Argument Against Healthy School

To be successful in an argument you must present a logical claim with reasons and evidence that backs it up. When an argument has logos it makes it even stronger. After reading the 3 articles about nutrition in schools, it is obvious that they did a good job in presenting them.

In the first article, Some Students Rebel Against Healthy School Lunches, their claim is USDA offering seconds on fruits and vegetables did not solve the conflict. The reporters claim is valid because they give facts and statistics to help explain the argument. Overall their argument was logos and not pathos. The text says, “ The week before, all 111 vegetable containers served were thrown away.” This shows they are trying to reduce the obesity but it isn’t helping because the kids are still going through the container of food fast. This is good evidence because it is logos, it gives good evidence to back up their claim , and it is not opinions it is statistics. Overall , the reporter of the first article, Some Students Rebel Against Healthy School Lunches, did a good job of backing up their argument,

In the next article, School Lunch Guidelines Lose Cooks In Congress, the authors claim is congress’ position to new nutritional guidelines was overly influenced by food industries. The claim is valid because it gives logical reasoning and good factual evidence. The evidence given is logos. The text says , “ Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., who has gotten $10,500 in campaign contributions from Schwans’s political action committee (PAC) since 2000, wanted to scrap the new nutritional guidelines entirely.” This shows he is only following the proposal ideas just to get money instead of worrying about children’s health in schools. It is showing that congress is too influenced by the industries than to do what he believes in. The author was successful in presenting the argument because they didn't put their opinion in it. So overall, the author of School Lunch Guidelines Lose Cooks In Congress did a good job of presenting the argument.

In the last article, School Lunch Standards Miss the Mark, the authors claim is dietary guidelines are actually healthier than USDA’s new ones.

Their claim is valid because it gives sufficient evidence and does not express feelings. This means it is logos. Evidence that shows this is, “ The proposal contradicts the dietary guidelines which encourages americans to eat white potatoes and other vegetables high in potassium and fiber.” This shows the older dietary guidelines were healthier than the new updated ones that USDA are trying to enforce because the new guidelines are encouraging people to eat foods that contain fats. The author of School Lunch Standards Miss the Mark was successful in presenting the argument because they have a good claim, logical reasoning , and it gives statistics. The author does not back up the claim with opinions which makes this argument

sound.

The articles School Lunch Guidelines Lose Cooks In Congress, School Lunch Standards Miss the Mark, and Some Students Rebel Against Healthy School Lunches are presented excellent by the authors. All 3 articles are logos instead of pathos which is a great thing to have in an argument. They also have very good claims, reasons, and evidence to back up their arguments. In all, the authors of School Lunch Guidelines Lose Cooks In Congress, School Lunch Standards Miss the Mark, and Some Students Rebel Against Healthy School Lunches did an amazing job of presenting their argument.