Alyssa Molina Proposal

Context: What am I Responding to?

1. What topic are you focusing on for this project, and what were some of the major conversations, arguments, and stances surrounding this topic? (Note: Your annotated bibliography should help you answer this question, but feel free to incorporate new points if you have done additional research).

I am focusing on the overuse of antibiotics in the meat and how they lead to antibiotic resistant diseases, and how the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA) would solve this issue. PAMTA within two years would require the FDA to re-review approvals it previously issued for animal feed uses of seven classes of antibiotics that are important to human medicine. The approvals would be canceled for any antibiotics that are found to be unsafe from a resistance perspective. This means that no more new antibiotic resistant bacterium will be able to form in animals and be passed on to humans. There are many organizations and groups of people that are strongly urging for the passing of PAMTA in Congress; however lack of support is really what is causing PAMTA to fail. Furthermore, the American Meat Institute and other meat companies are obviously strongly against passing this type of legislation. In fact, the American Meat Institute actually created a website to show the truth regarding meat myths in order to state their side of the story. Meanwhile, although the FDA is aware of the antibiotic resistance due to overuse in animal agriculture the agencys

process for withdrawing drugs from the market is way too slow. That is why Congresswomen Slaughter has recently re-introduced PAMTA to Congress and urges it to be passed because it will encourage producers of meat to raise animals in a better living condition that way they are less susceptible to disease.

2. After surveying the conversations surrounding your topic, which source or text are you interested in responding to? In detail, please explain what the source is, the stance or position that this source is taking on the topic, why this stance is worth responding to, and if possible, how are others responding to this source or text.

I am interested in responding to an article written by the Union of Concerned Scientists which was meant to inform the general public about the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act and what it would exactly change in the meat industry regarding antibiotic use. The union strongly disagrees with the overuse of antibiotics in the meat industry and felt that PAMTA needed to be re-introduced to Congress because of the antibiotic resistant diseases that have been discovered and linked to antibiotic overuse. This stance is worth responding to because it is a very important and current topic that affects many people and it is something that everyone needs to be knowledgeable about. There are many similar articles to this one by different groups trying to spread awareness as well. Some are written and published online in a blog, while others are online newspaper articles.

Purpose: How will I respond? 3.As of now, how do you see yourself responding to this source or text? Will you pose a view that counters the discourse you are responding to, pose a view that agrees with and expands the argument in order to establish a more convincing appeal, critique or analyze the source through conducing rhetorical analysis, or debate various view in order to reconcile multiple arguments? I plan on responding to this source with an article and within my article I will definitely be agreeing with the stance that the Union of Scientists took. However, I feel that this stance did not go far enough, they only gave a small amount of information about the actual antibiotic resistant bacterium and did not go in depth, they did not give enough details about what the results would be if PAMTA is passed, and they did not state very clear ways of what an individual person can do to get involved. I plan to expand on the argument the union made by educating my readers how antibiotic resistant bacterium was created, how antibiotic overuse in meat industry affects human health, how PAMTA will monitor and help fix the issue of antibiotic resistant diseases, and clarify what an individual can do to help PAMTA get passed. I also plan on addressing concerns that may come up such as Will meat prices go up if PAMTA is passed? I will also use and quote both scientific statistics/facts as well as the opinions of health professionals to make my article very convincing to the reader In detail, describe what you hope to achieve through your response, why your are pursuing this purpose, how you see this response fitting into the larger conversation, and what you may want to discuss in order to achieve this purpose. I ultimately hope to get people involved with the movement of PAMTA. This has just recently been introduced to Congress and there are still many people who are unaware of its

existence. I want to demonstrate to my audience that this is an issue not only worth caring about but also worth taking action about because it will affect them and their futures. I am honestly pursuing this purpose because I feel like if people really knew about all the antibiotics in the meat they consume they would want to do something. However, it seems that many people are just really unaware of the current meat situation. Or they do know of the issue, but feel that it is not severe enough to make them want to take action. I want to show those people that this issue is really worth taking some action over.

Audience: Who should hear my response? 4. When posing your response, who will be your intended audience and why? Consider how your response is meant to impact them, what you want them to do with the information you are conveying, and how addressing this audience is connected to your purpose. My intended audience will be meat consumers over the age of 18, that way they will actually be able to get involved politically. My response is meant open their eyes and make them realize that this issue is really affecting them and their families. I want my response to urge them to get involved and talk to their representatives and make their individual opinion known. Meat consumers really need to get involved in this issue because currently many people are unaware of this issue altogether. My other audience is Congress, because although this is not completely directed towards Congress, its important for me to illustrate how I want Congress to pass PAMTA since it has just recently been brought up again in Congress by Rep. Slaughter. 5. What genre of composition do you feel will allow you to connect with your audience and why?What aspects of the genre do you hope to take advantage of in order to make your appeal more convincing

I want to write an article because I feel writing a letter to Congress wont accomplish anything. However by posting an article online, I can inspire hundreds of people to write letters and talk to their representatives and that is what will truly help spread the support of PAMTA within the Congress. I also feel that by making my genre an article it will allow me to really reach more of my audience as well.