【1010G精英组】ARGUMENT35 F组回收站

lynnuanaUID: 2772328

* 5月2日，13点之前上交ARGUMENT35，作文直接跟帖，修改直接跟帖，不用另开新帖~
* 要求每篇argument附上逻辑链
* 欢迎在本贴内讨论+BS本期题目~

【Argument188情况汇报】
请大家尽快跟上进度~

总贴地址    F组素材积累库地址

35The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia.

"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."

附：改作文指南 by 最後の使徒
        【heaven in flowers汇总贴】by irvine666

lxin333UID: 2650844

1 s是a的一种同类化合物，a可治疗头痛
2 食物中加入s作为防腐剂
==》
A s在商业中使用的增加与头痛者人数逐步减少有关
3 20年的研究

B 最近发现s被用来作为添加剂
AB
==》 C 可以预测将来M的市民头痛的人数还会减少

Grounding on the 20-year study, supposing salicylates have been correlated with a steady decline in the average number of headaches, and then synthesizes the hypothesis and another fact that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods, the author accordingly suggests that the continued use of salicylates will steadily decline the average number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. However, the author fails to consider whether salicylates take effect in the treatment of headaches and whether there are other factors which can help decline the happen of headaches. The conclusion suffers from several doubts, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, based on the fact that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin which can treat headaches, the author claims that the salicylates have same function of aspirin. However, similar chemical construction doesn’t mean similar function at all cases. It is entirely possible that salicylates won't work on headaches or even aggravate the situation. So, the author's conclusion that salicylates can treat the headaches is unreliable.

Even assume salicylates take effect in the treatment of headaches, the author cannot concludes that a steady decline is the result of the commercial use of salicylates. The authors ignores other factors which can reduce the happen of headaches. With people's increasing concerns about their own health, they gradually focus on healthy life styles, for examples, they have regular exercises, healthy diets, good work environment, thus lead to less pressure and worries and the steadily decline of average number of headaches. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author cannot convince me of salicylates' correlation with the decline of headaches.

Moreover, the author unfairly infers that the citizen of Mentia would take the food with salicylates as flavor additives. Perhaps only a small section of food contains the flavor made from salicylates and just a few people buy these food. In addition, we are not informed that how many participants in the 20-year study and whether they are from Mentia. Without accounting for these necessary factors, the author cannot convince me that it is salicylates that decline the number of headaches.

Last but not least, the author provides no evidence that salicylates won't have side effect on people. As we know, medicines may have side effect such as allergy, inflammation, toxicities. Before further study to ensure that salicylates can treat headaches and is safe for people to take, we cannot have great expectations of salicylates.

In sum, this argument, while seems well supported at first glance, suffered from several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unpersuasive. To bolster it, the author should prove more persuasive evidence to substantiate the correlation between salicylates and the steadily decline of headaches. To better evaluate the conclusion, a rational further study is necessary to prove the performance of salicylates.

carol.ljUID: 2764249

逻辑：
1水杨酸酯和阿司匹林只是同一类化合物，虽然阿司匹林可以用来不治疗头痛，但水杨酸酯不一定与阿司匹林具体相同的功能。
2头痛发病平均数量下降的原因可能有其他的药品，或者是心态，心理的养状况变好了。
3水杨酸酯可以被用作食品香料，但根据这种用途，不一定会得到居发头痛症的数量持续稳步下降。因果不必然。
4样本的问题，参与调查的人数是未知的，得出的结论不一定是科学的。
          In this argument, the author concludes that the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia will decline with the use of salicylates. To support his conclusions, the author cited a twenty-year study, and claim that salicylates are correlated with the decline of headaches and salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin. At first glance, this argument seems to be logical, but after taking many things into consideration and clearly examining the author's reasoning, these evidences will neither provide a logical support, nor be practical and the argument contains several facets that are questionable.

