 90s. My mom told them she doesn’t allow us to eat there because their hamburgers killed kids. Many cows grown for meat in the US today are fed genetically modified corn diets which fuel hundreds of E. Coli cells to multiply and evolve within their stomachs, pass through the system, and contaminate our bellies. Apparently feeding a cow grass, what they naturally eat, for 5 consecutive days would cut out a huge percentage of the E. Coli breading in their stomachs. However, instead of reverting to the system mother nature provided us with and proved successful for thousands of years, scientists employed by these meat industries think they can out do her, and are seeking even more inorganic methods to solve a solved problem. Way to go guys.

Diabetes is a condition when the human body cannot filter the sugar they take in into their cells for energy. Type one diabetics got this genetically; type two diabetics got this by overworking their bodies system of breaking down sugars, with bad eating practices. It used to be that only older people got type two, which makes sense, a lifetime of work could ware out many systems. Today however, many children are developing type two, because the amount of straight sugar, fat and carbohydrates in the food we eat today is unparalleled by all previous generations. Food companies are breeding a diabetic generation.

Despite all the sadness and irritation Food Inc. brought viewers, they ended with promise: the growing organic industry. Organic foods are products that are not messed with. No pesticides, growth hormones, artificial color or anything, just good old mother nature providing us with the fruits of her labor, in exchange for some of ours, which is how it should be.

Questions I still have include:

How the eyf can Monsanto sue people for their own genetic pollution even if they aren’t USING their ‘pattented gene’?!?

Why on EARTH hasn’t someone sued the CRAP out of those giant slaughter houses for the health issues they cause their employees?!?

Can I punch who ever makes up Tyson’s chicken supplier coop regulations in the face?

Can I patent my eye color because I had it first? If so can I have Monsanto’s lawyers’ phone numbers?

Does treating the animals as badly as some companies do actually make them as much money? Counting all the animals that die and all the cover-up and manipulation it takes to make it possible?

What do you do with a ‘cream cap’ in organic milk bottles?

Socratic Seminar Questions:

How was it possible for the meat system to revert after all the positive changes since The Jungle?

What would be the best course of action to take to change the systems back and make sure they can’t get this bad again?

What are some things we as seniors, voters (some), college students (some), Americans can do to make sure we don’t get diabetes, support a negative system (farmers, consumers, most company employees cons do not out weigh pros.)

I am now a devoted local and organic shopper, as well as a devoted preacher of the organics to those who I care for. I don’t want my family, friends, future children, or myself to suffer from a system that we have the power to end. I love veggie burgers, but that is just a well established fact I wanted to through in, sorry.

Abstract

Engineering the Solutions For Our Modern World

Every living thing has DNA, which depicts the way it thinks, works, acts and what it is made of. In the past few decades scientists have begun to unravel the way DNA works and how it is made, providing other scientists the information to manipulate it. Today the manipulation of an organism’s genetic material (DNA) is called genetic engineering, and the products are called genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This research paper gives examples of what common GMOs we see today as well as providing explanation for why GMOs and genetic engineering should be researched and tested to their farthest extents, as long as the proper precautions are taken. As our world develops at an exponential rate we have begun to see more a more problems arise from the progress. Today more than ever infertility, diabetes, and food shortages have plagued many developing nations. Genetic engineering has offered many promising answers to these problems, answers that could someday help people of every nation and social class achieve health and happiness.

" ...There should be no regulations upon the research and expansion of biotechnology, genetic engineering or genetically modified organisms because they have the potential to solve many modern like cancer, infertility, and crop loss, as well as developing problems like global food shortages and available farmland..." (Swingley, 5)

