argument168[Jet小组]第二十次作业

ellefrancaiUID: 2449693

TOPIC: ARGUMENT168 - Typically, as people age, their bone mass decreases, making them more vulnerable to bone fractures. A recent study concludes that the most effective way to reduce the risk of fractures in later life is to take twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium daily. The three-year study followed a group of French women in their eighties who were nursing-home residents. The women were given daily supplements of twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium. In addition, the women participated in a light weightlifting program. After three years, these women showed a much lower rate of hip fractures than is average for their age.
WORDS: 451          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2008-3-9 1:44:28

The argument builds the conclusion on the basis of a recent study which concludes that the most effective way to reduce the risk of fractures in later life is to take twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium daily. In addition, the three-year study followed a group of French women and gave them daily supplement of twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium as well as a light weightlifting program. However, this argument is far from convincing since it is full of logical flaws and dubious evidences.

Above all, the participants of three-year study are sure to be of a certain group of French women in their eighties who were nursing-home residents, which made the study has no common meaning by all means and the result of it unpersuasive. It is possible that French women are much stronger than French men and women from other counties like German, Britain, China etc.. Hence, if the participants of the study were changed into other groups of people in different ages or one of the groups I just said above, the result would be totally the opposite that they would show a much higher rate of hip fractures than is average for their age.

Moreover, assuming that the participants were able to be the representatives of all groups of people, the arguer provided limited information of the study which made the conclusion he or she made seemed to be really rush and hasty. It lacks the detailed information about the health condition of those participants. It is entirely possible that those participants are extremely healthy and the real age condition of their bones is around thirty and has nothing to do with bone fractures.

Furthermore, the methods used in the study seem to be random and have no scientific rationales. It is greatly possible that taking three times the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium will be more likely to protect people away from bone fractures. Also, the light weightlifting program provided to participants is nothing but weird since it might be a cause of the result that the participants have a much lower rate of hip fractures than is average for their age. The arguer failed to build causal relationship between the methods used in the study with the conclusion he or she made.

In sum, this argument shows unconvincing conclusion and is filled with logical flaws. In order to recheck whether the most effective way to reduce the risk of fractures in later life is to take twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium, we need a long-term study much longer than three years and changed the participants as well as further information of participants.

[ 本帖最后由 lastangel 于 2008-3-9 02:02 编辑 ]