Pre-Historic Art and Egyptian Art

There were many differences between Pre-historic art and Egyptian art . One being that pre-historic art was before written history. Which roughly started about 40,000 BC as to were written was about 3,500 BC. Also many pre-historic sculptures which they date to be around 40,000 BC had three main aspects to it Found ,Portable ,Magical . A prime example of this would be the Venus of Willendorf which was dated around 25,00-21,00 BC. This figure shows the apparent large size of the breasts and abdomen ,which can be interpreted as a fertility symbol. The figure has no visible face as well which could mean that it was universal in the sense, that it could be any female not just a particular one. There were also many caves that were found with different types of paintings in them known as cave paintings. About 30,000 BC. One of the first cave paintings found was in 1911. Some of the Egyptian art was such as the palette of narmer about 3100 BC. The Narmer Palette is a flat plate of schist of about 64 centimeters in height. Its size, and decoration show us that it was a ceremonial palette, rather than an actual palette for daily us. Things like the Egyptian tombs or mastaba’s were made to perfection with detail and in most cases made out of gold. Pyramids themselves were magical works of art such as the pyramids of Giza and the Sphinx. Egyptain sculptures were more detailed and never free standing always and a flat back piece to it to keep it from falling or balancing the weight.

The Crucible’s Abigal and Mary Warren

Abigail ; Mary Warren In this essay I will explore the characters of both Mary and Abigail. These two seem to be within the same circle of friends however have to complete different personalities. However with one being a leader and the other a follower they match perfectly. In the last scenes towards the end of the play we start to see a stronger side towards Mary Warren. She enters the court with intentions of speaking the truth of what happened, to tell the court that they all lied about seeing the devil.However eventually she stops coming across as strong minded and starts to show her real timid side who doesn't like to be ‘left out’ or seen as an outcast. Whereas Abigail’s character is shown to be very strong minded and conniving she always strives for what she wants. In one of the scenes we see Abigail trying to seduce ex flame Proctor, during this it is clear to see that proctor is indeed finding this hard to keep away however he does manage to stick to No and not retaliating.In the court we see another side to her, where she is fighting for her life and doesn't care who she takes down with her, this is shown by calling out to a big yellow bird as referring to it as Mary, and telling us that this bird wants to destroy her face. Abigail is portrayed to be a leader, she has her group of ‘friends’ who look up to her and rely on her. This is shown twice throughout the play, the first time is when the girls go to meet her at the beside if Betty and after hearing of witchcraft in town a couple of the girls immediately go to Abby asking for help/advise on what they should say.On the other hand, Mary Warren is portrayed as a follower. This shows that she is a weak minded person. She always needs someone there to push her or to defend her. This is shown at it strongest when at the last scene in the court, Mary leave the house with proctor with intentions of telling the courts the truth and to talk about how they all lied about dan cing with spirits etc however it is then reversed when Abigail turns all the other irls against Mary and trying to make the judges believe that there is a big huge yellow bird that Mary has sent to deface her, after about 2-3 minutes of this the girls catch on and also start to join in with mimicking Mary and making the people of the court believe that Mary has sent her soul out to get them. At this point Mary is petrified and doesn't know what it is that she is to do. In the end she ends up following Abigail and the girls and puts all the blame on proctor, blaming him for bringing her here, and saying that he too has made a pact with the devil.

Is cloud computing beneficial to organizations Annotated Bibliography

Is cloud computing beneficial to organizations - Annotated Bibliography Example It also compiles information on software as a service, platform as a service and infrastructure as service styles of its architecture. The paper carries useful information to beginners. 3. Matt Goldner (2010). Winds of Change: Libraries and Cloud Computing. [Online]: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.. 3. Available at [https://docs.google.com/viewer] Last Accessed on 24th Sep 2012 This early article contains definition for cloud computing and its characteristically high benefits compared to old systems. Author then describes improvement of technology, data and community of libraries using cloud computing. This is a case study based article focusing the financial aspects of cloud computing in businesses. Author describes changing production architecture as the main source of reducing cost. He also explains balancing risks between customer and service provider. Paper employs a simple approach to introduce cloud computing to readers by describing its characteristics compared to old systems. Uses are broadly described in the next section. Focus of the paper narrows down to application in academic institutions in the final section. Using cloud computing to solve specific problems in academic institutions is described in this paper. Authors recommend integrating industrial IT resources with academic institutions in order to use resources economically. Importance of facilitating student researches in software engineering is also highlighted. 7. Wardley, S, Goyer E, and Barcet N, "Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud Architecture," 2009, [Online]: Available at [http://www.canonical.com/sites/default/files/active/Whitepaper-UbuntuEnterpriseCloudArchitecture-v1.pdf.] Last Accessed on 24th Sep 2012 This paper focuses on Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud (UEC). The chapters discuss its internal architecture and characteristic advantages over security, networking and scalability in cloud computing. These are presented in detail with related technical

