Phoenix小组组员6号A38

hhfboyUID: 2749089

套了模板了还写了1个多小时……倒了
TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 439
TIME: 01:03:52
DATE: 2010-3-2 12:49:48

In this argument, the author advocates that we should use the lchthaid which a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil to prevent colds and lower absenteeism. The recommendation is based on the observation that a research presented in nearby East Meria(EM) has proved that eating fish can prevent one person to catch colds. In addition, the authors assumes that if the residents in West Meria(WM) eat more fish, they will get less colds and then reduce the absences. However, the argument depends on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

To begin with, the author unfairly infers that the Ichthaid, which derived from fish oil,has the same effects to fish. As we know, the process of distillation will happen chemical reactions. It is entirely possible that the effects for fish to prevent illnesses will be eliminated after these reactions.
Lacking evidence to substantiate that there are no different effects between Ichthaid and fish, the author cannot convince me that the two things have same effects on preventing illnesses.

Next, the author cited a study in EM as his evidence is unreasonable. because the study claims that the high fish consumption is result in a healthy body condition. But it is not that case. Perhaps, the author overlooks the possibility that others foods which the consumption always in a high condition
will help the residents in EM out of frequent illnesses. Moreover, the author still neglects the possibility that people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds not means that they have colds only one or two times per year. It is entirely possible that most of the resident's illnesses are so slight that do not require to seeing a doctor at all. To convince me, the author has to provide more information about the study in EM.

Aside from the flaws mention above, the author fails to establish the relationship between catching colds and reducing absences. Even if the residents in WE have eaten substantial fish and the have a good health to prevent them catch colds. But it still cannot conclude that the absences will be reduced.Perhaps, the illness is just an excuse for one's absences from work and school. Without ruling out the possibility, the author cannot assume that the absences are relevant to the illnesses.

In conclusion, the argument is indefensible as it stands. To convince me, the author should provide more evidences and information about the study In EM and the process of distillation on fish. Moreover, to better evaluate the recommendation, the author also has to establish a relationship between the absences and catching colds.

xusichuangUID: 2653998

1# hhfboy
抱歉，这两天刚开学事情比较多。
刚刚看了文章，大毛病没有，只是觉得作者可以多写几个逻辑漏洞，这篇文章的漏洞太多了，另外就是加入让步可以使得文章更加有条理。
其中有些小的错误As we know, the process of distillation will happen chemical reactions.
But it is not that case（最好不要用这样绝对的话语）  It is entirely possible that most of the resident's illnesses are so slight that（they） do not require to seeing a doctor at all.