Genetic Engineering Research Paper Final Draft

Ariel Swingley
April 14th, 2010
Environmental Science

Engineering the Solutions For Our Modern World

Our world today moves a mile a minute. Everything from talking to traveling is racing towards instantaneous and the technology making it possible is evolving at an even faster pace. It makes sense that in this engineered world of ours, new problems should arise from the lives we live and the environments we live them in. It seems like in order to keep up with the next new thing, we have to keep moving forward and surpassing the our ideated limits. However, many people seem to be resisting many of the new technologies and fields of study that could solve many of the problems facing everyone in this day and age. I argue that there should be no regulations upon biotechnology, genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms or their research because they have the potential to solve many modern and developing problems in agriculture, medicine and beyond.
Lets begin with the basics, what exactly are biotechnology, genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms? Biotechnology is the use of living things and/or organic processes to make marketable products, genetic engineering is the direct manipulation of an organism’s genes, and a genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genes have been modified by genetic engineering processes. An easy way to think of these things is that biotechnology is the type of company, genetic engineering the work they do and a GMO is their product.
Some genetically engineered products are easily recognized like In vitro fertilization, recumbent human insulin and genetically modified, herbicide tolerant (GMHT) plants.
In recent years some couple’s inability to conceive children, has come to the forefront of science. In vitro, which is Latin for ‘in glass’, fertilization is the process by which female eggs are stripped of their genetic information and is replaced by the genetic information of the mother and father. This process actually happens in a glass Petri-dish giving validity to its Latin name and its product’s common reference, test tube babies. The fertilized egg (zygote) is then implanted into the mother, or a surrogate mother’s uterus. This genetic engineering technique allows people who would naturally be unable to reproduce, to be ripe with children (in vitro fertilization often leads to multiples i.e. twins, triplets, etc.)
Another easily recognized product of genetic engineering is recumbent human insulin. Human bodies break down everything they are fed into sugars, which are then put into the blood stream and transferred into our cells for energy by means of insulin. Type one diabetics did not get so lucky. Due to a certain genetic mutation, type one diabetics do not make insulin, so the sugar they break down circulates in their blood streams until fatal chemicals are released. From 1922 to 1974, insulin had to be extracted from animals (Teuscher 1974). Today, thanks to the scientific geniuses at Genentech and Eli Lilly, type one diabetics have recumbent human insulin, a mirror image of our natural insulin, made in a lab by genetic engineers. The new process of acquiring insulin is safe, provides the purest form of insulin, and harms no paws in the process.
A final example of a genetic engineering feat is genetically modified, herbicide tolerant (GMHT) plants. Farming is tough. Not only do you have to do all the manual labor of prepping soil, planting crops, watering and harvesting, you also have to deal with a percentage of your crop being ruined by pesky bugs. Monsanto Agricultural Biotechnology Company decided to take a stand, and engineered some of the first commercially grown GMHT plants. If you lay down the green for some Monsanto seeds, you are paying for the freedom to spray your plants with deadly toxins that will trample the attempts of Mother Nature to ruin your crop quota, because Monsanto GMHT crops can withstand the spray and live to see a riper day.
So if science is capable of all this what is the problem? Why on earth would anyone want to stifle our journey towards better farming, medicine and families? Well despite John Locke’s attempts at a government free of religious impediment, many people are smitten with the idea of scientists crafting their dinner salads, children, or health. In fact between 20 and 30% of the USA’s population is against any type of GMO (Kwiecinski 2009). In Europe many EU state members have outlawed the widespread use of GM plants for being potentially invasive and their enhanced ecological fitness, both of which could ruin their native plant life (Hails, 2002). However, despite many attempts at testing these theories, nothing conclusive has been proven (hails 2002), showing once again that it is hard to know what you don’t know, but that wont stop people from passing laws against it anyways.
Genetically modified (GM) plants, despite the taboo, are actually one of the leading advancement to aiding world hunger (Huang 2002), and Monsanto is the leading developer and distributor of GM seeds around the globe. In fact approximately 5.5 million farmers, just in developing countries, directly benefit from their use of Monsanto’s round up ready soy beans, Bt cotton, and Bt yellow corn (James 2001). However, the focus upon only using on GM cash crops may be weeded out in the near future.
As our science advances and our population grows, several related problems have popped up. Some examples are the daunting food shortages, food-growing space vs. living space, and cancer.
It has been projected that in 2050 our population and food demand will have doubled (Tilman 2002). That is a rather scary statistic considering that there currently is not enough produce in the United States for everyone we already have, to eat the recommended amount of fruit and vegetables daily. So how on earth are we supposed to keep up with those numbers when urban sprawl is already creeping into farm space? The answer is genetic engineering.
As of now the majority of the best quality farmland around the world is already in use for agriculture (Tilman 2002). This means that all the remaining land is marginal for farming, yielding far less crop, and ruining more natural animal habitats. As the population continues to grow exponentially, so must our food supply, except, thrashing more natural habitats to keep up could lead to disastrous ecosystem collapses. We are going to need the farmland already in use, to grow more nutritious food in much greater abundance, if we don’t want to reach a global carrying capacity. Right now, GM crops are the only answer. We do not have time to waste hoping plants will evolve to our every needs; we need to assist the process.
The next example is cancer. Why is it that as our technologies get more advanced, more people have these raging diseases we cannot figure out? Did people thousands of years ago get melanoma? Ovarian cancer? Or could these things be from the tanning boxes and laptops we created in the past decades? Well no one knows for sure, but there is truth in recognizing that we are doing a lot of inorganic stuff these days and somehow that has to be effecting us.
In conclusion, there should be no regulations upon the research and expansion of biotechnology, genetic engineering or genetically modified organisms because they have the potential to solve many modern like cancer, infertility, and crop loss, as well as developing problems like global food shortages and available farmland. As we move forward at a pace unforeseen by our ancestors, we have to recognize that with every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, and that unless we revert to all natural living, we have to keep ahead of the curve and explore every option there is to balance the scale. Biotechnology, genetic engineering and GMO’s are just our way of keeping ahead of the curve and using what nature gave us, to sustain our technological momentum.

Works Cited

"About the Human Genome Project." Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
Amunts, Alexey, Omri Drory, and Nathan Nelson. "The Structure of a Plant Photosystem I Supercomplex at 3.4 A? Resolution." Nature 447 (2007): 1-6. Print.

"BIO | About BIO." BIO | Biotechnology Industry Organization. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

BIO | Biotechnology Industry Organization. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

Endy, Drew. "Foundations for Engineering Biology." Nature 438 (2005): 1-5. Print.

"Gene Therapy." Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

"Genentech: Research: Biotechnology." Genentech: Home. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

"Genentech: Research: Genomics." Genentech. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

"Genentech: Research: Milestones in Biotechnology." Genentech: Home. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News - Biotechnology from Bench to Business. Web. 09 Mar. 2010.

Huang, Jikung, Karl Pray, and Scott Rozelle. "Enhancing the Crops to Feed the Poor." Nature 418 (2002): 1-7. Print.

Pearson, Graham S. "How to Make Microbes Safer." Nature 349 (1998): 1-2. Print.

Sharma, Cynthia M., Steve Hoffmann, Fabien Darfeuille, Jeremy Reugnier, Sven FindeiB, Alexandra Sittka, Sarndrine Shabas, Kristin Reiche, Jorg Hackermullen, Richard Reinhardt, Peter F. Standler, and Jorg Vogel. "The Primary Transcriptome of the Major Human Pathogen Helicobacter Pylori." Nature (2010). Nature. Nature Publishing Group, 2010. Web. 8 Mar. 2010.

Teuscher A: Treatment of insulin lipoatrophy with monocomponent insulin. Diabetologia
1974;10:211–214. Print.

Tilman, David. "Agricultural Sustainability and Intensive Production Practices." Nature 418 (2002): 1-7. Print.

Van’t Veer, Laura J., and René Renards. "Enabling Personalized Cancer Medicine through Analysis of Gene-expression Patterns." Nature 452 (2008): 1-7. Print.

Wambugu, Florence. "Why Africa Need Agricultural Biotech." Nature 400 (1995): 1-2. Print.
Weber, Bruce H. "Back to Basics." Nature 445 (2007): 1-1. Print.

