Processed Meat: The Horror

The Horror of Processed Meat: A Critical Evaluation

The author Jennifer Carmona evaluates the issue of unnecessary eating of processed meats in "Processed Meat: The Horror," which he proclaims is extremely counterproductive if no habitual changes in food processing exist.

Avarice and the Vileness of the Meat Industry

The author describes how Americans have developed a habit of only eating meat and not knowing how it is stored, cooked, and served from farm to table; the text begins by quickly highlighting how avarice is making the meat industry vile, and then the author goes on to thoroughly discuss the harmful health effects of consuming processed meat.

Harmful Health Effects of Processed Meat

It is clear that the paper's main aim is to aid the audience in abstaining from the excessive intake of processed meat, i.e., to refrain from eating such unhealthy beef and cattle the author gives reasons as to why such foods are not beneficial and have the potential for perilous health disorders. Individuals who regularly consume fast and cheaply produced meats which constitute a considerable portion of the American population are the primary audience for this paper.

Agreement with the Author's Message

I wholly agree with the message that the author is trying to put across through the text and particularly the thesis. In truth, it is evident that majority of Americans do not delve deeper to know how the food they eat is made and most importantly whether it is safe or not.

Shortcomings in Credibility

This may be due to many reasons for example lack of cheaper alternatives or intensive advertising by fast food mega-corporations which the author has not explained. With regards to the shortness of the article, it is excusable that the author could not list every detail regarding this particular topic. Nonetheless, I feel that despite the author's firm grasp on the health impacts of consuming process meat the paper is not sufficiently credible.

The Need for Scientific Evidence

In truth, there are a few statements that go in depth into how perilous they can be, e.g., the release of heterocyclic aromatic amines during frying of meat, however, as a whole, the paper comes out as a bit of a hybrid between a casual and an informative article. This is to say that I feel the author should have added more information to why such information is credible. For instance, instead of saying "one hot dog or about six pieces of bacon- raises the risk of colorectal cancer by 8%" the author should have listed how that information was found out, i.e., either a scientific or cohort study. This is because some people may easily disregard and even refute the claims within the text should the author not detail the relevant scientific evidence. Thereby, from my perspective, I commend the author's insight on the harmful impacts of processed meat. However, I still feel annoyed since more could be done to increase credibility.

Eliciting Fear and Guilt: The Indirect Approach

"Processed Meat: The Horror" intends to evoke fear and guilt in the audience without blatantly stating what the reader should feel. To begin with, the author starts off by uttering how most individuals just eat food without giving much thought to how it came to be.

The Suffering of Animals

This is followed by an eloquent description of the suffering that animals have to undergo before they are transformed to food. Although, it is very succinctly stated any keen reader would be shocked at how and or why animals are treated in such a manner. However, it is imperative to remember that that is in any way the aim of the paper. As such, here the author indirectly creates awareness of how processed meat is terrible without actively stating the negative health impacts.

An Unintended Condescending Tone

Additionally, the author states that "Americans no longer search for fresh food; instead they consume products that can be easily obtained..." That statement is very different from saying Americans should search for fresh food. Depending on either a reader's keen observation or one's subconscious comprehension such a statement may come as condescending to some.

The Pitfall of Emotional Interpretation

With regards to evoking fear, it is essential that a writer who details an important issue should make the matter as serious as possible. The author goes on to heavily describe the negative impacts of consuming processed meat. Cancer is slowly brought out as a link between regularly taking processed meat and its development.

Redundancy in Emotional Interpretation

However, it is important to note that the author may not be fully aware of how the placement of such phrases and statements can have on some readers. It is hard to assume that the author had intentions of evoking fear and guilt albeit it is imprudent to deny the existence of the stated remarks which may result in those feelings.

Nonetheless, it is important to note that evoking such feelings may be detrimental to the actual aim of the paper. In this context, the paper aims to inform its audience why consuming processed meat is harmful to one's health, however, if a reader assesses the document from an emotional standpoint then the text's point becomes redundant.