Agument142 [Victors小组]第3次作业

乳虎UID: 2251211

142The 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文中引用的实验本身不一顶可信.
     2作者把食物中含铁量高和心脏病之间的相关关系等同于因果关系.
     3作者未考虑红肉中其他物质的影响.

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the relationship between high iron and heart disease is the function of the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease relying a study showing that a correlation between high levels of iron in the diet and an increasing risk of heart disease and a well establish link between large amounts of red meat in the diet and increased risk of heart disease. Close scrutiny shows that the argument in based on a series of fallacious assumptions.

Firstly, the study cited in the argument showing the correlation between high iron level and heart disease is unconvincing. The arguer provides no information about the sample and the procedure of the study. Maybe the sample is too little, in which case, the sample is not representative of the population.  It is also possible that the sample is not random. Either possibility, if true, would make the study  unconvincing, let alone the arguer's argument.

Similarly，the arguer falsely assumes that large amount of red meat is the primary cause of heart disease. Actually heart disease is the function of a series of factors, including habits and customs, career etc. The arguer should consider and eliminate other alternative explanation, otherwise he cannot draw any convincing conclusion.   


Secondly, the arguer assumes that high iron level in diet is attributable to heart disease. In fact the argument identify the correlation and causation between high iron level and heart disease. Losts of factor may engender heart disease, such as hereditary, mental pressure etc. Unfortunately, the arguer takes it granted that high iron level contributes to heart disease, which makes the argument not so tenable as it stands.

Thirdly, the link between red meet and heart disease is little indication that the correlation between high iron level in the diet and an increased risk of heat disease is function of the link between large amounts of red meat and heart disease. In meat consist  kinds of ingredient, such as protein, cholesterin and so on. It in equally possible that some of those substances rather than iron are responsible for heart disease. Without excluding those possibilities, the arguer can not persuade me.

In conclusion, the argument fails to provide credible evidence that can lend credible support to the conclusion. To strengthen it, the arguer must provide the evidence which indicates that high iron level contributes to heart disease and the evidence which proves that high iron level in the diet accounts for heart disease. To convince me, he also should provide the evidence which indicates that other ingredients in meat do nothing with heart disease.   

[ 本帖最后由 乳虎 于 2007-5-12 11:13 编辑 ]

jennetrjUID: 2275453

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the relationship between high iron and heart disease is the function of the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease relying a study showing that a correlation between high levels of iron in the diet and an increasing risk of heart disease and a well establish link between large amounts of red meat in the diet and increased risk of heart disease. Close scrutiny shows that the argument in based on a series of fallacious assumptions.

Firstly, the study cited in the argument showing the correlation between high iron level and heart disease is unconvincing. The arguer provides no information about the sample and the procedure of the study. Maybe the sample is too little[ the sample size is too small], in which case, the sample[一句话中有俩个sample，可否用其他词] is not representative of the population.  It is also possible that the sample is not random[randomly collected]. Either possibility, if true, would make the study  unconvincing, let alone the arguer's argument[assumption可以避免重复].

Similarly，the arguer falsely assumes that large amount of red meat is the primary cause of heart disease. Actually heart disease is the function of a series of factors, including habits and customs, career etc. The arguer should consider and eliminate other alternative explanation, otherwise he cannot draw any convincing conclusion.   


Secondly, the arguer assumes that high iron level in diet is attributable [ attribute ]o heart disease. In fact the argument identify [identify用在此处有些拗口]the correlation and causation between high iron level and heart disease. Losts of factor may engender heart disease, such as hereditary[疾病的遗传一般用genetical], mental pressure [stress]etc. Unfortunately, the arguer takes it [for]granted that high iron level contributes to heart disease, which makes the argument not so tenable as it stands.

Thirdly, the link between red meet and heart disease is little indication that the correlation between high iron level in the diet and an increased risk of heat disease is function of the link between large amounts of red meat and heart disease. [In] meat consist kinds of ingredient, such as protein, cholesterin [cholesterol]and so on. It in equally possible that some of those substances rather than iron are responsible for heart disease. Without excluding those possibilities, the arguer can not persuade me.

In conclusion, the argument fails to provide credible evidence that can lend credible support to the conclusion. To strengthen it, the arguer must provide the evidence which indicates that high iron level contributes to heart disease and the evidence which proves that high iron level in the diet accounts for heart disease. To convince me, he also should provide the evidence which indicates that other ingredients in meat do nothing with heart disease.   [最后的小结段，句式可否多变些？]

全文没有太大的问题，只是感觉反驳的时候单薄了些，若能充实，就能向高分进发！

乳虎UID: 2251211

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the relationship between high iron and heart disease is the function of the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease relying a study showing that a correlation between high levels of iron in the diet and an increasing risk of heart disease and a well establish link between large amounts of red meat in the diet and increased risk of heart disease. Close scrutiny shows that the argument in based on a series of fallacious assumptions.

Firstly, the study cited in the argument showing the correlation between high iron level and heart disease is not statistically deliable. The arguer provides no information about the sample and the procedure of the study. Maybe the sample size is too little, in which case, the it is not representative of the population.  It is also possible that the sample is not randomly collected. Either possibility, if true, would make the study  unconvincing, let alone the arguer's conclusion.

Similarly，the arguer falsely assumes that large amount of red meat is the primary cause of heart disease. Actually heart disease is the function of a series of factors, including habits and customs, career etc. The arguer should consider and eliminate other alternative explanation, otherwise he cannot draw any convincing conclusion.   


Secondly, the arguer unfairly assumes that high iron level in diet is attributable to heart disease. In fact the argument identify the correlation with causation between high iron level and heart disease. Losts of factor may engender heart disease, such as genetic factor, stress etc. Unfortunately, the arguer takes it for granted that high iron level contributes to heart disease, which makes the argument not so tenable as it stands.

Thirdly, the link between red meet and heart disease is little indication that the correlation between high iron level in the diet and an increased risk of heat disease is function of the link between large amounts of red meat and heart disease. In meat consist  kinds of ingredient, such as protein, cholesterin and so on. It in equally possible that some of those substances rather than iron are responsible for heart disease. Without excluding those possibilities, the arguer can not persuade me.

In conclusion, the argument fails to provide credible evidence that can lend credible support to the conclusion. To strengthen it, the arguer must provide the evidence which indicates that high iron level contributes to heart disease and the evidence which proves that high iron level in the diet accounts for heart disease. To convince me, he also should provide the evidence which indicates that other ingredients in meat do nothing with heart disease