Argument Analysis: Grass-Fed Beef

I believe that the narrator had a good point about grass fed beef, because most cattle are fed a variety of different things, inorganic things, that could pass cancerous proteins. It was stated that the cancer rates for Americans one in every four, but the Hopi Indians had a much luckier reputation with the cancer rates, being one out of every one-thousand. The fact that these Indians are much less likely to have cancer, could be affected by many factors throughout their heritage. But the grass fed beef and other animals used for meat have an undeniable advantage over those who are fed other mixtures. It could be the nitrilosides in the grass that is fighting cancerous proteins. Or it could be that the Indians ate their organs, which were rich in nutrients, which could have helped preventing cancer. Uneaten vegetables and fruits could also play a role in the forming of cancer, because it is well known that they can provide nutrients and maybe be a way to prevent cancer.

“Quality animal protein,’ which means to me, grass fed beef, bison, goat, and such, as well as …show more content…
“The Intuit had historically low rates of cancer.” It is found that grass is very high in cancer-fighting nitrilosides, which are found in grass fed beef, like those the Indians had eaten. “ the Inuit people eat the caribou and not just the meat but other organs rich in nutrients.” In this quote we see in the Inuit Indians had eaten the organs of the Caribou which could have evened out the cancerous parts that they could have consumed. It is a fact that the grass-fed beef are much healthier for your body, but whether or not it could help prevent cancer is still being