Genetically modified food pros and cons

In Joshua Duvauchelle's article "Pros & cons of GMO foods" (2014), he proposed a neutral position towards genetically modified food. Health issues and "superweeds" are the consequences from GMO's; decreased pollution and herbicide resistant plants are the benefits of GMO's.

Duvauchelle's article is beneficial to the concerned citizens of America because it informs them on the factors of GMO's, whether negative or positive. His purpose throughout the article is not to give his audience a bias position but rather just to state the facts of what GMO's are and what how they're impacting the world. The "Pros & cons of GMO foods" article is the perfect suit to my topic because it gives off context of  genetically modified food and whether it should be banned or not. Duvauchelle gives off great points for each side, for example GMO's are benefiting the problem of pollution because it's decreasing the amount of herbicides that are needed for plants. However, he also states that GMO's are creating new allergens from all the transformations the food has gone through which is impacting society. Therefore, Duvauchelle's article is a great starter when it comes to choosing a position on genetically modified food.

Duvauchelle, Joshua. "Pros & Cons of GMO Foods." LIVESTRONG.COM. LIVESTRONG.COM, 13 Jan. 2014. Web. 30 Jan. 2016. <http://www.livestrong.com/article/213053-pros-cons-of-gmo-foods/>.

Anger: An American History

In Schiff's opinion editorial "Anger: An American History" (2015) New York Times she claims that America has evolved but it has not revolutionized because the same problems in America are still occurring. The author first uses examples by Ryan's quote "not what this country stands for" to show expert opinions towards her topic; she then compares old and present America using  New England; and to conclude she illustrates with diction such as "Amen" to Trump's statement. Her purpose is to prove to her reader's that it may seem as a lot of change has come to America but in reality it is not that different as it was in the 17th century, and the problem's that have risen since those dates have grown instead of disappeared. She seems to have an upscale audience in mind because she uses Trump as her evidence and Trump is an advocate who doesn't support minorities.