2nd Rough Draft of research paper

Ariel Swingley
March 16, 2010
Environmental Science
Engineering the Solutions For Our Modern World
Our world today moves a mile a minute. Everything from talking to traveling is racing towards instantaneous and the technology making it possible is evolving at an even faster pace. It makes sense that in this engineered world of ours, that new problems should arise from the lives we live and the environments we live them in. It seems like in order to keep up with the next new thing in every aspect of life we have to keep moving forward and surpassing the previously accepted end points. However, many people seem to be resisting many of the new technologies and fields of study that could solve many of the problems facing everyone in this day and age. I argue that there should be no regulations upon biotechnology, genetic engineering or genetically modified organisms of their research because they have the potential to solve many modern and developing problems in agriculture, medicine and beyond.
Lets begin with the basics, what exactly are biotechnology, genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms? Biotechnology is the use of living things and/or organic processes to make marketable products, genetic engineering is the direct manipulation of an organism’s genes, and a genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genes have been modified by genetic engineering processes. An easy way to think of these things is that biotechnology is the type of company, genetic engineering the work they do and a GMO is their product.
Some genetically engineered products are easily recognized like In vitro fertilization, recumbent human insulin and genetically modified, herbicide tolerant (GMHT) plants. In recent years some couple’s inability to conceive children, has come to the forefront of science. In vitro, which is Latin for ‘in glass’, fertilization is the process by which female eggs are stripped of their genetic information and is replaced by the genetic information of the mother and father. This process actually happens in a glass Petri-dish giving validity to its Latin name and its product’s common reference, test tube babies. The fertilized egg (zygote) is then implanted into the mother, or a surrogate mother’s uterus. This genetic engineering technique allows people who would naturally be unable to reproduce, to be ripe with children (in vitro fertilization often leads to multiples i.e. twins, triplets, etc.)
Another easily recognized product of genetic engineering is recumbent human insulin. Human bodies break down everything they are fed into sugars, which are then put into the blood stream and transferred into our cells for energy by means of insulin. Type one diabetics did not get so lucky. Due to a certain genetic mutation, type one diabetics do not make insulin, so the sugar they break down circulates in their blood streams until fatal chemicals are released. Thanks to the scientific geniuses at Genentech and Eli Lilly, type one diabetics now have recumbent human insulin, a mirror image of our natural insulin, made in a lab by genetic engineers.
A final example of a genetic engineering feat is genetically modified, herbicide tolerant (GMHT) plants. Farming is tough. Not only do you have to do all the manual labor of prepping soil, planting crops, watering and harvesting, you also have to deal with a percentage of your crop being ruined by pesky bugs. Monsanto Agricultural Biotechnology Company decided to take a stand, and engineered some of the first commercially grown GMHT plants. If you lay down the green for some Monsanto seeds, you are paying for the freedom to spray your plants with deadly toxins that will trample the attempts of Mother Nature to ruin your crop quota, because Monsanto GMHT crops can withstand the spray and live to see a riper day (Swingley 2010).
So if science is capable of all this what is the problem? Why on earth would anyone want to stifle our journey towards better farming, medicine and families? Well despite John Locke’s attempts at a government free of religious impediment, many people are not down with the idea of scientists crafting their dinner salads, children or health, for whatever personal reasons they choose. In fact between 20 and 30% of the USA’s population is against any type of GMO (Kwiecinski 2009). In Europe many EU state members have outlawed the widespread use of GM plants for their direct impacts of being potentially invasive and their enhanced ecological fitness, both of which could ruin their native plant life (Hails, 2002). However, despite many attempts at testing these theories, nothing conclusive has been proven (hails 2002), showing once again that it is hard to know what you don’t know, but that wont stop people from passing laws anyways.
As our science advances and our population grows, several related problems have popped up. Some examples are the daunting food and water shortages, food-growing space vs. living space and cancer. It has been projected that in 2050 our population and food demand will have doubled (Tilman 2002). That is a rather scary statistic considering that there currently is not enough produce in the United States for everyone we already have, to eat the recommended amount of fruit and vegetables daily. So how on earth are we supposed to keep up with those numbers when urban sprawl is already creeping into farm space? The answer is genetic engineering. We need plants that have more nutritional value, more easily harvested and that can survive in our changing climates, and there currently are none. We do not have time to waste hoping plants will evolve to our every needs; we need to assist the process. Regulating environments for the sake of biodiversity and scenery is nice, but don’t be surprised if in 40 years you don’t have any food. The next example is cancer. Why is it that as our technologies get more advanced more people have these raging diseases we can not figure out? Did people thousands of years ago get melanoma? Ovarian cancer? Or could these things be from the tanning boxes and laptops we created in the past decades? Well no one knows for sure, trust me I have definitely checked, but there is truth in recognizing that we are doing a lot of unnatural stuff theses days and somehow that has to effect us.
In conclusion, I argue that there should be no regulations upon biotechnology, genetic engineering or genetically modified organisms, or the research of them, because they have the potential to solve many modern and developing problems in agriculture, medicine and beyond. As we move forward at a pace unforeseen by those before us, we have to recognize that with every action there is an equal and opposite reaction (Newton), and that suggests we need to either revert to all natural discourse or keep ahead of the curve and explore every option there is to balance the scale. Biotechnology, genetic engineering and GMO’s are just our way of keeping ahead of the curve and using what nature gave us, to sustain our life styles and momentum.


Works Cited
"About the Human Genome Project." Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
Amunts, Alexey, Omri Drory, and Nathan Nelson. "The Structure of a Plant Photosystem I Supercomplex at 3.4 A? Resolution." Nature 447 (2007): 1-6. Print.
"BIO | About BIO." BIO | Biotechnology Industry Organization. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
BIO | Biotechnology Industry Organization. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
Endy, Drew. "Foundations for Engineering Biology." Nature 438 (2005): 1-5. Print.
"Gene Therapy." Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
"Genentech: Research: Biotechnology." Genentech: Home. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
"Genentech: Research: Genomics." Genentech. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
"Genentech: Research: Milestones in Biotechnology." Genentech: Home. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News - Biotechnology from Bench to Business. Web. 09 Mar. 2010. .
Huang, Jikung, Karl Pray, and Scott Rozelle. "Enhancing the Crops to Feed the Poor." Nature 418 (2002): 1-7. Print.
Pearson, Graham S. "How to Make Microbes Safer." Nature 349 (1998): 1-2. Print.
Sharma, Cynthia M., Steve Hoffmann, Fabien Darfeuille, Jeremy Reugnier, Sven FindeiB, Alexandra Sittka, Sarndrine Shabas, Kristin Reiche, Jorg Hackermullen, Richard Reinhardt, Peter F. Standler, and Jorg Vogel. "The Primary Transcriptome of the Major Human Pathogen Helicobacter Pylori." Nature (2010). Nature. Nature Publishing Group, 2010. Web. 8 Mar. 2010. .
Tilman, David. "Agricultural Sustainability and Intensive Production Practices." Nature 418 (2002): 1-7. Print.
Van ?t Veer, Laura J., and René Renards. "Enabling Personalized Cancer Medicine through Analysis of Gene-expression Patterns." Nature 452 (2008): 1-7. Print.
Wambugu, Florence. "Why Africa Need Agricultural Biotech." Nature 400 (1995): 1-2. Print.
Weber, Bruce H. "Back to Basics." Nature 445 (2007): 1-1. Print.

