The Omnivore’s Dilemma
The Omnivore’s Dilemma
Billions of people worldwide have made eating of mean part of their lives. Millions of animals have been killed for meat production. People who have reared livestock, among other purposes, have been keen to keep them as source food. Meat has also been used when people want to mark important events in their lives. Meat is an essential delicacy in the meals of billions of people does not make it an essential factor for tEthics of Cloninghe existence of human beings. They are just a source of food just like any other food. In fact, studies have found out that too much meat can have adverse, significant effects on the health of human being. These consequences are not seen or felt immediately, but appear with time. These research findings clearly indicate that a meat diet is not as healthy as most would thins. This paper establishes the ethics of eating animals and some of the consequences of eating meat.
Doctors believe that a meatless diet could be healthier than a diet containing meat. Researches have conducted to establish the contents of the food products. The research findings have indicated that indeed meat contains fatter than non-meat foods. The body of the human being has not been designed to process high quantities of fat in the meat, which will accumulate and eventually leads to some unhealthy body conditions. This paper establishes the ethics of eating animals and some of the consequences of eating meat.
While a human being has all along considered eating meat as “Natural,” Pollan believes that human being mistreats an animal. Some animals such as cats and dogs are treated. Differently, they are regarded as pets, treated with love and attention. They are not considered a source of meat or food but a source of companionship to the human being. Other animals such as pigs and cows are brutalized in a slaughterhouse. Pollan is not only talking about meat eating but how the source of that meat is treated. According to Pollan, such cultural schizophrenia way of treating animals would take place in a culture where people have less meaningful contact with the animals that will become their food. People would interact more with their pets more they would do with animals such as pigs or cows.
Pollan is opposing the use of animal’s meat on the basis of the relationship between these animals and the human being. Apart from the fact that animal meat has some adverse effect on our health, Pollan seems to think that this animal ought to be accorded fair treatment. This forms the notion behind moral Dilemma regarding the use of meat as food. In the omnivore’s dilemma, Pollan believes that there is a lack of a stable culture of food to guide people. It, therefore, leaves people with no clear direction or guideline regarding the use of meat. This lack of guideline is the reason why people have not been able to control how much or less they can take meat. From the notion by Pollan, there is all indication that meat is not bad, but how people treat the whole issue. Hence, a remarkably unwholesome population is gripped with eating healthily—the American Absurdity.
