Is The Jungle Completely Naturalistic?

          In Sinclair's "The Jungle" he uses descriptions of the meat packing industry and horrifying scenes to to shock and disgust. The goal as a Muckrakers in the Progressive Era was to write pieces that exposed the truth in this way. Muckrakers had a no-frills approach to journalism.          
         Naturalists feel that humanity is under the control of larger forces, forces that were not able to be controlled. The handout in class summarizes Zora's description of naturalism in this way "naturalists viewed humans as but higher order animal, subject to their instincts, passions, and surroundings" later it the articles offers a quote from George Becker: naturalism is "no more than and emphatic and explicit philosophical position taken by some realists, showing man caught in a net with no escape"  So in a way the naturalistic writing which believes individual's are at the mercy of greater things conflicts with the Muckraker's who wanted to inspire change and believed they could help to change world problems through their journalistic endeavors.
       Up to the point I've read I'm left questioning whether or not Sinclair believes the situation can change, or that it is possible to overcome capitalism. And I find it interesting that his now famous use disgusting descriptions actually did inspire change and was a major reason for the creation of the FDA. This which makes me wonder if his writing was actually completely naturalistic, or if some degree he saw the situation in Chicago fixable.