Alli Tepperberg's List: Annotated Bibliography

Animal antibiotics [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: Animal Health Institute; 2013 [cited 2013 Nov 4]. Available from: http://www.ahi.org/issues-advocacy/animal-antibiotics/

This particular web article describes the benefits of using antibiotics in the food industry, and the little known facts that are associated with it. This website has many advantages because there are specific articles titled "Benefits of Antibiotics," "Fact or Fiction: Common Antibiotic Myths," and a section for "Frequently Asked Questions." This allows the reader to explore different pages to explain how antibiotics is important for the food industry, as well as disprove common misconceptions about these drugs.

This article is very beneficial because there are not many articles that explain the advantages of antibiotics. Much of the information about using antibiotics for animals are harsh statements that try to misconstrue the reader; however, this reference is able to confirm the falsification of facts in other citations. This website is one of the most useful websites, because it has many different areas within the it that help disprove common misinformation about antibiotics. The "Fact or Fiction" article is extremely valuable because it states specific facts that previous articles believe are true and this article states as fiction. By using an article that describes the benefits to antibiotics, one can disprove information found in the later citations, therefore making the topic more debatable.

Crance B, Fahey M, Orfanopoulos J, editors; Boon A, Corry J, Wendel B, producers. Forks over knives [digital video online]. Los Angeles: Monica Beach Media; 2011. online digital video documentary: 90 min., Dolby Digital sound mix, color.

This film highlights the different harmful effects that can occur from a diet filled with hazardous additives in meats and dairies. The documentary suggests there is only one-way to ensure people that they will have no health issues from the food system: to stop eating meat. This resource looks at people's specific stories and how they are affected when they switch to a whole foods and plant diet. The resource shows that people eating a meat-heavy diet, are more likely to have cancers and/or diabetes during their lifetime. However, people on a whole foods, plant based diet have little to no risk at all.

This resource is intended to reach a large audience and nearly scare people into wanting to eat healthier. The downside of using this resource is that the documentary is most likely only showing the extremely harsh side effects of a meat intensive diet, not the outcomes of many people who live a healthy, normal lifestyle with meats in their diet. Nevertheless, this source is a strong and verifiable argument against the use of dangerous drugs within the food system. The documentary gives an in depth explanation of the effects of using these drugs in the food system, and the consequences it has on the people consuming the meat.

Ultimately, this resource is beneficial because it provides important factual evidence, such as graphs and statistics, about real-world incidents related to health issues from harmful additives found in the meat industry. Also, it informs the public about the most common and most harmful side effects that can occur with an overabundance of meat and dairy in one's diet. There are clear reasons why using these additives, specifically in the meat industry, can have harmful repercussions on the general public.

Gustafson R, Bowen R. Antibiotic use in animal agriculture. Journal of Applied Microbiology [Internet]. 1997 [cited 2013 Nov 4]; 83: 531-541. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2672.1997.00280.x/abstract

This online journal review discusses antibiotic use overall within animal agriculture. There is a table of contents that opens the article and splits it into many sections, including the history of antibiotics, current uses, risks, benefits, and regulatory controls within animal agriculture. The main portion of this article evaluates the risks versus benefits of animal antibiotic use. This is particularly important because it is not common to find the benefits of antibiotic use on livestock. There are very few scholarly articles that discuss the idea that antibiotics can be used without harming the people consuming the meat. The resource cites work from numerous scholarly articles covering many topics about the use of antibiotics within the food system, and concludes by considering different "Suggestions for Future Research" within the antibiotic and animal agriculture world.

This article is very useful because it specifically supports previously cited information. The fact that this resource is a scholarly article helps the credibility of the prior citations as a whole, along with contributing to the controversial aspects about antibiotics in animal agriculture. The only concern with this academic article is the date that it was written. It was last modified in 1997, which leads to the suspicion that the article could be outdated. Although this is true, the article still has very useful information and clearly describes the view of antibiotics from a positive standpoint. Therefore, this articles is very beneficial because it helps prove the benefits of antibiotics in livestock.

Hormones in food: should you worry? [Internet]. United Kingdom, The Huffington Post Edition: U.S.; 2011. [modified 2011 May; cited 2013 Nov 4]. Available from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/31/hormones-in-food-should-y_n_815385.html

After looking through the many articles and websites about growth hormones in the food system, this article from The Huffington Post proved to be extremely valuable because it describes the dangerous effects for humans that occur when there are left over hormones in meat and dairy. This article is an edited syndication style of resource that explains what growth hormones are and why they are given to livestock. From this, the article begins to give details about the different types of growth hormones and the consequences that can occur with overconsumption. The main example that the article uses to prove the consequences of growth hormones is the rise in the number of young girls reaching puberty at an earlier age. The author gives quotes from numerous doctors that reach the same conclusion about entering puberty at a younger age, and describe facts from researched data. The end of the article concludes with a few paragraphs on whether or not it is worth it to spend the extra money buying organic meat that guarantees no added growth hormones. One particular doctor said it is more beneficial to cut meat out of one's diet completely. This fact was particularly interesting because it is very similar to the theory in the documentary, Forks Over Knives, which believes that the only way to take away all health risks is to completely remove meat from one's diet.

Overall, this source is very valuable to further the debate about the harmful effects of food additives. The article gives clear factual information about hormones in meat as well as evidence proving the data.The article is also very helpful because there are specific examples of the hormones that are described. This article is particularly useful because there are quotes directly from professors and doctors that support the argument against hormones in food. Although a lot of the information in this web article may be biased due to the little discussion about the benefits of hormones, this resource can still extend the argument and give useful support towards the harmful effects of food additives.