        Firstly, the very noteworthy problem concerned to the argument is that salicylates may not have the same effect just as aspirin even they are both the members of the same chemical family. Perhaps, the specific chemical structure would lead salicylates have partial effect of the asprin, but not all, since there are still other components with salicylates. And the arguer fails to tell us where comes out the conclusion about the some chemical family. is the result reliable? Furthermore, there is no information available to prove that whether both salicylates and aspirin have the same effect on headaches treatment. On several grounds, these evidences lend little credible support for the conclusion.

         Even if the salicylates may have the same effect just as aspirin, can we draw a conclusion that a steady decline of headaches is merely due to the commercial use of salicylates? The answer is obviously no. On the one hand, the author ignores the possibility that headache may be declined by various facets, with less pressure and radiation; on the other hand, perhaps the participants in the experiment have taken other chemical materials which can solve headache disease in physical level. Thus, we should treat them from both physical and psychological facts. It would be too hasty to predict that the salicylates correlate with the steady decline of headaches, without enough evidence.

         In addition, the author doesn't tell us what kind of food will contain the salicylate additives and whether the local citizen would like to buy such food. Flavor additives are not for all kinds of food, and perhaps the food with salicylates is just the one people dislike in that area. Thus it is possible this use can not help, or the declination is caused by other medication that we have not found out.

         Last but not least, there is a problem with this argument involves a survey itself. The author provides no evidence that the number of participants is statistically significant. Lacking the information about the randomness and the size of the survey sample, the author cannot draw any precise conclusions based on the survey.

         In sum, this argument, while seems well-supported at first, has several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unacceptable.Before any final decisions are made, the author should reason more convincingly, cite more persuasive evidence, and take every possible consideration into account.

makeithappenUID: 2585223

1.
Salicylates 与 a有关，a是治疗头痛的。
2.
for the past several decades, food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates. 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.
3.
Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods.
The three points get the conclusion : 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."

The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to point out sufficient evidence to get the conclusion. First, the author fails to prove the effect of Salicylats in curing headaches, especially considering the specific location: Mentia. Secondly, although salicylats can decline the number of headaches, we could not expect the companies will use salicylats as flavor additives.
The author does not give sufficient evidence to explain the effect of Salicylats in curing headaches. First of all, Although salicylates and aspirin, which used to treat headaches, locate in same chemical family, it does not mean salicylates can treat headaches, too. A more explicit analysis of the chemical process in treating headaches of both salicylates and aspirin would be helpful.
Secondly, the twenty-year study’s conclusion, that rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches, seems questionable, since the experiment does not rule out other factors which would influence the final results. For example, the significant effect in declining the number of headaches would be other element also widely used as preservatives in recent decades. Or other example, the obvious decline of headaches is due to the development of life quality. Thus, the study does not figure out the direct reason for the decline, which makes the final conclusion powerless.
Although we assume that salicylats can decline the number of headaches, the new use of salicylats cannot lead to the result that a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. More conditions should be take into account.
If the cost of adding salicylats as flavor additives is relatively high, since most of the companies only care about the profit, they would disregard the new use of salicylats and turn to use other cheaper element as a flavor additive. Or if the most people cannot tolerate the flavor of salicylats as flavor additives, the company might stop produce the food using salicylats as flavor additives. So, there are not enough evidence to guarantee the widely use of salicylats as flavor additives.
At last, the whole passage fails to consider the situation in Mentia. Mentia might have its own eating habits, differ from another areas, which even lead to contradicting conclusion.
In a nutshell, the author makes some logical faults in evaluating the effect of treating headaches of salicylats and forecasting the result of the new discovery about salicylats. A more complex and comprehend search will be needed when estimate the link between salicylats and decline in the number of headaches.

lynnuanaUID: 2772328

• Salicylates = aspirin -->headache

• Study(20年)：食品加工厂添加Salicylates作为防腐剂（for several decades）-->steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants

• 食品加工厂recently发现Salicylates可以做食品香料添加剂-->a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia

The speaker asserts in this summary that the average number of the people suffer from headache will continue reducing due to a new application of salicylates by food-processing companies, merely based on a twenty-year study towards the residents of Mentia which seeks to prove that the expanding commercial use of salicylates in the past decades has caused the general declining of headaches in number. Unfortunately, a rigorous scrutiny of this argument reveals several logically irrelevant causalities and some vague expressions, which render it unconvincing.

