argument142 Smile-A组 第四次作业

EmmanuelleUID: 2231740

TOPIC: ARGUMENT142 - The article entitled 'Eating Iron' in last month's issue of Eating for Health reported that a recent study found a correlation between high levels of iron in the diet and an increased risk of heart disease. Further, it is well established that there is a link between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease, and red meat is high in iron. On the basis of the study and the well-established link between red meat and heart disease, we can conclude that the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease, then, is most probably a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease.

提纲：
1 文中的关于含铁量与引发心脏病的研究不可信。没有具体数据显示样本合适，而且任何研究内容没有提及。
2 没有证明铁是唯一导致疾病的因素。
3 即便铁导致心脏病，牛羊肉里含的铁未必就能导致。而且没有排除肉里面其他的因素。


In this argument, the speaker concludes the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease is a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease. To justify the conclusion, the speaker cites a recent report about the study of high levels of iron and heart disease. The author also mentions that red meat is high in iron. However, the argument has several doubtful assumptions, rendering it unconvincing.

First, the study cited in the argument is specious. No evidence in detail can guarantee the result is statistically reliable. As a scientific research, the study should have a sample sufficient in size and representative overall population. For that matter, the speaker at least should provide some data and information of the sample like age, gender etc to make the study persuasive. Furthermore the speaker should describe briefly how the study is carried out for example the principle, the method and so forth. However hardly any of these has been found in the argument as a result the research is not convincing.

Even if the study is statistically reliable and the high-iron level does have a correlation with heart disease that does not mean that the former causes the latter. Perhaps though iron has correlation with the disease it is not the main cause but only accessorial. As we all know, factors which cause heart disease are various including heredity, vehement exercises etc. If the speaker wants to be persuasive these reasons must be considered. It’s also possible that the substance which causes heart disease exists in another kind of food that all informants eat. Lacking of evidence ruling out these possibilities the conclusion is dubious.

Another one is that iron element exists in red meat is the only one can be absorbed by human body based on which the speaker thinks red meat that is high in iron can cause heart disease. Yet, whether iron can be absorbed completely is not answered. Perhaps the iron in red meat can not be absorbed or only a little by organizations in human so it has no relation with heart disease. Or perhaps the iron in the form as existing in red meat can not cause heart disease. The argument leaves open the possibility that maybe it’s some other chemical ingredient in red meat has much to do with the disease but has not been found. Without accounting for these questions the speaker comes to a hasty conclusion which can not be taken seriously.

In sum, the conclusion is not reliable lacking of detailed information about the study and without considering how the iron is absorbed. To bolster it, we need to know how the study be carried out, the size of the sample etc. To better assess it, scientists must study how the iron be absorbed by human and its function when iron exists in red meat. Only when these work has been done can the researchers conclude the correlation.

欢迎来拍！

[ 本帖最后由 Emmanuelle 于 2006-7-29 21:23 编辑 ]

xinxinwUID: 2144273

In this argument, the speaker concludes that the correlation between red meat and heart disease is due to the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease. To justify the conclusion, the speaker cites a recent report about the study of high levels of iron and heart disease. The author also mentions that red meat is high in iron. However, the argument has several doubtful assumptions, rendering it unconvincing.

First, the study cited in the argument is specious. No evidence in detail can guarantee the result is statistically reliable是作者没有提供，不是没有. As a scientific research, the study should have a sample sufficient in size and representative overall population. For that matter, the speaker at least should provide some data and information of the sample like age, gender etc to make the study persuasive. Furthermore the speaker should describe briefly how the study is carried out for example the principle, the method and so forth. However hardly any of these has been found in the argument as a result the research is not convincing.

Even if the study is statistically reliable and the high-iron level does have a correlation with heart disease that does not mean that the former causes the latter. Perhaps though iron has correlation with the disease it is not the main cause but only accessorial. As we all know, factors which cause heart disease are various including heredity, vehement exercises etc. If the speaker wants to be persuasive these reasons must be considered. It’s also possible that the substance which causes heart disease exists in another kind of food that all informants eat. Lacking of evidence ruling out these possibilities the conclusion is dubious.这一段内容跑偏了，作者没有说iron是唯一的原因

Another one is that iron element exists in red meat is the only one can be absorbed 也不是作者的直接观点或假设by human body based on which the speaker thinks red meat that is high in iron can cause heart disease. Yet, whether iron can be absorbed completely is not answered. Perhaps the iron in red meat can not be absorbed or only a little by organizations in human so it has no relation with heart disease. Or perhaps the iron in the form as existing in red meat can not cause heart disease. The argument leaves open the possibility that maybe it’s some other chemical ingredient in red meat has much to do with the disease but has not been found. Without accounting for these questions the speaker comes to a hasty conclusion which can not be taken seriously.

In sum, the conclusion is not reliable lacking of detailed information about the study and without considering how the iron is absorbed. To bolster it, we need to know how the study be carried out, the size of the sample etc. To better assess it, scientists must study how the iron be absorbed by human and its function when iron exists in red meat. Only when these work has been done can the researchers conclude the correlation.

有一个问题，作者的逻辑链应该是这样的：study发现iron跟心脏病有关系-->红肉跟心脏病有关系，且iron含量高-->iron是红肉跟心脏病关系的根源-->iron跟心脏病的关联就是红肉跟心脏病的关联。所以主要的错误在于study，iron是不是红肉的致病原因，以及最后对结论。而你第二段想要说iron不是唯一的致病因，不知道是想说明study没有考虑到这些因素呢？还是想说红肉中还有其他因素可以致病。所以或者归到第一段，或者归到第三段。
另外语言上感觉比较琐碎。
不要客气来拍我吧