Argument38 第五次练习，望拍

HOHO小飞UID: 2686624

题目：ARGUMENT38 - The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.
"An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."
字数：485          用时：00:45:00          日期：2010-2-27 16:31:22
From the argument,the author recommended that people should eat a nutritional supplement which was derived from fish oil,in order to preventing colds and decreasing absenteeism.Author prvided a evidence that people living in East Meria merely visit the doctor for the treatment due to they have a high quantaty of fish consumption.However the argument suffers from several logical flaws and is therefore unconvincing.

Fisrtly,the author unfairly assumes that people living in East Meria does not catch the cold very frequently because of eatting fish.And then he concluds that fishes have a function that  prevent colds.The study reports only invest the consumption of fish is indefensible.We should not exclude the climate factor that help people do not catch colds easily.If the difference in temperature from day to night is not obvious,people could not catch a cold.A extreme hypothesis that East Meria is in the tropic also could refute the author's assumption.Thus,without addition evidence to prove people in East Meria merely catch cold due to eatting fish,i cannot accept the author's sweep generlization.

Similarly,even if i admit that fish is the foctor that prvent people living in nearby East Meria colds,the author commits a fallacy of hasty generalization.This single sample which people in nearby East Meria eat fish to prevent colds is insufficient to draw any genneral conclusion about we people also should prevent colds to eat a substance derived from fish oil .It is possible that people living in West Meria often eat some foods in which a substance make a series of chemical reaction to neutralize the function of fish.It is no doubt that the differences of body conditions affect the function of foods.For instance,milk would help people aborb calcium from the foods,but some people not only  causing the outflow of calcium but also get laxness.Eatting fish may be inappropriate for the people living in the West Meria.Without ruling out such scenarious,the author's generalization is unwarranted.

Finnaly,two unclearly hypothesises in the argument are not sound.The one that people often make an abenteeism due to cold. Author's hypothesis that the cause of absenteeism is colds is not reliability.As we know,it is best way to get permission to ask for leave with the cold for cause.Actually,people does not have colds,and they just have their own business to do.Another hypothesis is derived nutritional supplement has a same function with the fish which East Meria'people eat.Through the chemical extraction,the fucntion of substance might be changed because of chemical reaction;Through the pyhsical extraction,some piebalds which are harmful may exist in the nutritional supplement.Without providing other evidences to support these two hypothesises,the author cannot convine me effective.
In sum up,the author fails to recommend that people should eat these kind of nuritional supplement to prevent colds.To support the recommendation,the author would have to provide evidence that there are same conditions bewteen East Meria and West Meria.To strengthen the recommendation,the author need more informations about fish have a function to prevent colds certainly.