【big fish】3月13日习作Argument35-----by topran,有拍毕回~

topranUID: 2310216

"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."
===================================================================================

In this argument , the author foresee that in the future there would be a continued steady decline of headache patients in Mentia. This conclusion was established on following reasons . First , food-processing company had use salicylates as preservative and it also found that salicylates could increase flavor for food . Second , salicylates and aspirin known as headaches curer were in the same chemical family . Third , a twenty-year study showed that the increase in the usage of salicylates correlated with steady decline in headache patients .However ,this argument is fails to make a sound logic due to several false .

To begin with , the arguer point out that salicylates and aspirin were in the same chemical family ,due to aspirin is used to treat headaches , the arguer indicate that salicylates should have same function too. This evidence can not stand cause it a false analogy . There is no further information in this article to tell us that salicylates do have function to cure headache .

Then , the arguer proved a study to show the relation between the usage of salicylate and the number of headache patient . Base on such loose description of the experiment , the reliability of whole study is doubtful . We can not know that the samples in the study contains no bias . Do participants take no other medicine beside food with salicylates ?Do twenty-years is right time scale for study ? How strong and how evidence the correlation is? All this question need to be answered to make study reliable . Without more information about study , we can not trust the correlation between salicylate and headache do exist so hasty.

Last , even if we assume that salicylate do have function to cure headache and the correlation of headache patients and usage of salicylates do exist and the whole study is trustful , the conclusion still can not stand firmly . Even though the food-processing company found that salicylate can add flavor , there is no clue to indicate that food-processing company will increase the usage amount of salicylate in the future . And we can not proceed that in the future salicylate still effective in cure headache , it is possible that patients in Mentia get use to tolerant salicylate and the cure function is fading .

To sum up , the argument is unconvincing as it stands .To strengthen it the arguer should provide more information to show salicylate do have effect on curing headache . In addition , the arguer should describe the study more detail to make that persuasive . What's more , future situation is always more complicated than recent , so arguer should give us more convincing evidence to support the trend will be the same in the future.