Legal but Deadly Essay

Legal but Deadly Essay Legal but Deadly Essay Legal but Deadly Prescription for Disaster 1/11/2013 The non-medical use and abuse of prescription drugs is a serious public health problem in this country. Although most people take prescription medications responsibly, an estimated 52 million people have used prescription drugs for non-medical reasons at least once in their lifetimes. They are potentially deadly when taken in large doses or when combined with alcohol or other drugs. Take Gerald Levert, an R including Vicodin, Percocet, and Darvocet for his shoulder and Achilles tendon injuries, also Xanax for anxiety attacks. Just because they are legal does not mean that pharmaceutical drugs are any less dangerous than illicit drugs. There are several misconceptions about taking prescription drugs without a prescription. One is that people think because they are prescribed by a doctor and are legal that they must be safe. They tend to believe that they are safer than illicit drugs like heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. Individuals have confidence in that they are not as addictive. There is also the belief by many using prescription drugs, even recreationally, that they can quit whenever they want. Taking these drugs without knowing the warning signs and getting behind the wheel of a car or heavy machinery, could ultimately be fatal. The fact is prescription drugs are very powerful and that is why they require a prescription from a doctor, so their use can be monitored more closely. Doctors regulate use of these drugs so they can inform patients about the risk factors and side effects. Taking more than you are prescribed increases your chances of severe side effects and up to addiction. Drug abuse is discriminatory; it does not care about race, gender, age or social status. Prescription drugs are everywhere, they are advertised daily on television, easily purchased without a prescription online, and most people have them in their medicine cabinets. The younger generation has begun to use them as a way to self-medicate; they get them from home and through friends. Even drug dealers are selling them because they have become more popular than illicit drugs like cocaine and marijuana. People are becoming more susceptible to sharing their prescriptions with others, not thinking of the affects they could have. Individuals tend to believe that a pill can fix almost any problem they have because that’s how they are advertised everywhere you look. There continues to be a more social acceptance of using medications, so the misuse is not frowned upon by many as drug abuse. Many people, of all ages, misuse prescription drugs to relieve pain, if they have sleeping problems, have trouble focusing, or just want to get high. Every person has their own excuses for using. They may be finding different ways to cope with the pressures of life’s demands, dealing with stress that occurs because of adaption, frustration, and overload of daily problems. Peer pressure is and always has been a factor concerning drug abuse. Younger individuals have their own set of rules concerning authority figures and friends, having the mind set to be adventurous and be like others in the â€Å"group†. Users think that drugs help them by keeping them motivated, by enhancing their performance, to be more creative, relieve tension, and most commonly it makes them feel good about themselves. An analysis from the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) showed that in 2008 emergency room records reported that more than 4.3 million visits were associated with some form of drug abuse. This number is up over an overwhelming 70 percent from2004. Almost half of the 4.3 million were results of drug misuse or abuse. The remaining 2 million were the result of legal medical use of prescription and over- the- counter drugs. ("Prescription Drugs More Dangerous Than

