Personal Response About The Documentary “Food Inc.” University Essay Example

The documentary, Food Inc., argues that the production of today’s food choices are solely profit based, and that there is insufficient government regulation on agriculture. There is little regard to the health and safety of the consumer, or the health and treatment of the animals. The movie is based upon the complete disregard of anything that gets in the way of profit margins. Food Inc. encourages the production and consumption of organic foods that are produced in humane ways. In this documentary, the food industry is given some much needed transparency.

Food Inc. is a disturbing look into the foods that are consumed daily in the U.S. Just as disturbing as the health effects on humans, if not more disturbing, is the treatment of the animals in these mass market farms. The inhumane treatment of these animals is unacceptable. When given proper information, people are able to choose what they put into their bodies. People have rights to humane treatment. The animals on these farms are abused; they are regarded strictly as merchandise, not living things. The documentary itself was an eye-opener into what is actually placed on American tables daily.

The chickens in Food Inc. were crammed into small grow houses, lacking light and humane treatment. The chicken feed is chemically enhanced to form larger chickens, making larger breast pieces. The chickens can barely stand because of their lack of exercise and excess weight. The health effects that an obese person faces are forced upon these chickens. A number of chickens are expected to die, all being part of the process. The cows are corralled, standing in their own manure. Cows are forced to eat corn, a product that they cannot digest properly. Not only is this cruel, it increases the risk of E Coli. It is amazing that these corporations find corn a better choice than grass for these cows.

The foods people eat affect their health. When eating a meal at home, a meal that is made of know products, everyone feels better. Fresh foods increase energy and mood; whereas processed foods leave people feeling tired and hungry. People need to pay more attentions to how they feel after they eat. When eating at a fast food chain, it is typical to feel bloated and nauseous, or notice excess water retention. Eating fast food and processed food is not worth the after-effects. It is a good idea to consider the long term health effects when experiencing the short term effects. It should not be okay to feel bad after eating.

The movie was a reminder of how little people know about what they consume. People are subject to the will of the manufacturer. Greater oversight is needed to ensure the health of our nation. People wonder why health problems are on the rise, and why people are overweight, this movie shows some of those contributing factors. Of course people are responsible for their own health, but knowledge about what they are consuming could help people make informed decisions.

Where food is obtained and how it is created is important. There should not be surprises in regard to the safety of the things we need to live. Non-processed food makes people feel good for the long term. It is better to feel healthy than to consume those comfort foods that cause detrimental long term damage to ones well-being and physical health.

Ethics In The “Gilbane Gold” Film

The film “Gilbane Gold” features the eponymous town, which is known for the excellent fertilizer made from its sewage plant sludge. To maintain the quality of the product, which benefits all inhabitants of the town via tax revenue supplementation, it has introduced stringent regulations on materials permitted to be in sewage. However, at the same time, it has also attempted to create a business-friendly environment and introduce tax abatements for companies that would move in. As a result, Z Corp moved in and established a plant that has recently discovered that it has been dumping excessive amounts of toxic waste. From the viewpoint of David, a new employee, the author will review the unethical behaviors of the engineers presented in the movie.

The first ethical issue is the engineers’ behavior prior to the usage of the new test and the discovery of the problem. The city’s regulations regarding toxic waste were flawed, enabling companies to dilute their waste with water to increase the overall volume and reduce the proportion of harmful materials in it. Moreover, an engineer needs to sign the test results before they are submitted to the city. They were presumably aware of the unethical practice or the possibility of it but did not report it to the city. In doing so, they violated the first fundamental canon of the NSPE Code of Ethics, disregarding the safety, health, and welfare of the public. In their place, the author would have reported the problem to the city, even if it did not manifest in practice.

The second ethical issue is whether Z Corp should present the results of the new test to the city. The city does not require it to use the new test, and the old one would not show that the company’s effusions were above the limit. However, in submitting the old test instead of the new one, the engineer signing the results would violate the fifth fundamental canon, avoiding deceptive acts. As such, in David’s place, the author would report the problem to the city regardless of the consequences for the company.

