Argument38 【Persistence 小组】第十八次作业

欣馨之火UID: 2183210

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."


In this newsletter, the author recommends that the residents of West Meria use Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived
from fish oil, to prevent colds and lower absenteeism. To justify the recommendation, the author cites a study about East
Meria's public health, and according to this, he/she concludes that eating substantial amount of fish can prevent colds and
therefore can lower the absences of school and work for colds are most frequently excuses. Close scrutiny of the study and
the analysis, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

First of all, the author fails to justify that preventing colds could lower the absenteeism. Ailments would be the most
efficacious excuses for the absenteeism, and even colds are the reason most frequently given for the absences and could be
prevented effectively, it is entirely possible that people will use other excuses such as headache, asthma and bronchitis for
his/her absences from school or work. For that matter, that taking the recommendation can lower absenteeism is unconvincing.

Secondly, there are several vital flaws in the analysis of preventing colds. First, the mere fact that people of East Meria
visit the doctor only once or twice per year for treatment of colds cannot justify that East Meria residents rarely catch a
cold. Perhaps they prefer taking medicine bought from pharmacy than visiting doctors. Second, the author assumes that high
consumption of fish can prevent colds, yet, he/she provide no evidence to substantiate the causality between fish consumption
and colds. Third, even if eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds, the author fails to justify that Ichthaid,
which is only a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, has same effects as what fish has done. It is entirely possible
that some other ingredients, not fish oil, benefits to prevent colds.

Furthermore, no evidence supports that the situation of West Meria is similar to that of East Meria. The author provides no
information about the similarities between West Meria and East Meria. Perhaps the climates of the two locations are quite
different and the average temperature of West Meria is much higher than that of East Meria and residents of West Meria do not
more easily catch a cold. For that matter, it is unnecessarily to adopt a intentional method to prevent colds.

In sum, the West Meria Public Health Council cannot justify their voting recommendation on the basis of the scant evidence
and analysis provided in the newsletter. To bolster the recommendation, the author must give more information about the
situation of public health of West Meria and the efficacy of Ichthaid.