Analysis of Essay

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Analysis of Essay
The writer of “They Say, I Say” claims that Americans are advocating for healthy eating yet they are not healthy enough to champion the issue of health. Mary Maxfield posits that while Americans are taking much of their time advocating for healthy food and certain styles of eating and the kind of food to eat; the whole idea they contend with is an industrial campaign to make money in the name of championing for health. The author suggests that the whole plan of teaching Americans how to eat is an economic agenda by some industries to capitalize on the confusion of innocent American regarding feeding methods and modes. The author asserts that prescriptions by experts are funded. The writer even points that the so-called experts in their book admit that people eat primarily to get the energy to undertaking activities and not to be healthy. The writer criticizes various proponent of healthy eating for talking much against overeating and keeping quiet about under eating. Furthermore, she highlights the government initiatives to support and pour resources on campaigns against maladies that people say are related to poor feeding habits.
Mary Mayfield’s argument is precise and clear. She believes that eat healthy campaigns are religious rather than scientific. She provides counterarguments early enough in the beginning of her text. Mayfield uses the rhetorical triangle to emphasize her argument. She appeals to logic and facts, emotions and her credibility, having professional expertise in American culture studies.

She opens the argument by saying “How do French people eat so unhealthy-Famously indulging in cheese, cream, and wine but stay, on average healthier than Americans?” (Graff, Birkenstein and Durst 442). Even though the essay was a critic of another work, Maxfield has sufficiently presented the two sides of the story without bias. The writer also posits that the second step in presenting an argument is summarizing the counterarguments well and providing sufficient points used to support a theory. Maxfield does an excellent job by presenting every theory and how the healthy feeding campaigners present their arguments. Maxfield also notes where the campaigners overlooked one side of the story without balancing sensitive issues such as underfeeding where the agenda was to theorize the problem associated with eating too much. Maxfield has also quoted the statements from the opposite manual and at the same time citing the fallacy involved in the argument as per the directive of Graff (Graff, Birkenstein and Durst 443).
Once the writer has presented all the counter-arguments, she then provides credible information about her arguments. Furthermore, Graff also explains that when the writer has presented his idea, it is important that this person illustrates to the audiences the importance of the issue presented. Like in the model of writing discussed by the writer, Maxfield presents her points on the argument that feeding problem is an issue exaggerated ad mostly religious than scientific. The author even provides the questionable move by healthy feeding campaigners. Maxfield even cites how the industry does benefit from the manuals and feeding recommendations from these campaigns. This provision allows readers to establish a point of balance and allow readers to make judgments based on facts provided rather than scaring audiences without sufficient claims. Finally, the author explains the importance of considering the presented arguments. In summary, Maxfield idea is to liberate American citizens from economically funded campaigns that are on the verge of boosting the growth of certain industries at the expense of creating fear upon Americans. Without a doubt, I agree with Maxfield.

Work Cited
Graff, Gerald, Cathy Birkenstein, and Russel Durst. “They Say, I Say”. New York: Norton & Co, 2012. Print.