Corn Fed Beef Research Paper
Dr. Carlson
English 110-01
September 27 2013
The Comparative Health Effects of Consuming Corn Fed Beef to Grass Fed Beef
Are all cows created equally? What makes any one piece of beef superior to another? This thought leads one to question what one is putting in one’s mouth, and what is being put in the mouth of the animal one is consuming. The meat production industry in America today has quite a few mouths to provide for, and a limited amount of time in which to do it. Because of such a high demand, the meat production system has morphed to its growing pool of consumers by learning how to produce large quantities, quickly, and at a low cost. One major alteration is the diet on which our beef is raised. Questions have been raised regarding the health repercussions of a corn-based diet over the bovine’s natural herbivorous diet. Grass fed beef is more nutritious to consume than corn fed beef …show more content…
because animals that feed on grass are healthier and yield a more chemically beneficial product.
For one to fully understand the nutritional value of the meat one is eating, one must first understand the nutritional value of the food one’s meat has eaten and the biology of the animal itself. A man or woman does not only eat the meat on their plate, but the food that has been presented to their meal. By nature the cow is not only an herbivorous animal, but also a ruminant, meaning that it exclusively feeds on grass. It seems however, that industrialized cattle are being fed anything but grass these days.
Today, most of the beef that the average American consumes includes a long list of ingredients: grains such as corn, rendered animal protein, marine bi-products, animal waste, restaurant food waste, antibiotics, and added vitamins and minerals (Walker). Along with these identifiable components to the feed mixture cattle are consuming often times come harmful bacteria such as salmonella and E. coli (Walker). Polly Walker cites a 2005 study in which Dargatz revealed that 38.7% of 514 E.Coli isolates we resistant to cephalothin, an antibiotic commonly included in animal feed. Another 53.4% of this number was resistant to a combined number of three other common antibiotics. E. Coli contamination is very serious, and sometimes fatal to the human body. Food Inc., a documentary about the changing industrial food system, highlights the story of one family who lost their young son to E. coli poisoning after eating a contaminated hamburger from a “Jack in the Box” restaurant.
Cattle can often host E. coli without ingesting it through their feed. Margot Roosevelt explains the biological problem that is raised when cows eat a steady diet of corn or grain in her article, Grass Fed Revolution.
Biologically, cattle are ruminants, exquisitely evolved to graze grass, and researchers have found that a grain diet raises the acidity in steers’ guts. This breeds an acid-resistant form of E. Coli that can spread from feces contaminated carcasses to meat. In 1993, 600 people in Seattle got sick and three children died after eating E. coli- tainted hamburger. According to USDA research, more than ½ of grain-fed cattle have been found to have acid-resistant E. coli in their feces; the proportion drops to 15% if they are switched to hay (Roosevelt 5).
Not only does corn fed cattle pose the threat of an E. coli infection, but the possibility of other detrimental side effects. Walker sums up her journal by reviewing some of these possible side effects.
Currently the use of animal feed ingredients, including rendered animal products, animal waste, antibiotics, metals and fats, could result in higher levels of bacteria, antibiotic resistant bacteria, prions, arsenic, and dioxin-like compounds in animals and resulting animal based food products intended for human consumption. Subsequent human health effects among consumers could include increases in bacterial infections and increases in the risk of developing chronic diseases such as vCJD (Walker 668).
Antibiotics are necessary for corn fed, industrialized cattle because of their unhygienic living conditions, and simply because they are ingesting a man made diet consisting of corn and other additives. However, Food Inc. states that there is some evidence to suggest that cattle finished with as little as 5 days of grass will shed 80% of their E. Coli before slaughter. Although this may be true, finishing a cow on grass does not yield the same results as raising a cow on grass. A corn or grain based diet can often lead to stomach ulcers and liver abscesses in cattle, so settling for a grass finished steak could mean you are still eating a unhealthy animal (Roosevelt). Cattle raised on a steady diet of grass naturally clean out impurities, eliminating the need for antibiotics, while providing a healthier product. However the growing reliance and overuse of antibiotics has become a health issue for the consumer. The over usage of antibiotics in preventing food born illness has caused bacteria to become resistant to treatment, a factor in the deaths of more than 60,000 Americans each year, while grass fed cattle rarely require antibiotic treatment. (Roosevelt).
