Allergies: Box Analysis

The topic was explained in a way where only the essential science background was given and there was nothing too advanced to confuse the reader. It was written in a way to give an overall view of one develops allergies, then explain how it pertains to children and finally give examples and solutions. This really made it so the audience could not only read the examples and suggestions of solutions, but truly understand them and find them logical. The box explaining more allergies more in depth on the side was a fabulous idea, as it added information without side-tracking the paper from its main point (which I believe was specifically how we develop allergies and how to prevent them, not really how allergies actually take action once we have them). Indeed, box still more information on the topic that is interesting and relevant, and contributed the the audience's general knowledge of allergies. One more thing that really specifically stuck with me is the description of how the early immune system is like clay. A few sentences later the author explains how it is "sculpted" as well, and both of these really give the reader a very visual idea of what happens. This greatly helps the audience, especially the lay audience, understand
that and thus the rest of the paper. The study about the Amish was also a great addition as it gave real-life context to the "science" that was explained previously, making it easier to accept it.
The enthusiasm was felt in the more upbeat and sometimes witty style of writing the text had.
The significance was also very present as the author started by giving information about the relevancy of the topic in our present day society. The suggestions especially provided clear-cut examples of how this paper and its topic can be helpful to anyone, as it emphasized that allergies are dependent on the choices we as individuals make. The last sentence really stuck with me, and gave me a sense that knowing this is a responsibility, which added to the significance conveyed. Furthermore, the way the author took time to actually make it look like a magazine entry was fantastic! It was really nice to the eye and added some liveliness to the
paper.
There really is very little that needs to be suggested in terms of improvements in my opinion. It is a very cohesive yet simple text that would work wonders with your target audience. One improvement would be to make the columns more wider or to demarcate paragraphs more efficiently. Having such small columns could make it a bit harder to compartmentalize and create links between the different information the reader is provided, as it almost seems like one big paragraph that keeps going on for two pages. Visual demarcations in a text greatly help the reader organize the information that is being received, I believe.

The science was incredibly well integrated. The main example that comes to mind is the study about the Amish. It was basically a summary of an actual scientific study, but did not feel like one, as it was warranted. After giving an overview of the development of the early immune system, it was only logical to give a real-life example showing this process. Thus, it felt very organic. The development of the early immune system was also very well handled, as it was described in very normal terms and therefore conveyed the science without it popping out of the page. All the science served a purpose, as it always complemented information that the target audience was really looking for.
The author did a great job of showing the repercussions of the topic by showing the direct effect of what was being said through the Amish study. This cemented the fact that it was something that regular, every-day people could improve and that it was not just information that would never be able to be applied in real life. This was continued in the part of the paper that suggested improvements, as it gave general enough advice that it could be integrated by a vast majority of people. It also gave the audience insight on how they could apply the information they received. The suggestions were also pretty diverse (pets, adding peanuts, etc) which dissipated any alienation the audience could feel; if they were not pet people, there were other options that they could look into further.
Overall the scientific content was more than adequate for the target audience. It gave the fundamentals of both the developing immune system and allergies themselves, while always keeping a constant tone and tying it into things the audience would care about. I really do not have any weaknesses as far as the scientific content of the paper, well done!

The paper was structured much like a magazine entry, which made it a very nice experience. The box on the right of the first page was very logically placed, as it coincided with the audience starting to get an idea of the development of allergies, and thus it is at the optimal point to pick the reader's curiosity. The way the ideas were structured also made sense, as the science was immediately followed by an example so that there would be validation in the reader's mind. Everything also built on each other, as the suggestions for lifestyle changes at the end would not have worked if they had not been brilliantly set up beforehand.
Again, one improvement that I personally feel would be necessary is just having a better demarcation of the paragraphs as because of the thinness of the columns, it was very difficult to differentiate where the text segmented. One way would also be to maybe add a title (like the one at the beginning of the text that said "Germs Please!") before you start giving the lifestyle suggestions or after Also, in terms of references, they were good overall but one thing came to my attention. On the second page of the text, there is a citation from "Gough". However, in the References page, I could not seem to find that name, so be careful to include that source in your references as well.

The "Why" answer is pretty complete, as the author gives a goal to his paper and explains how this can have a wide range of impacts, showing the universality of the topic. However, it seems that there could have been a bigger focus attributed to the primary audience that was targeted (people who take care of infants) rather than the more society-wide rationale that was given. Furthermore, it might be a good idea to explain maybe in a sentence how this paper is different from other writings on the subject (content wise, points of emphasis, not a lot of information on the topic given to the target audience, etc). This would further emphasize why it is important for the author to write about this topic.
The "Where" was very well explained. The author not only gave two examples which were considerably different from each other, but also argued the different scopes those two examples would provide. It was especially good that the author could explain how the two examples would reach the target audience and why it would be the optimal way to reach them.