Biodiversity Reading

(Wrote this out on paper for homework and just copied to blog)
1. Intrinsic Value?
The view that nature is innately valuable
2. Ecological Services-> anthropocentric?
They are anthropocentric because they have economic, aesthetic or recreational value, all of which benefit humans.
3. Noah Principle?
The principle that the ‘usefulness’ of a species is not a consideration when discussing it’s conservation, but that the specie’s presence in the history of evolution is a good enough reason to protect it.
4. Is there truth to biophilia?
There must be some truth to the theory that environmentalism is hardwired into humans through natural selection because environmentalist exist and Native Americans and other cultures all over the world (unrelated) had similar ideals of connection to the earth, but it must be a trait some people miss out on because there are of course those who do not feel any sort of connection to the earth and really don’t care at all. I think it has to do with the type of person you are and whether or not you care about things that may not seem to directly affect you.
5. 3 Goods:
Domestic agriculture (crops) -> food supply
Medicine
Clothing
6. 4 Services:
Air Purification
Water Purification
Climate Regulation
Generation of moisture and oxygen
7. Gram of soil – Ecosystem?
1 gram: 2.5 billion fungi, 50,000 algae, 30,000 protozoa…. That is a whole bunch of living organisms in one small amount of soil all coexisting and functioning together… seems like an ecosystem to me.
8. Dangers of over-emphasizing:
1. Could create a bias towards which species to save (biodiversity no, no)
2. Could lead to the thought that ecosystems that don’t directly benefit humans are not worth preserving
9. Aesthetic value only for the wealthy?
No. Having natural wild reserves provides a very cheap and nice vacation for people who could not other ways afford it. It also provides free outlets for exercise. Certainly desolately poor families probably will not be able to appreciate them as often as those who have more available money to take vacations and things but it provides an opportunity for those with enough money to do that and not other vacations a place to go instead of not having the option at all.
10. Protection of biodiversity -> benefit human future
Biodiversity is not only the diversity of animals on the planet for the way they look, they each support an ecosystem. When there are no masquitos what do spiders eat? When the spiders die what do the animals that eat them eat? Loosing one species could mean eventually loosing all the animals we need.

Genetic Engineering Information

New useful sources:
Genetic Technology and Biotechnology News
http://www.genengnews.com/

Genetic Technology and Biotechnology News: Best of the Web (Genetics Specific)
http://www.genengnews.com/bestofweb/bestofweb.aspx?tid=13

Genetic Engineering The Facts (Book w/ Extensive Preview)
http://books.google.com/books?id=Fr4-sMtxoMYC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_navlinks_s#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Genetic Engineering Second Edition (Book w/ Extensive Preview)
http://books.google.com/books?id=7yo0Baa0lgwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=genetic+engineering&lr=&ei=zvGPS77PCITmlAT-9emwDQ&cd=11#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Genetic Engineering (Used Book $1.99 + shipping)
http://www.alibris.com/search/books/invid/10147580776?cm_mmc=shopcompare-_-base-_-aisbn2-_-na

Genetic Engineering Volume 1 (Used Book $0.75 + shipping)
http://www.a1books.com/search-page/show-seller-item?act=showSellerItem&WVSESSION_ID=616220868&SELLER_ID=394959&SKU=ZL-050-110%3AP12&ITEM_CODE=0122703014&LIST_PRICE=49&TITLE=Genetic+Engineering+%28Genetic+Engineering%29&%60cart%60=Continue

Human Genome Project:
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/medicine/medicine.shtml

Main Points:

Genetic Engineering is the direct manipulation of genes.
Techniques: Molecular cloning, transformation
Five steps of accomplishing manipulation:
1. Isolate desired genes
2. Insert desired genes into a transfer vector
3. Transfer of vector into organism
4. Organism's cells change
5. Select altered organism from non-altered organisms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_engineering

Gene Therapy:
Altering a faulty or damaged gene that causes a disease
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/medicine/genetherapy.shtml

No Impact Man

What Struck Me:
The wife's designer apparel addiction parallel's mine, or is the future of mine, and she WANTED to give it up. In fact it seems to me that she was the epitome of the over using out of sight and out of mind life style, so he was really making a difference by changing HER lifestyle. Her caffeine addiction terrifies me. I am ASTOUNDED by how much they were actually able to change. Some people may think that they did too much, but they really proved it was possible, and that gives me a lot of hope.

A huge thing that affected me was the parenting aspect of this video. How many people who want children or have children actually raise their own kids? Instead of handing them off to a nanny or subscribing them early to TV. A lot of people have kids because that is what they are 'supposed' to do at a certain age or once they get married, but how many are actually willing to give up their relax time in the afternoons to running around with their kids? Or their date nights and vacations to spending quality time raising their children? I want to be a surgeon and that means a lot of time in school, late nights and weird sleep times, will I be able to have children if I am going to raise them the way I want to? I am not sure I will.

Beyond even that, how much time and energy should go into living? How much of our days are spent in a half-conscience state? How much do we really have to think about? We microwave food or at best read recipes. What would our world be like if we had to make our own food, and follow our garbage to the dump? Is being 'lazy' a new characteristic to recent generations made possible by money interested corporations? Are profitable things only things that make stuff easier? THIS IS A TERRIFYING WEB OF SELF AND CULTURAL DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIORS!

