This rhetorical analysis will be looking at the article “Scientists Are Starting to Test Claims about ‘Microdosing,’” by Sharon Begley. Begley is an American Journalist and senior science writer for STAT, which focuses on bringing science and health-related topics to public awareness. In this case, this article is aimed at people who would like to reap the alleged benefits of microdosing. The idea of microdosing is not new, yet the amount of knowledge on this topic is still scarce. The majority of the evidence right now is anecdotal mainly because the commonly used drugs for microdosing such as LSD and shrooms are illegal in most states. But that is subjected to change as laws are allowing scientists to test certain psychedelics. Through the use of the rhetorical elements, Begley seeks to evoke interests in the readers regarding the further research that needs to be done on microdosing. She uses anecdotal accounts and an optimistic tone that signals the reader of the possible integration of microdosing into people’s everyday lives. 

The article begins with a piece of visual rhetoric, an image of a pill capsule. The pill capsule looks as if someone had put it through the process of tie-dyeing, resulting in bright and vibrant colors. By using the colorful pill capsule, Begley is attempting to accomplish two things. First, is to let the readers know that there are drugs involved in microdosing. Upon seeing the pill, the readers will automatically think of drugs, whether legal or not, over the counter or prescribed, because these capsules are most associated with medicine. Second, is to show the psychological effects that it has. By using bright and vibrant colors, it alludes to the experiences one would have when they are under the influence of psychedelics. It reinforces the “trippy” feeling of disconnection from reality. However, the image does not accurately represent microdosing. As Begley explained, “microdosing involves taking roughly one-tenth the “trip” dose of a psychedelic drug, an amount too little to trigger hallucination…” The image, on the other hand, implies that there is a strong psychological effect enough to change perception when taking a dose. Therefore, the use of the image is misleading. Although it accurately describes the experience of taking a regular dosage, it is counter-productive to associate this image to microdosing. 

The audience is mostly going to be targeted at young adults with ages ranging from 18 to 35, anybody that is interested in gaining the advantages from microdosing and new ways that psychedelics are being consumed, and people who have access to internet connection because the article is online. The alleged benefits from microdosing that Begley included from being more “focused, more efficiently and be more creative” to being “energetic enough to skip coffee” (Begley) would be most attractive to the 18 to 35 age range because it offers a solution to their most common issues such as productivity. The average person’s attention span is 8 seconds, making microdosing to increase productivity a great incentive in today’s workplaces. Since the purported results from this activity are something everyone can benefit from, she is also targeting the general public. 

Begley takes a supportive stance on microdosing. While she does show skepticism towards it by first mentioning the bulk of the “evidence about its effects has been anecdotal,” she quickly follows up with the available studies that found positive effects of microdosing. A large portion of the article discusses a study done by scientists in the Netherlands in which they found that microdosing had an overall positive effect on the subjects’ convergent and divergent thinking which is the basis of creativity (Begley). Begley could have easily included a section dedicated to the dangers of this unknown activity but decided to remain the readers’ attention on the incentives of microdosing. Begley ends the article with more positive anecdotes of microdosing that matches up with the results from available studies and a quote from CEO of Wenham, Massachusetts based Ideasicle, Will Burns. Burns said that “Scientific studies could legitimize the claimed benefits… we’re swimming in a world of anecdotes and almost no one has taken this seriously… We need scientific studies” (Begley). This quote reveals the exigence that caused Begley to write this article. The benefits of microdosing are being kept away from the public due to laws and the longer people do not realize the positive impact that it can have in society, the longer it will take for Mirodosing to be legalized. Therefore, she insinuates the possibility that with enough research, microdosing could perhaps be legalized. By ending the article with that quote, she is trying to evoke a sense of urgency in the readers and researchers to do what they can to increase our knowledge on this topic, with the hopes that one day the general public can reap the benefits of microdosing. Although she did not specify which position she is taking, it is clear that she finds the purported benefits of microdosing appealing and is advocating for more scientific research. 

The purpose of this article blends into the stance that Begley takes. By taking a supportive stance, she wants to educate the audience about the “benefits” of microdosing. By not including the downside of this activity, it is evident that she wants to sway the readers into supporting microdosing. To fulfill these purposes, she utilizes an online article as her medium with the genre being an informative and persuasive article. The informative aspect of this article can be seen when Begley compares the results from the scientific studies with each other by saying that the results from the Dutch study “fit with another new study of psilocybin” (Begley), followed by another comparison between the results from the scientific study to anecdotal accounts by saying “The findings in the microdosing study also fit with many anecdotal reports.” (Begley). This will, in turn, persuade the readers that perhaps further research is required to confirm the benefits. The persuasion continues at the end of the article where she creates a “call to action” by using the quote from Will Burns to promote further interest in microdosing. 

Begley arranges her article in a way that makes reading it easy to follow along. When there is a problem, there is also an intrinsic drive to search for the answer. That is why she first proposes a problem (the lack of scientific information on microdosing due to laws), then provides a solution to that problem (laws are changing, allowing for more scientific research on it). By arranging her article in that manner, it makes it more coherent and also keeps the readers’ interest so that they would continue reading in search of the answer. 

Begley appeals to the ethos aspect of the rhetorical situation by having a credible background. Having worked as a “senior health and science correspondent at Reuters, the science columnist at the Wall Street Journal, and the science editor at Newsweek” (statnews.com), and receiving the “Public Understanding of Science Award from the Exploratorium in San Francisco,” (statnews.com) she has extensive experience in scientific journaling. Using formal language and refraining from using first-person pronouns also makes her seem more credible. Begley uses persuasive language to make her stance more convincing, while appealing to the pathos of the audience. This can be seen when she signals the possibility that microdosing could become a common activity in people’s daily lives. The benefits of microdosing from anecdotal accounts all show an increase in people’s ability to handle everyday tasks. From being able to work more “focused, more efficiently and be more creative” to being “energetic enough to skip coffee,” (Begley) she makes microdosing seem very appealing to the average person.  She utilizes logos by providing multiple scientific studies and anecdotal accounts and making comparisons between the two. She starts with personal accounts of microdosing then backs it up with the scientific studies with similar results, showing that there is truth in those accounts. 

While there was a time where the majority of the evidence on microdosing is anecdotal, the times are changing. Laws are now allowing scientists to conduct research on certain psychedelics such as psilocybin, whereas before they were constricted. However, there is still a need for further examination of microdosing to confirm the benefits that people claim it has. By using rhetorical elements, Begley aims to inform the readers about the topic of microdosing while persuading them of the possibility that microdosing could become a common practice in people’s lives.

Works Cited

Begley, Sharon. “Scientists Are Starting to Test Claims about ‘Microdosing.’” Scientific American, Scientific American, 24 Aug. 2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-are-starting-to-test-claims-about-microdosing/.

STAT. “Sharon Begley.” STAT, www.statnews.com/staff/sharon-begley/.