GMO critical analysis

The Fake Science of Biased Scientists in The Health Bearer Journal

The March 12, 2014 GMO article The Fake Science of Biased Scientists in The Health Bearer Journal criticizes a group of scientists who claim to have been duped by international pesticide corporations into endorsing the latter’s “damaging” acts. The paper seems to be against the unapproved use of GMOs under the guise of “tested” imprints. The writing is powerful in persuading audiences that the intellectual reputation of the entire chemical technology is jeopardized if the status quo is maintained. It uses a variety of methods that, when combined, make the paper influential.

Forces Exercised by Pesticide Manufacturers

In summary, the paper examines the forces exercised by pesticide manufacturers. They use both hard and soft power to contain research works that appear to diminish the value of their products and services. Seralini is one of the scientists who have been affected by the retaliation with several of the writer’s articles being withdrawn from Elsevier Journal as a consequence. The writer mentions Dr. Pamela Ronald as one of the collaborating scientists in the scandal. The paper then lists the horizontal gene transfer as opposed to vertical gene transfer as the genesis of highly inflammatory foreign proteins, which are responsible for most deformations. It sums up its views by agreeing with the results conducted from various animal-feeding studies that portray a notable correlation between GMOs and human disease patterns.

Appropriate Structure

The paper is appropriately structured. It has a defined thesis statement in the fifth paragraph arguing that the scientific credibility of the chemical technology fraternity is threatened by the undue influence from pesticide producers. The sentence introduces the article’s body that is also segmented by clearly defined sub-headings and paragraphs. Proper structuring is useful in creating a logical flow of events. Besides, the work style enhances the understandability of the writings. The author separates the paper into two major sections with the first part laying the foundation for the bigger picture with general perspectives as the second part delves into the minute issues including the particular findings on the matter of GMO. The methodology used affords readers several views on the subject, especially those readers who lack the right foundation in the issues of GMO and the findings related to it.

Mixture of Logos, Pathos, and Ethos

The article appears to harbor genuine concerns and applies a mixture of logos, pathos, and ethos to win the trust of the audience. For instance, by referring to prior research studies, such as the ones by Jefferey Smith, the author builds its credibility. The approach helps to formulate the authenticity, especially in terms of referring materials from peer-reviewed sources. It assists readers in positioning the study on a successive period. Later, by providing the story of a man with dialysis treatment, the article manages, although in a limited way, to appeal to the audience’s emotions. Most importantly, by maintaining a professional tone and desisting from attacking the particular researcher’s character, the article scores highly on ethics. According to Hasan and Emad (19), the content quality is maintained by objective information without cultural, institutional, political, or religious biases.

Inclusion of Publication Date

Further, the writings have a date of publication. The inclusion of such critical details adds to the article’s integrity and content quality dimension, as it assists readers to position the study on a timescale and discern its relevance (Hasan and Emad 18). For instance, the fact that the paper was written less than five years ago shows that the contents are not outdated and most likely they are in line with the relevant world trends.

Suitability for the Average Audience

Finally, the simplicity of the paper makes it suitable for the average type of audience. The writer assumes that his audience is not grounded in scholarly works. Readers who have low levels of academic qualification can understand the contents. For instance, the article is free of jargon words even though it talks about matters founded on technical fields. Also, the author tries to simplify and tailor his views, for instance, by providing explanations for unusual words such as “vertical gene transfer” (The Fake Science of Biased Scientist 2).

Conclusion

Overall, the paper is persuasive in outlining the threat posed by undue influence on the field of chemical technology. The author observes simplicity and appears to be genuine to present the reliable and credible information, which is characterized by excellent reasoning. Nonetheless, the article could have been more useful if the author tried to appeal more to the reader’s emotions than what has been presented. Consequently, after reading the contents, readers would have been more likely to agree with the writer’s perspective.

Works Cited

The Fake Science of Biased Scientist. Health Bearer Journal, 2014, March 12.

Hasan, Layla and Emad Abuelrub. Assessing the Quality of web sites. Applied Computing and Informatics (2011) 9, 11-29. Print.