My Research Process :)

My research process is going well. I am going to discuss the question "Should homeschooling be allowed in America?". First of all, I started looking for different sources. I used the Foothill Library search machine and looked for interesting article in the New York Times and CQ Researcher. I wanted to use a variety of different sources. CQ Researcher was very useful because it provides some articles with statistical evidence which are related to my topic "Homeschooling." I was spending minimum 1 hour with reading articles about homeschooling every day. I found 16 different articles and 2 articles with statistics. Even through all articles are very interesting I will be not able to use all of them. The way, points, pro arguments and counter arguments are very hard to find and often not in the way connected how I want to use them. I think it takes long for me to choose the right information from the articles and the most useful ones. Therefore it is very important for me to find clear arguments against homeschooling and for homeschooling.

Summary and Response to "Community-Level Obesity Prevention Initiatives - Impact and Lessons Learned"

Summary:
The article "Community-Level Obesity Prevention Initiatives - Impact and Lessons Learned" written by Allen Cheadle, Suzanne Rauzon and Pamela M. Schwartz discusses how several areas in the United States have implement initiatives to combat obesity in the populace over the last 10 years. They have done this by creating policy and environmental changes in regards to food and exercise in certain demographics. The policy changes tried to reduce obesity by taxing sugary drinks and reducing unhealthy food at schools. The environmental changes tried to improve access to and cost of healthier foods and drinks. However it is uncertain if these initiatives have actually worked. It is difficult to measure their success because of the difficulty in gathering concrete data about the populace's behaviors when it comes to food and exercise. The authors researched existing published studies between the years 2000 and 2012 to try to understand the impact of these initiatives.  They focused on two initiatives "Shape Up Somerville" and "Kaiser Permanent HEAL-CHI Initiative." "Shape Up Somerville" tried to increase healthy foods in every aspect of the community. It was successful in reducing body mass index scores of children in first to third grade. The "Kaiser Permanent HEAL-CHI Initiative" tried to affect school policies on cafeteria food as well as increasing exercise for students in elementary schools. This Initiative was effective at increasing exercise in students from 61% to 67%. The article recommends strategies that "Focus on youth in schools", "Cluster strategies", "Sustainable strategies" and "Logical model evaluation designs." All in all the article says that the Initiatives are promising but should continue to be monitored.

Response:
I think since a lot of money is spend on this Initiatives it should be controlled. Obesity is a big problem in the United States and policies for taxing sugary drinks and unhealthy foods are necessary. This article is summarizing important research and is showing the different Initiatives. I believe it is  trustworthy information and useful to know.

Summary and Response to "Conquering Food Deserts With Green Carts"

Summary:
The article “Conquering Food Deserts With Green Carts", written by David Bornstein and published in Fixes discusses the problems of “food deserts” in low-income areas in America where poor people live far away from grocery stores with fruits and veggies and have little opportunity to buy healthy foods. The article shows that the government tries to fix the absence of healthy food by passing initiatives to promote businesses that provide healthy foods. Some of the initiatives are Green Cart initiative, farmer’s market Health Bucket program and Healthy Food Financing Initiative. The government is trying to create more opportunities for poor people to buy more healthy foods by increasing the number of stores and vendors who provide healthy foods. At the one hand the government is trying to solve the problem of obesity and the lack of healthy food in poor areas with electronic foot stamps and coupons but at the other hand it doesn’t allow the sale of bottled water, nuts and dried fruit, which are very healthy, in the Green Cart stores.

 

 

Response:

I think that the government did an important step in the right direction to solve the problem of obesity and to provide more healthy foods in poor areas but there is still a lot of space for improvement. The article shows the shocking statistic that “23.5 million people live in low-income areas that are more than 1 mile from a supermarket, which represents 8.4% of the total U.S. population.” I really believe that this is a big problem and even though the government is trying to solve the problem, it should do more about it. In my opinion there should be more fresh foods markets and the government should be thankful for the vendors from Green Cart. They should try to support them better. It is not acceptable in my opinion that they don’t allow Green Cart stores to sale nuts, dried fruit and bottled water. This is ridiculous.

