Genetically Modified Organisms Rhetorical Analysis

In 2015, Tim Anderson, a PhD researcher, wrote “GMO Foods are Unsafe”, an article which perhaps sheds light on the mishandling of genetically modified foods, including the lack of testing of said food products, as well as the potential hazards posed to humans and the environment. In the same year, Genetic Literacy Project’s web editor, JoAnna Wendel, wrote a contrasting article “Genetically Modified Foods Have Been Studied and Found Safe to Eat”, and voices her disgust over the false information that constantly belittle GMOs. She believes the allegation that little evaluation has been accomplished to monitor and ensure the safety of these genetic modifications is based on frantic opinions and not accurate facts. Although their positions appear to utterly oppose one

GMOs, (genetically modified organisms) have been a topic of interest in the social eyes for years. Since they’ve been created, many people have voiced and written about their opinions on GMOs, and whether they are dangerous or not. Created to expand the genetic diversity of crops and animals, many don’t know whether GMOs are good or bad, and neither do researchers. Though there hasn’t been any evidence claiming whether GMOs are good or bad, it has certainly not stopped the public from creating their own opinions. Since no one knows the truth behind GMO, it has opened a window of opportunities for companies including Monsanto to voice their support of GMO, while other companies like the Non-GMO Project voice their

“Should We Care About Genetically Modified Foods?” by John N. Shaw appeared in Food Safety News issue of February 1, 2010, as a feature under the health section on the controversy between the pros and cons of genetically modified foods (Also known as GMO, genetically modified organisms). The main idea of this article is to inform people of the benefits of GMOs . The author, John Shaw received his Bachelor of Science degree in Finance with a minor in Marketing from the University of Arkansas in 2007, where he was a “leadership scholar.” In addition to his studies, he has worked as a research assistant with Food Law LL.M. Director Susan Schneider, interned with Wal-Mart Government and Corporate Affairs division, the Arkansas Attorney General Public Protection Division, and with United States Senator Blanche Lincoln. John has a passion for Food Law, sports, and outdoors. In the article, he states, “ I submit that I am no scientist; merely an interested student.” According to the article, he is passionate and has done sufficient research about the topic to support his argument.

uses pathos throughout his essay to appeal to his audience's emotional side and their sympathy

Specific Purpose: To persuade the audience to take action against genetically modified food and realize the risks of GMO’s.

The rhetorical device of logos served as support for presented claims like food not being natural anymore. The claim of how food not being natural was supported by facts such as how hormones are applied to chickens so that they would grow faster and bigger. This affects the audience by making them realize that they too are consuming those hormones. Reflective facts applied as support include how meat is no longer boneless and vegetables are available all year round with no regards to seasons. As a result, the argument’s validity is strong because the logos applied would make people consider everyday details around them. It would be difficult to contradict or disagree with the claim since Food Inc.’s claim of unnatural food has provided very concrete supporting details. Logos was also applied to defend the claim of how corn is an essential component to everything. Facts used to prove the claim were logical and understandable like how corn is cheap, makes cows fatter, and can be genetically modified. These facts convince the audience that corn has become a major source of income but is

Genetically Modified Organisms, or GMO’s, are organisms that have had genes from a different organism implanted into their own genetic code in order to produce a new result (“Genetically engineered foods”). This practice has elicited polar responses across the globe, for a multitude of reasons. Besides the obvious reason, being the morality of changing an organism's DNA for human benefit, one frequently noted problem is the monopolization of GMO’s by the company Monsanto, whose name is nearly synonymous with GMO’s due to their involvement with these crops. Monsanto has been at the center of many controversies regarding GMO’s, and is even considered to be ranked third to last for reputation among all major American companies (Bennett). Most

After watching GMO & OMG, Fix Foods, Fed Up, and reading “ If you pitch it they’ll eat it”, I realize that I need to make changes to my eating habits and that there needs to be a humongous change in our food industry. For an example many of us don’t really pay attention to what we eat if it looks good or smells good we're going to want more. As they said in GMO & OMG “ The Supermodel Foods”. Us people we tend to buy the food that looks best to our preference and not if it’s actually good for us. In the documentary GMO & OMG by: Jeremy Seifert he argues and tries to bring to our attention that there’s Genetically Modified Organisms has been put in our food without our knowledge. But even when knowing this we still continue to buy the genetically

Those opposed to GMO labeling have won once again. In “California Rejects Labeling Of Genetically Modified Food; Supporters Vow To Fight On”, Amy Standen points out the advantages that biotechnology companies have over local, small farms. Standen highlights the individual support, effort, and money put into labeling GMO’s. “Yes to 37” was a step away from success, until the opposing side stepped in and won the labeling battle. Through the use of direct quotes, as well as reference to companies like Monsanto, it becomes clear that biotechnology has succeeded once again. Standen uses these rhetorical strategies to evoke both an emotional, and ethical appeal within the reader throughout this article.

This DNA can come from a multitude of places including bacteria, viruses, or other animal and plants. (“GMO Education”)

When trying to make people aware of the effects GMOs have on one's health, Image events hit the verbal and visual aspects to create awareness in strides towards positive direction. NBC is not only local and relevant to the habitants of the Bethesda area, but also available to wide range of people. Bethesda magazine is smaller in scale, but delivers our message to local families on the concerns issue of community issues. When applying logistics and facts to this GMO argument we have Right to Know MD to help us back up the claims and movements we are trying to impose by hosting this image event.

When it comes to the foods we eat, we should all be fully informed on the potential benefits and dangers of every given product. Currently, there is a slow, but hard battle on the labeling of Genetically Modified Organisms, more commonly known as GMO’s. Some scientist and farmers may say that GMO production is beneficial to their finances; however, it is a health risk on humans, due to the chemical and genetic engineering done to foods that naturally give us the nutrients we need. In this proposal I plan to talk about the steps I will be taking to achieve my goal and to engage my audience through different types of media. I will also

I. Attention: What you had for lunch today? The DNA of that food? That was completely altered with.

The Non-GMO project, one of the main proponents of labeling GMOs, feels with an obligation to inform consumers what they are putting into their bodies. As part of society, they feel they have an obligation to prevent fraud in consumers by providing them with reliable information about what are the ingredients in the food they are purchasing. They also feel obligated by creating a healthier community. This not only creates less harm but more awareness in what people are consuming to prevent illness or

Many people today are often amazed by the amount of nutrition and health information required for humans. The constant stream of genetic modification of food can be confusing. Genetically modified (GM) foods are plants and animals that have had their genetic makeup artificially altered by scientists to make them grow faster, taste better, last longer and to provide more nutrients. Scientists make these alternations by transferring genes from one organism into another in order to change the condition or character of the receiving organism. This process is known as biotechnology or genetic engineering (GE), and it has revolutionized the way that agriculture is practiced in many parts of the world. Researchers are now able to use GE