Compare Montaignes work de 'institution des enfants in Essais livre 1 Essay

Compare Montaignes work de 'institution des enfants in Essais livre 1 and Jean Jacque Rousseau novel Emile ou de l'education theories of education, with particular reference to authority - Essay Example Indeed, in the introduction to Montaigne’s On the Education of Children, William Harris includes a chart that illustrates striking similarities in both the philosophical and literary stylings of the theorists. Both writers seek to shift the traditional assumptions of the education process away from merely treating the student as an open receptacle to whose head knowledge of facts and figures is dutifully filled. Instead, they embrace a progressive concept of education that would later be echoed in the transcendental theories of Emerson and Thoreau, and the self-exploratory theories of Maria Montessori. Rousseau and Montaigne contend that the focus of education must be placed not on the rote memorization of knowledge, but on the acknowledgement that true wisdom is gained in the understanding of the processes of learning. Even as the underlining message of both writers concerning the need of shifting the emphasis of education away from socially constructed knowledge, towards the grasping of the intuitive processes of its attainment is the same, they differ in the extremity of their characterizations. While Montaigne acknowledges the necessity of questioning particular elements of society, he ultimately embraces it for its essential role in personal development. Conversely, Rousseau understands socially constructed knowledge to be inherently unsound and encourages the systematic and perhaps revolutionary questioning of its foundational concepts. In The Social Contract, another influential work, he even goes as far as chastising society because "the social pact gives the body politic absolute power over all its members (Rousseau 70)†. Whereas for Montaige, Harrison writes, â€Å"Humanity is too complex to reach the millennium through any single revolution, whether it be in religion, politics, or education. Montaigne saw this vaguely, yet more clearly than did

How has the use of ICT enhanced the quality of learning and teaching Essay

How has the use of ICT enhanced the quality of learning and teaching across the curriculum at Key Stage 3 - Essay Example of impact of the use of ICT on teaching and learning at Key Stage 3 already existed within a wide literature on educational uses and outcomes of ICT in classrooms and out of school settings. This study is designed to investigate the issues in more detail and involves wide collection of data from the researches conducted in this context. Since Key Stage 3 is the foundation stage so special emphasis has been laid on it in this document. The main aim of this study is to : This study draws on the evidences available on the progress made in schools and the learning and skill sectors. It is based on the research done by various government agencies like Becta, Ofsted, DfeS etc. So the data has been collected through: This study would help in understanding the current challenges in realising the objective of ICT based education. It should lead to improvement in the provision and planning in the use of ICT, which has become an all school issue. It would bring forth the progress issues and challenges. This document would provide information that would help in formulating educational policies on the deployment of ICT, for key stage 3. The study reveals that initiatives taken by government has borne fruitful results. There is significant developments at pupil, teacher and school levels. But in certain cases it was observed that unavailability of sufficient resources became main obstruction in the path of progress like in the case of music departments. The pupil motivation has increased. Pupils have become increasingly independent users of ICT tools and information sources. They have become more focused, efficient and rigorous in their use of ICT, and carry out a range of increasingly complex tasks. Teachers feel more

The Creation of Youth Culture Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

The Creation of Youth Culture - Essay Example Fashion has been considered as a cultural trend since it is associated with certain sets of groups and advances around influence. This paper, therefore, focuses on presenting how fashion is currently being used to identify certain youth culture identity. Rouse (1989) argues that fashion is about change for change sake and the illusion of novelty (Rouse, 1989, p126). By considering this argument, youths of the present generation have emerged, with a number of symbolic identities, to define a set of cultural identities. The symbolic identities are just fashions since they do not have significant meanings within the youths and their cultures. Citing a few examples, in this case, tattooing, the wearing of ornaments and masks are some of the most common fashion trends that youths currently consider identifying themselves with certain identities. Any youth is not under obligation to participate in the above practices since it is a matter of choice. This, therefore, draws a clear distinctio n between culture and fashion. Some youths may argue that tattoos make them feel adventurous while others would reason that it makes them remember a special person in their lives. Some youths also get tattoos in support of some campaign in some illness like breast cancer or some charity work. Contrary to what youths are inclined to these days, tattoos were used as a cultural scribe to churches in the olden days, which showed some signs in faith (Savage, 2007, p109). The ornaments worn by the youths, on the other hand, may signify birth dates and are given as birthday presents or those in a relationship as a sign of remembrance and love. The idea is that the ornament acts as a bond between the parties. Similarly, some ornaments symbolize authority. These are found among the people in positions of power like kings, queen, and some religious leaders. Wearing of masks has also become a common fashion identity among the youths.

Learning Framework Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4250 words

Learning Framework - Assignment Example irected, reflective learners Learning Goal 2: Be knowledgeable in their major field of study Learning Goal 3: Be critical enquirers and problem solvers Learning Goal 4: Be able to think and act ethically Learning Goal 5: Be able to work collaboratively Learning Goal 6: Be effective communicators The Learning Framework is the first stage of your assessment programme that culminates in your Oral Brief and Co-operative Education Report. In your Co-operative Education Report you will critically reflect on, analyse and evaluate your development throughout your Co-operative Education Placement and work on and complete a discipline research topic of your choice. Instructions for completing this document You are required to address all of the points which relate to each of theBBus Learning Goals. You may either answer each point individually or you may choose to respond to all points in the one discussion of paragraphs using appropriate headings and sub-headings. Learning Goal 2: Be knowledg eable in your major field of study demonstrating the application of knowledge from your major(s) to your Co-operative Education Placement In this Learning Goal you will explain how knowledge from your major(s) might apply to your tasks and discuss the value of your role. You are required to address both of the points below. You may include further comments or discussion that is relevant to this Learning Goal. You must integrate relevant concepts, models, frameworks, theories and/or technical competencies (use in text references) to support your discussion. 1. Provide a brief overview of your role and your Co-operative Education Placement Organisation (CPO) 2. Briefly describe each of your key tasks or activities that relate to your major(s). For each key task or activity, identify a comprehensive range of theories, concepts, models, frameworks and/or technical competencies from your major(s) and explain how they could apply. 3. Discuss the value that your role and personal attribute s may add to your CPO. 1. Provide a brief overview of your role and your Co-operative Education Placement Organisation (CPO) 2. Briefly describe each of your key tasks or activities that relate to your major(s). For each key task or activity, identify a comprehensive range of theories, concepts, models, frameworks and/or technical competencies from your major(s) and explain how they could apply. 3. Discuss the value that your role and personal attributes may add to your CPO. 1. I have already worked in a branding and advertising agency in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and I became interested in functional attributes of branding and advertising career during my tenure in Brand House Advertising Service. It has been already mentioned that I am going to join Brand House Advertising Service in Riyadh as Co-op Placement in temporary basis. During the short tenure of

