【Flyer杀G作文组】1.30-Argument35-By 师大菜菜

师大菜菜UID: 2838404

TOPIC: ARGUMENT35 - The 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."
WORDS: 144
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2011/1/30 22:36:16

The arguer asserts that with the use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. To support the assertion, the author cites the following facts about salicylates: 1) salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin which used to treat headaches; 2) Adding salicylates to foods for the past several decades has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches in a twenty-year study. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the assertion.

First, belonging to the same chemical family do not necessarily indicate that Salicylates have the totally equal function with aspirin. Perhaps salicylates have many different properties with aspirin, and cannot do anything for treating headaches. Although I have a little of professional knowledge, I can see that the author’s argument fails to proof belonging to the same chemical family necessarily means have the same medicine function. Therefore, this fact cannot make the conclusion reasonable.

Secondly, the author’s argument is based on an assumption that adding salicylates to foods for the past several decades is totally contributable to the steady decline in the average number of headaches in the past. However, the twenty-year study that the author cited just draw the conclusion that that the former correlates with the latter. It is possible that there are other factors causing the decline in the average number of headaches in the past, though which correlates with adding salicylates to foods. For example, the decline in the average number of headaches was due to the development of medical skills and most headaches were cued. It is also possible that the headaches catch the disease for the poor quality of water in Mentia. It is the improvement of quality of water caused the decline in number of headaches. The author fails to account for these possibilities, therefore the conclusion is unconvincing.

Thirdly, even if adding salicylates caused the decline in the average number of headaches in the study, the author still cannot convince us that we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. The author fails to provide details about participants of the twenty year study. Therefore, we don’t know whether the conclusion in the study suits to the Mentia. It is possible that there is no headache in Mentia. It is also possible that the headaches in Mentia catch the disease due to the factor which is different with the participants in the study and cannot be treated by salicylates. Without ruling out these possibilities, the conclusion is not reasonable.

In sum, the two reasons that the author cites both cannot support the conclusion. In order to make the conclusion convincing, the author need to not only confirm that salicylates have the same function with aspirin, but also proof that adding salicylates can cause the decline in the number of headaches, and it is true in Mentia in the future.