What our SCHOOL can do:
Recycling: We have LOTS of aluminum and plastic but barely any paper and we are a SCHOOL. We are also awful at keeping this stuff straight. Our school majorly lacks in the organization of many things but if we could just get recycling straight it would have a big impact I think.
Carpooling: We are a commuter school, carpooling should be better as well. That is HUGE.
We should figure out what exactly being a new wave educational institution means and cut out the things we don't need. We should be ALL online or use smartboards, we need to go all the way on this if we are going to be a 'high tech' school and help the environment where we can.

New Annotated Sources!

This past.. day actually, my fantastic group of four (Diana, Luke, Paul and I) met for the first time to really pan out our ideas for our senior project. Keeping an eye on the medical field of study and sciences has been really important to me so far in this class because I want to be able to use everything I learn in a way that will benefit me for the rest of my life. By that I mean I want to learn Environmental Science in a way that will make me a much better and more well rounded person, so I have been trying to attach it to things I am already really passionate about. Ok this is coming out wrong but moving on... I am letting go of my absolute NEED to have my senior project and research paper be ONLY about medicine, instead I am going to integrate the information I learned about the bacteria evolution and anti-biotic resistance and put it toward our video's new theme of a bacteria that solves the world's energy and oxygen needs (complete details on what this magnificent bacteria are still to be determined.)

Finding information has definitely been a problem since we clarified our ideas yesterday at lunch and I did my other citations for my previous idea Tuesday. With that stated please bear with me as I am using sources more to form ideas and learn current processes than directly support that our society is heading in this bacterial energy direction. I am also still a bit stuck in my ways with the medicine web sites, they just seem to have all the good articles.


Article 1: Engineering hybrid genes without the use of restriction enzymes: gene splicing by overlap extension.

"Gene splicing by overlap extension is a new approach for recombining DNA molecules at precise junctions..."

"Extension of this overlap by DNA polymerase produces a molecule in which the original sequences are 'spliced' together."

"This technique is used to construct a gene encoding a mosaic fusion protein comprised of parts of two different class-I major histocompatibility genes."

Annotations:
This article is really informative about the exact process of gene splicing, which is when then genetically engineer DNA by adding, subtracting or mutating the DNA. This article was really really helpful in the way of showing me what professional scientists in industry do to splice and what they are doing it for. Our video is going to be a commercial glorifying the new genetically engineered bacteria in a similar fashion to how petroleum and tobacco companies advertise their projects and do 'damage control' when people are opposing them, so we are considering having small sections of scientists actually creating the bacteria. I think it's taking science a little too far when they start to create their own creatures and things but I think that will add to the satirical aspect of our video. Plus who really cares about the well being of bacteria? (Rhetorical question) That could be another part to our video.

Citation:
Horton, R. M. "Engineering hybrid genes without the use of restriction enzymes: gene splicing by overlap extension." Engineering hybrid genes without the use of restriction enzymes: gene splicing by overlap extension. (1989). Pub Med Centeral. 1989. Web. 26 Feb. 2010. .

*another source I will be using for learning about gene/DNA reading, splicing, mapping, etc. will be the Human Genome Project


Article 2: Principles of Gene Manipulation. An Introduction to Genetic Engineering

"Genetic manipulation or genetic engineering is a technology which is becoming widely used in biological research and industry. It has therefore become difficult for scientists not directly involved in the field to keep pace with the literature.

"Other worthwhile contributions are on sickle cell disease, cystinosis, and the muco-
polysaccharidoses, by Lehmann, Schulman, and Leroy, respectively.

"..expression of cloned DNA sequences is also covered in this book and the development of vectors resulting in enhanced expression and in the production of proteins from cloned sequences are described with examples."

Annotations:
So this source is actually from a peer-reviewed text book type thing for a college course. It is a dated piece of work but now that I realize that maybe college textbooks or lesson plans could be really helpful, I am much more confident in my ability to get my hands on real solid evidence and thoughtful writings about the practices of gene splicing and genetic engineering. These materials may also give me a feel for the past's projections for today's science ability so I can make reasonably ridiculous expectations for our bacteria that could possibly be believable to scientist today. Only if we go that route though. I did realize that going the text book route could be either just as or more dry than reading journal articles... both are peer reviewed though! At this point I think that the science part from here on out could possibly be an easier part for me since I am genuinely interested in genetic engineering. It could also be interesting to explore the ethics side... but I guess I really need to do some more serious planning and idea consolidating sessions with my whole group specifically about what we are wanting out bacteria to DO. I think our project will be great because we have a topic that we can theoretically get small hints of all four of our initial researched topics in.



Citation:
Generet, Med J. "Principles of Gene Manipulation. An Introduction to Genetic Engineering." Principles of Gene Manipulation. An Introduction to Genetic Engineering (1981). Pub Med Centeral. 18 Apr. 1981. Web. 26 Feb. 2010. .


If I am late tomorrow John I am so sorry. I was having the darndest time deciding on sources, ideas and really trying to make these annotated sources effective no matter what. I will most likely be there on time. GOODNIGHT

Nate Lewis Video

Video Recap:
We need roughly 10 Terra-watts of energy to sustain us.
Oil, Gas and Coal make up 85% of our current energy.
USA uses 1/4 of the worlds energy.
Renewable energy sources cost more money to build and run making them less desirable, we need cheap energy.
We have roughly 40 years of oil, 60 years of natural gas and 2,000 years of coal left on earth (based on current consumption amount.)

Renewable energies will ONLY have a chance to be used more often IF:
-There is a technology/cost break through
-Outside forces make us stop using oil (government interference)
-Climate change becomes more dramatic/more of a priority

Sources of Carbon-Free Power:
-Nuclear (Fusion/Fission) (capacity to produce 10 TW if we build 1 new plant a day for 50 years)
-Hydroelectric
-Geothermal
-Solar (active, passive, photosynthesis)
-Biomass
-Wind


I would like to start by saying that I really hate coal. Coal is bad in every way possible. I may be over simplifying but our entire global warming and air pollution problem could have been avoided if people stuck with a rule similar to you are what you eat, our air is what we burn. All the thick black petroleum and chary black coal burned up and put in our atmosphere, OBVIOUSLY we were going to have problems.