Nazi Holocaust Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Nazi Holocaust - Essay Example The essay "Nazi Holocaust" will help to understand the graphic nature of the Holocaust, and the reader can picture the events in his mind based on the explanation given. The book Night recalls the occurrences in the town of Sighet, Transylvania in Northern Romania. At the very beginning, we get introduced to the twelve-year-old Eli back in 1941. The historic expulsion of all Jew from Sighet gets vividly explained in the book. The Hungarian police rounded up all foreign Jews and bundled them up into waiting vehicles in full public glare. Rumor mills purported that these Jews got taken to Galicia where they became happy and got formally employed. These reports later got challenged by an escapee, Moshe the Beadle, who told of the Gestapo and how the Jews got killed each day. He explained that the Jews got led to a forest where they got forced to dig trenches before they got shot and buried. Babies, he explained, got tossed in the air and used for target practice. Moshe had escaped after getting a shot at the leg and mistaken to be dead. The Jews ignored Moshe’s warning with some saying that he was mentally unstable (Wiesel 21). As soon as the Fascist took over control of the government, Nazi soldiers took to the streets of Sighet where they rounded up all Jews including Eli and his family. Elis family got put in a cattle wagon after receiving a stern warning that anyone who dared to escape would be killed. They got transported to Auschwitz. Upon arrival, men and women got separated. Eli and his father got whisked away separately, while Hilda, Elis mother and Tzipora got led straight to the gas chamber. Eli tried to remain vigilant the rest of the night in the concentration camp never losing sight of his father. He feared that if they got separated, that would be the last he would ever see of him (Wiesel 22). On their first night at Auschwitz, Eli and his father got put in line ready to be thrown into the fire furnace. They both watched trucks loading up children that were to be delivered into the fire (Wiesel 19). Elis father chanted the prayer for the dead, commonly known in Jewish circles as Kaddish. He m ade the prayer for them too in anticipation of the inevitable. They survived the night and got ordered back to their barracks. Sometimes the whole camp got forced to watch hangings of children. Eli graphically explains this when he says the child’s eyes were still clear, and his tongue was still pink (Wiesel 23). Eli and his father got moved to Auschwitz II form Birkenau in 1945. This was a work camp with reduced cases of violence. Eli explains that they were in constant search of food, saying that they were worse than corpses. After American and soviet bombing of the concentration camps, 60,000 Jews including Eli and his father got moved back to Germany in what gets commonly referred to as the death march. They got bundled up in trains to Auschwitz where many of them lost their lives due to congestion. They literally lay on top of others, occasionally throwing out dead bodies each morning. This train journey marked their symbolic journey to freedom as the Soviets liberated A uschwitz (Wiesel 65). Maus, on the other hand, gets divided between the present interviewing sessions where Spiegelman interviews his father and the past, where Vladek recounts his experiences between the mid 1930s and 1945, when the Holocaust ended. The book recount details of the marriage union between Vladek and his wife, Anja. Vladek got captured as a war prisoner due to escalating racist and political tensions. He got shocked to find out that Sosnowiec got placed under German siege when he got released. Vladek got released on the Polish Protectorate side of the

