argument 125 第一篇argu，求拍

ripperseanUID: 2523263

The following appeared in a health newsletter.

"A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness ofwearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that numberis nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the sameten-year period, the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they arewearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, to reduce thenumber of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government shouldconcentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less onencouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets."

Write a response in which you examine thestated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how theargument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for theargument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

第一篇argu, 没卡时间，用了大概一个小时吧。没有模版。求狠拍，求攻击。

Although in the argument the authorprovides a solution for decrease the number of serious injuries from bicycleaccidents which seemly effective, it needs some extra data and evidence to makethis argument stronger.

The author talked about two studies whichlast ten years, but didn't show us the details of them: who or whichinstitution do this research? How's the fairness of these studies? Is theconclusions objective? In the first study, it represented a difference of thepercent of bicyclists who wearing helmets throughout 10 years. How did thenumbers been counted? Is the sample size in the statistics sufficient enough tohave an objective and accurate result? These all need further consideration.

Then, the second study shows that the numberof accidents caused by bicycling has increased 200 percent and based on thefirst study, it comes to a conclusion which violates common sense that the numberof bicycling accidents has been tripled because of the increase of helmetwearing. In author’s word, a man who rides a bicycle wearing helmet will feelsafe enough for further exploration. Practically, it needs to explain thefollowing questions. First, are the helmets nowadays same as the ones 10 yearsago on safety? What if the quality of the materials in helmets nowadays hasdecreased just for pursuing larger profit by manufacturer? Second, is there anyother explanation for the increase of accidents caused by bicycling? Forexample, maybe there is a boom in the number of motor vehicle during 10 yearsbut government did not broaden the road, which makes traffic crowded like a jamand bicycle lane then became an optional choice for drivers riled by thetraffic.

Last, a suggestion was given by the authorto launch an education program on bicycle safety concentrating on the factorsother than helmet use. It brought more problems need to be proved by theauthor: can this education program on bicycle safety attract a lot of people'sattention?  Could this program be anannual one supported by local government and local traffic department? What ifmany people stop riding bicycles and start driving low-power-consumption cars?And the most important, will the number of accidents caused by bicyclingdecrease after people get educated by this program? These all need furtherevaluation.

erencieUID: 3311178

I feel that there are too many questions in the argument. Using one or two questions to evoke readers' thoughts is impressive; but over usage may make it look very repetitive and defeats the purpose of asking questions.

ripperseanUID: 2523263

2# erencie
谢谢你的回复。我也注意到这个问题了，看了下范文，发现都是以一种陈述的方式在说。用这么多问句主要是受到了5.5的干扰。
再次感谢，以后不会了。