Corn fed beef and grass fed beef can also be compared by levels of fatty acids and antioxidants. It is important to remember that regardless of diet, red meat is rich in nutrients and several very beneficial vitamins including vitamins A, B, D, and E (Larson et al.). However, grass fed and corn fed beef produce different representations of good fats and bad fats. In their academic article, Daley, Abbot, Doyle, Nader and Larson provide information about the two essential fatty acids for the human body.
There are two essential fatty acids (EFAs) in human nutrition: a-linolenic acid (aLA), an omega-3 fatty acid; and linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 fatty acid. The human body cannot synthesize essential fatty acids, yet they are critical to human health; for this reason, EFAs must be obtained from food. Both aLA and La are polyunsaturated and serve as precursors of other important compounds (Larson et al. 5).
Larson’s study shows fairly consistent results, proving that grass fed beef contains higher levels of these beneficial fats. Yet, grass fed beef does not only yield a product that is rich in healthy fats, but also that is plentiful in carotene and vitamin E. Carotene, particularly beta- carotene, is an important nutrient for the progression of healthy eye sight, bone growth, cell division, cell differentiation, and reproduction (Larson et al.). Sufficient levels of carotene in beef are classically expressed through a yellow or orange tint to it’s fat. This yellow tint is also expressive of healthy fatty acid profiles and higher levels of antioxidants (Larson et al.). What’s more is that this same study found that grass fed cattle demonstrated a seven-fold increase in beta-carotene. This is presumably related to the high beta-carotene content of grass compared to grains such as corn (Larson et al.).
Grass fed beef is also comparatively rich in vitamin E, which has been proven to possess many health benefits (Larson et al). Larson, Nader, Doyle, Abbot, and Daley elaborate on these health benefits in their nutritional review of grass fed beef including disease prevention, immune system enhancement, and the blocking of carcinogen formations in the stomach
Antioxidants such as vitamin E protect cells against the effects of free radicals. Free radicals are potentially damaging by-products of metabolism that may contribute to the development of chronic diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease. Preliminary research shows vitamin E supplementation may help prevent or delay coronary heart disease. Vitamin E may also block the formation of nitrosamines, which are carcinogens formed in the stomach from nitrates consumed in the diet. It may also protect against the development of cancers by enhancing immune function (Larson et al. 8).
Grass fed and corn fed beef also contrast nutritionally in other ways. For instance one serving of grass fed beef has approximately one hundred fewer calories than a serving of corn fed beef (Turner). In an article written for Time Magazine, Roosevelt offers a logical explanation for the nutritional superiority of grass fed beef to corn fed beef.
It makes sense. Grass is a low-starch, high-protein fibrous food, in contrast to carbohydrate-rich, low-fiber corn and soybeans. When animals are 100% grass-fed, their meat is not only lower in saturated fats but also slightly higher in omega-3 fatty acids, the healthy fats found in salmon and flaxseed, which studies indicate may help prevent heart disease and bolster the immune system (Roosevelt 2).
It is this way of thinking that has started to spread like wildfire across our country. The knowledge and awareness of the substantial benefits of eating beef that was raised in its natural, evolutionary manner have caused a revolution of sorts. Of course there are those who neglect the idea that the health benefits of grass fed beef are worth the economical cost and slower production rates that may ensue if all cattle was raised on an exclusively grass fed diet. A feedlot cow fed a corn and grain diet can reach its slaughter weight approximately one year sooner than a grass fed cow (Cross 1). With a demand for large quantities of meat such as the American market, the quicker route seems to be more practical, not to mention that feeding cows a diet of corn supports the growing force of corn farmers that make up much of the Midwestern United States. Perhaps this is why small, organic, grass fed beef farmers have begun to accumulate more business. In her article The Grass Fed Revolution, Margot Roosevelt highlights the story of an industrial beef farmer gone rogue. Jon Taggart recently transitioned from growing cattle on a steady diet of corn, soy, and antibiotics, to a 100% grass diet. Since the switch, the Taggarts have doubled their income, adding more than one thousand customers to their database. The nutritional quality of beef raised on grass and beef raised on corn differ significantly. Grass fed beef is more nutritious to consume than corn fed beef because animals that feed on grass are healthier and yield a more chemically beneficial product. Because cows are by nature herbivorous, ruminants they are healthier when they feed on grass. Evidence to support this statement is seen in the nutritional content of beef such as levels good fatty acids, vitamins, and the prevalence of harmful bacteria. When cattle are not fed grass, it requires antibiotics to fight against bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella. Administering antibiotics to our food becomes an issue when a bacterium builds up immunity to the antibiotics, resulting in sickness and death among Americans every year. As farming and treatment methods change, consumers have an option to make an informed opinion about the food they eat. Perhaps, by the passing on of this knowledge, more and more consumers will chose to eat what is better for their bodies.
