Argument38， 超时6分钟，大家使劲拍，必还砖！

AlierUID: 159518

Argument38  第2篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：36分21秒     445 words
从2005年3月7日8时54分到2005年3月7日9时36分
------题目------
The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.
'An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism.'
------正文------
In this argument, the author suggests that residents in West Meria should be prescibed Ichthaid for daily use in order to prevent colds which often leads to their absenteeism. To convince us of this recommendation, he cited the evidence that the residents in nearby East Meria went to the hospitals less frequently with the high consumption of fish. The conclusion may seem logical at first sight, however, close scrutiny reveals its several lethal flaws as discussed below.

To begin with, the author fails in groundlessly equating the consumption of fish to the eating of fish. As common sense tells us, there are quite a lot of ways to consume fish. It is possible that the fish industry there is prosperous, which contributed much to the high consumption. For example, if East Meria is the biggest fish can production base of the country, then the manufacturer's buying of fish obviously constituted the majority of the fish's high consumption while the fishes residents really eat maybe just a little portion, even less than that eaten by residents in West Meria. Therefore, without collecting sufficient information on how the residents in the East Meria consume fish, the author's assumption is doubtful.

Moreover, even if we assume the fish consumption is mostly made by people's eating, the author still fails in making false causality between people's less frequency of seeing the doctor and the more eating of fish in East Meria. It is imaginable there are a myriad of factors that may cause residents not to see the doctor frequently for treating colds. Perhaps they got colds often actually, but they feel no need to see the doctor because they prefer more to take some effective medicine by themselves. Or even given that they do catch less cold, it is not necessarily the result of fish-eating. Maybe they own better immunity to the cold disease due to their race, climate, or life habit. It is possible that they exercise more and own a more healthy eating habit, which may all attribute to the lower risk of catching cold. Thus, more careful inspection on the real health situation of people in East Meria is another work should be done by the author before making his recommendation.

Finally, accepting that fish-eating do help reduce the risk of getting cold, there's still little evidence that could relate the use of Ichtchaid to the lowering of absenteeism. First, there's little evidence show that the part in the fish that helps preventing cold is in the fish oil, thus the Ichthaid, which is drawn from fish oil, may not produce the same effect as eating fish. Further, though people mostly use catching cold as the reason for their absenteeism, more research should be done to validate its truth or not. Actually, it is commonly seen from our empirical experience that people are often late duing to other reasons, such as the late get up, the laziness, or some other urgent things, say his wife is boring. In such cases, they just want to find a reasonable excuse, while catching cold maybe a proper one. Therefore, without pointing out the real causes for people's absenteeism, it is unacceptable to prescribe them the Ichthaid.

In sum ,the author's recommendation is unacceptable for groundless assumption and the ignoring of many critical factors in the reasoning. To make it more sound, it is necessary for the author to do more careful inspection and research to find out the true reason that help prevent  people from catching cold as well as revealing the real cause of the low absenteeism in West Meria.

candybonUID: 194801

In this argument, the author suggests that residents in West Meria should be prescibed(??) Ichthaid for daily use in order to prevent colds which often leads to their absenteeism. To convince us of this recommendation, he cited the evidence that the residents in nearby East Meria went to the hospitals less frequently with the high consumption of fish. The conclusion may seem logical at first sight, however, close scrutiny reveals its several lethal flaws as discussed below.

To begin with, the author fails in groundlessly equating the consumption of fish to the eating of fish. As common sense tells us, there are quite a lot of ways to consume fish. It is possible that the fish industry there is prosperous, which contributed much to the high consumption. For example, if East Meria is the biggest fish can production base of the country, then the manufacturer's buying of fish obviously constituted the majority of the fish's high consumption while the fishes residents really eat maybe just a little portion, even less than that eaten by residents in West Meria. Therefore, without collecting sufficient information on how the residents in the East Meria consume fish, the author's assumption is doubtful.论证不错，我真么没想到。

Moreover, even if we assume the fish consumption is mostly made by people's eating, the author still fails in making false causality between people's less frequency of seeing the doctor and the more eating of fish in East Meria. It is imaginable there are a myriad of factors that may cause residents not to see the doctor frequently for treating colds. Perhaps they got colds often actually, but they feel no need to see the doctor because they prefer more to take some effective medicine by themselves. Or even given that they do catch less cold, it is not necessarily the result of fish-eating. Maybe they own better immunity to the cold disease due to their race, climate, or life habit. It is possible that they exercise more and own（你好像好喜欢用own, 我觉得不太好) a more healthy eating habit, which may all attribute to the lower risk of catching cold. Thus, more careful inspection on the real health situation of people in East Meria is another work should be done by the author before making his recommendation.