To begin with, the study the speaker puts seems incomplete and unscientific as it stands. First, the quantity of the participants could not be found from this article. If the number is too small, the headache cures of these subjects are unable to represent the vast majority of patients. Second, even if the number is proper, the speaker still fails to unify the experimental operation standard of the salicylates in the research process, such as how much this chemical used in the food processing, whether its content is unchangeable in so many years, whether the participants would try the same food brand all the time and so forth. The answer to these questions would definitely affect the result of the study, let along the conclusion the speaker makes.

Moreover, a significant factor-- whether the salicylates, as preservatives in previous food producing, are safe to overdose or not-- is overlooked by the speaker, which is highly possible to jeopardize his conclusion. As is known to all, in the food processing, the preservatives could be mingled with the food or just put into a small package sold with food. Therefore, two possibilities would be deducted from the summary. On the one hand, if the salicylates were mixed with the food before and yet used as flavor additives recently, the nutrition value is actually the same; because from the very beginning-- the past several decades, salicylates has been eaten by the people and therefore will not cause a new continuing decline, as the speaker asserts. On the other hand, if the salicylates are inedible and just packaged with food before, the food-processing company would absolutely not risk mixing it with food and then put on the market, before proving it is safe to overdose at present. Thus, considering these two results assumed, the speaker should make it clear that what the real usage of salicylates in the food producing is.

Finally, the speaker also confirms that the number of headaches suffered by the Mentia residents would be expected to continue declining steadily with a new use of salicylates which are, in the previous study, proved to have caused the number of headache patients decrease. However, other possibilities like participants’ age, health condition or the living surroundings would be inextricably related with the recovery as well. For example, the surrounding the participants lives twenty years ago was very noisy so that they sufferred severe headache, but later, they moved to a quiet environment which helped to cure their headache. Thus, the salicylates must be only part of reason for the decline. Moreover, does the speaker unwittingly imply that the recovery of the headache of the participants is very slowly, or why they used twenty years to recover and still need time to make a full recovery? If so, I would say it is better to prescribe painkillers to the patients rather than only trust regimen ways. In all, the speaker ultimately fails to persuade me that using salicylates is the best way to cure headache.

To sum up, the function of salicylates in the headache therapy is still open to doubt. The speaker could not convince his reader with a scientific study and moreover, many other possibilities fail to be considered in the argument, which cause his conclusion unsafe to be drawn in the end.

xmaszztUID: 2796708

逻辑：
1 水杨酸酯是阿司匹林的同类药物不能说明其能治头痛
2 20年的study和水杨酸酯导致头痛减少的因果关系错误（忽略了其他可能性）
3 就算1,2成立，水杨酸酯作为香料也不一定有效果
4 就算1,2,3成立，作为香料的水杨酸酯也未必对M地区的人有效
5 就算以上都成立，目前的发现并没有使用，并且M地区的人干嘛非要吃你带香料的食物

In this argument, the author expects a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. To support his conclusions, the author claims that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, which is a medicine used to treat headaches and cited a twenty-year study. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several erroneous logical relations and is therefore unpersuasive.

First of all, the author preliminary judging the function of salicylates only by the reason that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin. It is unilateral to assert the salicylates could use to treat headaches, so we have every reason to suspect that this medicine has nothing with headaches, even worse, it will aggravate the situation or has other bad consequences. So the author can not get conclusion by this erroneous evidence.

Secondly, the author unfairly indicates a causal relation between the salicylates and the headaches in the twenty-year study he provides. There could be other factors, such as the increasing level of healthcare made people have much better health condition in these twenty years, or perhaps by the reason that people in modern world increasing concerns about their own health, for example they will have regular exercise, healthy diets, which will also lead to the decline of average number of headaches. With out ruling out such possibilities, I cannot accept the author’s point of salicylates’ influence on the declined number of headaches.