Free Essays on Keeping Violence Out of Schools

Factors contributing to school violence are numerous, complex, and mostly community-related. For example, teachers perceive that major factors contributing to student violence are lack of parental supervision at home, lack of family involvement with the school, and exposure to violence in the mass media. Teachers are also believed that certain types of parenting produce children who contribute to school violence. America's children are exposed to a steady diet of verbal and physical violence that begins early and continues throughout their lives. In too many communities, children constantly send signals that they feel isolated from and maligned by society. These feelings know no geographic, social, or economic boundaries. Children often receive mixed messages from parents and other adults about what is right and what is wrong. The use of material goods to persuade children to behave in one way or to dissuade them from behaving in another is an example of mixed messages. These attitudes and actions convey strong lessons about roles, responsibilities, and the right that must be learned in odes to assume positions as citizens good in a democratic society. How children learn theses lessons is as important as what they learn. Victims of violence in schools cover the spectrum. For example, 900 teachers are threatened, and over 2,000 students and nearly 40 teachers are physically attacked on school grounds every hour of each school day each year (Stone, 1994). Younger students (grades 6-10) are much more likely to be victims of violence than are senior high school students (The American Teacher, 1993;U.S. Department of Education). The Department of justice reported that students whose families moved frequently are students from racial or ethnic groups that are minorities within the school are more likely to be physically assaulted. Students, who wear expensive or fashionable clothing or jewelry, or who bring cameras, cassette player... Free Essays on Keeping Violence Out of Schools Free Essays on Keeping Violence Out of Schools Factors contributing to school violence are numerous, complex, and mostly community-related. For example, teachers perceive that major factors contributing to student violence are lack of parental supervision at home, lack of family involvement with the school, and exposure to violence in the mass media. Teachers are also believed that certain types of parenting produce children who contribute to school violence. America's children are exposed to a steady diet of verbal and physical violence that begins early and continues throughout their lives. In too many communities, children constantly send signals that they feel isolated from and maligned by society. These feelings know no geographic, social, or economic boundaries. Children often receive mixed messages from parents and other adults about what is right and what is wrong. The use of material goods to persuade children to behave in one way or to dissuade them from behaving in another is an example of mixed messages. These attitudes and actions convey strong lessons about roles, responsibilities, and the right that must be learned in odes to assume positions as citizens good in a democratic society. How children learn theses lessons is as important as what they learn. Victims of violence in schools cover the spectrum. For example, 900 teachers are threatened, and over 2,000 students and nearly 40 teachers are physically attacked on school grounds every hour of each school day each year (Stone, 1994). Younger students (grades 6-10) are much more likely to be victims of violence than are senior high school students (The American Teacher, 1993;U.S. Department of Education). The Department of justice reported that students whose families moved frequently are students from racial or ethnic groups that are minorities within the school are more likely to be physically assaulted. Students, who wear expensive or fashionable clothing or jewelry, or who bring cameras, cassette player...

Strategic Knowledge Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words - 1

Strategic Knowledge - Essay Example al., n.d.). With the intention to determine that whether the idea of intellectual capital can be managed at the strategic level or not, it can be affirmed that intellectual capital aids an organisation to generate greater value to the customers and drive success at in the long-run. Contextually, it has been viewed that the success of several foremost organisations including Microsoft, Amazon and Google among others have been typically based upon their respective intellectual capital in terms of managing it in an effective manner (Marr, 2008). Samsung Group, popularly known as Samsung, is one of the biggest Information Technology (IT) based global organisation that deals with various products and services including consumer electronics, medical instruments, mobile phones and telecommunication related equipments (Samsung, 2012). Notably, the vision of the company is to incessantly develop its pioneering technological advancements as well as effectual business procedures with the intention of penetrating into new business markets, enhancing profitability and most significantly accomplishing superior competitive position over its chief business market competitors (Samsung, 2012). Thus, it can be stated that the group can attain its expected business goals within the context of KM by effectively managing its intellectual capital. Based on these considerations, the discussion henceforth will intend to present a comprehensive analysis of the statement concerning the issue that whether the perception of intellectual capital can be managed at the strategic level. Different important aspects that include knowledge management or environment related managerial concerns, intellectual along with social capital, communities of practice and soft systems thinking will also be portrayed in this discussion. The conception of Knowledge Management (KM) is

Radical changes are needed in company reporting to cope with the rise Essay

Radical changes are needed in company reporting to cope with the rise of intangible assets. Discuss - Essay Example 1. Ability to be separately recognised: Since the asset can be separately quantified, relative commercial transactions such as sale, transfer or exchange could be carried out, Further, the creation of an intangible asset is out of an agreement or other legal imposition, 2. Ability to produce future benefits: Software development expenses is example of an intangible asset that has the ability to produce future benefits. For the same reason, special distribution and selling rights, trademarks and intellectual properties ownerships also constitute intangible assets Intangibles can be acquired either externally or through internal means. Intangible assets acquired externally are through buying, transfer or leasing process and the internally generated ones are established by way of the companies’ own efforts and market reputation. The main aspect to be considered with regard to intangible assets is that it must be compatible to quantitative analysis and future benefits. Whether the intangible assets are self generated or acquired externally. If this parameter is not met the investment would be â€Å"recognised as an expense when it is incurred [IAS 38.68]1† and not as an intangible asset. The aspect of intangible asset which is self generated refers to determination of goodwill and its accounting treatment. In real effect, goodwill represents â€Å"the excess paid for a firm over its adjusted net asset value.†2 (p.992). The goodwill amount refers to the special ability of the firm to generate revenue by way of its current market standing and also its future earning capacity. Goodwill is only seen in the context of business mergers and acquisitions representing the difference between the purchase prices and the net value of assets acquired. The aspect of goodwill in accounting cannot be undermined because â€Å"when Philip Morris acquired Seven Up for a price of $ 520 Million, approximately $ 390 million of the purchase price represented goodwill,†3

