argument 81 难题

zxwhy825UID: 2668443

题目：ARGUMENT81 - Allergies are an overreaction of the immune system to certain stimuli. One view is that allergies can develop as the result of childhood exposure to certain irritants, such as dust or animal dander, while the immune system is not yet mature. Another view is that exposure to particular bacteria early in childhood actually triggers the proper development of the immune system, and that limiting exposure to these bacteria through excessive hygiene can cause children's immune systems to overreact to certain irritants later on. A new study supports the second view: children who are washed especially frequently and whose parents clean their homes especially frequently are more likely to develop allergies than are other children. So in order to reduce the incidence of allergies in children and adults, parents should not limit children's exposure to irritants or bacteria.
字数：336
用时：00:30:00
日期：2010-8-11 上午 11:38:58

【a原文】The argument seems logic and cogent at first glance by refer to a new study to supports the second view, then based on the view conclude, in order to avoid the allergies in children and adults, parents should allow chidren's contact with irritants and bacteria. However, there are several flaws, which will be discussed in turn.

Firstly, the result of the study is questionable. The argument do not provide any detail of the study, such as the numbers of children included, and the health condition of the children before and after the study, and the age. Without these, it is too hasty to conclude that the new study supports the second view. Even if the study is valid, it don't guarantee that the result applied to every child. The condition of every child is different. Pperhaps the proper exposure of particular bacteria avoid the incidence of allergies of one child. However the same degree of
exposure of
bacteria of another child,
leads to severe disease rather than reduces the incidence of aller Before the result is verdicted by the experts, we should better keep the suggestion ^.

Secondly, even if reality of the study is admitted by the experts, the suggestion overlook some other elements. For example, the exposure of the

bacteria is not limit to the condition of the house. The playground also offer the opportunity to the tact the things with bacteria. Perhaps the such exposure of bacteria is enough to avoid the possibility of allergies and more exposure of bacteria in house may cause bad influence.

What's more, the arguer blur the children and adults^. Even if the action parents takes as the arguer, reduces the incidence of allergies in children, there is no evidence that it
do the same to the parents. Both of the view, have an common idea that the allergies depend on the condition of the childhood. That means whatever the parents do, when they grow up into adults, have nothing to do with allergies in themselves. In addition, parents suffered with allergies will develop worse exposed to bacteria.

In sum
【a修改】
The argument seems logic and cogent at first glance by refer to a new study to supports the second view, then based on the view conclude, in order to avoid the allergies in children and adults, parents should allow children’s contact with irritants and bacteria. However, there are several flaws, which will be discussed in turn.

Firstly, the result of the study is questionable. The argument do not provide any detail of the study, such as the numbers of children included, and the health condition of the children before and after the study, and the age. Without these, it is too hasty to conclude that the new study supports the second view. Even if the study is valid, it doesn’t guarantee that the result applied to every child. The condition of every child is different. Perhaps the proper exposure of particular bacteria avoids the incidence of allergies of one child. However the same degree of exposure of bacteria of another child, leads to severe disease rather than reduces the incidence of allergies before the result is vindicated by the experts, we should better keep the suggestion aside.

Secondly, even if reality of the study is admitted by the experts, the suggestion overlooks some other elements. For example, the exposure of the bacteria is not limit to the condition of the house. The playground also offers the opportunity to the tact the things with bacteria. Perhaps such exposure of bacteria is enough to avoid the possibility of allergies and more exposure of bacteria in house may cause bad influence.

What's more, the arguer blurs validity to the children and adults. Even if the action parents takes as the arguer, reduces the incidence of allergies in children, there is no evidence that it does the same to the parents. Both of the views under discussion have a common idea that the allergies depend on the condition of the childhood. That means whatever the parents do, when they grow up into adults, have nothing to do with allergies in themselves. In addition, parents suffered with allergies will develop worse exposed to bacteria.

In sum, there is no reason to reject the suggestion. However, there is reason to improve the argument. In order to demonstrate the reality of the study, the arguer need provide more information of the study in details. As well, to convince the adults, the arguer should show reliable evidence to eliminate other elements relevant to the exposure of bacteria. What’s more, the arguer should warn the parents with allergies these suggestions do no help to their diseases. (427
293 )

zxwhy825UID: 2668443

谢谢。。求P