The Development Context Essay -- Politics Political Economics Essays

The Development Context This study falls at the intersection of several key themes or debates in International Development. These include the debate about the role and effectiveness of official international assistance agencies, the body of thought on the micropolitical forces which shape the development assistance process, and the debate over the ecological limits to and sustainabiltiy of economic growth. The following sections will review the most important concepts and some of the authors associated with those themes. 1) What do international donor agencies do, and do they do it well? Some discussion has been given in the literature to approach taken by international donor agencies to development assistance. For the most part, this discussion has focused on the fact that large governmental and bureaucratic agencies lack the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions and be effective at grassroots-level implementation. In a scathing condemnation of official international development assistance, Korten (1990) asserts that such efforts are defined by the bounds of bureaucratic convenience, and that there has been a strong preference in international assistance for short-term, narrowly-focused, and self-interested efforts.' Hellinger et al. (1988), in an assessment of the U.S. Agency for International Development, suggest that even when more farsighted and well-designed approaches emerge, they "face internal structures, operational procedures, and reward systems geared to promote objectives related primarily to expansionary ' David C. Korten, Getting to the 21st Century, West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, 1990, pp. 36-137. and survival interests of the AID bureaucracyi' In the context of this criticism and dom... ...r: Lynne Rienner. 1988. Hirschmann, David. "Women and Political Participation in Africa". Public Domain. 1990. Kasfir, Nelson. "Explaining Ethnic Political Participation". (in State of Development in the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1986.) Kolenda, Pauline. Caste in Contemporary India: Beyond Organic Solidarity. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. 1985. Korten, David C. Getting to the 21st Century. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press. 1990. Lipsky, Michael. "The Rationing of Services in Street-Level Bureaucracies". Street-Level Bureaucracy. New York: Sage Foundation. 1980. Meadows, Donella et al. Beyond the Limits. Post Mills, VT: Chelsea Green. 1992. Robertson, C. and I. Berger. Women and Class in Africa. New York: Holmes & Meier. 1986. Ibid, p. 24. Samarasinghe, Vidya. "Hangin' in at the Margin". Public Domain. 1992.

The Life of Vincent Van Gogh Essay -- Biography Biographies Essays

The Life of Vincent Van Gogh Vincent Van Gogh is one of the most famous artists of all time. He is known for his paintings and is hailed as the quintessential expressionist painter in history. Yet, Van Gogh lived one of the most troubling lives one could ever imagine. Almost every painting can be viewed as a look into his troubled soul. Van Gogh’s Paintings today can be sold for millions of dollars, but during his life time he sold a single painting for a measly 40 francs. Van Gogh’s legacy has left behind stories of greatness and sadness having to do with both his personal life and his career as an artist. Vincent Van Gogh was born near Brabant, Belgium, the son of a minister. In 1869, he got a position at the art dealers, Goupil and Co. in The Hague, through his uncle, and worked with them until he was dismissed from the London office in 1873. He worked as a schoolmaster in England (1876), before training for the ministry at Amsterdam University (1877). After he failed to get a post in the Church, he went to live as an independent missionary among t...

The Colonization of the Philippines Essays -- Politics, External and I

Generally, textbooks, articles, and essays talk about America’s â€Å"occupation,† â€Å"supervision† or â€Å"intervention† in the Philippines. They seem to be afraid to use the word â€Å"colonization.† According to Webster’s Dictionary the definition of colonization is, â€Å"The colonial system of political government or extension of territory, by which one nation exerts political control over another nation, territory, or people, maintaining the colony in a state of dependence, its inhabitants not having the same full rights as those of the colonial power. The controlling power is typically extended thus by military force or the threat of force† (6). In his book analyzing Japanese Assimilation Policies in Colonial Korea, Mark Caprio makes a distinction between two different â€Å"levels† of colonialism: external and internal. He states that external colonization is what Hannah Arendt calls â€Å"overseas imperialism†¦where their indirect policy exerted minimal effort to forge political, social, or cultural bonds with the peoples under their jurisdiction† (2). Although this is the way the French colonized, the United States seem to adopt the British way of colonizing, which is Caprio’s second level of colonization or internal colonization. This is what Benedict Anderson describes as â€Å"inventing nations† (Caprio 2). It requires that the colonial power send ambassadors to impress its culture upon the colony through controlling things such as dialect, media, education, and military (Caprio 2). Caprio also mentions, â€Å"The decision to colonize, as well as the administration to administer the colonized, was based primarily on the needs and interests of the colonizer’s subject; those of the colonized object received minimal consideration† (2). Therefore, a colony serves... ...ates failed to see the Philippines as a free nation and did not provide equal rights to Filipinos, treating it as a colony. Therefore, the United States colonized the Philippines. It took the Philippines, by military force, through a three-year war. It did this, not for altruistic reasons, but for self-interest in trade and nationalism. It â€Å"exerted political control† over the Philippines by ignoring the Philippine republic and its representative at the Treaty of Paris, sending its own people to govern the Philippines, and monitoring the creation of the Philippines’ future government. Finally, the United States failed to provide equal rights to Filipinos by ignoring the Filipino government and representative at the signing of the Treaty of Paris, holding racial prejudices in dealing with Filipinos, and excluding the Filipinos from the right to the Monroe Doctrine.

