argument142 [smile-A]第四次作业，难题欢迎来拍。

hes2000abcUID: 2154084

142 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：
高含量的铁增加心脏病的可能性，缺乏足够的数据支持。
可能不光是牛羊肉中含铁，其他食物也可能含大量容易吸收的铁
即使牛羊肉中含有大量的铁，是否可以被人体吸收进而导致心脏病。

   The argument is well-established, but not thoroughly well reasonable. To substantiate the conclusion that the correlation between high levels of iron and heart disease is own to the correlation between red meat and heart disease, the argument cites a recent study and a well established fact. Although reasoning seems to be logical at the first glance, the whole argument suffers several fallacies after careful reflections.
     
      First of all, the argument fails to supply concrete data about the recent study for relationship between the level of iron in the diet and the increase of heart of disease which is vital important. The blurry data-high level can hardly help us to judge. So it is very possible that the high level only can be reached in scientific laboratory, which cannot apply to our ordinary life directly, for the high level of iron that a person can get in our diet cannot be so high during one day.

     Second, the well-established facts that the link between a large mounts of red meat and the heart disease is scant enough evident. It is possible that other ingredients contained the red meat contribute to the heart disease. It is even possible that other foods may contain lots of iron can be absorbed. Without ruling out these and other possible reasons, the argument cannot be incredible.

    In addition, the most critical flaw in the argument is that even assuming that red meat contained high level of iron whether can be absorbed or not, and in turn, lead to heart disease. Moreover, without comparing the level of iron in the study related and the level in red meat can be absorbed by us, the conclusion can hardly persuade us to believe it.

      Overall, to bolster the conclusion, we needed to more statistics about the iron in the red meat we can take-in, and more concrete data about the level of iron and the increased heart disease. And to support the conclusion, the argument should find out whether other reasons might contribute the increase of heart disease.

猫猫寿司UID: 2219543

The argument is well-established, but not thoroughly well reasonable.这三个词连用不合适吧 To substantiate the conclusion that the correlation between high levels of iron and heart disease is own to the correlation between red meat and heart disease, the argument cites a recent study and a well established fact. Although reasoning seems to be logical at the first glance, the whole argument suffers several fallacies after careful reflections.
     
      First of all, the argument fails to supply concrete data about the recent study for relationship between the level of iron in the diet and the increase of heart of disease which is vital important. The blurry data-high level can hardly help us to judge. So it is very possible that the high level only can be reached in scientific laboratory, which cannot apply to our ordinary life directly, for the high level of iron that a person can get in our diet cannot be so high during one day.

     Second, the well-established facts that the link between a large mounts of red meat and the heart disease is scant enough evident. It is possible that other ingredients contained the red meat contribute to the heart disease. It is even possible that other foods may contain lots of iron can be absorbed. Without ruling out these and other possible reasons, the argument cannot be incredible.

    In addition, the most critical flaw in the argument is that even assuming that red meat contained high level of iron whether can be absorbed or not, and in turn, lead to heart disease. Moreover, without comparing the level of iron in the study related and the level in red meat can be absorbed by us, the conclusion can hardly persuade us to believe it.

      Overall, to bolster the conclusion, we needed to more statistics about the iron in the red meat we can take-in, and more concrete data about the level of iron and the increased heart disease. And to support the conclusion, the argument should find out whether other reasons might contribute the increase of heart disease.
整个文章的结构有一点失衡哦~开头结尾反而比说理驳斥要详尽一些，呵呵不过逻辑没啥问题