Thirdly, it is as preservatives that food-processing companies have been adding salicylates to foods for the past several decades, so there is no grounding that using the salicylates as flavor additives for foods will affect the headaches. So it is reasonable to suspect that salicylates will useless to headaches as flavor additives, even worse it will lead to some side effect which the author never considered.

Even assuming the salicylates lead a decline in the average number of headaches when is use as flavor additives, the author fails to consider possible particularities in Mentia. It is possible that Mentia has a higher medical standard and the citizen of Mentia pay much attention to their healthy, so headaches suffered is few whether the salicylates is used as flavor additives; or perhaps it is contrary that the citizen of Mentia have a bad life style and no healthcare, so that the salicylates do little good for them. In a word, the salicylates might have no relationship with the citizen of Mentia.

Last but not least, the author finds the new use of salicylates dose not mean that the food-processing companies will use salicylates as flavor additives-it is not in use yet. And by the common sense we know that flavor additives are not for all kinds of food, it is uncertain that the citizen of Mentia will eat the food with flavor additives.

To sum up, the author’s conclusion about the steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentiais not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence and consider many other possibilities.

lynnuanaUID: 2772328

4# makeithappen
红色：小词或补充  蓝色：句子  括号：点评 加粗：主题句子 下划线：标记 粉色：学习


The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to point out sufficient evidence（指出->证据？或者可以用give，provide） to get（reach或者draw？） the conclusion. First, the author fails to（与上句重复~） prove the effect of Salicylates in curing headaches, especially considering （that in？）the specific location: Mentia. Second, although（如果做让步的话，用even though/if吧？althrough似乎反而同意了arguer的话~与上句矛盾了） salicylates can decline the number of headaches, we could not expect the companies will use salicylats as flavor additives.

（这里缺少连接词，与第一段没有衔接）The author does not give sufficient evidence to explain the effect of Salicylates in curing headaches. First of all, Although salicylates and aspirin, which used to treat headache,
locate（应该被动？sb locate sth~） in same chemical family, it does not mean salicylates can treat headaches, too.（句子主语不一致--参考：although S are located in same chemical family with A which is used to treat headache，it might not have the same effects as A reaches.  ） A more explicit analysis of（on） the chemical process in treating headaches of both salicylates and aspirin would be helpful.

Secondly, the twenty-year study’s conclusion,（同位语不用逗号） that rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches,（句子太长这里可以隔一下） seems questionable,（可以用分号隔开两个主语不一致的单句） since the experiment does not rule out other factors which would influence the final results. For example, the significant effect in declining the number of headaches would be other elements are also widely used as preservatives in recent decades.Or other example, the obvious decline of headaches is due to the development of life quality. （这两句好繁复呀，可以变一句话长句~ 比如for example， other elements were also widely used as preservatives in recent decades，  or the obvious decline of headaches is due to the development of life quality）Thus, the study does not figure out the direct reason for the decline, which makes the final conclusion powerless.

Although we assume（似乎与后面的主语不一致，换成assuming？） that salicylats can decline the number of headaches, the new use of salicylats cannot（限制下？possibly？） lead to the result that（删？） a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. More conditions should be take into account. If the cost of adding salicylats as flavor additives is relatively high, since most of the companies only care about the profit, they would disregard the new use of salicylats and turn to use other cheaper element as a flavor additive. Or if the most people cannot tolerate the flavor of salicylates as flavor additives（删？）, the company might stop produce the food using salicylats as flavor additives. So, there are not enough evidence（no enough evidence could be found？） to guarantee the（a） widely use of salicylats as flavor additives.

At last, the whole passage fails to consider the situation in Mentia. Mentia residents might have its（their） own eating habits, differing from another areas（感觉插入语做的有些牵强，不必用前面逗号隔开的）, which even lead to contradicting（可以直接用contradicts吧？） conclusion.

In a nutshell（第一次看到，学习~不过可以用在书面语论文写作么？）, the author makes some logical faults in（when？） evaluating the effect of treating headaches of salicylats and forecasting the result of the new discovery about salicylats. A more complex and comprehend research will be needed when estimate（ing） the link between salicylates and decline in the number of headaches.