The final ethical issue is in David and the other engineers’ continued association with Z Corp despite its questionable actions. Tom Richards, the environmental engineering consultant for the company, voiced an opinion that it had violated regulations repeatedly. However, instead of investigating the allegations, the company fired him, which may have indicated awareness of an unlawful practice and the desire to conceal it. Engineers who follow the first rule of practice, paragraph e, should have questioned the firing and pressured the company to investigate.

Overall, the engineers in the film acted too passively, preferring to overlook potentially problematic actions so as not to risk their positions at the company. In doing so, they violated multiple components of the NSPE Code of Ethics, enabling Z Corp to exceed regulations in its toxic waste effusions and endanger the public in multiple ways. It is critical to remember the purpose for which the Code of Ethics was created, which is to avoid the development of situations such as the one depicted through constant vigilance.

The Effectiveness And Importance Of Byelaws

Introduction

By definition, byelaws are laws or provisions passed by the local government or authorities. Primarily, they are passed by the local authorities with the objective of solving or preventing the occurrence of certain issues (Keene 2002). The authority of state law, charter or provincial, specifies the concerns which may have to be regulated by local authorities. The difference between common law and a byelaw is that common laws are passed and enacted by a provincial, state of federal body while bylaws are passed and enacted by a non-sovereign body such as local councils. The non-sovereign body draws its mandate primarily from a governing body such as the state or federal government. In the UK, the municipal council has the authority to pass and enact byelaws through the federal government or charter after confirmation by the secretary of the state. The byelaws specify the things that have to be regulated by the byelaws passed. Local councils powers have been provided by the Acts of Parliament as provided under Local Government Act 1972 (Parry, 2011). Some of these bylaws are related to occupational health and safety in the workplace and other areas. Basically, they ensure that health and safety are managed in different places within the municipality. The objective of the current report is to explore the effectiveness of byelaws. To achieve this objective, different aspects such as benefits or importance of bylaws and who makes the bylaws shall be used as a platform for the report study.

Discussions

By laws, their importance and effectiveness

Byelaws are made and passed by the local authorities under the Act of the Parliament (Bailey, 2005; Communities and Local Government 2008). Primarily, the Local Government Act 1972 has given local authorities the authority to make legally binding rules that govern the areas and the people under that particular region (Slapper, &Kelly 2001). The authors add that byelaws are part of delegated legislation which is more important than the Acts of Parliament. Delegated legislation is important in the sense that it saves the parliament the time that could be used while discussing a concern and an issue at local rather than national level (Slapper & Kelly 2001). Byelaws are made with conjunction with the local people thus making them valid (Thomas Reuters 2012). After consulting the local people, the council responds with the raised concerns. When the byelaws have been approved by the secretary of the state, they are then confirmed as part of the municipal byelaws (Prytherch 2005). Like any other laws, byelaws ensure that law and order are maintained. Moreover, any breach of the set byelaws calls for a penalty fine or fixed penalty fine (Communities and Local Government 2008). This reduces the level of committing offences which jeopardize the safety and health of others For example, in case the offence is serious like a road accident as a result of reckless driving, the offender is taken to a magistrate court (Thomas Reuters 2012). Therefore, it is through byelaws that the safety of people in ensured in road or transport industry.

Byelaws play an integral role in ensuring that the safety and the health of people are achieved thus making them effective and appropriate. As noted by Garmory, Tennant, and Winsch (2007), in the reserves and recreational centers, byelaws are adopted to restrict the movement and entry on certain days or during centers in hours of the day. In addition, the assist in prohibiting fires and littering of recreational and conservancies thus increase the level of safety. For example, littering is a form of environmental pollution which threatens people and animals in natural habitats. Furthermore, fires can lead to suffocation, death, or fatal accidents. Through byelaws, people acquire permits to undertake forbidden activities in conservancies and recreational parks. All these precautions are carried by the local government to ensure the safety and the health wellbeing of the local people. The byelaws related to pleasure grounds and public walks are enacted under Section 164 of the Public Health Act 1875 (ODPM 2006; Parry 2011).

