The Omnivore's Dilemma

The goal is this book is to provide an answer to the question: “What should we have for dinner?” (Pollan pg 1).  In fact, it is the very first line of the text, and it proceeds to answer this question in-depth, starting “all the way back to fields of corn growing in places like Iowa” (Pollan pg. 5).  The author is Michael Pollan, educated at Bennington College, Oxford University, and Columbia University, and has a Master’s in English.  He has written about the places where nature and culture have intersected for over twenty-five years, most notably in his novel, The Omnivore’s Dilemma. This book is written in a modern time, where modern-day American’s are in a health craze, trying to eat healthy, looking up the latest diets, looking up the best health foods.  This is a book written for the American, people who are interested in diet, people who are “buffeted by one food fad after another” (Pollan, back cover).  People who are interested in or are experiencing the dilemma of “What should we have for dinner?”.  It’s interesting how Pollan mixes the appeals together, using the expertise of Billy and George as corn farmers as ethos, taking statistics and then weaving them together into a single cohesive argument that is based in both ethos and logos.  When speaking about the meat industry, Pollan adds a bit of pathos as he speaks of the treatment of livestock and the effects of their treatment.  His cause-and-effect arguments, as well as his logical appeals make this text very effective.  His diction is such that any educated person would be able to read it with no problem, and he explains concepts in depth using layman’s terms.  As long as you’ve had a basic course in either biology or chemistry, there really is no problem in understanding the text.  The first quarter of this book gets its point across very well, using personal experience, such as his own cow, steer number 534, quotes from the experts, and real-life statistics and laws from the government, such as Earl Butz’s administration.  Each chapter gets its own little purpose across, whether it be that we are eating petroleum through corn, that corn is in literally everything, that our current-day feedlots are unhealthy, or that the current system is promoting unhealthy consumption.  

A Robot With a Reassuring Touch

This interesting article is about a new robot named Baxter programmed to assist human workers without accidental harm; using sensors to sense obstacles and then move accordingly.  The author of this text is John Markoff, known for his book and articles about a hacker named Kevin Mitnick, and is also known for his work at the New York Times.  Robots and new technology are rapidly flooding the industry at the moment -the issue is getting humans and machines to work together and make the machines safe for humans.  Automation and AI are programs still in research now in order to produce maximum safety for workers.  This piece is intended to detail a new technology, and also assure readers that robots will not cause the laying off of workers.  It is mostly factual, detailing the some of the nuances of the robot: how it works, how much it may cost once it gets on the market, how its safety mechanisms work, and also how it works with live humans.  Markoff explains this and gets his point across using a few different devices.  He uses clear-cut examples from real sources and qualified people, such as the director of the plastics company that tested Baxter.  His diction is made for the layman; using few words that could be considered technical jargon, perhaps also from an awareness that not many of his audience would be familiar with technical terms.  As for whether or not he got his point across, well, while his conclusion leaves much to be desired, it leaves a sense that the possibilities of this technology are boundless, with the words, “it will be able to adapt the system with more complex and capable hands”.  Using quotes from Mr. Budnick, the president of Vanguard Plastics, Markoff accomplishes his goal of how well Baxter works with humans, as Mr. Budnick’s people worked with it.  All in all, I say he accomplished his goal.  

Here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/science/a-robot-with-a-delicate-touch.html?pagewanted=all&_moc.semityn.www

TOW #1 A First: Organs Tailor-Made With Body’s Own Cells

A First: Organs Tailor-Made With Body’s Own Cells

This is an interesting article from the New York Times about synthetic organs created out of a patient’s own cells. It is written by Henry Fountain, a writer for the science section of the New York Times for 17 years, usually covering engineering.   This article is about new technique is being researched and experimented with, using a synthetic scaffold of an organ and lacing them with a patient’s stem cells to ensure the body does not reject it and to grow and work like a natural organ.  The author uses the treatment of a cancer patient to both open and close his article, a sort of full-circle technique that utilises pathos for an audience that understands and knows the effects of cancer.  He uses quotes from several scientists for his article, perhaps to give the article more credibility.  The readers are most likely layman’s readers, those interested in scientific discoveries, but mostly those looking for alternatives to organ transplants and cancer treatments.  His diction is meant for the layman reader, explaining the science and terms for those not of the scientific field.  He most likely wishes to detail this new technique to the populace and inform them of this new development that may save the lives of many patients.  As for my opinion of whether he accomplished this purpose, I believe so.  His article is divided into five sections.  The first introduces the new technique using the recovering cancer patient and quite a bit of pathos.  The second explains the science and terms with a smattering of logos and ethos.  The third explains more about the actual technique used and the current research.  The fourth once again uses the original cancer patient, as well as a nice dose of both pathos and logos - “If it bleeds, it lives”, using repetition to enforce the idea that this new technique is unique, introducing a living organ.  And the fifth closes with a full-circle ending and where this research may take us.  

Here's a link for those interesting in the article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/health/research/scientists-make-progress-in-tailor-made-organs.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1&ref=science