Language in Anthony and Brutus’ Speeches Essay Example for Free

Language in Anthony and Brutus’ Speeches Essay Compare and contrast Henry’s use of rhetoric to affect others in his Harfleur speeches with the effectiveness of the language in Anthony and Brutus’ speeches In Henry V, Henry uses rhetoric very effectively as he persuades the Governor at Harfleur to surrender and encourages his troops onward with his ‘Once more unto the breach’ speech. This is very similar to Anthony and Brutus of Julius Caesar as they use rhetoric to influence the ‘mob’; firstly Brutus wins the crowd over and they believe the death of Caesar is a good thing and then Anthony turns them around and they end up hating Cassius and Brutus. Henry uses rhetoric to create a number of different effects one of them being to persuade the Governor to surrender. Rhoda Koenig suggests that this scene ‘points up the character of this immature and disaffected king’, which I disagree with as I believe that this speech shows just how the King has matured as he is able to bluff his way through as his army is, really, worn and battered. This speech shows how Henry’s words are more powerful than his army, which is similar to Anthony in Julius Caesar who turns the mob into a state of madness just through the use of his oratorical skills. For example, Henry starts his speech with short, sharp sentences: â€Å"How yet resolves the governor of the/ town?† This creates an assertive beginning and one that makes Henry seem powerful and stern. This coupled with the use of a rhetorical question puts the Governor in a situation where the mercy of Henry is in his hands, as if the outcome of his men depends on his decision. This also removes the responsibility from Henry’s shoulders which is a recurring theme throughout the play. Henry also describes what the outcome could look like if the Governor doesn’t surrender: â€Å"The gates of mercy shall be all shut up.† The use of a metaphor here, ‘the gates of mercy’, refers to Henry as if once he starts the battle there’s no goi ng back. This is used to scare the Governor so that he believes Harfleur will be desecrated once the battle has begun. This, of course, is a faà §ade as Henry knows full-well that his army is worn thin and lacking in strength. This demonstrates Henry’s good leadership, as he bluffs his way through with confidence. Also, this quote contains lots of monosyllables which make it very powerful and reinforces the threat which forces the Governor to surrender. Bernard Richards raised an interesting point where he said that Shakespeare ‘wanted to show the full range of war – the glamour as well as the squalid and obscene violence.’ This interested me as throughout this speech there is talk of atrocities of war such as ‘shrieking daughters’ while elsewhere in the play we see the French think of war as glorious. This is very similar to Brutus in Julius Caesar who has to use rhetoric to convince the crowd to surrender, as they are initially angry at the conspirat ors for killing their leader. For example, he uses rhetorical questions to force the crowd to realise that the murder of Caesar will benefit them: â€Å"Who here is so base [†¦] Who here is so rude [†¦] Who is so vile [†¦] for him have I offended.† The crowd are forced to ask themselves if they would want to be slaves, for example, which they of course answer ‘no’. The use of a three-part list also emphasizes this and would allow the crowd to remember this more accurately: â€Å"Let him be Caesar!† This quote shows that Brutus’s rhetoric successfully convinces the crowd, although they appear to have missed the point as they want Brutus to be ‘the new Caesar’ and the sole leader of Rome which is what the conspirators were fighting against. It is also interesting to note that Shakespeare’s main characters usually speak in blank verse, but here Brutus speaks in prose. This is because prose is the perfect way to persuade so has a stronger affect on the crowd. It could also be argued that because he speaks to the low-life characters, they will understand prose better than blank verse. Within his speech Brutus also uses repetition which reinforces his message: â€Å"Hear me for cause [] hear.† The use of framing repetition here grabs the crowd’s attention and makes them listen. He also repeats ‘honour’ throughout his speech: â€Å"Believe me for mine honour, and have respect for mine honour.† This repetition is used to emphasize to the crowd that the conspirator’s cause was honourable and that they have done the right thing while it also serves to remind the crowd how Brutus is an honourable man, which is a similarity with Henry who also takes great care in ensuring the cause for going to war is moral. The repetition would ‘grind’ it into the crowds’ heads so that it’s almost like subliminal messaging. The repetition also shows how Brutus is still unsure himself and that he is trying to convince himself that they have done the right thing. Henry also uses rhetoric to empower his army and urge them on at Harfluer in what Hal Hinson of the Washington Post calls ‘the greatest half-time speech in human historyà ¢â‚¬â„¢. Here, Henry is forced to persuade his army that they should not retreat but attack once again: â€Å"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.