The Usa Beef Exported To Eu Is Safe And Should Not Be Banned

It has been a decade since the European Union (EU) issued a 10-year ban of U. S. imported beef treated with hormone additives. The primary reason set by EU was the fact that â€Å"scientific advertisers are convinced the hormone additives in beef are harmful to human health† (James, Barry 1999). Despite the fact that the World Trade Organization (WTO), the international body that regulates international trade policies and laws, ruled out the ban, the EU preferred to defy such ruling.Such a vital economic event posed multi-faceted effects in the international relations of both nations: economic, political, ethical and cultural relations. The main point is not the ban itself, rather, it is the fact that there has been no solid scientific evidences yet established by the EU before it ordered the ban on US hormone-treated beef. In fact, three neutral members of the WTO panel arbitrators ruled that the EU's decade-old ban on the import of hormone-treated beef broke global trade rul es (Thompson, Sharon R.1999 cited in Orr, Rena 2001). This paper will focus on the health safety of hormone-treated beef exported by U. S. to the EU. In this premise, this paper will present facts and figures that will prove the safety claims relative to hormone additives using scientific studies by the representatives of both nations. The events leading up to the ban on the domestic use of hormones in cattle raising and on imports of hormone-treated beef are important in explaining the political longevity of the issue in Europe.In many ways the story begins with the emergence of non-governmental institutions, such as the consumer and environmental groups, together with the rise of the European Parliament, each cutting their political teeth on issues that appeared to resonate with public opinion. The beef-hormone controversy was made to measure for these organizations. Trade concerns were not dominant in the early years, and the disciplines applied by trade rules were in any case we ak.European livestock producers were searching for ways to stimulate growth in cattle, and took eagerly to the use of hormones, but sometimes with inadequate knowledge of the consequences of misuse of such chemicals. Regulatory control sometimes slipped between the cracks, as coordination and harmonization of national regulations progressed haltingly in the European Union. The United States has about 90% of its beef production raised with growth hormones (Paulson, Michael 1999).Growth hormones are injected to cattle for the purpose of enhancing muscle and fat growth and thereby allowing cattle to produce more milk (Bald, Renee and Bill Bigelow 2002). The process is as simple as injecting tiny pellets of these hormones into the ears of the cattle (Jacobs, Paul 1999). Such hormones are approved and permitted to be legally used as per federal laws by ranchers in producing meaty and lean cows (Paulson, Michael 1999).There are generally six types of hormones used in beef production and t hree of these are natural sex hormones- testosterone, progesterone and oestradiol-17 beta (Bald, Renee and Bill Bigelow 2002). In the fact sheet published by Health Canada (2005), hormonal growth promoters are defined and explained as follows: â€Å"Hormonal growth promoters are naturally occurring or synthetic products. They are approved for use in beef cattle. The effect of hormonal growth promoters (HGPs) is to increase lean tissue growth.Fat deposition is reduced and since fat is so energy dense, food conversion efficiency is increased. The result is a healthier product which is produced at a lower cost to the consumer. † The fact sheet also defined the growth hormone somatotropin as â€Å"a naturally occurring substance in both humans and animals. It is responsible for skeletal, organ and cell growth’’ and Recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) as â€Å"a synthetic version of the naturally occurring growth hormone somatotropin which is approved for use in the US to increase the production of milk in dairy cattle.† The safety of growth promoters has been confirmed by the Codex Alementarius. Codex Alementarius with FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives recommended minimum daily intake of 17 beta estradiol, progesterone and testosterone but maximum residue limit was not indicated (Orr, Rena 2001). â€Å"This means that the available data on the identity and concentration of residues of the veterinary drug in animal tissues indicate a wide margin of safety for consumption of residues in food when the drug is used according to good practice in the use of veterinary drugs† (ibid).As background information, the Codex program is under the supervision and sponsorship of the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization. The said program aims to develop food standards that would fit the requirements or needs of participating nations of which as of 2001 as already 150 nations. Primarily, Codex program ta rgets to minimize non-tariff trade barriers. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), on the other hand is an independent international arm composed of experts in food general health and safety issues.It is this international body that focuses on the scientific evaluation of a veterinary drug without consideration of government policies and politics (Orr, Rena 2001). Codex Alementarius with FAO/WHO concluded that the presence of drug residues does not present health concern and does not pose any health risk to humans (JECFA Fifty-second Meeting: Summary and Conclusions, 1999 cited in Orr, Rena 2001). In addition, JECFA concluded that there is no need to establish maximum residue levels for the hormones Estradiol, progesterone, and testosterone because the presence of residues would not present a health concern (ibid).The Lamming Committee convention (1982) and the Scientific Conference on Meat Production (1995) confirmed growth promoters are safe (Galvin, Timothy US Dept of Agriculture, 2000). Timothy Galvin is the Administrator of Foreign Agricultural Service of US Department of Agriculture. In his statement before the Subcommittee on Forestry, Conservation and Rural Revitalization, Galvin stressed that â€Å"the EU’s ban ignores a body of scientific evidence showing that the growth promotants in question are safe when used in accordance with good animal husbandry practices† (Galvin, 2000).Studies in the last four decades have confirmed that the proper use of these compounds, according to approved registered labels, poses no risk to human or animal health. EU's own Scientific Conference on Growth Promotants held in 1995 reached the same conclusion (BBC News Online, May 13, 1999). In its statement released and published in BBC News Online on May 13, 1999, the United States speakers insist those experts from JECFA, FAO and WHO have already released its reconfirmation on the safety of growth hormones under accepted veterinary pract ice.With this, there should have been no reason to continue with the ban. In addition, they pointed out that â€Å"EU already presented these arguments to an impartial WTO dispute-settlement panel in 1997 and lost and even in its appeal a year after† (ibid). Galvin (2000) also stressed in his statement: â€Å"In each of its decisions, the WTO found that the EU beef hormone ban is not supported by an adequate risk analysis nor is there credible evidence to indicate that there are health risks associated with hormone-treated beef. †The US Food Administration, USDA and WTO and other researchers have concluded that growth hormones are safe if used properly (Lusk, et. al. 2003). Although EU consumers have negative perceptions as to the health hazards of genetically modified foods, of which hormone-treated beef belongs, it should not be a basis for the ban. Perceptions are clearly different from scientifically proven evidences of health risks. According to Bureau of Consumer Unions based in Brussels, EU consumers are demanding â€Å"risk-free† foods because of the phobia they got from past experiences of pesticide contaminated meats (Lusk, et.al. 2003). However, if we are to base on available facts from scientific studies, hormones are unlike pesticides that can pose health hazards when in food. In fact, there are studies that show that hormones are naturally present in infinitesimal amounts in all meat whether implanted or not (Q&A Growth Promoting Hormones, cited in Orr 2001). Aside from this, the National Cattlemen Beef Association (2001) stressed that â€Å"the amount of estrogen in plant-source foods is larger than in meat.A standard serving of potatoes contains 225 nanograms of estrogen while a three-ounce serving of beef from an implanted steer contains 1. 9 nanograms of estrogen. † Published in the Los Angeles Times in April 19, 1999, Paul Jacobs presented the argument of the US government that three of the six hormones used in be ef production are legal as per federal laws and that these are hormones that are naturally in the human system, thus confirming the statement of the National Cattlemen Beef Association as stated above.Ironic to the EU ban, scientific panel organized by the EU agreed with the WTO stand that these hormones are perfectly safe (Jacobs, Paul 1999). Even if 17-beta estradiol has tumor initiating and promoting effects, the substance is freely available over the counter in the United States along with other hormone additives (James, Barry 1999). The human body naturally produces hormones in amounts greater than what is being consumed by eating meat or any food (National Cattlemen Beef Association cited in Orr, Rena 2001).â€Å"What often is not recognized is that the [natural] levels that are found in other animal foods, such as eggs or milk or butter, are substantially higher than those that occur in animal tissue as a result of use of these hormones† (Ellis, Richard cited in Jacobs , Paul 1999). Ellis is the director of scientific research oversight for the U. S. Department of Agriculture. Dan Glickman, the U. S. secretary of agriculture, also insists that â€Å"U. S. beef, whether grown with hormones or not, is absolutely safe, and that EU scientists have consistently failed to come up with proof to the contrary† (Barry, James 1999).EU is also fearful of the effect of rBST hormone, as one of the six hormones being used in cattle production in the US. The said hormone was said to have an effect of increasing the rate of infection in cattle. Although this is true, the infection is not applicable in humans (Bald, Renee and Bill Bigelow 2002). Another fear of the EU consumers and its government is the mutation effects of hormones. Although EU scientists identified at least one commonly used hormone (17 beta estradiol) as complete carcinogen, it was a common mistake to assume that the substance like other hormones causes cell mutation (James, Barry 1999).Su ch hormones are feared as endocrine disrupters which was explained by an American scientist as having an effect in the process of cell development but does not have solid explanation as to how it really works as of this moment (Sonnenschein, Carlos cited in Barry, James 1999). The scientist explained that â€Å"in assessing the risk of endocrine disrupters, therefore, it is necessary to consider their effect not only on individual cells but on the relations among cells.† In this ground, EU does not have the reasonable and supported evidence as to fearing the mutation effects of hormone-treated beef especially with humans. â€Å"Lacking proof, the EU can only fall back on observed effects, such as the specific distribution and observed increase of hormone-associated diseases, such as breast cancer and prostate cancer, in many countries of the world that may be caused by hormones and hormone-like substances in the human diet† (ibid).Growth promoting hormones has been use d in the beef industry for decades by countries other than the U. S. The Health Protection Branch of Health Canada approved the use of natural hormones: 17 estradiol, progesterone, testosterone and synthetic hormones as zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengestrol acetate (Taylor, 1983). The Center for Global Food Issues also has approved the safety of the growth hormones in beef production in relation to human health. There are three factors enumerated and explained by the scientific body.The first factor is the process by which the hormones are administered to the cattle. According to the authors, the doses of hormone implant are specific as to legal and authorized doses per FDA regulations (Avery, Alex and Dennis Avery 2008). The authors also stressed that â€Å"the implant ensures that the hormone is released into the animals’ bloodstream very slowly so that the concentration of the hormone in the animal remains relatively constant and low† (ibid).Here is an intere sting fact stated by the authors: â€Å"Because the ear is discarded at harvest, the implant does not enter the food chain. † There is no way that cattle raisers or producers of hormone-treated beef will administer the hormone in excess of what is required since it will just bring them additional cost for such unnecessary step. This second factor stressed by Avery et. al. (2008) is very significant in proving the cattle raisers were stuck to the limits of hormone dosage and that is economically wise.IN fact, there is very little impact on weight gain when such hormone will be administered beyond required dosage. Avery (et. al. 2008) also stressed that USDA is conducting annual monitoring of hormone administration in cattle to ensure everything is done with proper precautions and safety measures. The third factor is relative to the dosage of hormones administered in cattle and its impact on hormone levels in beef. Even with reference to the natural hormones produced by the hum an body, such dosage is comparatively low level.â€Å"A pound of beef raised using estradiol contains approximately 15,000 times less of this hormone than the amount produced daily by the average man and about 9 million times less than the amount produced by a pregnant woman† (Avery, Alex et. al. 2008). According to JECFA’s calculation, even if a person is consuming one pound of beef and that the amount of hormone in such beef is at the highest level of ingestion amount (50 nanograms of estradiol, it is still less than one-thirtieth of the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of estradiol for a 75 pound child.This is based on the regulatory requirement set by WHO/FAO Expert Committee (Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. 