Annotated Bibliography
Are all cows created equally? What makes any one piece of beef superior to another? This thought leads one to question what one is putting in one’s mouth, and what is being put in the mouth of the animal one is consuming. The meat production industry in America today has quite a few mouths to provide for, and a limited amount of time to do it. Because of such a high demand, the meat production system has morphed to its growing pool of consumers by learning how to produce large quantities, quickly, and at a low cost. One major alteration is the diet that our beef is raised on. Questions have been raised regarding the health repercussions of a corn-based diet over the bovine’s natural herbivorous diet. What are the comparative health effects of consuming grass fed beef and corn fed beef? Through my research, I will found that grass fed beef is more nutritious than beef fed a man made diet mostly consisting of corn. My research focuses and expounds on scientific testing of different types of beef and the nutrients that they yield. Some of the sources provide test results that show bacteria levels in the waste of corn fed cattle that negatively reflect on its overall healthfulness, and even greatly increase the levels of E. Coli in the meat. My research also explains the sort of treatment that industrialized, usually corn fed, beef receive that reflects on the cow’s overall health. In addition to reflecting negatively on the healthfulness of beef raised on a diet of corn, my research shows a remarkable amount of positive information about grass fed beef. “The Grass fed Revolution” is very informative about the variety of vitamins and minerals that are found in grass fed beef, but not corn fed beef. My research has led me to believe that grass fed beef has numerous amounts of health benefits, especially when compared to corn fed beef, and a grass fed cow itself is a healthier animal than a corn fed cow. In conclusion, based on my research thus far, I deduce that grass fed beef is more nutritious than corn fed beef, having less negative health effects.
Works Cited
T.P.L. Smith, et al. "Comparison Of Bacterial Communities In Faeces Of Beef Cattle Fed Diets Containing Corn And Wet Distillers ' Grain With Solubles." Letters In Applied Microbiology 55.2 (2012): 109-114. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This academic journal speaks on the gastrointestinal health and more specifically intestinal bacteria found in cattle placed in varying living conditions and diets. The research and testing presented in this journal reveals that cattle raised on a diet of corn have increased levels of E. Coli in their waste. This source is particularly relevant to my topic because it elaborates on the affects of diet to the cattle, and consequentially the health of the cattle. Having information about the health of corn fed to grass fed cattle will helps prove which type is more nutritious to the human body. In addition, this article comes from a journal exclusively about microbiology, so there is little to no bias concerning the supremacy of corn fed or grass fed beef.
Stephanie Larson, et al. "A Review Of Fatty Acid Profiles And Antioxidant Content In Grass-Fed And Grain-Fed Beef." Nutrition Journal 9.(2010): 10-21. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. In this journal, Stephanie Larson compares the nutrition of grass fed beef to corn fed beef chemically. She writes mainly about the acids, vitamins, and fats contained in each product. While still comparing the two types of beef, Larson focuses mainly on the benefits of grass fed beef, supplying a long list of extremely beneficial qualities.
This source is beneficial because it not only compares grass fed and corn fed beef, but offers a detailed nutritional profile that will help prove which type of beef is more nutritious.
This information in this journal is very supported, factual, and unbiased.
