Wease 1

Julia Wease
Professor Sheila Fielding
WRTC 103
14 February 2016
Individualized Treatment
Homeopathic medicine has always been a controversial topic in todays medical society.
There has been a common concern of whether it is efficient and effective enough to be
prescribed to patients. Dana Ullman argues for the effectiveness in her article titled,
Homeopathic Medicine is Effective, in the Huffington Post in 2010. Ullman compares the
effectiveness of modern medicine and homeopathic medicine throughout her article, as well as
Julia Wease does in her PSA titled, Personalize Your Treatment, to prove that there is a need in
current society for the individualized forms of care that homeopathic medicine can offer. The
PSA used to support Ullmans argument could be published in medical journals, and shown in
homeopathic medical treatment facilities. Both Dana Ullmans article, and Julia Weases PSA use
ethos, pathos and logos to support the efficiency and effectiveness that homeopathic treatment
offers compared to modern medicine.
Ullman discusses in this article how homeopathic medicines and treatment are usually
overlooked when they should not be. Ullman says that some of the same homeopathic treatments
that were used 200 years ago, are still used today because they still work (7). The continuous use
of these medical treatments support her argument for the effectiveness of these different forms of
treatment that may be used for millions of patients. She compares them to modern day medicine
by how well both may work. Ullman stresses how modern day medicine is usually only
researched for short periods of time, instead of long term. This type of research is not useful and

Wease 2
explains how so many modern medicines may seem like they work and fix the problem that the
user may have. After a user may use the medicine for a long period of time, they may get worse
side effects from the medicine, and if they stop taking it a lot of the times their symptoms come
back even worse than they were before they began using the medicine (Ullman, 3). She explains
how homeopathic medicine has been researched for much longer than most modern medicine
and tends to actually fix the problem instead of just cover it up (2). Ullman uses evidence against
modern medicine such as facts, example, and statistics in order to portray to her audience that it
may not be the best option when considering which form of medical treatment is best for each
patients situation.
Throughout Ullmans article, she uses ethos to establish ethics by showing her credibility.
She does this by starting her article off with an introduction of her achievements in order to show
the audience that she is a credible source of information. She states in third person, Dana
Ullman is a practitioner and advocate of homeopathy, a columnist for the Huffington Post, the
founder of Homeopathic Educational Services, and the author of several books including The
Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy (1).
Ullman then clarifies her credibility throughout her article by supporting her evidence and
research to prove to the audience that she has done research for not only homeopathic treatment,
but also modern medicine. Ullman then uses her credibility to try to appeal to the emotions of her
audience since they know that they can trust her by using the rhetorical appeal pathos.
The use of pathos was used throughout the article to appeal to the audiences emotions.
Ullman does this in order to draw in the readers attention and make the information she is
stating important and personal. An example of this would be when Ullman says, Would many

Wease 3
patients take this drug if they knew this fact, and based on what standard can anyone honestly
say that this drug is effective? (5). Ullman chose to write about a common anxiety medication,
Xanax, in order to draw the readers in and to question the effectiveness od the common drug that
they may be using themselves, or most likely know of somebody else who is. She then pushes
her readers to further further question why drugs like these are being prescribed by and question
their trust in the doctors who may prescribe them. She does this by stating, It is simply no
longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the
judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines (6). After Ullman uses pathos
to grab the readers attention, she then backs up her information used with facts and statistics.
The most dominant rhetorical appeal used throughout the argument would be logos in
order to show that her argument is logical. Ullman includes facts such as, a very popular
antianxiety drug called Xanax was shown to reduce panic attacks during a two-month
experiment, but when individuals reduce or stop the medication, panic attacks can increase 300400 percent, (5) in order to appeal to the logic that her readers need to trust her judgment. She
uses facts and examples to prove her point through reasoning. She also uses many statistics to
provide trustworthy evidence to backup her arguments up further. Ullman mostly uses these
statistics and facts to provide evidence against the usefulness of common modern medicine.

Wease 4

PSA created by Julia Wease in order to convey the individuality that homeopathic
treatment offers.
The PSA titled, Personalize Your Treatment, created by Julia Wease conveys the
individuality that homeopathic treatment offers to its patients. The PSA would interest anyone
considering a different path of medical treatment, or anyone who is simply interested in the
naturalistic forms of medicine that can be offered. Wease uses her PSA to portray that
homeopathic treatment is a more personalized form of medical treatment that is created for each
individual patient. She gains the audiences attention by using statements that are personable, and
facts that make homeopathic treatment even more appealing. The color green used for the word
personalize is used to portray the naturalistic ways of treatment that homeopathic medicine
offers. The statement, You are an individual, so why settle for medical treatment that is not
individualized? makes the audience question their own use of modern medicine and makes
them want to learn more about what homeopathic medical treatments can offer.
The rhetorical appeal, ethos, was used in the PSA created by Julia Wease in order to form
credibility. Wease used the logo of, The National Center of Homeopathy; a non-profit
organization, to show credibility to her argument. Even though Wease used information from a

Wease 5
credible source, she would not be a credible source herself. The only research that she did to
create this PSA was from the verbal argument that supported homeopathic treatment by Dana
Ullman. The information itself would be credible, but the creator of the PSA would not be.
Logos, another rhetorical appeal, was used in order to support her purpose. Statistics such
as, Homeopathic treatment has been practiced for over 200 years (Ullman, 7) were used in
order to show logical evidence for her claim. The claim of the PSA was strong and clear, and was
also supported with information such as, Homeopathic experts prescribe their treatments in an
individualized way in order to create the most effective treatment plan for each person.
Treatment is based off of the whole person, which includes physical and psychological
symptoms in order to cure the underlying problem, (Ullman). The author of the PSA
successfully backed up her argument with logical reasoning. Once logic was proven, Wease used
pathos in order to link these facts to the emotions of the viewers.
The most dominant rhetorical appeal used in the PSA would be pathos. Julia Wease uses
emotional appeals in order to draw in her audience. She did this by making the title of the PSA
personable to the audience. The statement, You are an individual, so why settle for medical
treatment that is not individualized? (Wease), was used in order to make the audience question
their current form of treatment, and to be interested in learning about the option of homeopathic
treatment. Wease used pathos in order to appeal to her viewers emotionally because she knew
that they would be more likely to become interested in homeopathic treatment if they were to
question their current medical treatment.
The verbal argument written my Dana Ullman, and the PSA created by Julia Wease were
both made in a way to appeal to their viewers. Both authors had the goal to make their audience
question their current form of medical treatment in order to consider the possibilities that

Wease 6
homeopathic medicine could offer them. The main difference between the two would be that the
verbal argument mainly focused on the bad qualities of modern medical treatments, whereas the
PSA focused on the good qualities of homeopathic treatments. The PSA does an overall better
job of convincing the audience to try homeopathic treatment because it directly appeals to the
emotions of them, but the verbal argument has a stronger argument of how modern medicine
may not be the best option of medical treatment, and is supported with facts. The two arguments
compliment each other by portraying a different type of argument that supports homeopathic
treatment.

Work Cited

Wease 7
"File: Homeopathic Medicine.jpg." Commons.wikipedia.org. Wikimedia Commons, 25 Mar.
2009. Web.
Ullman, Dana. "Homeopathic Medicine Is Effective." Alternative Medicine. Ed. Lynn M.
Zott. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Lies,
Damn Lies and Medical Research." Huffington Post. 2010. Opposing Viewpoints
in Context. Web. 4 Feb. 2016.
"What Is Homeopathy." NCH. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.