1999 cited in Avery, et. al. 2008). In a separate study, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), stated that â€Å"a person would need to eat over 13 pounds of beef from an implanted steer to equal the amount of estradiol naturally found in a s ingle egg and that a glass of milk contains about nine times as much estradiol as a half-pound of beef from an implanted steer† (Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA 1999 cited in Avery et. al. 2008). Avery et. al.(2008) stressed that governing bodies that can prove the safety of hormone treated beef exported by the United States which include The European Agriculture Commission Scientific Conference on Growth Promotion in Meat Production (1995) and Sub-Group of the Veterinary Products Committee of the British Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food (1999). Having been proven of its safety, let us now look into the consumer preferences and awareness as to buying hormone-treated beef produced in the United States. Consumers are actually aware of Genetically Modified Foods (GM Foods) but are still willing to buy them.A survey on US consumers found that concern on the hazards of hormone residues in food ranked average on the list, even below the concerns for contaminants (bact eria and pesticides) (Kramer and Penner, cited in Lusk, et. al. 2003). In a separate study, by the Food Marketing Institute found that only 1% of consumers volunteered to be concerned with hormone residue (Lusk, et. al 2003). Apart from this, 65% of US consumers are aware of biotechnology, 73% of who were willing to buy GM foods while 21% biotechnology as health risk (Hoban, 1996).A survey of EU consumers found that consumer awareness of biotechnology ranged from 55 to 57% in France and the United Kingdom to 91% in Germany. Only 30% of German consumers were willing to buy GM foods whereas 57% viewed biotechnology as a health risk. In France and the United Kingdom, 60 and 63% were willing to buy GM foods with 38 and 39% viewed them as a health risk (Hoban 1996). An experimental auction found that consumers placed more value on the leanness of pork than the use of hormone itself (Lusk, et. al. 2003).A survey of US student consumers found that 70% were unwilling to pay a premium to exc hange a bag of GM corn chips for a bag of non-GM corn chips but 20% were willing to pay at least $. 20/oz in exchange (Lusk, et. al. 2003). EU’s ban of US beef for safety reasons is baseless and a clear violation. WTO rules 3 times that the ban on the use of certain hormones to promote growth of cattle violated the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement (Galvin, Timothy, Foreign Agricultural Service, US Department of Agriculture, 2000).Europeans who traditionally get their beef from aging bulls and dairy cows–are sometimes subjected to far higher amounts of natural sex hormones than they would get from U. S. cattle. Americans point out that a slaughtered bull, for example, can have 10 times more natural testosterone in its flesh than a treated steer (Jacobs, Paul, The Los Angeles Times, 1999). Estrogen levels from treated cattle are, on average, 3% higher than the meat from an untreated animal. For testosterone and progesterone, the differences are less than one-te nth of 1% (Ellis, Richard, US Dept.of Agriculture cited in Jacobs, 1999). These evidences of the health safety of hormone-treated beef produced by the United States did not move the EU authorities and did not at all lift the ban. As of this time, there has been no solid scientific evidence yet presented by the EU authorities to justify the decade-long ban. Despite the continuing ban on US beef, the federal government, in cooperation with the USDA and the American livestock producers has been taking all the efforts they could possibly exert in keeping the market alive and growing without the EU market.What the government did was to support the cattle raisers and beef producers in seeking and developing new markets to make it up with the lost EU beef market which is undoubtedly significant to the US beef export. â€Å"As a result, U. S. beef exports represent one of the true success stories in our agricultural trade† (Galvin, 2000). Galvin stated that the United States is now a ble to export more than 80 percent of what is being imported based on volume, and the trade surplus in beef exceeds $1 billion annually. †The bottom line therefore is that the United States should not be wasting its time and resources in appealing to the EU to lift the ban on hormone-treated beef. This is primarily because it has already proven its case on the safety of the products. Secondly, the United States have proven itself able to establish and develop new markets and strategies to cover what is being lost in the ban. Lastly, the United States have all the resources to support the cattle and beef industry as it can with other industries so what it needs to focus now is to help the industry continue to rise. WORKS CITED Avery, Alex and Dennis Avery (2008).The Environmental Safety and Benefits of Growth Enhancing Pharmaceutical Technologies in Beef Production. Retrieved on March 22, 2008 from http://www. thecattlesite. com/articles/1240/the-environmental-safety-and-benefi ts-of-growth-enhancing-pharmaceutical-technologies-in-beef-production Bald, Renee and Bill Bigelow (2002). The Beef Hormone Controversy: Whose Free Trade? Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. rethinkingschools. org/publication/rg/RGBeef. shtml Battle over beef hormones. BBC News Online, May 13, 1999. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://news. bbc. co. uk/1/hi/business/the_economy/342310.stm Galvin, Timothy (2000). Statement of Timothy J. Galvin Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service U. S. Department of Agriculture Before the Subcommittee on Forestry, Conservation and Rural Revitalization Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, Washington, D. C. September 25, 2000. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. fas. usda. gov/info/speeches/ct092500. html Health Canada (2005). Questions and Answers – Hormonal Growth Promoters. Retrieved on March 22, 2008 from http://www. hc-sc. gc. ca/dhp-mps/vet/faq/growth_hormones_promoters_croissance_hormonaux_ stimulateurs_e. htmlHormones in Cattle. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. foodsafetynetwork. ca/en/article-details. php? a=4&c=19&sc=162&id=308 Jacobs, Paul (1999). U. S. , Europe Lock Horns in Beef Hormone Debate. The Los Angeles Times, April 09, 1999. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. organicconsumers. org/Toxic/beefhormone. cfm James, Barry (1999). Behind Contested EU Ban, a Scientific Puzzle: Battle to Prove Beef Hormone Risk. The Herald Tribune, October 18, 1999. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. iht. com/articles/1999/10/18/snhorm. t. php Lusk, Jayson L. ; Roosen, Jutta ; Fox, John A. (2003).Demand for beef from cattle administered growth hormones of fed genetically modified corn: a comparison of consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://goliath. ecnext. com/coms2/summary_0199-2500157_ITM National Cattlemen Beef Association: Myths & Facts about Beef Production: Hormones and Antibiotics. http://www. beef. org/librfacts/mythfact/mythfact_11. html in Orr, Rena (2001). Growth-promoting Hormones in Cattle. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. foodsafetynetwork. ca/en/article-details.php? a=4&c=19&sc=162&id=308 Orr, Rena (2001). Growth-promoting Hormones in Cattle. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. foodsafetynetwork. ca/en/article-details. php? a=4&c=19&sc=162&id=308 Paulson, Michael (1999). WTO Case File: The Beef Hormone Case. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, November 22, 1999. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://seattlepi. nwsource. com/national/case22. shtml Q&A Growth Promoting Hormones: Contact: Julie Bousman 202-347-0228 http://hill. beef. org/ft/qagph. htm in Orr, Rena (2001). Growth-promoting Hormones in Cattle. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www.foodsafetynetwork. ca/en/article-details. php? a=4&c=19&sc=162&id=308 Taylor, W. (1983): Risks Associated with the Exposure of Human Su bjects to Endogenous and Exogenous Anabolic Steroids Anabolics in Animal Production. OIE p 273-287 in Orr, Rena (2001). Growth-promoting Hormones in Cattle. Retrieved on March 09, 2008 from http://www. foodsafetynetwork. ca/en/article-details. php? a=4&c=19&sc=162&id=308 Thompson, Sharon R (1999): International Harmonization Issues. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice. Vol 15 No 1, 181-195 in Orr, Rena (2001). Growth-promoting

Assignment on Cell Phone Essay

â€Å"Watson, come here: I want you.† This was the first message ever transmitted from one place to another, through a device called Telephone. Alexander Graham bell the American genius along with his assistant Thomas Watson invented this machine in 1876. It was March 10, 1876, an important day for the human civilization when this great machine was invented and it was the first step towards developing the means of communication. Since then we have come across a long way. Various means were added to the means of communication. Today, telephone is a part of our everyday life. Besides telephone, mobile phones are playing a great role to communicate massages from one place to another. It has become an integral part of life in all over the world. Today, telecommunication is one the major part of life. Nowadays, phone is not only using for making calls, among many other functions it’s used for text messaging, multimedia messaging and also even to connect us to the internet. Due to its various functionality it has a greater impact not only in the economy as well as in the society. Bangladesh is talking like never before. The phenomenal growth of the telecom industry over the last two decades has considerable changed the way people interact. The impact is seen among all spheres of people in Bangladesh. But the most significant impact is seen among the young users of cell phone. Telecommunications allows better access to services that enhance a society’s health and wellbeing such as healthcare and social services. Amongst the many implications of research is that poor and rural populations benefit most from mobile telephony because they are least likely to have alternatives. In view of this, the cross subsidies in Bangladesh from mobile to fixed users, from the poor to the rich, are especially damaging. There are a number of ways that mobile services can promote cohesion in families and society. For example, a cheap mobile service allows families and communities to remain as a coherent unit when family members are away for long periods. In cases where a family member is abroad either temporarily or permanently it allows the family unit to remain intact as well as generating inbound international call revenues. Due to intense competition among the operators, every company is trying to provide cheap call rate which is benefiting the users. Young people are benefitting most in this regard since they lack income sources. A cheap mobile service keeps them in touch with families and relatives thus strengthening social bodings. But every coin has two faces. The telecommunication companies in our country have been inclined towards introducing new and alternative packages for young people like Djuice & Bondhu by Grameenphone, Desh by Banglalink, Shorol by Robi and many more. The question arises why companies are so aggressively coming up with such packages without the social mobilization to check the mindset of youth. How they are facilitating their users by such packages which offer lower call rate at midnight. Except on very urgent occasions ordinarily no one would like to talk after midnight. In our youth segment the majority is student community that is spell bounded by these packages. They are losing their essence of their studies. They are derailing and deviating themselves. They are getting away for their goals, destinies and motives. Their minds are becoming stagnant and static. Creativity and innovation is blocked by the consistent telephonic conversations spread over the whole of night. They are losing their interest towards the interactions and sociality. Alienation is increasing within small community or groups of people. In home young hardly get time to spend with their parents. In one room of hostels all four members are strangers to one another. They never try to tie up the relation because they don’t have a pinch of time. By talking whole night with opposite sex, they are getting psychologically weak and pressured. There are more other physical disorders also experiencing by the youth due to spending the precious time which is needed for compulsory rest, relaxation, relief and mental health. Due to spending whole nights over phone the absenteeism is skyrocketing in every profession. They are going far and far away from the hold of families. They tell lies and have false communication with their parents thus seriously jeopardizing the social relationship. They are deceiving the decisions, trust and expectations of their parents. They are traveling towards the lone parent family system in which one is not accountable to anyone and he is the only decision maker. Suck kind of behavior is leading towards the social fragmentation and terrible decline of moral values in which respect is core one. Even their mental approach is revolving around sexual satisfaction. Other emotions and sentiments are pushed oblivion, they are forgetting that there are so many matters that need their kind attention. Which are making them socially challenged. The mobile companies have every right to work out innovative packages offering greater value of money to their customers. But they should not making profits by compromising on the interest of young generation. Youth spend a huge amount of money on mobile cellular services annually. Major amounts of their disposable income are going to the mobile telecom companies. In the name of competition companies are aggressively promoting their offerings without considering the welfare of the youth. Therefore, we all have to realize the worth and well being of our youth.