Byelaws are relatively important as they ensure greener, safer and cleaner environments (ODPM 2006). Issues related to poor quality environment especially in public open spaces are addressed through the set byelaws. As a result, safety to the local residents is enhanced and promoted. Policies and byelaws related to occupational health and safety are increasing becoming very vital in municipals (Coggan & Gabites 2007). Byelaws give the local people and the local authorities a mission to undertake in ensuring the environmental, social and economic wellbeing of people. Through the implementation of acts related to community safety, the local government is accorded the authority to promote community safety, promote and increase public confidence on safety and health issues and concerns. As noted by Bassett (2012), through the enactment of byelaws in UK, issues related to pollution control, OHS, control of communicable diseases, food safety and waste management have been addressed. For example, Section 231 of the Public Health Act 1936 addresses public bathing in UK which is an issue related to health and safety (ODPM 2006; Parry, 2011). For instance section 231 ensure that the safety and the health of bathers are necessitated. For example, subsection 1(e and f) of s231 of the Public Health Act 1936, require persons offering accommodation for bathing to avail appliances essential in life saving practices or provide other means which can protect bathers from any form of life threatening danger (The National Archives 2012). In addition, the byelaws regulate and prevent danger which swimmers and bathers may be exposed to especially while using navigation vessels for recreational or pleasure purposes (The National Archives 2012). These are some of the byelaws which ensure the safety of people.

According to Hughes and Ferrett (2009), the workplace is governed by byelaws which are related to health and safety hazards. In addition, they also provide safeguards to issues related to workplace safety, noise nuisance, and ways or mechanisms applied to prevent health hazards (McFarlane, 2010). These are passed under section 235 of the Local Government Act 1972 (ODPM 2006; Parry, 2011). Safety is ensured in the transport sector through the use of byelaws. In addition, road accidents and road accidents fatalities are reduced. For example, byelaws related to walkways have been passed under section 35 of the Highways Act 1980. For instance, it is against the byelaws for any person to play football on the land or space near a major highway. This is because it exposes the player to road accidents, traffic obstruction or compels the driver to commit road accidents (ODPM 2006). In addition, heath is managed in the public places and city streets. For example, people are prohibited from defecating or urinating in a public place of street. This is because these acts jeopardize the health and wellbeing of other people.

Employees are prone to workplace accidents and hazards which result to deaths or injuries. As noted by Alli (2001), millions of employees get injured or die annually from workplace hazards. Through the enforcement of bylaws, occupational health and safety is improved for better (Great Britain 2007). Exposure to workplace hazards infect a large proportion of employees which result to increased expenses and family burden. However, the enactment of policies and byelaws related to OHS over the years has reduced workplace hazards drastically thus promoting safety and health in the workplace (Bartrip 2006). For example, according to Hughes and Ferrett (2009), byelaws have been passed related to how to operate of machinery, processes and equipments without the risk to safety and health concerns. Under Section 15 of the Local Government Act 1982 (UK Government 2009), byelaws related to cleanliness in workplace and open places have been passed. This ensures that the safe health of people is promoted. Therefore, byelaws are effective as they ensure safety and welfare among the citizens are promoted (Goldberg 2001). Other byelaws are concerned with stake boarding, climbing of bridges and verges climbing which are passed under Section 235 of the Local Government Act 1972 (ODPM 2006a; Evans 1997; Government of UK 2005).

According to Fernandes (2006) byelaws that govern building and construction ensure the safety of residents. For instance, they ensure that buildings meet the required standards, have fire fighting requirements and proper ventilation. This promotes the health of the people as well as their safety too. In addition, byelaws are employed to ensure that the anticipated health and safety standards are achieved (Ley 2000). This has been supported by Brennan and Casey (2008) who opine that byelaws requirements ensure that owners of buildings comply with the set rules and regulations.