Polly Walker, et al. "What Do We Feed To Food-Production Animals? A Review Of Animal Feed Ingredients And Their Potential Impacts On Human Health." Environmental Health Perspectives 115.5 (2007): 663-670. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This source shows investigative research about the affects of processed feed in animals as well as the life span and living conditions of industrialized beef. Findings in this journal show the presence of harmful bacteria, animal by products, and even animal waste in commonly used animal feed. This journal compares the health of beef fed different diets, as well as compares the health of humans who consume different types of beef. Using this investigative information in my research supports my hypothesis, by revealing the negative health effects imposed upon beef fed a corn-based
diet.
Roosevelt, Margot. "The GRASS-FED Revolution." Time 167.24 (2006): 76-78. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This source spotlights Texas rancher, Jon Taggart, and his experience raising his own beef on a pasture. Throughout this piece, the benefits of consuming grass-fed beef are emphasized, including the improvement of major body functions. The aim of this article is to put more emphasis on the “miracle effects” of consuming beef raised on an herbivorous diet. The farmer featured in the article, Jon Taggart, even goes as far as to suggest cancer preventative substances found in grass fed beef. This source is beneficial because it provides more information about the benefits of grass fed beef and also provides a comparison.
Turner, Lisa. "The Real Beef." Better Nutrition 70.7 (2008): 46-49. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This source highlights the health benefits of eating grass fed beef. In this article Lisa Turner shares information about the way grass nourishes the cattle, and how that consequentially nourishes the human body. Turner elaborates on the substantial amounts of omega-3 fatty acids found in grass fed beef. The article also does a good job of comparing the nutritional benefits of corn fed and grass fed beef. This article will provide more scientific evidence to support the hypothesis that grass fed beef is more nutritious than corn fed beef.
Cross, Kim. "The grass-fed vs grain-fed beef debate." Cooking Light. 29 3 2011: 1. Web. 24 Oct. 2013. . Kim Cross evaluates the price, nutritional value, and taste of grass fed beef as it compares to corn fed beef in this article. This piece is useful in providing a few straightforward facts and statistics about the raising of industrialized beef. Cross’ article has little to no bias, as it simply reports fact.
English 110-01
September 27 2013
The Comparative Health Effects of Consuming Corn Fed Beef to Grass Fed Beef
Are all cows created equally? What makes any one piece of beef superior to another? This thought leads one to question what one is putting in one’s mouth, and what is being put in the mouth of the animal one is consuming. The meat production industry in America today has quite a few mouths to provide for, and a limited amount of time in which to do it. Because of such a high demand, the meat production system has morphed to its growing pool of consumers by learning how to produce large quantities, quickly, and at a low cost. One major alteration is the diet on which our beef is raised. Questions have been raised regarding the health repercussions of a corn-based diet over the bovine’s natural herbivorous diet. Grass fed beef is more nutritious to consume than corn fed beef …show more content…
because animals that feed on grass are healthier and yield a more chemically beneficial product.
For one to fully understand the nutritional value of the meat one is eating, one must first understand the nutritional value of the food one’s meat has eaten and the biology of the animal itself. A man or woman does not only eat the meat on their plate, but the food that has been presented to their meal. By nature the cow is not only an herbivorous animal, but also a ruminant, meaning that it exclusively feeds on grass. It seems however, that industrialized cattle are being fed anything but grass these days.
Today, most of the beef that the average American consumes includes a long list of ingredients: grains such as corn, rendered animal protein, marine bi-products, animal waste, restaurant food waste, antibiotics, and added vitamins and minerals (Walker). Along with these identifiable components to the feed mixture cattle are consuming often times come harmful bacteria such as salmonella and E. coli (Walker). Polly Walker cites a 2005 study in which Dargatz revealed that 38.7% of 514 E.Coli isolates we resistant to cephalothin, an antibiotic commonly included in animal feed. Another 53.4% of this number was resistant to a combined number of three other common antibiotics. E. Coli contamination is very serious, and sometimes fatal to the human body. Food Inc., a documentary about the changing industrial food system, highlights the story of one family who lost their young son to E. coli poisoning after eating a contaminated hamburger from a “Jack in the Box” restaurant.