I think Nate Lewis is a really intelligent guy. Besides the obvious that he teaches at Cal Tech and such, I really like how he presented his ideas first stating that everything he was going to say was based on scientific fact, not personal preference or outside influence. He began by talking about how much energy we need and that stayed the constant theme through out the entire presentation which gave the presentation more structure and strength in my opinion. Mr. Lewis then proceeded to discuss what energy sources are currently used and how much each contributes to our total energy used. I can not believe coal is 50%. That is jaw dropping. Everything I hear is always about oil, solar, nuclear etc., and because of that I sort of forgot about coal as an energy source and seeing that it contributes that heavily to everything I do is rather discouraging. Like I stated earlier, I am not a fan of coal, so that added insult to the miss-informed injury.

Moving on to the renewable portion of the presentation, I am really bummed that renewables are not a larger percentage of our energy sources. Nuclear, probably the worst idea for energy ever because of the waste, is a MUCH larger percentage (19.9) and that SUCKS. I loose more respect for politicians and government every day that nuclear power is the topic for 'alternative' energy. We have NO idea what to do with the waste NOTHING can contain it long enough and there is NOTHING we can do (yet) to change the composition of the RADIO ACTIVE waste. There is so much wrong with nuclear power and our way of containing it (Barring it in a mountain? Seriously?) that I am convinced who ever thought it up just half thought it out and decided to not think it the rest of the way out period because he/she would be dead before it would be a problem. This out-of-sight, out-of-mind attitude is getting more and more apparent and annoying as I get older and learn more about the things we (human race) have done. I would like to formally apologize to my future family and the future families of everyone in my generation if we don't figure this out, because you guys might all have cancer just for being alive on this planet we are pumping full of radio-active waste.

Meat, Disease and Climate Change?

Humans are not your average mammal. Not only are we the only species that drinks another animal's milk, we also have the ability and tendency to manipulate nature, resources and instincts. In the past hundred years we have made leaps in education and technology but we have also begun to see the repercussions of our out of sight, out of mind life styles in the form of disease and climate change. How does the meat we eat for dinner correlate to disease and climate change? That is what I sought to find out.

Article 1: Global Farm Animal Production and Global Warming: Impacting and Mitigating Climate Change
By: Gowri Koneswaran and Danielle Nierenberg

Abstract:
Background
The farm animal sector is the single largest anthropogenic user of land, contributing to many environmental problems, including global warming and climate change.

Objectives
The aim of this study was to synthesize and expand upon existing data on the contribution of farm animal production to climate change.

Methods
We analyzed the scientific literature on farm animal production and documented greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as well as various mitigation strategies.

Discussions
An analysis of meat, egg, and milk production encompasses not only the direct rearing and slaughtering of animals, but also grain and fertilizer production for animal feed, waste storage and disposal, water use, and energy expenditures on farms and in transporting feed and finished animal products, among other key impacts of the production process as a whole.

Conclusions
Immediate and far-reaching changes in current animal agriculture practices and consumption patterns are both critical and timely if GHGs from the farm animal sector are to be mitigated.

Citation:
Koneswaran, Gowri, and Danielle Nierenberg. "Global Farm Animal Production and Global Warming: Impacting and Mitigating Climate Change." Environ Health Perspectives (2008). Pub Med Centeral. Enviornmental Protection Agency, 31 Jan. 2008. Web. 10 Feb. 2010. .

Connection:
The practice of meat farming directly contributes to global warming because the practices are proven to emit abundant amounts of green house gasses(proven to aid climate change and global warming).

Article 2: Social and environmental risk factors in the emergence of infectious diseases
By: Robin A Weiss & Anthony J McMichael

Abstract:
Fifty years ago, the age-old scourge of infectious disease was receding in the developed world in response to improved public health measures, while the advent of antibiotics, better vaccines, insecticides and improved surveillance held the promise of eradicating residual problems. By the late twentieth century, however, an increase in the emergence and re-emergence of infectious diseases was evident in many parts of the world. This upturn looms as the fourth major transition in human–microbe relationships since the advent of agriculture around 10,000 years ago. About 30 new diseases have been identified, including Legionnaires' disease, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), hepatitis C, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)/variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD), Nipah virus, several viral hemorrhagic fevers and, most recently, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and avian influenza. The emergence of these diseases, and resurgence of old ones like tuberculosis and cholera, reflects various changes in human ecology: rural-to-urban migration resulting in high-density peri-urban slums; increasing long-distance mobility and trade; the social disruption of war and conflict; changes in personal behavior; and, increasingly, human-induced global changes, including widespread forest clearance and climate change. Political ignorance, denial and obduracy (as with HIV/AIDS) further compound the risks. The use and misuse of medical technology also pose risks, such as drug-resistant microbes and contaminated equipment or biological medicines. A better understanding of the evolving social dynamics of emerging infectious diseases ought to help us to anticipate and hopefully ameliorate current and future risks.

Citation:
Weiss, Robin A., and Anthony J. McMichael. "Social and environmental risk factors in the emergence of infectious diseases." Nature Medice Magazine (2004). Nature Medicine. Web. 10 Feb. 2010. .

Connection:
The act and process of farming animals for meat is an unnatural process that alters not only the animals and land causing global warming but has lead to the generation of bacterias un-effected by antibiotics leading to currently incurable diseases. Global warming and climate change is its self a new atmospheric combination that is causing a chain reaction of ecosystem alterations that has presented humans with new diseases and viruses that are also currently incurable.

