My process in doing my revision started out by reading all the comments made on the peer review sheet. I started with one sheet and looked at my paper at the same time to see where she recommended making some changes and then looked at the same place on the other peer review to see if they suggested something similar or if I needed to look at correcting both items. I was a little confused at one point because one said I had great topic sentences, and the other said I needed to work on them and after rereading it, I did need to work on those, so I did. I then next looked at my sandwiching and added some to that, I think my top bun needed some work, and so does the bottom bun. I am not sure if I still have those correct. When reading my paper, please look at that, can it be better or do I have it at all? I worked on my punctuation and thought I have this all worked out, but please double that that as well. I feel confident that I have all the evidence that I need to support what Pollan was trying to convince his average consumer audience that it is bad to eat certain foods. Any other information you can give me to make this a stronger paper would be helpful as well. Thank you for your time and advice. .
Michael Pollan, a journalist professor at the University of California and writer for the New York Times has also written books about food. One of his books is called, Eat Food: Food Defined. Pollan effectively points out that food is being replaced with "foodlike substitutes" and that we should eat the food that is being grown not produced. The structure used by Pollan begins by telling us about the great grandma rule, then to what ingredients to avoid, and finally to the health claims that are made by some foods. It helps to convince the average consumer that eating whole food versus processed food is healthier. He opens by quoting a speech that he had heard from nutritionist Joan Gussow, "I have watched real food disappear from large areas of the supermarket and from much of the rest of the eating world" (106).