小的错误有一些，不过不影响整体文章的理解~ 有些说的不恰当的地方欢迎讨论哈~~

xmaszztUID: 2796708

改lxin333
Grounding on the 20-year study, supposing salicylates have been correlated with a steady decline in the average number of headaches, and then synthesizes the hypothesis and another fact that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods(理解你说啥，但是觉得句子不太对。。并列的很牵强), the author accordingly suggests that the continued use of salicylates will steadily decline the average number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. However, the author fails to consider whether salicylates take effect in(on) the treatment of headaches and whether there are other factors which can help decline the happen(happen 不能当名词的吧？) of headaches. The conclusion suffers from several doubts, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, based on the fact that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin which can treat headaches, the author claims that the salicylates have same function of （with）aspirin. However, similar chemical construction doesn’t mean similar function at（in）all cases. It is entirely possible that salicylates won't work on headaches or even aggravate the situation. So, the author's conclusion that salicylates can treat the headaches is unreliable.

Even assume（assuming） salicylates take effect in(on) the treatment of headaches, the author cannot concludes that a steady decline is the result of the commercial use of salicylates. The authors ignores other factors which can reduce the happen of headaches. With people's increasing concerns about their own health, they gradually focus on healthy life styles, for examples, they have regular exercises, healthy diets, good work environment, thus lead to less pressure and worries and the
steadily decline of average number of headaches. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author cannot convince me of salicylates' correlation with the decline of headaches.

Moreover, the author unfairly infers that the citizen of Mentia would take the food with salicylates as flavor additives. Perhaps only a small section（minority）
of food contains the flavor made from salicylates and just a few people buy these food. In addition, we are not informed that how many participants in the 20-year study and whether they are from Mentia.（论据的问题应该在前面说吧，而且这里以全概偏应该是个大错误，分一段出来说更好吧） Without accounting for these necessary factors, the author cannot convince me that it is salicylates that decline the number of headaches.

Last but not least, the author provides no evidence that salicylates won't have side effect on people. As we know, medicines may have side effect such as allergy, inflammation and toxicities. Before further study to ensure that salicylates can treat headaches and
is safe for people to take, we cannot have great expectations of salicylates.

In sum, this argument, while seems well supported at first glance, suffered from several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unpersuasive. To bolster it, the author should prove more persuasive evidence to substantiate the correlation between salicylates and the steadily decline of headaches. To better evaluate the conclusion, a rational further study is necessary to prove the performance of salicylates.

句子还是改不出什么错误。。。全文理解起来很流畅
问题有：
1 从20年的study推到M地区，这个以全概偏的错误应该是个大错误，写一段出来会更好
2 关于错误的排列我觉得还是应该把论据错误放在前面说。在你even assuming论据能推出结论的时候就已经默认了作者的论据，这以后再去讨论论据的问题（比如不知道样本数量）就显得不够严密

weaselUID: 2739489

先擦掉了，明天补上全部的哈

makeithappenUID: 2585223

The speaker asserts in this summary that the average number of the people suffer from headache will continue reducing due to a new application of salicylates by food-processing companies, merely based on a twenty-year study towards the residents of Mentia which seeks to prove that the expanding commercial use of salicylates in the past decades has caused the general declining of headaches in number. Unfortunately, a rigorous scrutiny of this argument reveals several logically irrelevant causalities and some vague expressions, which render it unconvincing.

To begin with, the study the speaker puts seems [可以去掉seems] incomplete and unscientific as it stands. First, the quantity of the participants could not be found from this article. If the number is too small, the headache cures of these subjects are unable to represent the vast majority of patients. Second, even if the number is proper, the speaker still fails to unify the experimental operation standard of the salicylates in the research process, such as how much this chemical used in the food processing, whether its content[amount 是不是好一点？] is unchangeable in so many years, whether the participants would try the same food brand all the time and so forth. The answer to these questions would definitely affect the result of the study, let along the conclusion the speaker makes.

