Help with Essay

Post Reply New Topic

Hello, I need some help a MAJOR essay due this Thursday at midnight, Mountain time.

Anywho, I attached info explaining what the assignment is followed by the essay itself, which is then followed by the grading criteria used. I'm supposed to argue a thesis of my choosing.

Please, if you don't feel like reading it all, at least skim it. Some comments are better than none, especially if they focus on the content.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
_____________
Project 4:
Research Assignment
What: Your essay should include:

• A specific audience that is evident through your writing
• A title that expresses the tone and purpose of the piece (be creative here, folks)
• Headings that help organize your thoughts
• The MLA standards for document formatting and citations
• 1,800-2,500 words
When: In-class peer review—Post draft on Monday Week 16 by 5:00 pm for Tuesday review
Bring print and electronic copies of your draft on Thursday for editing workshop
Post final submission in the project 4 dropbox by 7:00 pm—Thursday, Week 16
How: You have already completed two assignments on the subject you have chosen for your research assignment. Your job in this piece is to bring together all of the knowledge and insight you have developed through your exploration and your research into a piece that will convince your audience of your points. We have talked about writing definitional, evaluative, causal, and proposal arguments, as well as variations of those themes.

You will be graded on your ability to:
• Define the elements of your topic you plan to discuss
• Focus on your topic and discuss it from multiple angles, considering counter arguments
• Argue your points to a logical (and plausible) conclusion, possibly including a call to action
• Organize your thoughts and create a roadmap through your essay that is easy to follow
• Integrate your evidence into your piece smoothly
• Appropriately use style and tone to address your audience and keep their interest

Invention: Outlining … with a twist

Part 1: The purpose of outlining before you draft your paper is to help you flesh out your points. Your outline needs to include enough detail to help you focus and narrow your topic and begin drafting your points.

Part 2: Because this essay is a longer piece, it becomes harder to stay organized. To help alleviate problems with focus and organization, after you have drafted your essay, (and before you submit it for peer review) develop a second outline. Because you are producing your outline after you have already constructed your essay, the purpose of your outline is not to develop content, but to organize it. Your outline doesn’t need as much detail as it did in part 1. It must, however, contain enough detail to help you locate any problems with organization you might have.