Article 3:
Environmental Systems Analysis of Pig Production
By: Ingrid Strid Eriksson (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)

Abstract:
The aim of this thesis was to develop the SALSA models (Systems AnaLysis for Sustainable Agriculture), and to apply them to studies for the benefit of more sustainable pig production.
Within the framework of environmental systems analysis, the SALSA models were constructed as substance and energy flow models using life cycle assessment methodology for impact assessment and scope definition. The pig production system studied included rearing of growing-finishing pigs (SALSA-pig model) and production of feed (SALSA-arable and SALSA-soybean models).
For energy use, global warming potential and eutrophication, the feed production sub- system had the largest environmental impact, whereas for acidification the pig sub-system was the dominant source.
Results from simulations using the SALSA-arable model showed that energy use, global warming potential and acidification increased with increasing nitrogen fertiliser rate, whereas eutrophication had a minimum around the current recommended rate.
When the pig production system was optimised regarding diet composition for different environmental targets, different diets were obtained. For acidification and eutrophication, a low protein diet was prioritised, which was achieved by high inclusion of synthetic amino acids. For energy use and global warming potential high levels of peas and rapeseed cake (a by-product from rapeseed oil production) were prioritised. The environmental optimiser almost entirely avoided soybean meal, due to its poor environmental record.
A main conclusion of the work was that feed choice had an impact on the environmental performance of pig meat production, not only via the features of the feed as fed to the pigs, such as the crude protein content, but also via the raw materials used, since the environmental impact from the production of these differed and since feed production generally had a large impact on the system as a whole

Citation:
Eriksson, Ingrid. "Environmental Systems Analysis of Pig Production." Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences 15 Jan. 2004: 1-37. Print.


Connection:
The enviornmental impact of a meat farm can be dramatically reduced by changing the animal's diet. Animals packed full of enriched foods and hormones produce more CO2 and other GHG's than an animal that is given real feed and left to nature for size and strength. Organic meat means less GHG's and no genetically enhanced bacteria.




Reflection:
I thought it was sort of common knowledge that meat farming is a big contributor to global warming and climate change just because of what I already know about carbon cycle emission, however I was extremely surprised that the types of food given to an animal weigh heavily on their individual carbon foot print. Meat farming to me sticks out of the already unnatural practices humans use to make our lives easier, like a sore thumb just because of how morally and environmentally wrong it seems to me. I do know that I do not want to have to go hunt a cow every time I want a hamburger, but having a million cows in small area strung out on hormones and sedatives seems just as if not more inconvenient. I don't really want to focus exactly on the effects of the meat industry on climate change, the bacterial evolution is a tad bit easier to find information on and interesting to me.

Lets grow some Passion Fruit!

Passion Fruit (Passiflora edulis)

I want to grow passion fruit because it is DELICIOUS, pretty and hilarious (it has the tendency to steal other plants water, smother them and then use the plants decaying nutrients to grow more, but at the same time lives in harmony growing over its self repeatedly.)
• Passion Fruits are fruits that grow on vines
• Growing seasons vary, but planted vines typically harvest August- December and March – May.
• Passion fruit vines are often planted from seeds and will take 2-3 weeks to germinate. Seedlings can be transplanted into soil when they are 10 inches tall. It should take roughly a year for the vines to flower and fruit using the seed method. Planting a pre-grown plant could lead to fruit (dependant on climate) in 2-3 months (I would estimate early to mid June by the time is was properly in the soil and growing.)
• Seed to harvest would take roughly one year.
• When planting a potted passion fruit plant you have to have the plant (can be purchased from many nurseries in San Diego) which will be a clone that can with stand a plant disease that typically plagues vines grown from seeds (Fusarium wilt), a trellis or fence for the vine to grow on, and lots of compost! Passion fruit vines need LOTS of organic nutrients and with lots of compost we will have LOTS of fruit.
• For us to produce a large amount of fruit we would need two potted vines and a 5 ft by 4 ft trellis or growing fence. The vines will grown like crazy with enough sun and compost so we could do a smaller one but it is imperative that we are able to control where the vine can grown because it will go nuts. A growing space that big would produce 40+ fruits (two per square inch of growing space average assuming they don’t grow over each other, should that occur we would have twice or three times as much.)
• Passion Fruit vines can grow in many different soil environment but grow best in light to heavy sandy loams. Passion fruit is a fast growing vine and therefore needs to have a ridiculous amount of nutrients, like a teenage boy growing a foot per month might need, but in plant form so LOTS of compost, worms and microbials. Soil pHs of 6.5-7.5 are preferable but some growers swear by acidic soil (adding lime juice and pulp to the soil.) NPK ration of 10-5-20 is ideal for the vine.
• Passion fruit vines will NOT grow in overly watered soil, so drainage is important but they do need continuous watering. The soil should remain moist between watering. The more frequently the vine is watered the more fruit it will produce, but the tender must be extremely careful of over watering.
• Passion Fruit is great at smothering other plants because of it’s fast growing and nutrient demanding nature. Vines also steal water with their shallow root systems and will should they be given the chance. Passion Fruit vines grow like bunny populations and will need to be confined and pruned regularly.
• Passion fruit is from Brazil but the most commonly know passion fruit (grown in Hawaii) has no known origin, it sort of just appeared one day in Australia and is a hybrid of a passion flower and passion fruit vine neither of which were native to that area.

Works Cited
"Guide to Growing Passion Flowers, Passiflora incarnata." How to grow your favorite plants, create a new garden, and resolve your plant and gardening problems. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. .
"How Not To Kill Your Passion Vine." Tropica Mango: Rare and Exotic Plant Nursery. Web. 27 Jan. 2010.
"How to Grow Delicious Passionfruit | eHow.com." EHow | How To Do Just About Everything! | How To Videos & Articles. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. .
"How To Grow Passion Fruit? By Growing Passionfruit Seeds..." Tropical Permaculture Gardens: Growing Fruits And Vegetables The Easy Way. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. .
"How to Grow Passionfruit." Homely Capers | Home and Garden Discussions - Mostly Garden. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. .
"PASSION FRUIT Fruit Facts." California Rare Fruit Growers. Web. 28 Jan. 2010. .
"Passionfruit." Web. 28 Jan. 2010. .

Drug Resistant Bacteria: Annotated Sources

It is common knowledge that non-organic meats that we find in the super market were treated with some kind of antibiotic or steroids, but they seem to taste exactly the same so what is the harm in saving some money on meat and buying the non-organic kind? Well research studies done by science institutions around the world suggest that more than just some steroids and antibiotics could be in that meat. The meat industry's practice of altering their animals to produce more meat has opened the door to new dangerous bacterias that are resistant to antibiotics. Deadly bacterias that are resistant to antibiotics means that should they make their way into the consumer's body, they will not be killed by much of our modern day medicines, allowing the bacteria to run wild in our bodies and possibly kill a person if it is not killed first.