Summary and Response to "Soda Tax Battle"

Summary:
The article, “Soda Tax Battle," discusses the debate over raising taxes on sugary soft drinks in the United States. The article explains how Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Dr. Pepper, the three biggest soft drinks companies, are trying to lower the calories and sugar content in their soda drinks. These companies are also trying to produce smaller drink containers though they are not willing to write a warning label on the containers. The soft drinks companies, however, insist that there is no connection between obesity and soft drinks. This is not true because there are many studies that show that sugary soft drinks are often the reason for Type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and obesity. The tax levied on soft drinks would limit the consumption of sugary soft drinks but most people do not favor the tax. They do not understand that the tax would help them to be healthier by decreasing their consumption while also bringing in an estimated $10 billion annually. This money could be used for research of "diet-related health conditions," prevention, and treatment.

Response:
Because of the knowledge that I already have about the harm which sugar can cause, I understand why the government wants to raise taxes on sugary soda drinks. I believe that sugar can cause obesity, Type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndromes and other health problems that are mentioned in the article “Soda Tax Battle”. I think that the U.S. government should have more control over it and raise taxes for sugary soda drinks especially. In my opinion it would also be very helpful to put warning labels on soda drinks. It would show the customer how dangerous sugar actually is and how addicted you can get from it. I really think that it would be a big step to solve the obesity problems. Americans need to demand better from soft drink companies or they will find the most taxing thing will not be taxed levied on sugary sodas but their declining health.
 

Summary and Response to "Should foods linked to diet-related diseases be regulated?"

Summary:
Obesity in America has become a bigger problem - treating obesity costs an estimated $150-210 billion a year, which increases health insurance costs as well as taxes to pay for government insurance programs. The article “Should foods linked to diet-related diseases be regulated” published by CQResearcher.com talks about whether or not the food industry should be even more regulated. The nation is divided between those who want government involvement in regulating foods that are supposedly unhealthy, and those that believe government should leave the people alone to make decisions for themselves. Those in favor of government involvement cite alcohol and tobacco restrictions and regulations for limiting the consumption of harmful substances. They would like the same types of restrictions and regulations on foods that are high in sugar (such as junk food) and high-calorie foods. These advocates say that government regulation and involvement is necessary because the food industry will not regulate themselves as they have no motivation or benefit to do so. Food companies spend $16 billion on marketing ($2 billion of which are targeted towards children) with the sole purpose of increasing their revenues. This demonstrates that they have no desire to voluntarily stop marketing these disease-causing foods towards children or adults. It's a conflict of interest. On the other hand, the food industry companies say that their industry is already heavily regulated by the government and if additional laws were passed, it would be denying consumers the right to choose and be responsible for their own actions. In essence, it would be treating consumers like children who can't be trusted to make the right decision for themselves. Additionally, the government restriction of these foods would affect the poorest people in America the hardest. This is because a higher percentage of their income would have to go to purchase other types of "better" food.




Response:
I believe that every grown up person over 18 years should be able do decide by themselves what he can eat and what not. At the same time I think that the government has to take responsibility for people’s health and especially children’s health. It is important that children learn healthy food habits from young childhood and that sugary soft drinks and junk food is dangerous for us. I think that adults should be able to buy any junk food and sugary products that they want but at the same time it should not be allowed to sell and give it at schools. Children are not able to understand how dangerous junk food and sugary soft drinks actually are for their health and body. I believe that it is not fair to tax sugary soft drinks because there are many poor people who couldn’t afford it other than to buy themselves a soft drink for special occasions. Another reason is that every adult should be able to do eat and drink whatever he wants if it is not dangerous for the society.

Questions for the Research Paper

1) Should public college and university tuition cost the same for international students and U.S. citizens?

2) Should home-schooling be more supported or should every child have the same school educational level?

3) Should parents send their children to public schools or private schools?

4) Should healthcare be free for all American citizen?