Moreover, a significant factor-- whether the salicylates, as preservatives in previous food producing, are safe to overdose or not-- is overlooked by the speaker, which is highly possible to jeopardize[good word] his conclusion.[感觉这个中心句没有包括你的Argument增加的量没有作用的例子] As is known to all, in the food processing, the preservatives could be mingled with the food or just put into a small package sold with food. Therefore, two possibilities would be deducted from the summary. On the one hand, if the salicylates were mixed with the food before and yet used as flavor additives recently, the nutrition value is actually the same; because from the very beginning-- the past several decades, salicylates has been eaten by the people and therefore will not cause a new continuing decline, as the speaker asserts.[good point] On the other hand, if the salicylates are inedible and just packaged with food before, the food-processing company would absolutely not risk mixing it with food and then put on the market, before proving it is safe to overdose at present. Thus, considering these two results assumed, the speaker should make it clear that what the real usage of salicylates in the food producing is.

Finally, the speaker also confirms that the number of headaches suffered by the Mentia residents would be expected to continue declining steadily with a new use of salicylates which are, in the previous study, proved to have caused the number of headache patients decrease. However, other possibilities like participants’ age, health condition or the living surroundings would be inextricably related with the recovery as well. For example, the surrounding the participants lives twenty years ago was very noisy so that they sufferred [suffered] severe headache, but later, they moved to a quiet environment which helped to cure their headache. Thus, the salicylates must be only part of reason for the decline.[I think this argument is including in the second paragraph which asset that the study inconvinced] Moreover, does the speaker unwittingly imply that the recovery of the headache of the participants is very slowly, or why they used twenty years to recover and still need time to make a full recovery? If so, I would say it is better to prescribe painkillers to the patients rather than only trust regimen ways. In all, the speaker ultimately fails to persuade me that using salicylates is the best way to cure headache. [个人感觉最后论证的东西有点小跑，因为题目中没有说salicylates is the best way to cure headache]

To sum up, the function of salicylates in the headache therapy is still open to doubt. The speaker could not convince his reader with a scientific study and moreover, many other possibilities fail to be considered in the argument, which cause his conclusion unsafe to be drawn in the end.

文章用词很丰富，体现了作者丰富的词汇量。。赞
整个文章的logic: study结果不可信；然后作为新添加物的效果和危害没有研究；作为新的添加物的不一定会decline..感觉最后一段的内容不是很合理，前面都很好哈。。

悦微微志燮UID: 2759026

In the argument the arguer predicted that the rise in the commercial use of salicylates as food additives steadily decreased the average number of headaches reported by participants in twenty-year study to support this conclusion that we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia with the new use for salicylates as flavor additives. The argument is well-present, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.

First of all, we just know that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, but there’s no evidence to prove that salicylates have the same function as aspirin that could treat headaches. Having the same chemical structure is not equal to having the same function.

In addition, the author cited the report which lasted 20 years. But the author ignored the different condition between nowadays and 20 years ago. We have a better quality of environment, a higher living standard, a more developed medical treatment. All these factors can lead the decline of the headaches. There is no other study which can certify not these factor but the salicylates decrease the headaches.

Moreover, the author said that with the new use of salicylates there will be a continued steady decline of headaches. I think it’s a little opinionated. Granting that salicylates could decrease the number of headaches, there are still many factors such as staying up late, higher working pressures will increase the headaches. What’s more, we’re not sure about whether the more salicylates the better influence will have on people. Maybe it will lead a side effect when using too much salicylates.

In summary, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer should provide more information concerning medicine functioning details and other possible factor that might cause headaches.

lxin333UID: 2650844

on carol~

          In this argument, the author concludes that the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia will decline with the use of salicylates.直接指出问题 To support his conclusions, the author cited a twenty-year study, and claim that salicylates are correlated with the decline of headaches and salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin. At first glance, this argument seems to be logical, but after taking many things into consideration and clearly examining the author's reasonin多余吧, these evidences will neither provide a logical support, nor be practical and the argument contains several facets that are questionable.