Sources:

Drug-resistant Salmonella from animals fed antimicrobials
The New England Journal of Medicine

Notes: Despite the technical jargon, this piece is very informative about the specific types of dangerous bacteria that is becoming resistant to antibiotics because of pesticides. Even more importantly this journal describes how the bacteria is doing it and projections of future abilities to do so.

Abstract: It has been difficult to document the postulated sequence of events that begins with the selection of drug-resistant organisms in animals fed subtherapeutic amounts of antimicrobials and ends with clinically important infections in human beings. In early 1983 we identified 18 persons in four Midwestern states who were infected with Salmonella newport that was resistant to ampicillin, carbenicillin, and tetracycline and characterized by a 38-kilobase R plasmid. Twelve of these patients had been taking penicillin derivatives for medical problems other than diarrhea in the 24 to 48 hours before the onset of salmonellosis. Eleven patients were hospitalized for salmonellosis for an average of eight days, and one had a fatal nosocomial infection. We compared plasmid profiles of all human (six-state area) and animal (United States) S. newport isolates over an 18-month period and examined selected records of meat distribution. The results indicated that the patients had been infected before they took antimicrobials, by eating hamburger originating from South Dakota beef cattle fed subtherapeutic chlortetracycline for growth promotion. This study demonstrates that antimicrobial-resistant organisms of animal origin cause serious human illness, and emphasizes the need for more prudent use of antimicrobials in both human beings and animals.

Citation: SD Holmberg, MT Osterholm, KA Senger, and ML Cohen
Drug-resistant Salmonella from animals fed antimicrobials
N. Engl. J. Med., Sep 1984; 311: 617 - 622.

Website: http://www.sciencemag.org/searchall/all.gca.dtl?allch=&SEARCHID=1&FULLTEXT=Drug-resistant+meat&FIRSTINDEX=0&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&gca=nejm%3B311%2F10%2F617

Occurrence and resistance to antibiotics of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli in animals and meat in northeastern Italy
Elsevier Science B.V.

Notes: This article shows the wide spread applicability to the topic. In short this doesn’t just happen in America, it is how the system works. This article must be purchased. Currently working on means of retrieving the article with out buying it but so far out look is not promising. Still looking for studies as well done and credible that are free but it has also been a seemingly futile pursuit.

Abstract: A study was carried out in northeastern Italy during 2000 and 2001 to investigate the occurrence of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli in animals, cattle, pigs, and broilers, and raw meat, beef, pork, and chicken. Campylobacter spp. were detected in 53.9% of the cattle, 63.5% of the pigs, and 82.9% of the broilers examined. Chicken meat was frequently contaminated (81.3%), while lower rates were found in pork meat (10.3%) and beef (1.3%). The resistance to antibiotics of the strains was also investigated, and compared to that of human clinical isolates. C. coli was generally more resistant than C. jejuni. Resistance to quinolones was frequently observed in C. coli isolated in chicken meat (78.6%); slightly lower rates were found in C. jejuni isolated in broilers (42.2%), chicken meat (52.8%), and humans (38.2%). C. coli was also frequently resistant to tetracycline in all sources, while resistance to streptomycin was most frequently observed in pig isolates (89.4%).

Citation: “MAMA-PCR assay for the detection of point mutations associated with high-level erythromycin resistance in Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli strains”, Journal of Microbiological Methods, Volume 63, Issue 1, October 2005, Pages 99-103, Rodrigo Alonso, Estibaliz Mateo, Estibaliz Churruca, Irati Martinez, Cecilia Girbau, Aurora Fernández-Astorga

Website: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T7K-46JYMFP-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1174157819&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=47f8586e526e4366b1ba46dac102c8fe#aff1

Drug-resistant infections lurk in meat we eat
MSNBC

Notes: The depth and scientific evidence is lacking, but this is a good source of an example. A man was stabbed by his animal (treated with antibiotics and such) and his wound would not heal with easy measures of medicine because the bacteria would not die. The implications of this super bacteria could have the most detrimental effects on the ones who make our meat, meaning the humanity could be taken out of the meat process if things get too out of hand.

Citation: MASON, MARGIE, and MARTHA MENDOZA. "Drug-resistant infections lurk in meat we eat." MSNBC. Associated Press, 29 Dec. 2009. Web. 20 Jan. 2010. .

Website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34614380/

Farmer in Chief

The Farmer in Chief and the Socratic seminar following the reading did a lot to enlighten me me upon the subject of our nation's farming practices. I am astounded that the government subsidizes certain foods. I thought our nation was really wise when they realized giving any one state the capital of the nation would give that one state too much power, hence forth we have Washington DC. How could the same Government not realize that subsidizing certain foods would lead to the mass production of that one food? And if they did how could they over look the implications these foods would have on our nations diet? The recent and current United States Government seems to make a lot of these decisions that are 'for the betterment of the people' which lead us to obesity, gross national debt and general disdain from the nations of the world. Why is it that many Americans think that they own the planet? How did ships of people fleeing Europe or other parts of the world from oppression and judgment become the all-oppressive and judgmental capital of the world? Baffling.

Family Farming Connection

After a long conversation with my father about our family's farming history it turns out we have none. For a long time my uncle was considering making his own organic farm up in the Bay area but the city would not permit him to do so in the area he was hoping for so that aspiration fell through. My grandfather was a large animal veterinarian in the Midwest for large farms but that is the closest thing we have to a farming past. This year I have made the goal to begin a garden in my own backyard and grow passion fruit vines as well as some vegetables.

Natural World Curiosity

What in nature fascinates you?

The things that fascinate me most about nature are the systems that work together within one animal or pant, at any one given time there are thousands of different processes going on in the organism making everything work. For example while I sit in math class after lunch my body is breaking down food, breathing, putting my motor skills to work taking notes and so on. Each microscopic cell is doing something for the greater good of the body using no thought at all. It astounds me. I am specifically interested in the human body because I want to be a doctor but learning about how similar processes work in other living things excites me as well.