Cattle can often host E. coli without ingesting it through their feed. Margot Roosevelt explains the biological problem that is raised when cows eat a steady diet of corn or grain in her article, Grass Fed Revolution.
Biologically, cattle are ruminants, exquisitely evolved to graze grass, and researchers have found that a grain diet raises the acidity in steers’ guts. This breeds an acid-resistant form of E. Coli that can spread from feces contaminated carcasses to meat. In 1993, 600 people in Seattle got sick and three children died after eating E. coli- tainted hamburger. According to USDA research, more than ½ of grain-fed cattle have been found to have acid-resistant E. coli in their feces; the proportion drops to 15% if they are switched to hay (Roosevelt 5).
Not only does corn fed cattle pose the threat of an E. coli infection, but the possibility of other detrimental side effects. Walker sums up her journal by reviewing some of these possible side effects.
Currently the use of animal feed ingredients, including rendered animal products, animal waste, antibiotics, metals and fats, could result in higher levels of bacteria, antibiotic resistant bacteria, prions, arsenic, and dioxin-like compounds in animals and resulting animal based food products intended for human consumption. Subsequent human health effects among consumers could include increases in bacterial infections and increases in the risk of developing chronic diseases such as vCJD (Walker 668).
Antibiotics are necessary for corn fed, industrialized cattle because of their unhygienic living conditions, and simply because they are ingesting a man made diet consisting of corn and other additives. However, Food Inc. states that there is some evidence to suggest that cattle finished with as little as 5 days of grass will shed 80% of their E. Coli before slaughter. Although this may be true, finishing a cow on grass does not yield the same results as raising a cow on grass. A corn or grain based diet can often lead to stomach ulcers and liver abscesses in cattle, so settling for a grass finished steak could mean you are still eating a unhealthy animal (Roosevelt). Cattle raised on a steady diet of grass naturally clean out impurities, eliminating the need for antibiotics, while providing a healthier product. However the growing reliance and overuse of antibiotics has become a health issue for the consumer. The over usage of antibiotics in preventing food born illness has caused bacteria to become resistant to treatment, a factor in the deaths of more than 60,000 Americans each year, while grass fed cattle rarely require antibiotic treatment. (Roosevelt).
Corn fed beef and grass fed beef can also be compared by levels of fatty acids and antioxidants. It is important to remember that regardless of diet, red meat is rich in nutrients and several very beneficial vitamins including vitamins A, B, D, and E (Larson et al.). However, grass fed and corn fed beef produce different representations of good fats and bad fats. In their academic article, Daley, Abbot, Doyle, Nader and Larson provide information about the two essential fatty acids for the human body.
There are two essential fatty acids (EFAs) in human nutrition: a-linolenic acid (aLA), an omega-3 fatty acid; and linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 fatty acid. The human body cannot synthesize essential fatty acids, yet they are critical to human health; for this reason, EFAs must be obtained from food. Both aLA and La are polyunsaturated and serve as precursors of other important compounds (Larson et al. 5).
Larson’s study shows fairly consistent results, proving that grass fed beef contains higher levels of these beneficial fats. Yet, grass fed beef does not only yield a product that is rich in healthy fats, but also that is plentiful in carotene and vitamin E. Carotene, particularly beta- carotene, is an important nutrient for the progression of healthy eye sight, bone growth, cell division, cell differentiation, and reproduction (Larson et al.). Sufficient levels of carotene in beef are classically expressed through a yellow or orange tint to it’s fat. This yellow tint is also expressive of healthy fatty acid profiles and higher levels of antioxidants (Larson et al.). What’s more is that this same study found that grass fed cattle demonstrated a seven-fold increase in beta-carotene. This is presumably related to the high beta-carotene content of grass compared to grains such as corn (Larson et al.).
Grass fed beef is also comparatively rich in vitamin E, which has been proven to possess many health benefits (Larson et al). Larson, Nader, Doyle, Abbot, and Daley elaborate on these health benefits in their nutritional review of grass fed beef including disease prevention, immune system enhancement, and the blocking of carcinogen formations in the stomach
Antioxidants such as vitamin E protect cells against the effects of free radicals. Free radicals are potentially damaging by-products of metabolism that may contribute to the development of chronic diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease. Preliminary research shows vitamin E supplementation may help prevent or delay coronary heart disease. Vitamin E may also block the formation of nitrosamines, which are carcinogens formed in the stomach from nitrates consumed in the diet. It may also protect against the development of cancers by enhancing immune function (Larson et al. 8).