Raymond R. Antibiotics and animals raised for food: lies, damn lies and statistics [Internet]. Seattle (WA): Food Safety News; 2013 [cited 2013 Nov 4]. Available from: http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2013/01/antibiotics-and-animals-raised-for-food-lies-damn-lies-and-statistics/#.UnHWSCOb0Sj

This resource is an opinionated article in which the author speaks directly to the audience in an informal tone about jumping to conclusions when it comes to antibiotics in the food system. The author starts by attacking the public's "lack of detailed knowledge about the use of antibiotics in animals raised for food." In this article, as well as other previously cited resources, there are similar disproved facts that are commonly misconstrued by the general public. The informal tone of this article allows the author to use logic to disprove facts as well, for example the author describes how "a 2,500 pound prize bull with pneumonia is going to be treated with a much larger dosage of an antibiotic than an 8-pound newborn with the same bacterial infection." Overall, the author of this article can disprove lesser-known facts based on his doctorial knowledge in the field.

Considering the evidence from all of the resources, there needs to be one more article describing why the antibiotics in food should be considered beneficial and is judged poorly by the general public. This article is particularly helpful for the research paper, because of the anecdotal evidence he disproves based on logical knowledge. The problem with this article is the short amount of time he spends discussing the benefits of antibiotics compared to the rest of the article. There is not much that the author has to say about the benefits, except for the first few short paragraphs. However, this article was published in 2013, and may depict the current knowledge and views that people are beginning to see within the food industry. This could infer that the articles published before 2010 may be outdated, and people are finally seeing that the use of antibiotics in livestock could actually be more helpful than harmful.

Wayne M. The meat you eat: steroid use in livestock [Internet]. New York: The Low Density Lifestyle; 2008 [modified 2009 Sept; cited 2013 Nov 4]. Available from: http://www.lowdensitylifestyle.com/the-meat-you-eat-steroid-use-in-livestock/

This web article describes the rapid increase in the use of steroidal implants in the livestock of food industries. The author starts the article bluntly by giving harsh facts about steroid use in animals. The article slowly starts to gear more towards specific steroids that are being used, and eventually the author narrows the steroid use to "six anabolic steroids given, in various combinations, to nearly all animals entering conventional beef feedlots in the U.S." The author goes on to describe the six steroids, which are all very similar, and discuss the harsh results that can occur from each one. The main result is very similar to the effects of growth hormones in children: young girls entering puberty at an early age.

This article is extremely helpful when writing about the effects of steroid use in the food industry because it gives clear examples about the consequences, as well as the definite steroids that are being used in the industry. The author being a Ph.D. helps strengthen the credibility of the article as a whole. There is also another overlap in information between the steroid use and the hormone use. This is very interesting because it shows that the factual information may not be as biased as people think it is, and it all is most likely very true. This article particularly adds to the argument because it gives yet another drug that is used in the food industry and is harmful the humans. The primary concern with choosing this article about steroids is the date in which it was published. The article was posted about 4 years ago, which means there could have been significant changes to the food industry within this time. It may be beneficial to research a different article about steroids to see if the information still matches up and is still reliable. However, through the use of this article and the similar information in the previous resources, there is enough information to state a clear argument agreeing that the food industry may have a harmful effect on the people of the United States.

What's on my food? :: pesticides on food [Internet]. Oakland (CA): Pesticide Action Network; 2011 [cited 2013 Nov 4]. Available from: http://www.whatsonmyfood.org/index.jsp

This website provides specific factual data on pesticide residues in everyday food. The Pesticide Action Network (PAN) is devoted to informing and educating the public about the pesticide problem on various types of food. There is a special feature in this cite that allows the reader to click on specific foods, anywhere from meats, fruits, vegetables, dairies, and ingredients, to view the different pesticides found within the food item. Furthermore, the website "[links the] pesticide food residue data with the toxicology for each chemical, making [the] information easily searchable for the first time."

This online reference gives basic yet in depth facts about the pesticides within the food system, making it an ideal resource for the controversial subject. There may be a bias towards only the harmful facts about pesticides because there are virtually no explanations of the positive reasons why the pesticides are being used; PAN is only concerned about enforcing the idea that pesticide use is a public problem. Regardless, this website is the strongest resource specific to pesticide use. The reference gives hard factual evidence about pesticides, and descriptions of what those pesticides are. It is a very useful addition to the evidence found proving the harmful effects of food additives.

Zobell D, Chapman C, Heaton K, Birkelo C. Beef cattle implants. Utah State University Extension [Internet]. 2000 [cited 2013 Nov 4]; 509: 1-9. Available from: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/extension_histall/29

This academic article specifically highlights the action of implanting animals, primarily cattle, with growth promoting hormones. The article discusses the "Mechanism of Action," "Implant Performance," and "Implant Use," as well as many other subheadings of information. The authors continuously describe the safety of implanting animals with growth hormones, insisting that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the use of growth promoting implants. The idea that implanting animals with these growth hormones is FDA approved is very important because it directly contradicts previously cited articles that describe the dangers of growth enhancing hormones. This resource also gives lists of available implants that are on the market for buyers, as well as "Implant Strategies," and recommendations for procedures. Overall, this article gives great detail about the uses, benefits, side effects, and practice of growth promoting implants in cattle for commercial use.

The most useful information within this article are the benefits of using growth-enhancing implants. Compared to previously cited references, there are no stated advantages about the utilization of hormones within the food industry. However, this online academic article gives a seemingly objective outlook on the use of hormonal implants for cattle. This indifferent perspective directly contradicts previously cited resources, which creates an interesting debate about whether or not the implants are generally beneficial or harmful. This controversy adds to the ongoing discussion about the harmful versus beneficial effects of additives within the food industry.