Options: If you like, you can add a challenge to your writing and choose a genre in which to write. Genre often makes speaking to an audience more realistic and easier, so you have the option of “bending” the academic essay into another form such as a letter, an editorial, a Web site, etc.
_________________________________________________________________
My Name
My Professor
ENGL-141-038
6 May 2008
Title
(New Paragraph)Ever since the introduction of genetically-modified (GM) foods, the public has discussed and debated this topic numerous times. GM foods are foods that have been directly changed at the genetic level. Traditional breeding changes the genes but differs from GM foods in that the changes are not directly made. Usage of GM foods is often debated due to uncertainty over its effects on the environment and human health. More specifically, the public debates to what degree, if any, the public should restrict usage of GM foods. The answer is highly complex, meaning that opposing pieces of evidence must be considered from multiple angles. Opponents of GM foods oppose them out of the belief that GM foods threaten human health and the environment, as well as the assumption that anything posing such threats should be restricted or banned and that anything mitigating such threats should be encouraged. Such concerns are understandable, but ultimately unfounded. As such, this essay is addressed to those who believe GM foods should be restricted or banned for the stated reasons. This essay argues that GM food usage generally should be encouraged based on the assumptions made for opposing GM foods.
GM Food Poses Little Risk
(New Paragraph)In support of this claim, consider that GM foods pose little risk; one reason for this is that the safety of GM foods for human health and the environment is already critically assessed by three federal agencies, as noted by L. Val Giddings, associate of the Biotechnology Industry Organization. These agencies include The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and, finally, The Food Drug Administration (FDA). All of these agencies must determine whether a GM is as safe as its traditional counterparts before allowing it on the market. Giddings also remarks, “The typical crop developed through biotechnology…on average [takes] 12 years” for approval due to the rigorous oversight required (Giddings 136). Compare such precautions to those for traditional crops, which have existed long before the concept of regulatory oversight. Despite these precautions, some beg to differ, claiming that the FDA and USDA have no inclusive testing prerequisites (Grogan & Long 129). It is not clear why this claim should receive any backing—the mentioned agencies all collaborate according to a 1986 law known as the “Coordinated Framework” (Giddings 136). Perhaps someone presenting this argument means that the FDA and USDA have different protocols. If so, it may simply be that these agencies perform different tasks. Evidently, there is little need to further restrict GM crops as they already receive plenty of government oversight.
(New Paragraph)Furthermore, the absence of severe negative consequences for human health from GM foods suggests that GM foods are overwhelmingly safe for consumption. Consider that no one has ever become from consuming GM food. In support, C. S. Prakash, Professor at Tuskegee University, and Andrew Apel, editor for Agbiotech Reporter, maintain, “More than two billion people have eaten [GM] food in the past five years without becoming ill” (Genetically Modified...). In contrast, compare this safety record to that of FDA approved drugs, which have been known to on occasion cause more harm, but are accepted precisely because their benefits outweigh the costs. Although the safety of GM foods is well-verified, some argue otherwise. For example, John Grogan and Sheryl Long, members of the editorial staff for Organic Gardening, state, “Modified soybean…triggered an allergic reaction” in those who were sensitive to Brazel nuts, from which the genes were taken (Grogan & Long 132). However, the results were part of a test conducted by the company researching them. In much the same way, the FDA tests pharmaceutical prior to approval, as stated by the authors. Obviously, GM foods demonstrate an excellent safety record for human health.
(New Paragraph)Interestingly, GM food can be engineered to avoid provoking allergies by removing allergens. Geneticists, for instance, are currently removing allergens from wheat, peanuts, and milk (Avery 162). This capacity for GM foods to circumvent individual allergies addresses an argument so often advanced against GM foods, namely, that GM foods pose the risk of provoking allergies (Grogan & Long 132). As such a major concern for GM opponents—unknown allergens—is lessened. More importantly, GM foods can be safer than their traditional counter-parts. However, some might argue, as noted earlier, that GM foods could also provoke unforeseen allergies. However, allergens can be avoided for those who fear GM products. Labeling would allow potential allergy victims to stay safe, while natural health stores can offer consumers alternatives. As such, GM foods do much to fight allergies, while those who fear GM foods can have a choice in the matter.
(New Paragraph)Another often overlooked point is that GM foods are created with a higher degree of precision than alternatives, which allows for more control and predictability, meaning more safety for consumers and the environment. The opponents of GM food often argue that GM food is unpredictable and can have unknown effects. Although this seems to be a compelling argument, it fails for several reasons. First, not allowing a food due to a small risk is unreasonable. All foods, including “natural” ones, run the risk of harming human health or the environment. Second, one must consider whether the food in question is more or less likely to cause more harm than good. If the food is more likely to benefit the public overall than it is to harm it, then it is unreasonable to prevent its use. Third, predictability can be assured through laboratory settings just as pharmaceutical drugs are approved through the FDA. GM crops thus have much to be desired in regards to predictability.
(New Paragraph)Similarly, GM foods can reduce human exposure to harmful chemicals. Some GM varieties of soybean and canola are resistant to various herbicides, which allows farmers to control weeds while spraying fewer herbicides (Miller & Conko 25). By modifying food so that fewer chemicals are used, a major concern of environmentalists, including many opponents of GM food, is assuaged. Additionally, consumers will consume fewer chemicals themselves than if they had eaten non-GM foods. Moreover, any farm workers in contact with such chemicals will have less exposure to them. Since 1987, as many as fifty-thousand Chinese have endured illnesses due to pesticide exposure on farms (Miller & Conko 28). As long as there are pests, there will be pesticides. Consequently, some human exposure is unavoidable. Therefore, the need to reduce human exposure to these chemicals is paramount. In response, some environmentalists argue that engineering crops to be herbicide resistant is only a short-term solution since weeds could develop immunity, at which point more herbicide would be used (Steinbrecher 155). The weaknesses of this argument, however, lie in the fact that any attempt to fight weeds could lead to hardier weeds and that a series of short-term solutions could be as effective as a long-term one. GM food evidently benefits human health better than the alternatives can.
