【challenge yourself小组】第一次作业 argu 158

superjiang001UID：2300426

Argument158.
The Trash-Site Safety Council has recently conducted a statewide study of possible harmful effects of garbage sites on the health of people living near the sites. A total of five sites and 300 people were examined. The study revealed, on average, only a small statistical correlation between the proximity of homes to garbage sites and the incidence of unexplained rashes among people living in these homes. Furthermore, although it is true that people living near the largest trash sites had a slightly higher incidence of the rashes, there was otherwise no correlation between the size of the garbage sites and people's health. Therefore, the council is pleased to announce that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard. We see no need to restrict the size of such sites in our state or to place any restrictions on the number of homes built near the sites.

Before the Trash-site Safety Council conclude that there is no need to confine the size of garbage sites in the state and to restrict the number of families live near the sites, we should reconsider the evidence offered by the author from other angles. The council who made a census of the total of five sites and 300 people seems to have assumed that the rashes among people has a small relationship to the size and number of the garbage sites, which may mask other significant factors which may inspire the potentially negative health problems of those people in the longer term.

First of all, the census made by the researchers is not accurate itself. In the above study, the author fails to give us specific information about those 300 people. We have no idea of their health condition, medical record, ages, and so forth. Maybe most of these people are under thirty years old or younger than we suppose, which may cause them a limited opportunity to get affected by rashes. We also do not know if the people have familiar disease history before, if it is the case, they may still have antibodies which may help them a better chance to fight against the rashes and they are not able to get infection even if they live near form those garbage sites. Still, maybe most of these people are in good habits, such as they exercise regularly, ate healthily and never get drank, and which may play a vital role in preventing such rashes from invading their bodies.

Second, even if we accept the author’s conclusion that there is only a small statistical correlation between the garbage sites and the incidence of rashes among people who live nearby, how can the author propose the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard? Perhaps the garbage may cause other extraordinary diseases or health problems which are not easily to detect in a short time. For example, the severe “ShuiYu” disease happened in Japan, which is caused by garbage pollution of water, was not discovered until a deformed baby born in this area years later. Thus, maybe the garbage has already caused some severely diseases which may influence people’s judge for they are difficult to find out.

Finally, we can not find any solid facts which can illustrate the conclusion that there is no correlation between the size of the garbage sites and people's health. If the author can provide a comparative experiment which consists of the same number of persons who have familiar physical conditions, and are alike in other fields, say, living habits, but different size of garbage sites, perhaps we can attain something useful from the consequence of study.

In sum, before the conclusion that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard and there is no need to restrict the size of such sites in our state or to place any restrictions on the number of homes built near the sites are reached, a more strictly controlled legitimate study is needed.

tangreihanUID：2499991

Before the Trash-site Safety Council conclude that there is no need to confine the size of garbage sites in the state and to restrict the number of families live near the sites, we should reconsider the evidence offered by the author from other angles我觉得结论不可信是因为证据不全或者错误或者不可信或者不相关，和angle关系不大吧.The council who made a census of the total of five sites and 300 people seems to have assumed that the rashes among people has a small relationship to the size and number of the garbage sites, which may mask other significant factors which may inspire the potentially negative换成“更严重的”可能会更好 health problems of those people in the longer term.

First of all, the census made by the researchers is not accurate itselfitself可以考虑去掉. In the above studyIn the study mentioned above, the author fails to give us specific information about those 300 people. We have no idea of their health condition, medical record请问是不是医疗记录的意思, ages, and so forth. Maybe most of these people are under thirty years old or younger than we suppose, which may cause them a limited opportunity有点怪 to get affected by rashes. We also do not know if the people have familiar disease history请问是不是病史的意思 before, if it is the case, they may still have antibodies which may help them a better chance to fight against the rashes and they are not able to get infectioninfected even if they live near form those garbage sites. Still, maybe most of these people are in good habits, such as they exercise regularly, ate healthily and never get drank, 三个并列结构的时态不一致and which may play a vital role in preventing such rashes from invading their bodies.

Second, even if we accept the author’s conclusion that there is only a small statistical correlation between the garbage sites and the incidence of rashes among people who live nearby, how can the author propose the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard? Perhaps the garbage may cause other extraordinary diseases or health problems which are not easily to detect in a short time. For example, the severe “ShuiYu” disease happened in Japan, which is caused by garbage pollution of water, was not discovered until a deformed baby born in this area years later. Argument中举例子，勇敢的创新，呵呵Thus, maybe the garbage has already caused some severely diseases which may influence people’s judge for 为什么是forthey are difficult to find out.

Finally, we can not find any solid facts which can illustrate the conclusion that there is no correlation between the size of the garbage sites and people's health. If the author can provide a comparative experiment which consists of the same number of persons who have familiar physical conditions, and are alike in other fields, say, living habits, but different size of garbage sites, perhaps we can attain something useful from the consequence of study.

In sum, before the conclusion that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard and there is no need to restrict the size of such sites in our state or to place any restrictions on the number of homes built near the sites are reached, a more strictly controlled legitimate study is needed.


呵呵，我水平太水了，又是第一次改作文，呵呵，该不出什么有价值的东东，呵呵见谅。这篇A没有什么摩版痕迹，这很好，不过有些细节表达我不太明白，请指教。一起加油~~

IclandUID：2517723

Before the Trash-site Safety Council conclude that there is no need to confine the size of garbage sites in the state and to restrict the number of families live near the sites, we should reconsider the evidence offered by the author from other angles.(Council的声明已经做出了吧，又何谓before呢？) The council who made a census of the total of(去掉of?) five sites and 300 people seems to have assumed that the rashes among people has a small relationship to(with) the size and number of the garbage sites, which may mask other significant factors which(that) may inspire the potentially negative health problems of those people in the longer term.

First of all, the census made by the researchers is not accurate itself. In the above study, the author fails to give us specific information about those 300 people. We have no idea of their health condition, medical record, ages, and so forth. Maybe most of these people are under thirty years old or younger than we suppose, which may cause them a limited opportunity to get affected by rashes. We also do not know if(whether) the people have familiar disease history before, if it is the case, they may still have antibodies which may help them a better chance to fight against the rashes and they are not able to get infection even if they live near form those garbage sites. Still, maybe most of these people are in good habits, such as they exercise regularly, ate healthily and never get drank, and which may play a vital role in preventing such rashes from invading their bodies. (抗体的例子很新颖哈，很有亮点)

Second, even if we accept the author’s conclusion that there is only a small statistical correlation between the garbage sites and the incidence of rashes among people who live nearby, how can the author propose the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard? Perhaps the garbage may cause other extraordinary diseases or health problems which are not easily to detect in a short time. For example, the severe “ShuiYu” disease happened in Japan, which is caused by garbage pollution of water, was not discovered until a deformed baby born in this area years later. Thus, maybe the garbage has already caused some severely diseases which may influence people’s judge for they are difficult to find (be found)out.

Finally, we can not find any solid facts which can illustrate the conclusion that there is no correlation between the size of the garbage sites and people's health. If the author can provide a comparative experiment which consists of the same number of persons who have familiar physical conditions, and are alike in other fields, say, living habits, but different size of garbage sites, perhaps we can attain something useful from the consequence of study.

In sum, before the conclusion that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard and there is no need to restrict the size of such sites in our state(our state?) or to place any restrictions on the number of homes built near the sites are reached, a more strictly controlled legitimate study is needed.

个人感觉写的很好，引用的实例都很新颖独到，值得学习～