† Similarly to Brutus, Henry uses framing repetition to encourage his army to attack Harfleur once more. The repetition helps to reinforce the message and will stick in their minds through the battle. Also in this quote, he uses an endearing pronoun ‘friend’. This affects the army as they will feel that they are all friends of the King and will have a surge of confidence. This will help the army to conquer whatever they face, even though they have had to retreat. Interestingly, this contrast to what the Chorus says in the preceding scene as he states that the great British are invading France when really they are being forced to retreat. Henry also uses alliteration: â€Å"But when the blast of war blows in our ears.† The use of plosive alliteration here creates a powerful sound which suggests that the English army are powerful enough to defeat the French. This also shows Henry’s passion as if it’s bursting out of him as he desperately wants his men to survive as he feels guilty that the war may not have an honourable cause. Also is this speech, sibilance is used: â€Å"Stiffen the sinews.† This also creates quite an aggressive sound which would be passed onto the soldiers and make them feel aggressive and willing to fight. Henry also uses figurative language: â€Å"Let it pry [†¦] like the brass cannon.† This simile likens the mind prying to a cannon – an item associated with war – which would rile up the soldiers and also remind them that they are at war, its kill or be killed. Another simile used refers to Alexander the Great: â€Å"On, on, you noblest English [†¦] like so many Alexanders.† Here, Henry likens his army to a group of Alexander the Greats. Alexander the Great is a figure of Greek legend which states that he conquered the Persian Empire. It also says that he was often reckless with his own life and his soldiers as he believed he was indestructible. This would encourage his men and fill them with confidence as Alexander was a great warrior and Henry’s army will feel equally invincible. Shakespeare’s Elizabethan audience were very interested in Greek culture so the simile would have been more relevant and had more effect than it would on our society who have a lesser interest. Also, in this quote he addresses the ‘noblest English ’while further on he addresses the â€Å"good yeomen.† Henry directly addresses each social class as his army was compiled of a number of different classes, even nationalities. King Henry V was known for uniting people under him as he prevented a civil war between the Church and the Government and th is unity is shown in the scene between Gower, Fluellen, Jamy and MacMorris. This scene also, as James Shapiro suggests, ‘prophetically anticipates the notion of a united kingdom’. Although these nations were far from united in 1599, when the play was written as England and Ireland were at war, and some were very hostile during Henry’s reign. For example, James Shapiro criticizes that Henry says the Scots may attack yet here they are united. This would make each soldier feel important, needed and a friend of the king’s, which would, ultimately, provide the soldiers with confidence to fight, and beat, the French. Likewise, Mark Anthony in Julius Caesar also addresses his crowd individually while manipulating them until they run riot around Rome: â€Å"Friends, Romans, countrymen.† Anthony immediately begins with a three-part list which grabs his audience’s attentions and the first word used is ‘friends’. This instantly makes the crowd warm to him as he is speaking to them as equals. This is similar to Henry who calls his army the ‘noble English’ and ‘good yeomen’, while it contrasts with Brutus who says, â€Å"Romans, countrymen, and lovers†, as if ‘lovers’ is an afterthought. This may hint at why Henry and Anthony were successful at convincing their audience while Brutus failed, because Henry and Anthony allowed the audience to warm to them while Brutus did not. Another way Anthony wins his crowd over is by using repetition: â€Å"And Brutus is an honourable man.† This is repeated at regular intervals throughout his speech and each time it becomes more sarcastic. The sarcastic tone induces the crowd to question whether killing Caesar was an honourable thing. Here, in the same way as Brutus, he uses subliminal messaging; however he uses it against Brutus and to much better effect as the crowd end up rampaging across Rome. In conclusion, Henry and Anthony use rhetoric and their oratorical skills very well combining repetition, friendly language, and other techniques to persuade their respective crowds to see their way of thinking. Brutus, however, fails to convince his crowd (or is unable to deliver a speech worthy of Anthony’s) which goes to show how good Anthony’s speech is. Henry manages to convince the Governor to surrender, and convince his battered army to continue, while Anthony manages to convince an audience who love Brutus, to hunt him down. Brutus, on the other hand, cannot prevent the people of Rome from turning against him as he didn’t endear himself to the crowd.

