So in the process of trying to find information about our topic that didn't completely fly over my head, I found this article. I really enjoyed reading it because it was simply written, and it still provided meaningful, seemingly researched information. It also was relatively recent---from 2005, so that was encouraging. One thing I found especially interesting was that the claim on labels that say "natural" or "all natural" have no real legal standard.  So when you see crackers and cookies with this claim, read the ingredients. These claims are really only legitimate when it comes to meat, and even then they are not strictly regulated (see article).  In addition, when meat claims that it is "natural", that does not mean that it is antibiotic free. Consumers have to look for that specification separately if it is important to them. Another issue that stood out to me was the caution toward buying "free range" eggs. The author pointed out that this could simply mean that the chickens had about 5 minutes a day to go outside, or maybe just the option to with a door somewhere in the coop. A lot of companies that claim this for their chickens, are really no different from the horrible conditions depicted in Food Inc. The author suggests looking for phrases like "pasture-fed". Other good phrases to look out for include the following:

• "100% Organic"
• "Organic"
• "Made with Organic Ingredients"
• "Free Farmed" poultry, beef and pork
• "Food Alliance" beef and pork
• "Pasture-fed" or "Grass-fed" beef, lamb, and eggs
• rBGH free

I really enjoyed this reading, and I think the breakdown of catch-phrases will give my group a good frame of reference for our research.
Group members: Dawn Roy, Megan Norris

After discussing with my group members today, Megan Norris and Dawn Roy, we narrowed down our research topic/main question to something like the questions that follow:
    With the growing trend to eat healthy and "all natural", how much of the food labeling is actually accurate? What kind of tricks do they use? How do advertisers manipulate words to trick the average consumer? How often do consumers fall for these schemes? Has that affected obesity rates?

Hopefully, with these questions, we can narrower our focus over the next week or so, but I think we have  pretty decent start. In addition the article by Wendell Berry, The Pleasures of Eating, he also questioned just how much the food industry hides from consumers--
        "How fresh is it? How pure or clean is it, how free of dangerous chemicals? How far was it              transported, and what did transportation add to the cost? How much did manufacturing or packaging or advertising add to the cost? When the food product has been manufactured or "processed" or "precooked," how has that affected its quality or price or nutritional value?"

These are all great questions, and they are similar to ones found in the documentary, Food Inc. Often people think they are eating well, grabbing fruit, veggies, and lean chicken at the grocery store. Little do they know that they are serving themselves and their families chemicals and pesticides that could wind up hurting the body down the road. Unfortunately as Wendell and the makers of Food Inc. pointed out, "Food is produced by any means or any shortcuts that will increase profits." Manufacturers don't care how it will affect consumers in 10 years, they care about 10 cents more they get to keep because of lowered production costs. It truly is an upsetting epidemic, and we all fall victim to it at some point or another.

With this in mind, my partners and I are looking at the mentioned Wendell article and the the following articles to aid our research at this time (these 4 articles found by Megan Norris)

1.) supermarket_semantics_the_rhetoric_of_food_labeling_and_advertising

2.) the_relationship_between_television_viewing_and_obesity_in_young_children

3.) consumer_perceptions_of_health_claims_in_advertisements_and_food_labels

4.) big_macs_for_big_grades