Argument53 【loveaw】 第十次作业

katrinajjUID: 2242021

38The 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."
写了之后都没有好好总结看过,写来写去都没有进步的说~ 这几天要好好总结下更正下~~

In this argument, the author recommend that people in West Media should use Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, everyday prevent colds and lower absenteeism. This argument based on a series of assumptions, therefore unwarranted as it stands.

Firstly, the author's recommendation relies on an assumption that eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. To substantiate this assumption, the author provide an study to show that people visit the doctor only once or twice every year for treatment of colds in nearby East Meria due to the high consumption oif fish there.  However, going to hospital only once or twice every year does not mean they suffer from cold so fewer times.  It is possible that their colds are not so seriously to see doctor and they only take some medicine at home by themselves. And also no evidences prove that the fish does contribute to prevent cold. It is high possible that the weather in East Meria is so warm and comfortable that people do not catch cold frequently. Thus without ruling out all these scenarios, we cannot conclude eating fish can prevent colds.

Further, even fish can prevent cold, it does not follow that Ichthaid is a good way to prevent colds. The author fails to justify this function of Ichthaid. The mere fact we know is that Ichthaid is only a nutritianl supplement derived from fish oil. Which nutrition in fish has this function, whether fish oil contain this kind of nutrition and weather the supplement contains that are a unknown. It is likely that Ichthaid do not contain the useful nutrition so it does not have this function. Moreover, no evidence show that whether Ichthaid have side-effect to people. If it can cause people feel badly and even cause other illness, we surely can not adopt the recommendation. Lacking so much information, the author can not convince us that taking Ichthaid is a good way.

Finally, the author's assumption that preventing cold can reduce absenteeism is also unpersuasive. The mere fact that colds are the most frequently given for absences is insufficient to justify this assumption. No evidence to show that this is the case and there are many other factors that affect the absenteeism. Even if colds are the main excuse, there is a possibility that people who do not catch cold also use this excuse to ask for a leave. Thus the causal relationship between preventing cold and reducing absenteeism can not be established

In sum, the author's argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strengthen the assumption, the author have to provide evidence that Ichthaid do have effect on colds, and the colds are truely the main factor to affect abstenteeism.