a. Where is the article from?  How do you know it is a reliable source? Does it have a known political bias?

 

 https://blog.daveasprey.com/carl-lewis-vegan/. It was recommended by the google scholar. Yes, the author is biased because he is the CEO and the founder of bulletproof.

 

b. Who wrote the article? Does the author have any potential biases/conflict of interests (ETHOS)?  Who is the target audience? How can you tell?

 

The article was written by Dave Asprey. Yes, because he is arguing about the damage of becoming vegan costed him. The target audience is athletes. I can tell because the article talks about Lewis Clarke who was an Olympic athlete.

 

c. How does the headline grab our attention?  Does it show any attempt to politicize the news item or appeal to a particular demographic?  Is it accurate or misleading (in relation to the content?)

 

The headline grabs our title by introducing a story in order to grab our attention and to makes us want to know what happened to the athlete in the story. Yes, it does make the attempt by appealing to athletes because the entire article concerns the adverse effects of veganism on an athlete’s performance. It is accurate because it includes sources that verify the facts located in the article.

 

d. Are there any pictures or graphics at the beginning of the article to preview the argument and/or give the argument a particular context?

 

  No there are no pictures or graphics.

 

e. Analyze the argument.  What is the main idea?  Break down the argument into steps – what are the sub-arguments?

 

The argument is that veganism is bad for an athlete because of the effect it has on the athlete’s body. From that point, the main argument is broken down into the facts that veganism is bad for an athlete’s muscles, vegans have less protein overall compared to people who also include meat, and vegans were found to also have deficiencies in vitamin B12 which led to diseases such as depression, Alzheimer’s and more.

 

f. Evaluate the argument.  Is it logical (LOGOS)? Does it appeal to emotion (PATHOS)? What strategies does it use to persuade the reader?  What examples does it give?  Are there any logical fallacies?

 

The article uses LOGOS by stating the author’s results from when he started being a vegan and when Lewis Clarke became a vegan. For the first year, Clarke had his best performance and did well; however, that is when he began a downward spiral where he deteriorated in quality and performance, some part of which, is attributed to his vegan diet. After a year of being a vegan, Clarke failed to qualify for the Olympics team and he was unable to compete in his formerly strongest events – the 100meter and 200meter sprints. The author likewise did vegan experiments and used his result. He found that for the first few months he felt great, but then he began to decline. He used his experience as a strategy to persuade readers. The only possibility of a logical fallacy would be the post hoc fallacy; however, the author provided sufficient evidence that I feel is enough to rule out the post hoc fallacy.

 

g. Evaluate the content and sources. Does the article link to other relevant sources? Does it list sources at the end of the article?  Is it clear if the article is factual or opinion-based?  How far can you get when you try to check the sources/background of the argument? 

 

  Yes, the article does link or list any other sources. The article is very clear and fact-based. You can find the background of the argument/sources on any scholarly site, YouTube, NY Times best-selling author and even on Tv by Dr. Oz. 

 

Dave Asprey “Athletic Anti-Nutrition: What a Vegan Diet Really Did for Carl Lewis,” The Bulletproof Executive, March 2012. www.bulletproofexec.com.