(New Paragraph)What then of the environmental risks? Contrary to popular wisdom, GM crops may actually benefit the environment more than they harm it. For instance, GM crops can reduce the use of pesticides and other chemicals (Info Sheet…). In fact, Alex Avery, a plant physiologist, points out, “You could reclaim a salt-contaminated field,” in reference to GM plants that can absorb up to seven percent of their weight in sodium from surrounding soil (Rauch 146). In response, some might argue that the results are hard to predict since genes affect traits other than those selected for and that GM foods might not be safe in all cases. For instance, the color gene from maize was transferred along with an antibiotic resistance gene into white petunia flowers. All the resulting flowers were red, but also had lowered fertility (Steinbrecher 152). However, the same can just as easily be said of traditional crops, which also involve the transfer of genes, but through breeding. In fact, both kinds of crops rely on the same principles of gene transfer, but through different methods. Patently, whatever risks can be supposed for GM organisms can as easily be assumed for traditionally bred ones.
GM Food Offers Many Health Benefits
(New Paragraph)Not only do GM foods offer few risks, but they also present many benefits. One such benefit is the potential to alleviate poor nutrition in the developing world. An exemplar of these benefits would be Golden Rice, which was engineered to contain extra vitamin-A. Globally, over Two hundred million children lack adequate nutrients. Golden Rice can help these children such as by limiting death, blindness, and mental retardation, which result from vitamin-A deficiency. Geneticists are also attempting to add iron (Miller & Conko 28). However, some would again argue otherwise. For instance, plants can suffer extra stress and survive in lower yields or under produce essential vitamins, so argues the British Society for Allergy, Environmental, and Nutritional Medicine member Ricarda Steinbrecher (Steinbrecher 150, 156). She writes, “In 1996, Monsanto’s pest-resistant cotton (Nucotn)…[was] eaten alive by bollworms…50% of…fields needed emergency spraying” (Steinbrecher 157). While there may be cases wherein crops that produce excess chemicals are undesirable due to the stresses such production can have on plants, a case-by-case analysis is more appropriate. A crop may not do well in some circumstances, but may do well in others. Additionally, as in the case of Golden Rice and other organisms with enhanced nutritional content, the extra vitamins and minerals in each serving could compensate for lower yields due to crop deaths from environmental stress.
(New Paragraph)Moreover, GM foods may also improve nutrition among the world’s poor through providing extra food. The 1970 Noble Peace Prize recipient Norman Borlaug supports GM food, claiming that even if all forests were replaced with farmland, organic farming alone could not feed over four billion people (Avery 163). Some, however, disagree, such as GeneWatch, a non-profit organization that wants more restrictions on genetic technologies (GeneWatch 164). The organization blames poverty rather than natural calamities for hunger (GeneWatch 165) and claims that companies invested in GM foods have no interest in spending research dollars on the poor (GeneWatch 167). While there may be some truth to such claims, GeneWatch fails to consider important counter-evidence. Even if GM foods fail to address the primary causes of starvation, some help is better than none. Also, GM foods can address the poverty issue through higher yields. Additionally, GM foods could be exported to developing countries by first world governments. Furthermore, GM foods could be engineered to grow in harsher conditions (e.g., salty and dry) (Rauch 146). By planting hardier crops, farmers could utilize otherwise unusable land, potentially allowing them to sell more food. As such, GeneWatch’s concerns are understandable but moot.
(New Paragraph)While similar concerns merit attention, they fail under scrutiny. Opponents of GM foods generally argue that GM foods are unpredictable. As demonstrated, however, such fears are unwarranted. Consequently, this essay successfully shows that GM food usage should generally be encouraged based on the assumptions made for opposing GM foods. Of course, though this essay succeeds in demonstrating the veracity of the pro-GM position, niches for further study remain. Someone may choose to assess the desirability of GM food among consumers, conduct a formal long-term study on the overall differences and similarities between GM and non-GM food, or develop ways in which biotechnology could be made more efficient such as by making it possible for genes to be removed (Steinbrecher 152). GM food’s benefits and possible avenues of research leave open a bright future for innovation.
____________________________________________________
Project 4
Grading Criteria
1. Content
a. The introduction immediately captures the attention and interest of the audience
b. The central idea is clearly expressed; clarity of purpose is exhibited throughout the essay
c. Major points are well developed—supported and illustrated with evidence and examples
d. Writing exhibits critical, careful rhetorical analysis and/or insight
e. Each paragraph has a clear relation to the main idea
f. The conclusion does more than simply end the paper
Points possible: 66 (~40%)
Points earned: __________
2. Organization
a. Essay is logically organized
b. By the end of the introduction, the audience has a good idea what the essay will be about
c. The introduction is well structured and focused on the topic
d. There are smooth, logical transitions between paragraphs and ideas
e. Topic sentences give a clear understanding of what each paragraph will discuss
f. Headings that help to organize main points
Points possible: 50 (~30%)
Points earned: __________
3. Style
a. Writer’s tone is clear, consistent and appropriate for intended audience
b. Genre is used correctly and completely throughout the paper
c. Vocabulary is sophisticated and correct, as are sentences, which vary in structure and length
d. Uses appropriate language for the intended audience
e. Writing overall is exceptional for a first year college student

Points possible: 33 (~20%)
Points earned: __________
4. Rules
a. Mechanical errors are rare
b. Follows standard academic requirements for grammar and punctuation
c. Uses 12 point type and double spacing (unless otherwise intended due to genre)
d. Follows MLA formatting standards (see A Writer’s Reference for guidelines)
e. Outside research is correctly documented in both parenthetical citations and works cited
Points possible: 17 (~10%)
Points earned: __________

Two things I'd really need to know in order to understand what's going on. One, what academic level is this for? A university essay has different requirements then a high school one. Two, can you give a quick, three sentence summary of what your essay is on, and what arguement you are trying to present? That would make things a bit easier.

-I'm a college freshman.

-My argument:
=Thesis: "This essay argues that GM [genetically modified] food usage generally should be encouraged based on the assumptions made for opposing GM foods."
=Assumptions: We should encourage what is beneficial for human health and the environment while discouraging things that do the opposite.
=Summary: I favor genetically modified foods for the same reasons that people oppose genetically modified foods.