No Fear Shakespeare Essay

In English class, everyone lets out loud groans when they hear about their next units: Shakespeare. With the class complaining about the hard language and the difficulty of understanding the plays, the teacher might grow exasperated and let them read the infamously talked about book No Fear Shakespeare. The teachers are doing question thing when they keep a supplementary text with the original. Yes, 15th century Elizabethan era is a tad difficult to understand, but that is one of the beauties of Shakespeare. No Fear has a good translation but is missing a few key elements such as symbolism, poetry, allusions, and other literary techniques. I think the original version is much better than the translated version because it has more appeal. No Fear Shakespeare is a series of translations of the Bard’s famous works to the modern-day language that is used today to make it easier to understand. I must admit that the translation is well written and is a much easier read than the original. No fear should be used for non-English speakers to read along but still have the original. Shakespeare’s language is broken down in the translation and takes away the finesse the original has. In the first soliloquy of infamously â€Å"emo-tastic† Hamlet, his first line in the speech is â€Å"Oh, what a rogue and peasant slave am I! † in the original as opposed to the translated one that says â€Å"Now I’m alone. Oh what a mean low-life I am! † Now compare them and see which sounds more poetic and more passionate. Shakespeare has a way of making such a self-loathing speech sound so passionately powerful and beautiful. The translated version is too literal while Shakespeare was all about the symbolisms and metaphors that was his trademark. In this famous â€Å"to be or not to be† speech is another example. â€Å"To be or not to be? That is the question. † Is destroyed with â€Å"the question is: is it better to be alive or dead? † The point of that line is to be used for a variety of situations it has been taken too seriously. It’s more poetic and a bit dramatic (in a good way) to say â€Å"to be or not to be† rather than â€Å"should I kill myself to end all the hardships or just live with it miserably? † It’s almost as if Shakespeare’s version is a pretty girl who wears a lot of make-up and looks attractive until you see her without the make-up and see what she actually looks like unmasked so to speak when it is taken into No Fear Shakespeare. The last line of this speech is worse saying â€Å"But shh, here comes the beautiful Ophelia. Pretty lady; please remember me when you pray. Instead the original â€Å"The fair Ophelia-Nymph, in thy orisons be all my sins remembered. † The allusion to Greek mythology is one of the things that make Shakespeare’s work significant because his world was controlled by the monotheistic Roman Church. He uses a polytheistic religion for his allusions but No fear gets rid of some of it to make it more comprehensible. The No Fear Shakespeare series should not be taught in regular English speaking class because it takes away the symbolism, rhyme, and beauty of the literature. It should be used as a reference outside of school. As one of my friend said â€Å"the teacher is supposed to teach you what it means and if you don’t get that then you can use the book translation. † I agree with this completely. They’re supposed to be teaching Shakespeare to enlighten the students in ways that connects to them. If they have a bad teacher that is when the translator is depended on to teach what Shakespeare is writing. If the language was better understood by students you’d be able to realize that the themes and plots are so relatable. What teenager doesn’t relate to Hamlet with his depression or with his feeling of being misunderstood? As Alexandra Petri’s article â€Å"On the Bard’s Birthday: Is Shakespeare Still Relevant? † it states â€Å"If we want to do a modern staging of his work, we’ll have to stipulate that ‘In fair Verona, where we lay our scene/the cell reception was spotty/from ancient grudge that brake AT&T. † Sure we can’t exactly relate because most teens have cell phones to communicate, but it gives us a feel of if this was to happen in the â€Å"electronically deprived† centuries. It gives a link from the 21st century to the 15th century. The translation’s text book definition of Shakespeare does not give you that link, it just tells a story; it doesn’t have meaning behind it. Shakespeare has great insults as well, so why insult in modern language when you can confuse a fellow peer with beautiful Elizabethan. We shouldn’t fear Shakespeare we should learn to love him. He brings beauty and richness into literature that no other could do, especially in this age. He is thought to be a genius of the theatre. He has this originality that has influenced a lot of famous authors of modern-day literature so I say â€Å"Long live Shakespeare! †

The Role of the Actor in the Industry

There is not one precise route to becoming an actor but there is a common direction most aspirant actors take. Training for an actor can be acquired in numerous ways. An actor could be trained academically, through studio schools or through pure experience. The young actors’ career will undoubtedly begin with pure experience through small scale performances. The small scale performances could take place through school, outside social clubs or other children’s associations.To begin the larger scale experiences, the hopeful actor would customarily attempt to be represented by an agent. Gaining an agent at such an early stage in the actors’ career is rather difficult. Therefore, joining an organisation such as The Spotlight is habitually the route actors take. The Spotlight is a small organisation with a massive output. It is the hub of the industry where you advertise yourself, whether you have an agent or not. It is essential that you are in it – it is the first port of call for virtually everybody who is casting productions.(Dunmore, 1991, p. 35). In this research explains the necessity of being involved in The Spotlight organisation. It is explained as the ‘hub’ for getting jobs in the entire industry and is used by thousands of actors. Although the propaganda and necessity surrounding The Spotlight is endearing and unquestionably crucial, the cost behind it is another obstacle for ambitious actors. The academic training is the route most commonly followed as a start to the more professional acting career.The cost of studying in drama school is a very prevalent issue around Britain, especially due to the recently ascending expenses. Places such as ALRA, Arts Ed, Guildford School of Acting, Mountview Academy of Theatre Arts and Oxford School of Drama are only a small amount of the most popular schools around Britain. These particular schools offer Dance and Drama Awards to selected students. D&DAs are scholarships provid ed by the government to allow ‘the most talented students to attend independent Drama Schools.The D&DAs are usually offered to a small amount of students who would benefit from the training but cannot afford to pay the fees. (West, 2005, p. 11). Most actors will save up for years or be lucky enough to have a wealthy family willing to pay for the tuition fees. If not so lucky, an actor could write to an organisation/person to ask them to sponsor the actor through Drama College, providing the answer is positive the actor has received his tuition fees through being sponsored.Once the young actor has completed the training necessary, it is ordinarily required to obtain an agent. This is not essential, however â€Å"Once you’ve got a little bit of experience under your belt you’re ready to secure representation. It is not necessary for