In the past two decades, Americans has developed a new attitude when it comes to
the food they buy and consume. With the growing popularity of stores like Whole foods
and Michelle Obama's recent push for organic ecofriendly products, people are leaning
more towards organically produced food and less towards modern day conventional food
technoogy. In Robert Paarlberg's essay 'Attention Whole Food Shoppers' published in
the 2010 May/ June edition of Foreign Policy Magazine he argues that although getting
your produce from organic local farms has good intentions in reality it is having a larger
negative effect globally, and this applies specifically to poverty stricken areas in under
developed countries. Americas focus has shifted from wanting to help end world hunger
to wanting to producing more 'sustainable' (Paarlberg 147) products for ourselves has
actually made the world hunger problem worse in several countries and the whole food
lifestyle isn't as simple as they believe it to be and Paarlberg wants to make his readers
aware of that through his essay and succeeds in doing so.

Robert Paarlberg is professor of political science at Wellesley College in
Wellesley, Massachusetts and is an associate at Harvard University's Weatherhead Center
for International Affairs and is the author of multiple books including, Food Politics:
What Everyone Needs to Know, and Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being
Kept Out of Africa. His background is clearly in Political Science and it is evident to
anyone who knows his name or is in the field of Political Science that he is very
intelligent and has good sense in what he is talking about. He draws on his situated ethos
with his audience by publishing his essay in a foreign policy magazine, which is read by
people who have a general interest in what he is talking about and who will be able to
recognize his name and know that he is well educated in his field. But, what is important
in his essay is that he gains the readers trust and establishing that he has goodwill
intentions with his argument against the whole food movement. One way that Paarlberg
helps to invent good virtue is although he is arguing against the organic food movement
he does so in a respectful way. He states, 'There are other common objections to doing
what is necessary to solve the real hunger crisis. Most revolve around caveats that purist
critics raise regarding food systems in the United States and Western Europe. Yet such
concerns though well- intentioned, are often misinformed and counter productive '
especially when applied to the developing world' (149). The way that he words his
argument does a lot to enhance his goodwill. By arguing in a respectful way Paarlberg
avoids anyone who is an organic food advocate having any hostile feelings towards his
essay. Rather than attack their logic and ideas about local farming he simply states his
own facts and reasoning about the industrial food system and about the negative impact
organic food has on underdeveloped countries such as Africa and Asia. By simply stating
facts that support his argument rather than attacking the opposing sides views it helps any
reader who is for the opposing argument consider his facts and ideas because they aren't
attacking their own.

Once Paarlberg has established his ethos with his audience he relies on a
substantial amount of reasoning to back up his argument against the whole food shopping
and conventional farming movement. Paarleberg draws on scientific reasoning for a
substantial amount of his argument. Scientific reasoning is extremely beneficial to
supporting his cause because the facts are demonstratively true and one can not argue
against facts being wrong. An example of this is when Paarlburg reflects back on previous
effort to help reduce the world hunger crisis led by the American scientist Norman
Borloaug in the nineteen sixties and seventies. They brought in new advanced farming
technology to underdeveloped and famished areas. Paarlburg states that the results were
extremely positive for most of the countries. 'India, for instance doubled its wheat
production between 1964 and 1970 and was able to terminate all dependence on
international food aid by 1975' (146). By using indisputable facts in his argument readers
are more likely to side with his argument because there is no room for disagreement.
Paarlburg also uses false reasoning in his essay but only when referring to points made by
the supporters of the traditional farming and food methods. Paarlburg brings up that the
supporters for organically grown foods feel that the conventional food system is
unappealing and therefor must be unhealthy and bad for them. This premise comes from
false reasoning, because although the way traditional food is made in is less appealing
than that of a farm it is actually not bad for us and is in fact more sanitary than products
that come from a farm. Supporters of organic foods just assumed that because the food is
made in a less attractive way than it must be unsafe for us to eat, and this is in fact false
reasoning. Paarlburg counter acts this statement by using some scientific reasoning to
back up his ideas and says although the modern way of food has 'unappealing
aspects'(149) it is actually safer for us to eat than the food grown on farms. ' Traditional
food systems lacking in reliable refrigeration and sanitary packaging are dangerous
vectors for diseases. Surveys over the past several decades by the Center of Disease
Control and Prevention have found that the U.S. food supply became steadily safer over
time, thanks in part to the introduction of industrial-scale technical improvements. Since
2000, the incidence of E. Coli contamination in beef has fallen 45 percent' (149). By
counter acting a opposing views false reasoning with his own scientific reasoning
Paarlburg creates a stronger argument for himself.

Lastly Paarlburg uses Pathos to ultimately make his argument successful.
Paarlburg understands that most people are compassionate individuals who genuinely
want to help others if they can. He also knows that world hunger is an extremely sensitive
subject that is very emotionally moving. He uses this to his advantage because human
compassion should overcome a consumers desire for organic foods. Paarlburg states that
recently in Europe and the United States of America these 'elite circles'(148) of people
have emerged and are opposed to sending those in need of food in Africa improved seeds
and fertilizers because they are not organic. They believe that 'sustainable food must be
organic local and slow' (148). But, Paarlburg tells his audience that Africa has been
trying this method for years and it doesn't work. Many African farmers do not have
access to chemical making their food in fact organic; similar to the movement that
Americans have recently been trying to enforce. But Paarlburg informs his audience that
organic farming in Africa has lead to high transportation costs that force the people of
Africa to sell almost all their food locally and that the preparation for food is painfully
slow resulting in an average income of a dollar a day for the average African farmer and
they have a one in three chance of being malnourished. These are staggering facts about
what the local farming movement has done for the people of Africa. To most audiences
this would make them feel sorry and want to help the people of Africa by not enforcing
the movement of locally grown foods. By stating facts that would hit the hearts of his
audience he helps to further his point that locally grown and organic farming may not
necessarily be good.
