Ben Kim, in “A Strict Vegetarian Diet is Unhealthy for Most People” discusses why a strict vegan diet is not a healthy diet for humans in the long run, which is the main claim in the article. Though the article has many opinions in it, the article has a very factual claim that is backed up by evidence, explaining the negative impacts of a strict vegan diet.
The author provided factual sub-claims as well as sub-claims of value. The sub-points relate to the main point in that they tell about the health risks of a strict vegan diet and the confusion that can be placed upon the pro-vegan organizations. The main points are that the health of people can be negatively impacted by strict vegan diets, organizations that promote strict, vegan diets …show more content…
People go on these diets to be healthy, eating only plant-based foods, but they are depriving their bodies of the other food groups they need to consume. The author discusses how a person’s body can be deceived in the beginning of their diet because they feel better, but the person then has high risks of having health problems in the long run.
The sub-point about the pro-vegan organizations provides factual evidence along with evidence of value in that the author talks about what the organizations are doing right and wrong. The organizations that support vegan diets only give out the information that supports their cause. Most of the time, the organizations do not discuss how much they are profiting from people going on this diet, and leave out the long term health risks that can result from the diet that they are promoting. They make themselves sound by wanting to save the animals when they are hurting the humans in the …show more content…
This author uses warrants in his article such as admitting he is human, and respecting the beliefs and health of others. The audience would accept the author’s support for fact because his words are sympathetic toward animals, but also concerned for human health. The author’s tone is warm and opening, and the author is not arrogant about what he is claiming. He does not ask the audience to just believe him, but to research and examine their health for themselves. We do not really see any problems with the author’s warrants. The author uses his tone and respect for others beliefs to gain the trust and respect of the audience. We did not see anything except for the lack of factual evidence that the author needed to change.
We only found a few problems in the source overall. The author was writing about the negative impact that a strict vegan diet can have on a person’s health, but he also included the reasons that a person becomes a vegan, which really were not that relevant to the main claim. The author also uses a lot of opinionated statements instead of providing more factual evidence and statistics. The author overall had a good article with a minimum number of
The author provided factual sub-claims as well as sub-claims of value. The sub-points relate to the main point in that they tell about the health risks of a strict vegan diet and the confusion that can be placed upon the pro-vegan organizations. The main points are that the health of people can be negatively impacted by strict vegan diets, organizations that promote strict, vegan diets …show more content…
People go on these diets to be healthy, eating only plant-based foods, but they are depriving their bodies of the other food groups they need to consume. The author discusses how a person’s body can be deceived in the beginning of their diet because they feel better, but the person then has high risks of having health problems in the long run.
The sub-point about the pro-vegan organizations provides factual evidence along with evidence of value in that the author talks about what the organizations are doing right and wrong. The organizations that support vegan diets only give out the information that supports their cause. Most of the time, the organizations do not discuss how much they are profiting from people going on this diet, and leave out the long term health risks that can result from the diet that they are promoting. They make themselves sound by wanting to save the animals when they are hurting the humans in the …show more content…
This author uses warrants in his article such as admitting he is human, and respecting the beliefs and health of others. The audience would accept the author’s support for fact because his words are sympathetic toward animals, but also concerned for human health. The author’s tone is warm and opening, and the author is not arrogant about what he is claiming. He does not ask the audience to just believe him, but to research and examine their health for themselves. We do not really see any problems with the author’s warrants. The author uses his tone and respect for others beliefs to gain the trust and respect of the audience. We did not see anything except for the lack of factual evidence that the author needed to change.
We only found a few problems in the source overall. The author was writing about the negative impact that a strict vegan diet can have on a person’s health, but he also included the reasons that a person becomes a vegan, which really were not that relevant to the main claim. The author also uses a lot of opinionated statements instead of providing more factual evidence and statistics. The author overall had a good article with a minimum number of