Change and Culture Case Study Essay Example for Free

Change and Culture Case Study Essay In tough economic times, companies are looking for ways to continue to provide services and products to the public without compromising quality and efficiency. When it comes to smaller businesses, or businesses that provide the same product or service, it is often wise to merge the companies together to form a stronger, more stable structure. This will take place when Frithsen Physical Therapy merges with Select Physical Therapy. Select Physical Therapy is a national corporation that provides physical therapy as well as aquatic therapy, occupational therapy, athletic training outreach and long-term care services. For the past decade Frithsen Physical Therapy has seen Select Physical Therapy as a fierce competitor that provides less than quality care to its patients. Frithsen Physical Therapy has been well known in the community for providing care in a professional and personal way. Many employees are afraid that merging with a large corporation will change the way they work, causing the quality of patient care to decrease. Middle managers will become essential before, during, and after the merge to ensure that every employee from each company understands the vision for the new corporation and is willing to compromise to make it a reality. The combining of two companies is no easy task and will change the shape and culture of both companies, until a new one is born. Processes such as communication, hiring, patient care and record keeping will change to accommodate the growing corporation, in hopes it will become more effective than either company was on its own. Merging two companies is a delicate procedure, requiring compromise and patience. Each company has built a certain culture over its existence, and each one believes that their culture is best. In reality, each company has certain services or tasks that they perform better than the other. In the instance of Select Physical Therapy merging with Frithsen Physical Therapy, the culture of the new, combined company will be similar to the cultures put in place by each company separately. However, it is important to create a new culture, differing from the previous ones, to promote a sense of teamwork and camaraderie. If this step does not occur, everyone will continue to work in his or her own culture, which becomes divisive, causing the company to be pulled in different directions (Sherrill, 2001). In the first phases of combining the companies, the culture may be fragmented, with each company holding on to what they know. Many of the employees will be wary of the changes occurring around them on a daily basis and may resist certain adjustments (Stanwick, 2000). A new atmosphere of open-mindedness and compromise needs to emerge for the blended company to be successful. When two companies are combined, there are bound to be differences of opinions between practitioners and administrators regarding polices and procedures. It is important to understand that each company brings something valuable to the table, and all ideas and opinions should be considered and discussed Avoiding a competitive stance will help employees from both sides see the positives of blending ideals and values, and ultimately encourage the birth of a stronger, more successful new culture (Stanwick, 2000). To successfully combine two companies involves cooperation from all levels of management. As a middle manager in a merging corporation, there are different strategies and skills that will be necessary to ensure a smooth transition. The most important strategy will be communication. Before the merger occurs, it is important for middle managers to understand the new beliefs and values that upper management desires (Bolton Lewis, 1998). Once middle managers understand the vision for the new company, they must pass it down to their employees. It is not enough to simply communicate the new vision; middle managers must begin practicing these changes immediately. Leading by example is the most effective way to produce results. The middle managers in most companies are more approachable than top management; therefore it is imperative that middle managers are on board with the new vision of the company and display this in a positive way. While the merger is occurring it is essential to build a team atmosphere, full of open communication, honesty, and teamwork. Each employee from both companies should feel as though their positions is important, and their cooperation is essential to the success of the forming company. Once the merger is complete, it is all about the new culture, staying visible, approachable, and communicating information early and often (Bolton Lewis, 1998). Aside from ensuring employees are blending well, it is important to focus on patient care. There will be changes implemented at every phase of the merger, but it is important not let misunderstandings, or issues within the staff affect the quality of care given to the patients. Once the merger has been finalized and integration is complete, middle managers need to assess their staff to be sure that each employee is doing his or her part to make the merge as successful as possible. If there are employees who are resisting the changes being made within the company, or not buying into the new culture and vision, it is necessary to evaluate the situation and decide what is best for the team and the company as a whole. Middle managers must not forget to consider the employees feelings when situation such as this arise. Often times, employees resist mergers because their identities are closely tied to their jobs, and they like to experience continuity of their identities. Giessner (as cited by Sidle, 2006) noted that mergers would challenge this continuity, leading to distress and anxiety from employees. When middle management can understand the feelings of their employees, they can be better equipped to handle issues that may arise by allaying fears or implementing strategies to make employees comfortable with their new roles. Even if all employees from both companies are comfortable with the combining of their two organizations, upper management has the daunting task of reworking its current systems and procedures to include the best strategies from each company. In the case of Frithsen Physical Therapy and Select Physical Therapy, the former’s employees will see the most changes. Frithsen Physical Therapy is a small corporation, covering New England, while Select Physical Therapy is a national corporation, encompassing more services and a variety of clinicians. Along with physical therapy services Select Physical Therapy offers occupational therapy, aquatic therapy, long-term care facilities, and a large athletic training outreach program. This will require managers from Frithsen Physical Therapy to be in charge of more people, and perhaps different clinicians than they are accustomed to working with. The shape and systems currently used in the company will have to shift in order to fit a larger scale of business and a more complicated hierarchy. The regional managers from Frithsen Physical Therapy reported directly to the President of the company, whereas the regional managers of Select Physical Therapy report to one of ten executive managers, who then report to the CEO of the company. The clinic managers of Frithsen Physical Therapy were able to see all of the employees they supervise on a daily basis, working side by side. With the inclusion of the vast athletic training program, they will now be responsible for knowing which athletic trainers report to their clinics, and what schools they are assigned to. There will also be a manager of athletic training services that they will need to communicate with about referrals and business relating to the relationship between the schools covered and the clinics in the area. Due to this more intricate hierarchy, the employees of Frithsen Physical Therapy will see a dramatic change in how they communicate with upper management. Under their old organization, there was a relatively straight path to the top, with only a few levels of management until they reached the President. Communication could be done easily by telephone or in person, and most employees had met each other face to face at one time or another. In the new organization, there will be a need for a more formal kind of communication. In organizations communication tends to be directional, moving upward, downward, diagonal or lateral (Leibler McConnell, 2008). Frithsen Physical Therapy was used to mostly lateral communication, discussing issues with other managers or sharing notes about a particular patient’s care. With the merger, the managers and employees will mostly be communicating upward, providing detailed reports to their supervisors, who will then provide reports to a higher supervisor, and so on. This will require attention to detail and more paperwork for the managers at every level, which will change the way the managers handle issues that arise within their department. With the inclusion of new services and a goal for comprehensive care, comes the call for new positions and alterations to old ones. A need for more middle management will arise, and more staff will be added to accommodate the growth of services while still maintaining exceptional patient care. In conclusion, there are many factors to consider when combining two organizations. It may make sense financially and logically to combine two entities that provide similar services. However, it is important to understand that not only will it be difficult to combine two cultures; it will also take time for employees to adjust to a new chain of command and new policies and procedures. Middle managers will play an important role in the blending of two corporations. They need to remain positive, lead by example, and possibly sever ties with employees who do not fall into line with new visions and ideas. An increase in communication will help make the transition successful, and ultimately all employees will reap the benefits from such a merger. References Bolton, J.M., Lewis, B. (1998, Jan/Feb). The challenge of merging and consolidating organizations. Journal of Management in Engineering, 14(1), 9-10. Academic Search Complete. Leibler, J.G., McConnell, C.R. (2008). Management principles for health professionals (5th ed.). Retrieved from The University of Phoenix eBook Collection database. Sherrill, T. (2001, May). Creating a can-do culture. New Zealand Management, 48(4), 17-21. MasterFILE Premier. Sidle, S.D. (2006, August). Resisting the urge to merge. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(3), 115-118. Business Source Complete. Stanwick, P.A. (2000, Jan/Feb). How to successfully merge two corporate cultures. Journal of Corporate Accounting Finance, 11(2), 7-11. Business Source Complete.

