Question

Read this excerpt from a website.

Sugar has been determined to have cognitive effects on consumers. While glucose (sugar) is essential to proper brain function, an overabundance of this nutrient can have severe consequences for brain health. High-sugar diets can impair the production of a protein needed to maintain working synapses, which are the connections between nerve cells. Without an adequate amount of this protein, communication among synapses starts to break down, resulting in cognitive decline. Medical professionals are distressed by the overwhelming amounts of added sugar in heavily consumed foods. To break the desire to indulge in sweets, one may need to seek medical guidance.

– "Sugar: Friend or Foe?” by William Harris, Registered Dietician, www.nutritionplace.org

How is this excerpt biased?

There is an overreliance on emotional appeals.
The author will benefit from people following his advice.
The author uses generalizations about eating sugar.
There is an omission of alternative viewpoints

Answer 1

Best answers: "The author uses generalizations about eating sugar" and "There is an omission of alternative viewpoints."

Why: the piece makes broad claims (e.g., "high-sugar diets can impair…" and "an overabundance…can have severe consequences") without nuance or supporting evidence, and it presents only one side of the issue (no counterevidence or alternative explanations). It also uses some emotional language ("severe consequences," "distressed"), but there's no indication the author personally benefits from readers following the advice.