The Great Gatsby - Chapter 1 Essay example -- English Literature

The Great Gatsby - Chapter 1 Read the beginning of the novel chapter 1 up to page 12 â€Å"Tom Buchanan in his riding clothes was standing with his legs apart on the front porch.† How effective do you find this as an introduction to Great Gatsby. In your response you should pay close attention to voice, language and style. The Great Gatsby was written by F Scott Fitzgerald in 1925, and is set during 1922, a period tinged with moral failure of a society obsessed with class and privilege. Fitzgerald presents us with the conflict between the illusion and the reality of the American dream. The novel begins in the present tense, and is told through the eyes of Nick Carraway, the narrator and moral centre of the novel. His tale is told in retrospect. Nick Carraway is a young man from the Mid West, introducing himself as a graduate of Yale and a veteran of World War One. He begins the first chapter by relaying his father’s advice: â€Å"Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone, just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the same advantages as you’ve had.† He states that he is also â€Å"inclined to reserve all judgement† about people and be a tolerant listener; who is entrusted with people’s secrets. This encourages him to withhold formulating opinions about people until he gets to know them, demonstrating his caution. Nick puts himself forward explicitly, as someone with an above average â€Å"sense of fundamental decencies† which now manifests itself as a wish for â€Å"the world to be in uniform and at a moral attention forever†. This military perspective clearly shows Nick has something of an authoritarian character with a developed instinct for discipline and order. These first pages of Chapter one... ...ds the end of page 9 the reader is given a sense of time and a positive idea of how the modern world is progressing, through the metaphor of â€Å"growing trees† and the â€Å"burst of leaves† creating new life that has potential just like the American Dream. â€Å"Fast movies† (p.9) and the â€Å"telephone† (p.12) symbolise the Twentieth –century technological environment. The growth of cinemas, cars, boats is recognised by the twenties as a decade of mass media and mass production in America. The novel raises the issue of individual worth in such a context. In contrast to this materialistic world, Daisy’s name evokes a delicate flower. The irony here is that her life is conducted in an entirely manufactured environment, distant from the natural world. The key structure of the chapter is the combination of first person narrative and the gradual revelation of the past.