        Firstly, the very noteworthy problem concerned to the argument is that salicylates may not have the same effect just as aspirin even they are both the members of the same chemical family. Perhaps, the specific chemical structure would lead salicylates have partial effect of the asprin, but not all, since there are still other components with salicylates.
And the arguer fails to tell us where comes out the conclusion about the some chemical family. is the result reliable? Furthermore, there is no information available to prove that whether both salicylates and aspirin have the same effect on headaches treatment这句和开头不是重复了吗？. On several grounds, these evidences lend little credible support for the conclusion.

         Even if the salicylates may have the same effect just as aspirin, can we draw a conclusion that a steady decline of headaches is merely due to the commercial use of salicylates? The answer is obviously no. On the去掉？ one hand, the author ignores the possibility that headache may be declined by various facets, with less pressure and radiation; on the other hand, perhaps the participants in the experiment have taken other chemical materials which can solve（cure？） headache disease in physical level. Thus, we should treat them from both physical and psychological facts. It would be too hasty to predict that the salicylates correlate with the steady decline of headaches, without enough evidence.
         In addition, the author doesn't tell us what kind of food will contain the salicylate additives and whether the local citizen would like to buy such food. Flavor additives are not for all kinds of food, and perhaps the food with salicylates is just the one people dislike in that area. Thus it is possible this use can not help, or the declination is caused by other medication that we have not found out.

         Last but not least, there is a problem with this argument involves a survey itself. The author provides no evidence that the number of participants is statistically significant. Lacking the information about the randomness and the size of the survey sample, the author cannot draw any precise conclusions based on the survey.这个样本有很多问题，代表性，从少数推倒M地区。。。。。。。可以简单一句带过吧

         In sum, this argument, while seems well-supported at first, has several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unacceptable.Before any final decisions are made, the author should reason more convincingly, cite more persuasive evidence, and take every possible consideration into account.

条理清晰 用语规范 句式单一了些 应该模仿些好句子
大的错误都找出来了 但是有那么个问题 就是survey的问题
Xma说如果调查放最后说，会显得前面的让步都是建立在默认了调查的前提下；虽然我认为和最主要逻辑错误（比如第二段你写的）相比，调查的问题可以简单略写并放在文章后面~因为我也是这么写的。。。所以这个问题我真不懂了

carol.ljUID: 2764249

1.
Salicylates 与 a有关，a是治疗头痛的。
2.
for the past several decades, food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates. 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.
3.
Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods.
The three points get the conclusion : 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."

The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to point out sufficient evidence to get the conclusion. First, the author fails to prove the effect of Salicylats in curing headaches, especially considering the specific location: Mentia. Secondly, although salicylats can decline the number of headaches, we could not expect the companies will use salicylats as flavor additives.[开门见三式开头，直接指出逻辑错误，学习了]
（感觉这里有个连接词好些）The author does not give sufficient evidence to explain the effect of Salicylats in curing headaches. First of all, Although salicylates and aspirin, which used to treat headaches, locate in same chemical family, it does not mean salicylates can treat headaches, too. A more explicit analysis of the chemical process in treating headaches of both salicylates and aspirin would be helpful.
Secondly, the twenty-year study’s conclusion, that rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches, seems questionable, since the experiment does not rule out other factors which would influence the final results. （这句直接写成两个简单句是不是好些？？）For example, the significant effect in declining the number of headaches would be other element also widely used as preservatives in recent decades. Or other example, the obvious decline of headaches is due to the development of life quality. Thus, the study does not figure out the direct reason for the decline, which makes the final conclusion powerless.
Although we assume that salicylats can decline the number of headaches, the new use of salicylats cannot lead to the result that a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. More conditions should be take into account.
If the cost of adding salicylats as flavor additives is relatively high, since most of the companies only care about the profit, they would disregard the new use of salicylats and turn to use other cheaper element as a flavor additive. Or if the most people cannot tolerate the flavor of salicylats as flavor additives, the company might stop produce the food using salicylats as flavor additives. So, there are not enough evidence to guarantee the widely use of salicylats as flavor additives.
At last, the whole passage fails to consider the situation in Mentia. Mentia might have its own eating habits, differ from another areas, which even lead to contradicting conclusion.
In a nutshell, the author makes some logical faults in evaluating the effect of treating headaches of salicylats and forecasting the result of the new discovery about salicylats（salicylates）. A more complex and comprehend search will be needed when estimate(estimating) the link between salicylats and decline in the number of headaches.
没什么错误，条理很清晰，主要的逻辑错误也找出来了。