Conclusion

Based on the report study investigation, it is imperative to note that byelaws are important and effective. In addition, they ensure that offences which jeopardize the safety and health of people are addressed. By addressing the concerns or issues that affect the people, byelaws protect the lives of the people. Byelaws are passed under section 235 of the Local Government Act 1972 after which they are later by the secretary of state. The byelaws are effective as they ensure fines or penalty fines are carried on persons who breach the set byelaws. In recreational places such as parks and conservancies, movement of people is controlled to prevent littering and fires which are health and safety hazards. Byelaws ensure greener, safer and cleaner environments making them effective and important. Through legal provisions, cleanliness is promoted in open space thus promoting occupational health and safety. Moreover, issues related to pollution control, OHS, control of communicable diseases, food safety and waste management are addressed. Byelaws regulate and prevent danger which bathers are exposed to by requiring bathing providers to have life saving appliances. In the workplace, byelaws safeguard issues related to workplace safety, noise nuisance, and workplace safety hazards. In the transport sector, byelaws reduce the number of road accidents and traffic obstruction activities. Lastly, byelaws related to OHS reduce workplace hazards drastically thus promoting safety and health in the workplace.

Reference List

Alli, B. O, Fundamental principles of occupational health and safety, Geneva, International Labour Office. Bassett, W H 2012, Clay’s handbook of environmental health, New York, Taylor & Francis.

Bailey, S H 2005, Cases, materials and commentary on administrative law, London, Sweet & Maxwell.

Bartrip, P W 2006, Beyond the factory gates: asbestos and health in twentieth century America, London, Continuum.

Brennan, G & Casey, N 2008, Conveyancing, Oxford, OUP.

Cogan, C & Gabites 2007, Safety and local government – partnerships and collaboration: How to find all those intersections and actually do something about it, Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, vol. 32, pp. 1-10.

Communities and Local Government 2008, The making and enforcement of byelaws. Web.

Evans, 1997, Byelaws: Pleasure grounds, public walks and open spaces. Web.

Fernandes, B G 2006, Making Delhi a better place: promoting a vision of urban renaissance., Delhi, Kalpaz Publications

Goldberg, L 2001, Massage and aromatherapy: a practical approach, Cheltenham, Thornes.

Garmory, N, Tennant, R, Winsch, C 2007, Professional practice for landscape architects, GB, Elsevier.

Government of UK 2005, Model byelaw 2 – Pleasure grounds, public walks and Open spaces. Web.

Great Britain 2007, Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007: Chapter 28, London, Stationery Office.

Hughes P, & Ferrett E 2009, Introduction to health and safety at work, 4th edn, UK, Butterworth-Heinemann.

Keene, M 2002, Religion in life & society: GCSE religious studies for EDEXCEL ‘A’, Dunstable, Folens Publishers.

Ley, A J 2000, A history of building control in England and Wales 1840-1990, UK, RICS Books.

McFarlane, A 2010, ‘What can councils use by-laws for?,’ BBC News Magazine, pp.1

OPDM 2006, Local authority byelaws in England: A discussion paper, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.

OPDM 2006a, Byelaws for pleasure grounds, public walks and open spaces, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.

Parry, K 2011, Local authority byelaws, Parliament and Constitution Center, UK.

Prytherch, R 2005, Harrod’s librarians’ glossary and reference book: a directory of over 10,200 terms, organizations, projects and acronyms in the areas of information management, library science, publishing and archive management, Aldershot, Ashgate

Slapper, G & Kelly, D 2011, The English legal system 2011 2012, Cavendish.

The National Archives 2012, 231Byelaws with respect to public bathing. Web.

Thomas Reuters 2012, How byelaws are made and enforced. Web.

UK Government, Byelaws. n.d. Web.

error: Content is protected !!