Grass fed and corn fed beef also contrast nutritionally in other ways. For instance one serving of grass fed beef has approximately one hundred fewer calories than a serving of corn fed beef (Turner). In an article written for Time Magazine, Roosevelt offers a logical explanation for the nutritional superiority of grass fed beef to corn fed beef.
It makes sense. Grass is a low-starch, high-protein fibrous food, in contrast to carbohydrate-rich, low-fiber corn and soybeans. When animals are 100% grass-fed, their meat is not only lower in saturated fats but also slightly higher in omega-3 fatty acids, the healthy fats found in salmon and flaxseed, which studies indicate may help prevent heart disease and bolster the immune system (Roosevelt 2).
It is this way of thinking that has started to spread like wildfire across our country. The knowledge and awareness of the substantial benefits of eating beef that was raised in its natural, evolutionary manner have caused a revolution of sorts. Of course there are those who neglect the idea that the health benefits of grass fed beef are worth the economical cost and slower production rates that may ensue if all cattle was raised on an exclusively grass fed diet. A feedlot cow fed a corn and grain diet can reach its slaughter weight approximately one year sooner than a grass fed cow (Cross 1). With a demand for large quantities of meat such as the American market, the quicker route seems to be more practical, not to mention that feeding cows a diet of corn supports the growing force of corn farmers that make up much of the Midwestern United States. Perhaps this is why small, organic, grass fed beef farmers have begun to accumulate more business. In her article The Grass Fed Revolution, Margot Roosevelt highlights the story of an industrial beef farmer gone rogue. Jon Taggart recently transitioned from growing cattle on a steady diet of corn, soy, and antibiotics, to a 100% grass diet. Since the switch, the Taggarts have doubled their income, adding more than one thousand customers to their database. The nutritional quality of beef raised on grass and beef raised on corn differ significantly. Grass fed beef is more nutritious to consume than corn fed beef because animals that feed on grass are healthier and yield a more chemically beneficial product. Because cows are by nature herbivorous, ruminants they are healthier when they feed on grass. Evidence to support this statement is seen in the nutritional content of beef such as levels good fatty acids, vitamins, and the prevalence of harmful bacteria. When cattle are not fed grass, it requires antibiotics to fight against bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella. Administering antibiotics to our food becomes an issue when a bacterium builds up immunity to the antibiotics, resulting in sickness and death among Americans every year. As farming and treatment methods change, consumers have an option to make an informed opinion about the food they eat. Perhaps, by the passing on of this knowledge, more and more consumers will chose to eat what is better for their bodies.
Annotated Bibliography
Are all cows created equally? What makes any one piece of beef superior to another? This thought leads one to question what one is putting in one’s mouth, and what is being put in the mouth of the animal one is consuming. The meat production industry in America today has quite a few mouths to provide for, and a limited amount of time to do it. Because of such a high demand, the meat production system has morphed to its growing pool of consumers by learning how to produce large quantities, quickly, and at a low cost. One major alteration is the diet that our beef is raised on. Questions have been raised regarding the health repercussions of a corn-based diet over the bovine’s natural herbivorous diet. What are the comparative health effects of consuming grass fed beef and corn fed beef? Through my research, I will found that grass fed beef is more nutritious than beef fed a man made diet mostly consisting of corn. My research focuses and expounds on scientific testing of different types of beef and the nutrients that they yield. Some of the sources provide test results that show bacteria levels in the waste of corn fed cattle that negatively reflect on its overall healthfulness, and even greatly increase the levels of E. Coli in the meat. My research also explains the sort of treatment that industrialized, usually corn fed, beef receive that reflects on the cow’s overall health. In addition to reflecting negatively on the healthfulness of beef raised on a diet of corn, my research shows a remarkable amount of positive information about grass fed beef. “The Grass fed Revolution” is very informative about the variety of vitamins and minerals that are found in grass fed beef, but not corn fed beef. My research has led me to believe that grass fed beef has numerous amounts of health benefits, especially when compared to corn fed beef, and a grass fed cow itself is a healthier animal than a corn fed cow. In conclusion, based on my research thus far, I deduce that grass fed beef is more nutritious than corn fed beef, having less negative health effects.