The deleterious effects, and the risks of GM food Essay Example for Free

The deleterious effects, and the risks of GM food Essay It’s been said that humans are what they eat. The relationship humans have with food is unappreciated. Food is the fuel that keeps humans going, gives them the energy needed to be creative and productive; it is the building block of society, after all, it wasn’t until the Neolithic Era, when humans figured out a way to domesticate plants and animals, that any form of organized society formed. Even during the previous hunter-gatherer foraging era, humans were very connected to the food they ate; understanding where it came and having an idea of how it came to be was crucial to knowing what was vital to survive. In this time, food sources like grains, fruits, and vegetables were naturally abundant, whole. Humans could choose between many different types of nutritious food because there were thousands of varieties of species. Unfortunately, as populations grew and more civilized societies formed, various farming techniques were created, and a vast majority of these species became extinct to make way for the harvesting of a select few (Pringle). In the industrial era, societies around the world, especially western ones, emphasized the importance of technological advancements. With this pursuit of technology, nature became something to control rather than live with; an attempt at making life simpler, better. Breaching the gap between nature and technology is optimization. It is this obsession with optimization that most accurately characterizes contemporary America. Undoubtedly, it comes with great costs. As it turns out, optimization is a business, and a profitable one. Thus, the costs and ef fects of optimization are often hidden from the public by industrial leaders in an effort to maintain profits. They control the businesses they run and protect themselves by dumping millions of dollars into politics. Today, it seems that the gap between nature and technology has been breached with the propagation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The aliens that now fill supermarkets nationwide represent the ultimate disconnect from natural, whole foods necessary for a healthy lifestyle. People are relatively uninformed about GM foods, issues include: their benefits, the testing and safety, the harmful effects they can have on the body and environment, the government’s role as overseer, the labeling controversy, and the â€Å"substantially equivalent† principle; all of these issues are conveniently hidden vitalities in understanding the danger, the deleterious effects, and the risks of GM foods. In tackling these issues, an additional understanding of the historic background of how GMOs came to be is equally important. Advocates for the rapid advance of technology will cite the numerous positive breakthroughs, the internet, healthcare, the numerous inventions; it’s hard to argue with, which is why when addressing GM foods, the emphasis should be placed on the relationship between technology and nature, specifically within the food industry, and how this relationship has become too intimate, to the point where it’s difficult to differentiate between technology and nature. The courtship leading to the marriage between technology and nature is exemplified in Peter Pringle’s book, Food, Inc., in which he discusses the 1960’s Green Revolution, a turning point in agriculture during which producers moved from traditional to monoculture methods of farming. This vastly increased crop yields. But how? Farmers had high yields because they started to use fertilizers and pesticides containing chemicals like nitrogen, left over from World War II explosives. New irrigation systems were introduced and animals replaced some human labor in order to handle the large crop fields and monoculture agriculture provided food relief to starving nations post-war (Pringle). Farmers experienced a rude awakening when yields started to decline due to a number of unforeseen or unaddressed consequences. Although the Green Revolution saved or improved millions of lives during the 1960’s, little consideration was given to the future effects it could have on environmental sustainability. The lack of food plant diversity eventually led to multiple problems, like the mass destruction of crops that had contracted disease or succumbed to pesticide-resistant insects, chemically saturated and overly watered soils, and an inevitable decline in production yields (Pringle). Obviously, the United States needed to find a solution to this problem. By the late 1900s, many scientists and biotechnologists approved and advocated genetic engineering as the most viable solution. This process is best described by Lauren and Robin Ticciati in their book, Genetically Modified Foods: Are They Safe? You Decide. According to the Ticciati’s, scientists planned to take a gene from one completely different organism and insert it into the plant in order to make it yield a desired outcome (Ticciati). The goal was to create food plants that could grow and withstand harsh conditions like pesticides, infertile soil, unfavorable climates, and geographical locations. Despite wariness from skeptical environmentalists about the unknown future effects of genetic food engineering, the companies who profit from this new food technology proclaimed it to be the wave of the future. As the Ticciati’s evidenced, in 1996, when the FDA approved the use of genetically engineered foods with no special label requirements, the GM foods were introduced on grocery market shelves with relatively no consumer awareness. This is just another example of how society is not clueless by choice. If this seems a harsh diagnosis, take into context what Kathleen Hart exemplified in her book, Eating in the Dark; a survey which took place just a couple years after GM foods were released revealed about two-thirds of the American adult population had no idea that supermarkets were carrying such items (Hart). Since then, GMOs have become part of the staple food products in the diets of the everyday consumer. Part of the problem is that nobody is exactly sure how harmful GM foods are, but there is substantial evidence to show that they can have a devastating effect on the economy, the human body, and the environment. In Food, Inc., Pringle discusses the farming method of artificial hybrid breeding which became a huge success in the mid-1900s and attracted a lot of commercial attention, spawning the term â€Å"agribusiness.