悦微微志燮UID: 2759026

6# xmaszzt
In this argument, the author expects a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. To support his conclusions, the author claims that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, which is a medicine used to treat headaches and cited a twenty-year study. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several erroneous logical relations and is therefore unpersuasive.
First of all, the author preliminary judging the function of salicylates only by the reason that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin. It is unilateral to assert the salicylates could use to treat headaches, so we have every reason?? to suspect that this medicine has nothing with？？表达无关的意思不太清晰 headaches, even worse, it will aggravate the situation or has other bad consequences. So the author can not get conclusion by this erroneous evidence.
Secondly, the author unfairly indicates a causal relation between the salicylates and the headaches in the twenty-year study he provides. There could be other factors, such as the increasing level of healthcare made people have much better health condition in these twenty years, or perhaps by the reason that people in modern world increasing concerns about their own health, for example they will have regular exercise, healthy diets, which will also lead to the decline of average number of headaches. With out ruling out such possibilities, I cannot accept the author’s point of salicylates’ influence on the declined number of headaches.
Thirdly, it is as preservatives that food-processing companies have been adding salicylates to foods for the past several decades, so there is no grounding that using the salicylates as flavor additives for foods will affect the headaches. So it is reasonable to suspect that salicylates will useless to headaches as flavor additives, even worse it will lead to some side effect which the author never considered.
Even assuming the salicylates lead a decline in the average number of headaches when is used as flavor additives, the author fails to consider possible particularities in Mentia. It is possible that Mentia has a higher medical standard and the citizen of Mentia pay much attention to their healthy(去掉y), so headaches suffered is few whether the salicylates is used as flavor additives(没看懂...); or perhaps it is contrary that the citizen of Mentia have a bad life style and no healthcare, so that the salicylates do little good for them. In a word, the salicylates might have no relationship with the citizen of Mentia.
Last but not least, the author finds the new use of salicylates dose not mean that the food-processing companies will use salicylates as flavor additives-it is not in use yet. And by the common sense we know that flavor additives are not for all kinds of food, it is uncertain that the citizen of Mentia will eat the food with flavor additives.
To sum up, the author’s conclusion about the steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentiais not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence and consider many other possibilities.
同义词的转换做得很好，基本没有重复用的词，条例也很清晰。我觉得可以对每一段做更多的扩展，是文章更丰富一些~

xmaszztUID: 2796708

改微微。~~
In the argument the arguer predicted (assert) that the rise in the commercial use of salicylates as food additives steadily decreased the average number of headaches reported by participants in twenty-year study to support this conclusion that (according to this ) we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia with the new use for salicylates as flavor additives. The argument is well-present, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.

First of all, we just know that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, but there’s no evidence to prove that salicylates have the same function as aspirin that could treat headaches. Having the same chemical structure is not equal to having the same function.(论述简单对比的错误)

In addition, the author cited the report which lasted 20 years. But the author ignored the different condition between nowadays and 20 years ago. We have a better quality of environment, a higher living standard, a more developed medical treatment. All these factors can lead the decline of the headaches. There is no other study which can certify not these factor but the salicylates decrease the headaches.（论述论据的因果错误）

Moreover, the author said that with the new use of salicylates there will be a continued steady decline of headaches. I think it’s a little opinionated. Granting that salicylates could decrease the number of headaches, there are still many factors such as staying up late, higher working pressures will increase the headaches. What’s more, we’re not sure about whether the more salicylates the better influence will have on people. Maybe it will lead a side effect when using too much salicylates. （论述结论错误）

In summary, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer should provide more information concerning medicine functioning details and other possible factor that might cause headaches.
语言方面还是改不出什么。。。
但是逻辑方面：感觉少改了2个比较明显的错误：1.水杨酸酯作为香料不一定有效这个类比错误；2对M地区的人是否有效这个以全概偏的错误