Finally, accepting that fish-eating do help reduce the risk of getting cold, there's still little evidence that could relate the use of Ichtchaid to the lowering of absenteeism. First, there's little evidence show that the part in the fish that helps preventing cold is in the fish oil, thus the Ichthaid, which is drawn from fish oil, may not produce the same effect as eating fish. Further, though people mostly use catching cold as the reason for their absenteeism, more research should be done to validate its truth or not. Actually, it is commonly seen from our empirical experience that people are often late duing to other reasons, such as the late get up, the laziness, or some other urgent things, say his wife is boring. In such cases, they just want to find a reasonable excuse, while catching cold maybe a proper one. Therefore, without pointing out the real causes for people's absenteeism, it is unacceptable to prescribe them the Ichthaid.

In sum ,the author's recommendation is unacceptable for groundless assumption and the ignoring of many critical factors in the reasoning. To make it more sound, it is necessary for the author to do more careful inspection and research to find out the true reason that help prevent people from catching cold as well as revealing the real cause of the low absenteeism in West Meria.
总体感觉你的观点和我的比较相似，不过你的展开比我好多了。看看我的https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=262596

天晴了UID: 201592

呵呵～～这篇是最近的一篇吗  
一步一步的接近30分钟了～～～

嗯 站上

天晴了UID: 201592

------正文------
In this argument, the author suggests that residents in West Meria should be prescibed Ichthaid for daily use in order to prevent colds which often leads to their absenteeism. To convince us of this recommendation, he cited the evidence that the residents in nearby East Meria went to the hospitals less frequently with the high consumption of fish. The conclusion may seem logical at first sight, however, close scrutiny reveals its several lethal flaws as discussed below.

To begin with, the author fails in groundlessly equating the consumption of fish to the eating of fish.【这个～我觉得好像有点牵强 可能会有大大小小不同的fallacy 可以发挥 但是像类似这杨的 是不是不是题目的考点呢  讨论一下～～】 As common sense tells us, there are quite a lot of ways to consume fish. It is possible that the fish industry there is prosperous, which contributed much to the high consumption. For example, if East Meria is the biggest fish can production base of the country, then the manufacturer's buying of fish obviously constituted the majority of the fish's high consumption while the fishes residents really eat maybe just a little portion, even less than that eaten by residents in West Meria. Therefore, without collecting sufficient information on how the residents in the East Meria consume fish, the author's assumption is doubtful.

Moreover, even if we assume the fish consumption is mostly made by people's eating, the author still fails in making false causality between people's less frequency of seeing the doctor and the more eating of fish in East Meria. It is imaginable there are a myriad of factors that may cause residents not to see the doctor frequently for treating colds. Perhaps they got colds often actually, but they feel no need to see the doctor because they prefer more to take some effective medicine by themselves. Or even given that they do catch less cold, it is not necessarily the result of fish-eating. Maybe they own better immunity to the cold disease due to their race, climate, or life habit. It is possible that they exercise more and own a more healthy eating habit, which may all attribute to the lower risk of catching cold. Thus, more careful inspection on the real health situation of people in East Meria is another work should be done by the author before making his recommendation.【很好～between people's less frequency of seeing the doctor and the more eating of fish in East Meria.具体化的反驳】

Finally, accepting that fish-eating do help reduce the risk of getting cold, there's still little evidence that could relate the use of Ichtchaid to the lowering of absenteeism. 【其实是反驳两个点 分开来吧 】 First, there's little evidence show that the part in the fish that helps preventing cold is in the fish oil, thus the Ichthaid, which is drawn from fish oil, may not produce the same effect as eating fish. Further, though people mostly use catching cold as the reason for their absenteeism, more research should be done to validate its truth or not. Actually, it is commonly seen from our empirical experience that people are often late duing to other reasons, such as the late get up, the laziness, or some other urgent things, say his wife is boring. In such cases, they just want to find a reasonable excuse, while catching cold maybe a proper one. Therefore, without pointing out the real causes for people's absenteeism, it is unacceptable to prescribe them the Ichthaid. 【第一点是说成分不一定导致感冒 第二点是说absenteeism 觉得逻辑上分开好 】

In sum ,the author's recommendation is unacceptable for groundless assumption and the ignoring of many critical factors in the reasoning. To make it more sound, it is necessary for the author to do more careful inspection and research to find out the true reason that help prevent people from catching cold as well as revealing the real cause of the low absenteeism in West Meria.  【 建议看看ETS范文 我今天刚看了一点 觉得范文的问题点 找的有些和我们不同 】

点点滴滴走过UID: 195083

占个先