† Scientists found that by crossing-breeding two varieties [of a species of plant] that had been inbred, [and] fertilized by their own pollen for three or four generations showed a tremendous leap in hybrid vigor, with grain yields up to 50 percent higher [than the natural bred variety] (Pringle). Unfortunately, when naturally crossed in the farmers’ fields, the hybrids strength did not withstand, so farmers had to rely on industry-produced super seeds. An economic boom occurred within the seed and fertilizer industries, with businesses rapidly sprouting up like the crops they helped produce. A few decades later the early warnings of genetic uniformity suddenly became a reality, (Pringle). One alarming discovery was the fact that since only one type of species was being harvested in a given area, if a crop contracted a disease, the entire field was wiped out, which meant no income that season for many farmers (Pringle). The companies who were invested in this new agricultural era and had seen the enormous profit potential in having a hand in controlling the food chain were not going to just quit. They pushed further into science, seeking ways to alter a species genetic make-up in order for it to conform to optimization, instead of considering natural solutions to these problems (Pringle). Today, there are GM super foods that are so genetically modified that they differ starkly from their ancestors. It is a teeter-totter industry; either profits are extremely high (like they have been for so long) or the industry fails and profits cease to exist. The latter doesn’t look like it’s going to occur any time soon because the government is firmly grasped by the biotech food companies that control the GM food industry. The most prominent of these companies, Monsanto, falsely advocates the necessity for GM foods, with the real motive the preservation of profits. Monsanto executive Hugh Grant claims â€Å"they [GM foods] can help feed the world and preserve the environment by reducing the need for pesticides,† (Harvest of Fear). Others advocate the hope that GM technology can save lives, like scientist Charles Arntzen, who is working on GM techniques to make edible vaccines to combat viruses in developing countries, (Harvest of Fear). More recently, companies like AquaBounty Technologies are working to develop genetically engineered animals. AquaBounty’s AquAdvantage salmon has been touted as â€Å"as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon,† by the FDA, but is still being met with numerous opposition (Pollack). The salmon â€Å"contain a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon and a genetic switch from the ocean pout that turns on an antifreeze gene,† which allows the salmon to make growth hormone in cold weather, whereas they usually produce it only in warm weather,† (Pollack). Genetic manipulation is causing drastic changes in the natural behavior of the organisms it’s implemented on, and it is believed that this could have multiple adverse effects on the environment and society. Those who have similar concerns, these cautious enemies to GM foods, can find strength in recent studies that are beginning to expose the numerous harmful effects of GM foods. In a study done by Gilles-Eric Sà ©ralini at the University of Caen in France, 200 rats were fed either genetically engineered corn or the herbicide Roundup and observed for two years, their entire life cycle and not just the normal ninety day period. It was found that they had an increased risk of developing tumors, suffering organ damage, and dying prematurely (Pollack, GMO Global Alert). Additional animal studies have shown other serious health risks associated with GM food consumption: infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen, and gastrointestinal system (Genetic Roulette). To exemplify how this is portrayed in humans, statistical evidence shows that after 1996, when GMOs increased in the American diet, disorders like inflammatory bowel disease, ulcerative colitis, chronic constipation, gastrointestinal infections, Crohn’s disease, and gastroephageal reflux have all risen dramatically and consistently (Genetic Roulette). Further evidence indicates that GMOs cause food allergies, have increased toxicity, decreased nutritional value, and promote antibiotic resistance (UMN). Not only do GM foods have a great potential for negatively effecting humans, they are harmful to the environment. Companies like Monsanto claim that genetically modifying foods is environmentally friendly, but this has been proven wrong on a multitude of levels. There is lack of nutrients found in soil in which GM crops are planted (Ticciati). These crops hurt the soil and the food chain. The chemicals found in pesticides were not only killing pests but also small animals, especially birds, were also facing extinction (Robbins). Tampering with natural selection creates a domino effect and damages the entire ecosystem. Imposing an unnatural element in the form of GM foods changes the equation and disrupts natural balance, even if things balance out, they will be forever different, even this is dangerous. Although GM foods are responsible for massive crop yields and the increased food supply, the industry is precariously perched given the increasing amount of deleterious effects that are being exposed more and more each day. For this reason, the government needs to take action. This is another dilemma; it is easy to wonder how the government can do anything when it has such close relationships with the companies that all the fingers are being pointed at. The primary antagonist in this story is the company Monsanto, the inventor of saccharin, an artificial sweetener, and many additional products. Monsanto accounts for over two-thirds of genetically engineered soy, corn, and canola crops worldwide (Robbins). Hendrik Verfaillie, Monsantos Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, described the company’s aggressive strategy with, The biggest mistake that anyone can make is moving slowly, because the game is going to be over before you start, (Robbins). It is understandable that a company this big has a profoundly large impact on government rulings regarding its industry. With Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide bringing in billions of dollars, the industry convinced the Supreme Court to allow the patenting of genetically engineered seeds so that the offspring would become the property of the seed manufacturer. In Genetic Engineering, Food and Our Environment, Luke Anderson exemplifies the impact of this ruling by stressing the profound repercussions it will have on the future of living organisms; This extraordinary decision by the U.S. Supreme Court heralded a new era. Once a shared heritage, the gene pool of plants, animals, and humans was now a commodity waiting to be bought and sold (Anderson). What appears to be mainly a business venture is an extremely important political issue, with companies pouring millions into politics to stay afloat. This is exemplified by the following quote, from the documentary The Future o f Food. Here, director D.K. Garcia focuses on the 2000 Presidential Election and the biotechnology issue: Agricultural biotechnology will find a support occupying the White House next year, regardless of which candidate wins the election in November (Garcia). The Future of Food reveals top ranking officials from the Supreme Court, such as Justice Clarence Thomas who previously represented Monsanto as their Lawyer for Regulatory Affairs, to Donald Rumsfeld, The Secretary of Defense, who was previously the President of Searle, a Monsanto subsidiary. Given their backgrounds, it is difficult to ignore the likelihood that their political stances would not be swayed. Even worse is Linda Fisher, who has switched roles between the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and Monsanto a number of times; she was Monsantos Executive Vice President for nearly a decade and Deputy Administrator for the EPA as well as Commissioner for George Bushs administration (Garcia). It’s frightening