Gloria Garcia

Rhetorical Analysis

October 27, 2014

RWS 1301

Rhetorical Analysis: Organic Food vs. Conventional Food

Rhetorical Analysis is a form of close reading that employs the principles of
rhetoric to examine the interactions between a text, an author, and an audience; by this I
mean analyzing a text or an artifact. Rhetorical analysis may be applied to any text such
as a speech, an essay, an advertisement, a poem, a photograph, a web page, etc. The goal
of Rhetorical Analysis is knowing HOW the author is writing rather than WHAT the
author is writing.

I decided to look for my artifact on Google Scholar since I find it easier to look
there rather than the UTEP databases. I found several artifacts but the one that I chose to
analyze is Nutritional Quality of Organic Foods: a systematic review. The American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition published the artifact. The text is informing about the
differences between organic and conventional food. There were a several authors writing
and helping with this artifact such as Alan D. Dangour, Sakhi K. Dodhia, Arabella
Hayter, Elizabeth Allen, Karen Lock, and Ricardo Vavy. All of them compromise or are
engaged into the Health Field. The nutrient composition of livestock products can
similarly be affected by factors such as the age and breed of the animals, feeding
regimen, and season( Suplemental Figure 1) The audience to this artifact would be
producers (farmers), retail distributors and general public. Both farmers and retail
distributers focus on economic values, by this I mean on what is going to make them gain
more money or profits. General public focuses on both economic and health values.
General public is seeking for what is best for their health but they are also aware that

Gloria Garcia
Rhetorical Analysis

October 27, 2014

RWS 1301

organic products are more expensive than conventional products. Just like Williams CM,
Winter and Davis mentions in the essay Notwithstanding the current uncertainty in the
available evidence of the nutrient composition of foods produced under different
agricultural regimens, consumets appear willing to pay a higher price for organic foods
based on their perceived health and nutritious benefits (Williams, 2002), (Winter,Davis,
2006). The audience does not need to be convinced about anything. The readers are
seeking facts to help them make the wiser decision when it comes to choosing between
organic and conventional. According to the Soil Association organic food production and
consumption has increased during these years the purpose of this essay was to compare
the benefits between organic and conventional foods. They wanted to see if it is true that
organic food has more nutrients and have better effects on the health of the people instead
of the conventional food.
The authors supported their thesis that was to see which had more nutrients such as
nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus among other, if organic food or conventional food by
searching into PubMed, Web of Science, and CAB Abstracts for a period of 50 years,
from 1858 to 2008. They also are using surveys done to farmers, studies investigating the
nutrient content of organically and conventionally produced foods. The facts that they
used were useful to compare between the nutrients they were able to extract 1149 nutrient
content comparisons from
They first began by introducing how the demand of organic food has increased over the
years. They later explain how they wanted to know if organically produced foods have a
nutrient composition superior to conventional foods. After the authors present the results
of studies that report the chemical analysis of foodstuff produced under organic methods

Gloria Garcia
Rhetorical Analysis

October 27, 2014

RWS 1301

and conventional methods. They also explain the process and methods they used in order
to get their results. The results were based on three different study design: field trials,
which compares samples originating from organic and conventional agricultural methods
on lands and fields; farm surveys, which compares samples of organic farms and
conventional farms, and basket studies, which compares samples of organically and
conventionally produced food that is already available for the consumer in the retail
stores. According to Gibson RS they also explain how the quality of the research was
very important and how they used 5 criteria components such as name of the organic
body, specification of the cultivar, a statement of which nutrients or substances were
analyzed, a description of the laboratory methods that were used and statements of the
methods used. The studies were satisfactory if they met all of these 5 criteria.
The authors are not appealing to any emotion because they are just informing the
people by giving facts and their results of the studies and research they have done. First
they show a Table 1, which is a comparison of content of nutrients and other nutritionally
relevant substances in organically and conventionally produced crops as reported in
satisfactory-quality studies. This table shows different nutrients such as Nitrogen which
they have made over 17 studies and over 64 comparisons and they get the result that
conventional crops have higher concentrations, Vitamin C which they made over 14
studies and 65 comparisons and the result was that there is no difference in
concentrations between organic and conventional crops. Calcium which they made over
13 studies and 35 comparisons and shows no difference between the concentrations and
Phosphorus which they made 12 studies and 35 comparisons and they got the result that
organic crops have higher concentrations. Secondly they show Table 2, which is a

Gloria Garcia
Rhetorical Analysis

October 27, 2014

RWS 1301

comparison of content of nutrients and other nutritionally relevant substances in

organically and conventionally produced livestock products as reported in satisfactoryquality studies. This table shows the Fats and Ash, with the fats they made 6 studies and
13 compatisons and it showed no difference between organic and conventional live stock
products and with Ash they made 4 studies and 8 comparisons and as well it showed no
difference between organic and conventional livestock products.
In conclusion I feel that what the authors were trying to achieve was to help
people see the differences between organic and conventional foods, but they came out to
the conclusion according to all of the studies they have done that there is no evidence of a
different in nutrient quality between organic and conventional foods, they detected that
the differences among these two are very small, and they mostly relate to the production
methods. The text was confusing at parts, but it helps people to see with their own eyes
what the differences are thanks to the tables the authors provide. The analysis was a little
difficult since they were giving many numbers and percents about crops and livestock
products.

Gloria Garcia
Rhetorical Analysis

October 27, 2014

RWS 1301

References:
Nutritional Quality of Organic Foods: a systematic review. The American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition 3 (90): 680-685, 2009 http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/90/3/680.full

Gloria Garcia
Rhetorical Analysis

October 27, 2014

RWS 1301