Fed Up (2014) - Summary, Response and Text-based questions

Fed Up (2014) - Summary
The documentary movie "Fed Up" was directed in 2014 by Stephanie Soechtig. The primary topic of this movie is obesity. Obesity is a big problem all over the world and especially in America. The documentary movie is trying to show this problem and how the big food companies are causing it. This movie wants to show the American people how junk food and sugary drinks are causing health problems; for example Type 2 Diabetes on kids used to be called adult onset diabetes. "Fed Up" is showing how dangerous Sugar, Corn syrup and Cheese are.  This movie wants to show and open people's eyes as to how big a problem obesity really is. It shows statistics, facts and researches how unhealthy this food is and how the government and food industries aren't doing anything. It is showed that only money is important for the big food industries and not people's health. Even when they are trying to make the food fat free or reduce the fat they are using extra sugar which is even worse. "Sugar makes you 8 times more addicted than cocaine " according to the movie. Famous people such  as Bill Clinton and Michael Bloomberg are giving testimonials about causes of obesity. Instead of the USDA helping to make more people healthy, they are actually contributing to the problem with what they choose to subsidize.

Fed Up (2014) - Response
After having seen the documentary movie "Fed Up", I have to agree that obesity is a big problem worldwide but especially in America. The statistics, researches and facts where showing that the health problem and obesity is growing. I have to agree with the point that the government is not doing enough and that people should be defended against the big food industries. People should know what is in the food and drinks and sugar should be named as sugar and shouldn't be given hundreds of different names for it. I also believe that the government should control what children are eating at schools. I feel that children should eat only healthy food at schools.  As we should know, the food habits start in young childhood and continue for the rest of our lives. I think that it is very helpful that the movie shows that not all calories are equal to other calories and that our liver works very different when we consume sugar with or without fiber. It should open people's eyes and to be more conscious about what they eat and drink. In my opinion it is wrong that the food companies and the government are prioritizing money first and health second.




Text-based questions
What can we as individuals do to make our government to care more about health and people instead of money?

Is there any way to make the food companies care about people's health?

Can we do anything to make it so that schools only provide healthy food?

Respond to "Revising (Real-World Writers)"

 

 

The art of good writing requires revisions as discussed on the YouTube video "Revising (Real-World Writers). While some people worry about writing the first draft, it is important to put your thoughts on paper with the full expectation that you will revise them later. A central theme in the video was how crucial revising your work can be to the overall success of your writing. I found it interesting, however, to hear that not everyone approaches revisions the same. For example, Charles Johnson usually writes two or three drafts before he is done writing. David Guterson, on the other hand, rereads his writing and revises as he goes. I am still early into the process of becoming a good writer and do not know what style I will adopt. But I have learned the importance of doing revisions and will be sure to revise my work so that my writing can improve.

Summary and my opinion of Sherry Turkle's NYT article "Stop Googling. Let's Talk"

The article "Stop Googling. Let's Talk." written by Sherry Turkle and published in the New York Times discusses the state of conversation in today's generation.  Nowadays, many children and teenagers' attention spans do not last very long as they are tempted to reach for their phones to go online, text other people, play a game, check email, etc.  Using phones very often has a big influence on people's behavior. It can also impact relationships. This has hurt their ability to interact and properly communicate with other people face-to-face.  No longer can they empathize or read the body language of the other people they are interacting with -  so much so that they do not even know when they are hurting the feelings of another peer.  The author claims that we are treating communication as an "app" - that we expect the person we are communicating with to respond immediately and efficiently.  However, we know that true communication takes time, and the little details of conversation is where the true communication exists.  It is not just words that we speak to each other, but true conversation takes time to develop.

I agree with the author's opinion. Using phones can change people's behavior especially children's and teenager's behavior. Having been an au pair before, I can see that many children and teenager nowadays are "communicating" through their cellphones, and it is important to restrict their usage so that they understand how to communicate in person.  The parents and I have set rules for the children so that they do not use their phones during dinner time and are required to actually talk to us about their day and what has happened at school.  It is with hope that these rules will have some influence on their sense of normal communication methods and will allow them to be able to communicate better with other people in the future. I think there is also a big difference when adults are using phones and children are using the phones. Most of the time adults are able to control their behavior and it's more difficult for children. This is especially true when teenagers begin to develop emotionally and they have to figure out how to act with friends and family in deep relationships. On the other hand I believe that FaceTime, Skype and WhatsApp are giving great possibilities to stay in touch with friends and family all over the world. I think we have to find a balance between talking to people face-to-face and communicating via phones and computers.