that the EPA, which acknowledges and regulates pesticides emitted into the environment, is likely to be biased in regards to the approval of genetically modified organisms into the environment. Needless to say, it’s shocking to see the connections that pose how much of an apparent influence Monsanto and the other leading biotech companies have on government regulations of GMOs. Evidence of this influence is presented in Seeds of Deception, in which Micah Sifry states, the four leaders of the biotech industry Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, and Novartis gave more than $3.5 million in PAC, soft-money, and large individual contributions between 1995 and 2000, three-quarters of it to Republicans (Smith). Stricter guidelines and extensive testing are not required because the companies have such strong political ties that they can influence the policy that is implemented upon them. In 1992, former U.S. Vice President, Dan Quayle, exemplifies this in his speech on behalf of the Council of Competitiveness, We will ensure that biotech products will receive the same oversight as other products, instead of being hampered by unnecessary regulation (Garcia). The FDA approved genetically modified foods with a high sense of hesitant reluctance. Consumers are supposed to rely on the FDA to determine if food is safe for consumption; the agency is supposed to be a protective one. This was a landmark decision for the FDA, a decision which required strong political influence for the agency to decide against its own principles. This is evidenced in The Future of Food; Dan Quayle and the Bush administrat ion appointed Michael Taylor as Deputy Commissioner for Policy, which Andrew Kimbrell divulges in an interview, noting that Taylor was formerly Monsantos Senior Counsel at the King and Spaulding law firm. Taylor instituted a no-regulation policy and left it to the biotech companies to determine whether or not genetically modified food was deemed safe for human consumption (Garcia). As the examples presented indicate, the successful clearance of GM foods has been engineered by companies like Monsanto and politicians, almost as much as the foods themselves. With the FDA swept out of the way, the companies that dominated the biotech industry were free to roam as they pleased, testing at their fingertips. How can the consumers trust Monsanto to act in their best interest, especially when the company’s Director of Corporate Communication, Phil Angell, says things like â€Å"Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job,† (Robbins). Without extensive testing, which would almost certainly yield new truths about the harmful effects of GM foods, Monsanto can achieve its goal of selling as much as possible while disregarding the consequences this has on society and the environment. Testing is probably the biggest grey area of them all. The FDA has a persona of an overseer and protector, meaning that people generally believe that all food undergoes tests by the FDA to ensure their safety. Unfortunately, this couldn’t be further from the truth. Testing genetically modified foods is dependent on the words of the companies that develop them. According to Consumer Unions Jean Halloran, When a company comes in with data, the FDA looks at it and writes a letter saying, Dear Monsanto, you supplied information regarding the safety of corn variety X and we are confident about what youve shown, It is your responsibility, (CBS). The FDA is in a difficult position. It is presented with its initial objective of protecting the American people but now, with biotechnology and GM foods, it is faced with a decision of whether or not to promote the biotech industry. The FDA regulates GM foods as part of the â€Å"coordinated framework† of federal agencies that also includes the EPA and the United States Department of Agriculture (Bashshur). The problem is that this framework has been the subject of critical analysis and calls for redesign; it is outdated, with the FDA policy unchanged since 1992. It is available online and contains a searchable database that covers â€Å"genetically engineered crop plants intended for food or feed that have completed all recommended or required reviews,† (Bashshur). The policy places responsibility on the producer or manufacturer to assure the safety of the food, explicitly relying on the producer or manufacturer to do so: â€Å"Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the producer of a new food to evaluate the safety of the food and assure that the safety requirement of section 402(a)(1) of the act is met,† (Bashshur). It is also this policy that establishes that the â€Å"substantially equivalent† concept, with which the FDA judges most GM crops as â€Å"substantially equivalent† to non-GM crops. In these cases, GM crops are â€Å"designated as â€Å"Gener ally Recognized as Safe† under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and do not require pre-market approval,† (Federation of American Scientists). Although these products are described as substantially equivalent, their manufacturers stress that they are different so that they can patent them and continue to profit. In this situation, the consumer must take the producer’s angle. Their products are dramatically different; their genetic composition is very different in comparison with that of their ancestral forms. In deciding whether or not to ingest these products, the consumer must realize that if the companies that produce them stress they are dramatically different, and there is minimal testing done on them, these GM food products could be extremely dangerous. Currently, there is no regulatory scheme requiring GM foods to be tested to see if it is safe for humans to eat or not. FDA guidance to the industry issued in 1997 covered voluntary â€Å"cons ultation procedures,† but â€Å"still relied on the developer of the product to provide safety data,† (Bashshur). There are numerous pieces of evidence that indicate that GM food testing is completely unregulated. The FDA’s policy is outdated and weak, â€Å"substantially equivalent† cannot be justified when such a small level of testing has been done. The fact that this policy has remained unchanged for two decades is staggering; there’s probably a lot of money keeping it that way. In tackling what Ramona Bashshur describes as the FDA’s â€Å"dual mission,† rational thought is vital. Although the FDA cannot ignore the opportunity to make scientific advances with the potential to better society, it must reflect on its original role, as a protector. While scientific advances with GMOs are rapidly continuing, there hasn’t been enough testing on them to determine how dangerous they are. If testing was done and the foods proved safe , which they probably wouldn’t, there would be nothing wrong with promoting it. In the meantime, as more and more harmful aspects of GM foods come to the surface, it would be smart for the FDA to revise its policy, improve the extent of testing done on these foods, so that America can move forward in science with the assurance that it won’t hurt its citizens. This is a difficult task; there is so much political influence on the industry that it may never occur. If the policy for testing cannot be amended, there is action that can be taken that could have a similar outcome. Specialized labeling for GM foods would set them apart from normal foods and make it easier for consumers to make healthy choices. In the United States, they aren’t labeled, while in Europe, Russia, China, and other countries, they are. This is an extremely popular movement in the United States. An example is California’s Proposition 37, which would’ve required â€Å"labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways.