TOW 13

            I went to Germany this summer on an exchange program, along with thirty of my classmates. When we were there, we asked our German companions what stereotypes they had about America and its people. One of the most commonly listed stereotypes was that all Americans are fat. Although this is certainly untrue, the sad fact is, because stereotypes originate from observed events in addition to a great deal of ignorance; behind every stereotype lies some truth. Obesity rates in America have been a problem with a great deal of emphasis on finding a solution. I have seen this in my own life in the changes to the health curriculum that is taught to me and the added focus on offering healthy foods in my school’s cafeteria. Changes like these have helped decrease childhood obesity rates, which should be a remarkable accomplishment; however, as Thomas Farley points out in his most recent article, the fight against childhood obesity has a bad side as well. Farley implements facts and statistics and a strong comparison to convince his audience that the fight against childhood obesity in America should actually be a fight against American obesity as a whole.

            Yes, the decrease in childhood obesity rates is a good thing. But, as Farley puts it, it is just “one achievement within a larger failure" of American obesity as a whole. He identifies that as “the obesity rate in children ages 6 to 11…flatlined at 18 percent, and the rate in children ages 2 to 5 falls below 10 percent for the first time since the 1980s,” “half of adults have either diabetes or pre-diabetes” and “38 percent of American adults…are obese.” These statistics prove his point that the focus on lowering childhood obesity rates has neglected to assist adults with their obesity, actually causing a rise in adult obesity; therefore, convincing his audience that America's strategy in the war against obesity needs to be adjusted to address society as a whole, not just children.
            Farley states that this mistake-of-audience is the “same mistake health advocates made in the battle against smoking 25 years ago.” He explains that the anti-smoking ads “focus[ed] on youth amounted to telling teenagers that ‘smoking is for adults only…’ But teenagers aspire to be adults." The real goal in this situation was to convince everyone to stop smoking. The idea was, that by focusing this movement on the younger generation, they would grow up and replace the older generation with a stronger sense that smoking is not right, and then their children would learn this too. But, it backfired in much the same way that the fight against childhood obesity has been, because “smoking rates actually spiked upward among teens and plateaued in adults.” This comparison reinforces Farley's message that focusing on fixing a health concern in children does not reap the intended effects. Because his audience is one of mainly adults, some of which were alive during the anti-smoking campaigns, this comparison allows his audience to logically compare the current situation with something they may be familiar with and will prompt them to advocate for a change in the approach of fighting obesity in America. It is no longer enough to shove non-GMOs and unprocessed goods into your children's mouths before their soccer practices, you parents must be sure to take care of yourselves as well-- being able to watch your grandchildren grow up will be your reward.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/18/opinion/the-problem-with-focusing-on-childhood-obesity.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

TOW 12- IRB Post

My grandmother can read multiple books in one day. She trained at Juliard and often sings opera. She was one of the first women to graduate from the Bronx High School of Science, she finished college in three years and medical school by the time she was twenty-two. She is a member of Mensa, the genius society. She is one of the most brilliant people in this world—well, was. She died thirty years ago, a victim of cancer, which takes the lives of so many wonderful beings, when my mother was fourteen. Growing up, I heard a lot about her and the impact her death had on my mother’s life. What I never considered was what it would be like to be a parent, and to lose your child to cancer. In his memoir Death Be Not Proud, John Gunther provides this perspective for me. His narrative style writing evokes emotion in his audience and ultimately teaches them an important lesson about dealing with whatever life throws in the way.

Gunther tells the story of a “long, courageous struggle between a child and Death” (1). The aforementioned child is his son, Johnny. Described as “handsome” (2), “considerate” (2) and “exceptional” (2), Johnny is a person everyone loves as well as a heroic and beloved character—as portrayed through the wit of Gunther’s words. The topic of cancer automatically evokes an emotional response from the reader. By sharing the exact events of Johnny’s diagnosis and ensuing journey, Gunther gives an in-depth and detailed synopsis of what it is like to live with cancer, the thing everyone hopes to never have. Gunther’s narrative style writing allows the reader to experience the process with Johnny, and to understand on a deeper level how remarkable Johnny’s continued optimism was. The narrative style writing also allows Gunther to show, rather than tell, how one should deal with difficulty in life. Johnny’s continued optimism and attention to the feelings of everyone around him even while in the face of his impending doom is exactly what Gunther hopes for his audience to achieve. By telling Johnny’s story and sharing every minute detail, Gunther proves to his audience the importance and how admirable it is to retain a positive attitude and find enjoyment in life even in the face of adversity.

Gunther’s narrative style writing is extremely effective in achieving his purpose and even goes further by providing an enjoyable read. Johnny’s continued positivity is something I believe we should all strive for.

TOW 11- Political Cartoon

We live in a world where the death of traditions and rise of technology are inversely related. In other words, as technology increases and our reliance on it increases, our traditions are practiced less and less. Mike Smith, an award-winning editorial cartoonist featured daily in the Las Vegas Sun, sends a powerful message about the effect of technology on modern society in this political cartoon. Smith’s use of contrasting colors and a satirical assertion effectively communicates that technology has a negative effect on society.

The first thing the reader sees is the speech bubble from the father, which says, “Billy! Did you do your homework?” This question is emphasized through the contrast in color—this speech bubble is the brightest thing in the picture, immediately grabbing the reader’s attention and forcing them to delve deeper into the other, more subtle aspects of the cartoon. The newspaper in the dad’s hands says that students in China have the highest test scores, which is obviously the driving reason for the father asking his son if he did his homework. By identifying that China is the country with the highest test scores, Smith presents a convincing argument that a change needs to be made because as Americans, we naturally want to be the best in the world—especially when it comes to competing with China. Next, the reader will see the other colored speech bubble, a light and faded blue that seems subdued when contrasted with the yellow speech bubble. The mother is saying that if the dad really wants an answer from his son, he should “try texting him.” This assertion is so ridiculous that it is humorous, because Billy, the son, is sitting in a chair right next to his parents, happily tapping on his phone and tuning out the voices of his elders. This satirical depiction of the interfamilial American relationship should incite readers to make a change in their values—if not for the sake of beating China in testing, then to save the valued tradition of family time.

 Smith’s use of contrasting colors and a satirical assertion effectively communicates that technology has a negative effect on society. Smith’s message is one that needs to be heard by everyone who owns any sort of iPad, tablet or smart phone—will America’s reliance on technology turn into an addiction that leads to our eventual demise?