Grass Fed Beef vs. Grain Fed Beef

Matthew Buckman Carla Baku English 1A 10:45 September 23, 2012 Beef Grass Fed Beef vs. Grain Fed Beef Before World War Two (WW2), ranchers raised grass fed cows and that was the norm. But because of the high demand for beef after WW2 ranchers had to change the way they raised cows. Ever since WW2, cows have been raised on grain which has become the norm when it comes to raising cows. That means they are fed mainly corn instead of grass. With the cows being fed corn they get fatter quicker so that means that they are at the weight to get slaughtered quicker.That was until recently when people started questioning corn fed beef and the health risks and how humane it was for the cows. Every year there are millions of cows slaughtered in the U. S for humans to consume. Most of the cows that are slaughtered are grain fed cows. Although some people argue that grain fed beef isn’t worse than grass fed beef in fact we should start eating more grass fed beef because it is more humane fo r the cows, better for the environment and it is healthier than grain fed beef for the consumer and the cows.We should start eating more grass fed beef because it is more humane for the cows. The first way that it is more humane for the cows is that they aren’t cooped up in a feed lot. This means that the cows aren’t kept in a confined space with other cows. They are more freely able to walk around on pastures and have the choice to eat whenever they want instead of having specific eating times. This allows the cows to live as they were meant to instead of the way grain fed cows are just raised for a quicker slaughter.Also with feed lots being such a confined space it collects a lot of manure instead which causes a lot of air and water pollution because the wind blows it up and when it rains it seeps into the groundwater. With grass fed cows being able to roam around on pastures they naturally spread their manure around the pasture which fertilizes the land. Another wa y that grass fed beef is more humane than grain fed beef is that grass fed beef aren’t given antibiotics and hormones like grain fed beef. Grain fed beef needs ntibiotics regularly because of the conditions that they live in. With being cooped up in a feed lot the cows have a lot of health risks such as dust pneumonia and E Coli because of air pollution and water pollution. With grass fed cows being able to roam free on pastures there isn’t as much air and water pollution so there is no need for antibiotics. The last way that grass fed beef is more humane than grain fed beef is that the cows get to live longer lives to get to their slaughter weight.With cows being raised on grass, it takes them roughly twenty-two months to get to their slaughter weight. That’s almost two full years for a cow to live. With cows being raised on grain they only get to live for sixteen months. That’s a full six months less then grass fed cows. I know that if I was a cow, I wo uld want an extra six months to live. Another reason we should start eating more grass fed beef because it is better for the environment. With grain fed beef, the cows manure is scooped up from their cell block and taken to the closet place to the feed lot to be dumped.This ruins the surrounding land because with too much manure being dumped in one place it gives the ground too many nutrients. With there being too many nutrients in the ground, the excess nutrients pollute the soil and water. With grass fed cows being raised in pastures they create and spread fertilizer naturally. This means that less chemicals and pesticides have to be used to fertilize the pastures. With pesticides not having to be used to, that means that less pesticides have the chance to get spread through the air and pollute are water ways and contaminate our drinking water.If pesticides get in our drinking water, it increases the chance of the person drinking the water to have reproductive disorders, and it ca n lead to neurological damage such as Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s disease. If farmers continually use pesticides to fertilize their land it reduces the soil fertility. All of these things are bad for our environment and with all of the things that are already bad for the environment, why would we add more to it when cows do the same thing naturally? Another way that grass fed beef is better for the environment is grass fed cows use less fossil fuels.Grain fed beef requires more fossil fuel to make the diet of the grain fed cows such as dried corn and soy. With all the required burning of these fossil fuels more carbon dioxide is being released into the air which is contributing to global warming. With fossil fuels burning being directly related to global warming, I think that by using less fossil fuel burning with grass fed beef that grass fed beef is better for the environment. The last reason we should start eating more grass fed beef because it is healthier for the c onsumers and the cows.When eating grain fed beef, you are taking in high levels of bad fats and cholesterol and low levels of good fats and Vitamin E. Grass fed beef is the complete opposite way, you take in high levels of good fats and Vitamin E, and low levels of bad fats and cholesterol. Just by these comparisons here it is clear that grass fed beef is better for the consumers than grain fed beef. Grass fed beef contains iron and calcium and a heavy healthy dosage of protein. This is all healthy for the consumer to eat. This gives the consumers a better healthier option of beef. Dr. Steve Atchley is one of many health-conscious carnivores fueling the trend. ‘I got tired of telling my patients they couldn't eat red meat,’ says the Denver cardiologist. So three years ago, he launched Mesquite Organic Foods, which sells grass-fed beef to 74 Wild Oats stores nationwide. Mesquite's ground beef is 65% lower in saturated fat and its New York strips are 35% lower than conven tional beef, as measured by the USDA. â€Å"Any feedlot-fattened animal has a much higher level of saturated fat than a forage-fed steer,† says Atchley. Another reason we should start eating more grass fed beef is because it is healthier for the cow that we are eating. With grass fed beef the cows are eating what they were meant to eat. Their four stomachs are made to digest grass. With the cows not having trouble digesting grass, the farmers don’t have to give the cows antibiotics and hormones to make digestion easier. So it only makes sense that with grass fed beef being fed grass that they would be healthier than grain fed beef. With grain fed beef being fed corn, and etc. heir stomachs have a difficult time digesting it because their stomachs aren’t meant to digest it. John Robbins a supporter of grass fed beef states, â€Å"When cattle are grain fed, their intestinal tracts become far more acidic, which favors the growth of pathogenic E. coli bacteria, whi ch in turn kills people who eat undercooked hamburger. † With the cow’s stomachs not being able to digest the grain, the farmers have to regularly give them antibiotics and hormones. Farmers now just put the antibiotics and hormones in the grain. Also before he first big hit of the mad cow disease, farmers would feed cows meat from other cows. This practice was basically turning herbivores into carnivores. This is not healthy at all because things like this are not supposed to be changed because you can’t change the way a living animal’s stomach digests something. This made a lot of cows’ sick which in turn makes the consumers sick. Although some people argue that grain fed beef isn’t worse than grass fed beef in fact we should start eating more grass fed beef because it is more humane for the cows, better for the environment and it is healthier for the consumer and the cows.Growing up I used to go to my grandpa’s farm every summer and help him with all of his work. He raised cows and chickens. He raised his cows off of grass instead of grains. So growing up I would always have grass fed beef. I feel that I am a healthy person today because of my grandpa having raised his cows on grass instead of grains. Works Citied Robbins, John. What About Grass-fed Beef?. N. p. , 18 April 2010. Web. 30 Sep. 2012. Roosevelt, Margot. â€Å"The Grass-Fed Revolution. † Time Magazine. 11 Jun 2006: 1. Web. 4 Oct. 2012. .