argument38 【米国有米】小组第七周作业，请多提意见

chronicleUID: 2254484

ARGUMENT 38
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."
WORDS: 435                                TIME: 35                     DATE:2006-12-17

提纲：
1. 论者不能证明吃鱼能够预防感冒；
2. 即使吃鱼有助于预防感冒，Ichthaid这种物质的功能有待证实；
3. 论者没有考虑到WM的居民缺勤的主要原因。

In this newsletter, the arguer recommends that it is a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism through daily use of lchthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, . To substantiate this recommendation, the arguer cites the phenomena concerning people's doctor visiting in the nearby East Media (EM). Close scrutiny of these facts, however, reveals that none of them could support the arguer's recommendation, and this argument suffers from several flaws.

To begin with, the arguer's recommendation is based on the unfair assumption that eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. To support this assumption, the arguer provides a study reporting that fish consumption is very high in EM, and people visit doctor only once or twice per year. Yet, there is not a reason-result relationship between the former and latter. The author might omits the other possible alternatives to explaining this result. It is possible that the health condition in EM is attributable to the clear environment, better climates, and the people's awareness of decease preventing. Consequently, the arguer cannot ensure the fact that eating a substantial amount of fish would prevent colds necessarily.

Secondly, even assuming that eating fish actually help prevent colds, there is no evidence to certify that use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, could prevent colds. What's more, no evidence indicates that how effect this kind of material would be. The arguer cannot convince me that lchthaid would attribute to preventing colds. And it is much likely that lchthaid have no effect in preventing colds at all. So if this is the case, it would serve to undermine arguer's recommendation.

Thirdly, the arguer cannot ensure that the use of lchthaid could prevent absenteeism. Even assuming that lchthaid would help prevent colds, the arguer fails to consider other factors that have influenced the absence in school and workplace. It is possible that in West Meria (WM) the cold would not lead to the absenteeism much more, and the other reasons such as weather, traffic and so forth might be the main factors for absenteeism. So if it is true, it would not be able to support the arguer's claim.

In sum, the arguer makes his recommendation based on a series of unfair facts. So the arguer cannot convince me that his recommendation is feasible and effective. To make this argument more convincing, the arguer should provide more clear and credible evidence such as: eating fish actually help prevent colds and lchthaid would be effective to prevent colds; what's more, the colds are the main reason for the absenteeism in West Media.