† And it would prohibit marketing â€Å"such food, or other processed food, as ‘natural,’† (Bittman). The numbers don’t lie; people supported Proposition 37; roughly 65% for to 20% against, with 15% undecided. From a national perspective on the labeling issue, 91% of voters believe that the FDA should require that â€Å"foods which have been genetically engineered or containing genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled to indicate that,† (Bittman). With these numbers as a reference for the support that Proposition 37 had, it’s hard to believe that it was struck down. Again, this is an instance of money having the loudest voice in the room. Money flew in from both sides, but the food companies that stood to lose in the situation, like Monsanto and The Hershey Co., contributed to what was â€Å"eventually a $44 million windfall for No on Prop 37, while proponents were only able to raise $7.3 million,† (Almendrala). According to MapLight, an organization that tracks campaign contributions, biotech companies amassed $46 million to defeat the measure, with Monsanto contributing $8.1 million and Kraft Foods, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola each contributing at least $1.7 million (Pollack). In contrast, those who backed Proposition 37 were only able to contribute $9.2 million; money made the difference. Proposition 37 was close, garnering 47% of the vote, with campaigns like the online based â€Å"Just Label It† collecting signatures and comments on a petition to the FDA, requesting rules â€Å"similar to those in the European Union, Japan, China, India and Australia, stating what transgenic food is in the package,† (Moskin). The biggest thing about Proposition 37 is that it had national implications; it wasn’t just California that the food conglomerates were worried about. If it passed, it could’ve been the beginning of a national labeling revolution, potentially the beginning of an even greater revolution. Throughout history, organisms have developed through a recurrence of genetic mutations that have naturally selected the organisms that are most fit for survival. The rise of GMOs can be viewed through the same lens. GMOs arose from the conditions following the monoculture agricultural shift in the 1960’s Green Revolution. The key here is that they are not natural. The â€Å"mutations† that have aided the rise of GMOs are manmade, manufactured, and abnormal. GMOs are a result of the American obsession with optimization, which manifests itself in technology. After World War II and throughout the Green Revolution, America sought numerous technological advancements as it relished its role as a world power. With GMOs, America breached the gap between technology and nature in an effort to optimize food. Companies like Monsanto, with their growing number of political connections, began using their funds to pave the way for GMOs to become and remain a staple contingent of the American diet. Today, GM foods are still privately and minimally tested and they remain unlabeled in the United States. While the FDA stands by its outdated 1992 policy, claiming that GM foods are â€Å"substantially equivalent,† the producers stress that they are different in an effort to obtain patents. America cannot trust the sources it looks to for accurate information because there has been little testing but there is hope on the horizon after California nearly passed a law forcing GM foods to be labeled. As concerned parties seek an answer, they must first look towards labeling these foods, sparking a chain reaction that causes uninformed consumers to ask questions like, â€Å"Why are these foods specially labeled?† and â€Å"What makes these foods different?† Labeling could prove to be the beginning of a further revolution to enhance regulation of GM foods. This revolution, though currently nonexistent, must occur before this problem mutates even further, before not just the American people, but the entire world, reaps the consequences for playing the role of Creator. Anderson, L. (1999). Genetic engineering, food, and our environment. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. Clark, E. A. Lehman, H. (2001). Assessment of GM crops in commercial agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14 (1), 3-28. Retrieved October 26, 2006, from ProQuest Research Library. Guidance for industry: Voluntary labeling indicating whether foods have or have not Been developed using bioengineering. (2001) Retrieved November 8, 2006, from http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/biolabgu.html. Garcia, D. K. (Director, Producer, Writer). (2004). The future of food. [DVD]. Mill Valley: Lily Films. Hart, K. (2002). Eating in the dark. New York: Pantheon Books. Pascalev, A. (2003). You are what you eat: genetically modified foods, integrity, and society. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16 (1), 583-594. Retrieved October 29, 2006, from ProQuest Research Library. Pringle, P. (2003). Food inc. New York: Simon Schuster. Robbins, J. (2001). The food revolution: How your diet can help save your life and the world. Berkeley: Conari Press. Smith. J. (2003). Seeds of deception. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. Ticciati, L. Ticciati, R. (1998). Genetically engineered foods. Are they safe? You decide. New Canaan: Keats Publishing. http://documentarylovers.com/genetic-roulette-gamble-our-lives/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njd0RugGjAgfeature=related http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/22/business/gene-altered-fish-moves-closer-to-federal-approval.html?pagewanted=all_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/dining/a-suit-airs-debate-on-organic-vs-modified-crops.html http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/g-m-o-s-lets-label-em/?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/business/energy-environment/21salmon.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/health/policy/04salmon.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/business/california-bid-to-label-genetically-modified-crops.html http://www.nongmoproject.org/learn-more/ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/business/energy-environment/disputed-study-links-modified-corn-to-greater-health-risks.html?_r=0 http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/gm/harmful.html http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-10004920-2.html http://www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/publications/aba_health_esource_home/aba_health_law_esource_1302_bashshur.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/prop-37-defeated-californ_n_2088402.html http://www.fas.org/biosecurity/education/dualuse-agriculture/2.-agricultural-biotechnology/us-regulation-of-genetically-engineered-crops.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njd0RugGjAgfeature=related