you to have an agent but an agent will offer you more opportunities than what you may have without one. † Westbrook (2012, p. 1 34). Gaining an agent, as stated previously is rather difficult to do.The actor could possibly send a letter to the agent asking the agent to represent the actor. This must be fulfilled once the agent is accepting unsolicited submissions. Other than writing a letter, the actor must make sure the agent sees the actor performing in a production and suggests an amalgamation. However, alas to common misconception the agent does not fulfil all of the work for the actor, the agent can only get auditions for the actor while the actor must get to the audition and obtain the part.An actor must be willing to deal with rejection, contrary to the popular stereotype of the ‘overnight celebrity’, an actor can struggle for years to break into the industry and never be noticed. The performer, like any other professional needs to put money aside to plan ahead for a successful career. The best way to proceed is to be able to devote yourself totally to the task of getting interviews and j obs without worrying about supporting yourself for at least the first six months. Once you’ve arrived and had a chance to unpack you can pay attention to the real  task, which is getting a job. (Henry and Rogers, 2008 p. 35).As clearly stated the main aspects in the path to becoming an actor is financial issues, due to the low employment level a lot of aspiring actors’ struggle for money and end up working more than one job to fund their career path. Harrop (1992, p. 26) exclaims, â€Å"For every Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor, there are a hundred actors in line at the unemployment office, and a hundred more waiting to stand and serve them in any restaurant in which they might want to sit down.†This investigation shows that in the acting business there are immense amounts of unemployed actors contrasted to the amount of employed actors, meaning the amount of actors working more than one job to fund their dream is vast in this particular industry. The pres sure on a working actor trying to succeed and keeping a foot in the door for a steady income can be highly stressful; actors usually find it hard to find time to keep up with everyday work (rehearsals, filming, learning lines) and finding time to work enough to afford food, rent and even travel.For this reason many unemployed actors find it difficult to pursue the dream of becoming an actor and afford to live their everyday life, â€Å"Having to contend with the pressures of rehearsal, production and performance while at the same time worrying about whether you’ll have enough money to pay the rent is worse than foolish† Henry and Rogers (2008, p. 10) which in turn results in them abandoning the actor’s aspirations. However, those lucky enough to achieve a desired income and a steady place in the acting business can come with a price.The criticism received with such fame can be discouraging, this is indicated in the study by Harrop (1992, p. 106), â€Å"The very worst kind of criticism is that written for the critic’s ego as an essay in dismissively clever language with no positive consciousness of the actor, who has to go out there and put him- or herself on the line. Such criticism can be personally destructive. † This quote shows that criticism can negatively affect an actor and their career; actors need a certain level of confidence to contain the ability to comfortably audition for roles and perform in front of an audience.Critical comments such as these can seriously harm an actor’s self-confidence. This shows the criticism such as personal stories or personal criticism (an actor’s lives, image or relationships) can be insensitive, embarrassing and can cause more harm than anticipated. Some personal stories in magazine articles and newspaper articles, surrounding a more famous actors’ relationship suggests that certain articles written about celebrities can be untrue and exaggerated, in regular cases such as this, actors’ lives and relationships can be used as a selling point.This can be mentally harmful to an actor and as seen below can affect their personal lives. Winona Ryder in Meikle (2004, p. 123) â€Å"I remember us desperately hating being hounded by paparazzi. It was horrible and it certainly took its toll on our relationship. Every day, we heard that we were either cheating on each other or that we were broken up, when we weren’t. † This research, surrounding an actor’s relationship suggests in regular cases such as this, actors’ lives and relationships can be used as a selling point and these stories can be untrue or exaggerated.This can be mentally harmful to an actor as seen in the quote above. Harrop (1992, p. 106) demonstrates â€Å"critics will have their own gaze, their own agendas: to establish their own careers; to sell news-papers†. Although the frequency of coverage aimed at a particular actor is damaging to their r eputation it can also highlight many other personal issues within the actor. Though it is not possible to ascertain the media as the fixed cause for raising psychological issues in an actor, existing research and media content still persists to support such a statement.To reiterate, the actors role in the industry is beyond simply learning lines and taking guidance from a director, the individual must have ‘creative instincts’ and unquestionably be determined to succeed, even when the media is always standing by to scrutinise their every move. When the dream of becoming an actor and securing the place in the business has come true more problems arise, in any profession, at any age a person will find that when aiming to be the professional desired, one will face hurdles and dream of reaching that goal and living ‘an easy life’.However, even when the goal is reached there will always be obstacles surrounding the role of the actor. â€Å"Many talented actors don’t succeed in show business because they simply forget the first rule: Show business is a business. † Garrison (2002, p. 1). If the actor has hunger and fortitude for acting, these hurdles will simply pass them by. Passion is the main ingredient to becoming an actor, if the actor has enough willpower for the occupation, the actor will strive to overcome all challenges to achieve this goal. ï » ¿The Role of the Actor in the Industry There is not one precise route to becoming an actor but there is a common direction most aspirant actors take. Training for an actor can be acquired in numerous ways. An actor could be trained academically, through studio schools or through pure experience. The young actors’ career will undoubtedly begin with pure experience through small scale performances. The small scale performances could take place through school, outside social clubs or other children’s associations.To begin the larger scale experiences, the hopeful actor would customarily attempt to be represented by an agent. Gaining an agent at such an early stage in the actors’ career is rather difficult. Therefore, joining an organisation such as The Spotlight is habitually the route actors take. The Spotlight is a small organisation with a massive output. It is the hub of the industry where you advertise yourself, whether you have an agent or not. It is essential that you are in it – it is the first port of call for virtually everybody who is casting productions.  (Dunmore, 1991, p. 35).In this research explains the necessity of being involved in The Spotlight organisation. It is explained as the ‘hub’ for getting jobs in the entire industry and is used by thousands of actors. Although the propaganda and necessity surrounding The Spotlight is endearing and unquestionably crucial, the cost behind it is another obstacle for ambitious actors. The academic training is the route most commonly followed as a start to the more professional acting career.The cost of studying in drama school is a very prevalent issue around Britain, especially due to the recently ascending expenses. Places such as ALRA, Arts Ed, Guildford School of Acting, Mountview Academy of Theatre Arts and Oxford School of Drama are only a small amount of the most popular schools around Britain. These particular schools offer Dance and Drama Awards to selected students. D&DAs are scholarships pro vided by the government to allow ‘the most talented students to attend independent Drama Schools.The D&DAs are usually offered to a small amount of students who would benefit from the training but cannot afford to pay the fees. (West, 2005, p. 11). Most actors will save up for years or be lucky enough to have a wealthy family willing to pay for the tuition fees. If not so lucky, an actor could write to an organisation/person to ask them to sponsor the actor through Drama College, providing the answer is positive the actor has received his tuition fees through being sponsored.Once the young actor has completed the training necessary, it is ordinarily required to obtain an agent. This is not essential, however â€Å"Once you’ve got a little bit of experience under your belt you’re ready to secure representation. It is not necessary for you to have an agent but an agent will offer you more opportunities than what you may have without one. † Westbrook (2012, p . 134). Gaining an agent, as stated previously is rather difficult to do.The actor could possibly send a letter to the agent asking the agent to represent the actor. This must be fulfilled once the agent is accepting unsolicited submissions. Other than writing a letter, the actor must make sure the agent sees the actor performing in a production and suggests an amalgamation. However, alas to common misconception the agent does not fulfil all of the work for the actor, the agent can only get auditions for the actor while the actor must get to the audition and obtain the part.An actor must be willing to deal with rejection, contrary to the popular stereotype of the ‘overnight celebrity’, an actor can struggle for years to break into the industry and never be noticed. The performer, like any other professional needs to put money aside to plan ahead for a successful career. The best way to proceed is to be able to devote yourself totally to the task of getting interviews an d jobs without worrying about supporting yourself for at least the first six months.Once you’ve arrived and had a chance to unpack you can pay attention to the real  task, which is getting a job. (Henry and Rogers, 2008 p. 35). As clearly stated the main aspects in the path to becoming an actor is financial issues, due to the low employment level a lot of aspiring actors’ struggle for money and end up working more than one job to fund their career path. Harrop (1992, p. 26) exclaims, â€Å"For every Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor, there are a hundred actors in line at the unemployment office, and a hundred more waiting to stand and serve them in any restaurant in which they might want to sit down.†This investigation shows that in the acting business there are immense amounts of unemployed actors contrasted to the amount of employed actors, meaning the amount of actors working more than one job to fund their dream is vast in this particular industry. The p ressure on a working actor trying to succeed and keeping a foot in the door for a steady income can be highly stressful; actors usually find it hard to find time to keep up with everyday work (rehearsals, filming, learning lines) and finding time to work enough to afford food, rent and even travel.For this reason many unemployed actors find it difficult to pursue the dream of becoming an actor and afford to live their everyday life, â€Å"Having to contend with the pressures of rehearsal, production and performance while at the same time worrying about whether you’ll have enough money to pay the rent is worse than foolish† Henry and Rogers (2008, p. 10) which in turn results in them abandoning the actor’s aspirations. However, those lucky enough to achieve a desired income and a steady place in the acting business can come with a price.The criticism received with such fame can be discouraging, this is indicated in the study by Harrop (1992, p. 106), â€Å"The v ery worst kind of criticism is that written for the critic’s ego as an essay in dismissively clever language with no positive consciousness of the actor, who has to go out there and put him- or herself on the line. Such criticism can be personally destructive. † This quote shows that criticism can negatively affect an actor and their career; actors need a certain level of confidence to contain the ability to comfortably audition for roles and perform in front of an audience.Critical comments such as these can seriously harm an actor’s self-confidence. This shows the criticism such as personal stories or personal criticism (an actor’s lives, image or relationships) can be insensitive, embarrassing and can cause more harm than anticipated. Some personal stories in magazine articles and newspaper articles, surrounding a more famous actors’ relationship suggests that certain articles written about celebrities can be untrue and exaggerated, in regular ca ses such as this, actors’ lives and relationships can be used as a selling point.This can be mentally harmful to an actor and as seen below can affect their personal lives. Winona Ryder in Meikle (2004, p. 123) â€Å"I remember us desperately hating being hounded by paparazzi. It was horrible and it certainly took its toll on our relationship. Every day, we heard that we were either cheating on each other or that we were broken up, when we weren’t. † This research, surrounding an actor’s relationship suggests in regular cases such as this, actors’ lives and relationships can be used as a selling point and these stories can be untrue or exaggerated.This can be mentally harmful to an actor as seen in the quote above. Harrop (1992, p. 106) demonstrates â€Å"critics will have their own gaze, their own agendas: to establish their own careers; to sell news-papers†. Although the frequency of coverage aimed at a particular actor is damaging to thei r reputation it can also highlight many other personal issues within the actor. Though it is not possible to ascertain the media as the fixed cause for raising psychological issues in an actor, existing research and media content still persists to support such a statement.To reiterate, the actors role in the industry is beyond simply learning lines and taking guidance from a director, the individual must have ‘creative instincts’ and unquestionably be determined to succeed, even when the media is always standing by to scrutinise their every move. When the dream of becoming an actor and securing the place in the business has come true more problems arise, in any profession, at any age a person will find that when aiming to be the professional desired, one will face hurdles and dream of reaching that goal and living ‘an easy life’.However, even when the goal is reached there will always be obstacles surrounding the role of the actor. â€Å"Many talented acto rs don’t succeed in show business because they simply forget the first rule: Show business is a business. † Garrison (2002, p. 1). If the actor has hunger and fortitude for acting, these hurdles will simply pass them by. Passion is the main ingredient to becoming an actor, if the actor has enough willpower for the occupation, the actor will strive to overcome all challenges to achieve this goal.