Works Cited
T.P.L. Smith, et al. "Comparison Of Bacterial Communities In Faeces Of Beef Cattle Fed Diets Containing Corn And Wet Distillers ' Grain With Solubles." Letters In Applied Microbiology 55.2 (2012): 109-114. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This academic journal speaks on the gastrointestinal health and more specifically intestinal bacteria found in cattle placed in varying living conditions and diets. The research and testing presented in this journal reveals that cattle raised on a diet of corn have increased levels of E. Coli in their waste. This source is particularly relevant to my topic because it elaborates on the affects of diet to the cattle, and consequentially the health of the cattle. Having information about the health of corn fed to grass fed cattle will helps prove which type is more nutritious to the human body. In addition, this article comes from a journal exclusively about microbiology, so there is little to no bias concerning the supremacy of corn fed or grass fed beef.
Stephanie Larson, et al. "A Review Of Fatty Acid Profiles And Antioxidant Content In Grass-Fed And Grain-Fed Beef." Nutrition Journal 9.(2010): 10-21. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. In this journal, Stephanie Larson compares the nutrition of grass fed beef to corn fed beef chemically. She writes mainly about the acids, vitamins, and fats contained in each product. While still comparing the two types of beef, Larson focuses mainly on the benefits of grass fed beef, supplying a long list of extremely beneficial qualities.
This source is beneficial because it not only compares grass fed and corn fed beef, but offers a detailed nutritional profile that will help prove which type of beef is more nutritious.
This information in this journal is very supported, factual, and unbiased.
Polly Walker, et al. "What Do We Feed To Food-Production Animals? A Review Of Animal Feed Ingredients And Their Potential Impacts On Human Health." Environmental Health Perspectives 115.5 (2007): 663-670. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This source shows investigative research about the affects of processed feed in animals as well as the life span and living conditions of industrialized beef. Findings in this journal show the presence of harmful bacteria, animal by products, and even animal waste in commonly used animal feed. This journal compares the health of beef fed different diets, as well as compares the health of humans who consume different types of beef. Using this investigative information in my research supports my hypothesis, by revealing the negative health effects imposed upon beef fed a corn-based
diet.
Roosevelt, Margot. "The GRASS-FED Revolution." Time 167.24 (2006): 76-78. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This source spotlights Texas rancher, Jon Taggart, and his experience raising his own beef on a pasture. Throughout this piece, the benefits of consuming grass-fed beef are emphasized, including the improvement of major body functions. The aim of this article is to put more emphasis on the “miracle effects” of consuming beef raised on an herbivorous diet. The farmer featured in the article, Jon Taggart, even goes as far as to suggest cancer preventative substances found in grass fed beef. This source is beneficial because it provides more information about the benefits of grass fed beef and also provides a comparison.
Turner, Lisa. "The Real Beef." Better Nutrition 70.7 (2008): 46-49. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. This source highlights the health benefits of eating grass fed beef. In this article Lisa Turner shares information about the way grass nourishes the cattle, and how that consequentially nourishes the human body. Turner elaborates on the substantial amounts of omega-3 fatty acids found in grass fed beef. The article also does a good job of comparing the nutritional benefits of corn fed and grass fed beef. This article will provide more scientific evidence to support the hypothesis that grass fed beef is more nutritious than corn fed beef.
Cross, Kim. "The grass-fed vs grain-fed beef debate." Cooking Light. 29 3 2011: 1. Web. 24 Oct. 2013. . Kim Cross evaluates the price, nutritional value, and taste of grass fed beef as it compares to corn fed beef in this article. This piece is useful in providing a few straightforward facts and statistics about the raising of industrialized beef. Cross’ article has little to no bias, as it simply reports fact.