Progress in Cancer Control: Rhetorical Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Rhetorical Analysis

For my study, I chose the article An assessment of progress in cancer control by Siegel et al. (2018). The article was chosen because of its relevance and societal relevance (2018 is the earliest of all the others). Problems related to cancer prevention and event management are precious for future research. In addition, the article is part of American Cancer Society (ACS) projects, which lends credibility to work because of its status.

Rhetorical Situation

The need for this article is justified by the widespread prevalence of cancer, which haunts many people, so society is concerned about their health. According to Siegel et al. (2018), the fight against cancer has lasted since the early 1900s through prevention and early detection. Consequently, the need for persuasion is justified by the lack of preventive measures to control cancer. The historical reason is the progress of medicine in technological support that can serve as tools to assess the likelihood of cancer.

Author

The authors of this article are ACS staff members who do research coming out of the standard and several visiting MDs. There is no personal credibility, but the collective work provided is credible. It is created by using specialized medical vocabulary, consistency in presentation, and coverage of issues that will be relevant to almost any reader. The authors appear knowledgeable and fair because they make an objective assessment using relevant research data and the openness of information in their work. Since almost all of the contributors are ACS, they create some credibility, and the article looks credible.

Purpose of Speech

The authors’ presentation aims to provide findings on the dynamics of cancer and the relationship to assumptions not previously addressed in medicine. Instead, the authors attack the reader, seeking to discourage drinking alcoholic beverages, smoking, and dietary extremes. According to their study, these behaviors are more likely to lead to cancer, and the authors’ goal is to convince the audience that they should take responsibility for their health and strive to minimize the triggers of cancer (Siegel et al. 2018). The authors seek to teach audiences about health care and show statistically valid connections.

Target Audience

The article’s target audience is the general public, who does not care about minimizing the triggers of cancer development. Siegel et al. (2018) summarize that more preventive measures should be used under the National Cancer Control Act. Based on this, audiences may be presented with a political asset that can influence budget allocation; however, these audiences probably do not fully recognize ethical values. A secondary audience may be individuals who suspect a predisposition to cancer and would like to seek help.

Content

The main message of Siegel et al. (2018) is that there is a need to strive to spread preventive measures because of the breadth of the cancer population. Siegel et al.’s (2018) arguments focus on the presence of high cancer mortality (including undetected), social inequalities (claims of racial and geographic differences), and disease outcomes. They use cause and effect to assess the relationship between prevention and cancer prevalence and compare differences in cancer outcomes across demographics. The authors instead appeal to reason, pointing to statistics as their most potent weapon.

Message Transmission Form

Siegel et al. (2018) use standard review articles, including an introduction, a statistics review, and a closing statement (conclusions). It is a literary genre using a specific technical (medical) style and a persuasive tone so that the audience imagines the seriousness of the issue being discussed. The central figure of speech is comparisons and forms like “if…, then…” to indicate the likely outcome of the course of cancer if no measures are taken to improve its prevention.

Correlation of Form and Content

It is a review article; Siegel et al.’s (2018) primary purpose is to reinforce the effects of the statistics and point out their potential and deterioration. Through the presence of comparisons, appeals to facts and statistics, and links to social inequalities, the authors reinforce their stance on cancer control. The presence of images and tables is one of the most vital tools of the form to help the reader visualize the harms of cancer and imagine the magnitude of the problem.

Implementation of Intent

The article’s message is spectacular and transparent because it contains facts and legitimate conclusions. The authors’ intent is achievable because it is non-contradictory, makes sense to themselves and the audience, and has a particular purpose. The authors reflect their messages because they belong to the scientific community, and their research is generally focused on the proposed topic, cancer control. The intended audience may react in two ways. Only a fraction will listen because political and economic circumstances impede prevention; however, secondary audiences will respond positively.

Nature of Communication

Siegel et al.’s (2018) communication is respectful and accessible; despite the terms they use, the authors express concerns clearly, grounding them in facts. According to the article, one can make assumptions about the scientific community as a whole: scientists are hardworking, persistent, operate with statistics, and genuinely care about the health of society. The article’s scientific style and form speak to the authors’ orderliness and their desire to deliver the material in an accessible format and to avoid lies or fabrications to embellish research results.

Reference

Siegel, R. L., Jemal, A., Wender, R. C., Gansler, T., Ma, J., & Brawley, O. W. (2018). An assessment of progress in cancer control. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68(5), 329–339. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!