The piece then continued to give a history of the beginning of the restaurants that are now American household names, primarily McDonald’s. Slaughterhouse conditions were also reviewed in the book and they were unsettlingly cruel to say the least. The authors even included pictures to further their impact. As the book progressed, it showed the overall lack of concern the industry has for the health of America. Chew on This was a book with hundreds of startling facts that led to one large suggestion for people to think about what they are eating and choose not to eat fast food.
The evidence of the authors’ claims supported the suggestion and would have been difficult for anyone to turn down II. Vocabulary 1 . With which vocabulary words in the piece did you encounter some degree of difficulty? Over all, the vocabulary was rather simple. However, In the chapter where additives and artificial flavors were discussed, there were quite a few terms that would be unfamiliar to many people.
Some additives were named things like methyl-2-pyramid-ketene and y-undetectable. Confusing to me, the scientists working with them knew exactly what they are and what flavor or aroma they produced.
Other terms that were a bit unfamiliar were business terms like synergy. 2. How did you resolve your lack of understanding with these words? When I was confused on the topic of food additive names, I simply thought It through. For example, ethyl nitrate was a term that seemed odd. I thought about the origins of the words and tried the piece them together in my head.
Ethyl being the first part, I examined it first. An “ethyl” is something derived from ethane. Next, a nitrate is something derived from nitrogen. Seeing that these terms simply display the atomic construction of the substance helped me grasp them.
The terms used In business were actually explained by the piece Itself. The authors give a good definition of synergy?lining many products together to ten consumer Ana secretly perseverant them all at once?and follow it with actual examples. The largest example and by far the most efficient was how Walt Disney partnered Disney with several other companies. The other companies would put things like a Mackey Mouse logo on their products and perhaps Disney would sell their products in its parks. Ill. Interpretation: What was the main point the author wanted you to get from this book?
Closers and Wilson made several valid points throughout Chew on This. Facts about business strategy, marketing, food composition, and slaughterhouse conditions all blended together to make one bad appearance for fast food. As intended, many flaws that exist in that industry were looked upon in a new light. The authors’ main point was to point out the flaws of the industry itself and expose fast food to America. They wanted not only to show the vindictive behaviors of the businessmen, but the cruel conditions that go into making the food. They wanted to open the eyes of the public to what they were really eating.
IV. Criticism 1 . With which points of the piece did you agree with or find easy to accept? Why? I agreed with most of the points. The authors had very credible sources and presented their findings clearly and enjoyable. For example, they found Dir. Oz, an esteemed heart surgeon. They took information from a man with a medical degree and a well- known practice to present. I agreed strongly with their opinions of the unfortunate conditions in slaughterhouses for both the workers and the animals that are to be slaughtered. Including pictures and testimonies both, they appeared to have a vast knowledge of the subject. 2.
With which points of the piece did you disagree or find difficult to believe? Why? There was very much in Chew on This that I didn’t agree with. I found the book to be extremely credible and informative. There were some points made about business strategy that were a bit vague. The authors made every industry out to be cold- hearted and cutthroat, trying to attack children for their business and virtually rob families. Though most of the information seems plausible, I believe the bias of the authors may have affected the way the information came across. Nevertheless, this is persuasive piece and bias should be expected.