【☆09GRE作文冲刺组☆】liuhantony.2.20号作业argument38

liuhantony2UID: 2597441

TOPIC: ARGUMENT38 - 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."
WORDS: 558
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009-2-20
Before announcing encouragement for people to largely use the nutritional supplement, a closer examination is needed for this specious conclusion. First, other possibilities, rather than oil, might actually be responsible for the low rate of occurrence of cold. Also, it is also a question if the lchthaid is the main factor in fish to cure or prevent cold. In addition, whether the cure of cold will actually reduce the absenteeism depends on the reliability of people's reason for their absence.

To begin with, whether fish is effective in the prevention or the treatment of disease is open to question. Actually, the fact that people seldom visit doctor might not because of their perfect body condition, but a lack of money or less availability. It is entirely possible that East Meria is having a problem of declining economy and the disease not so serious such as cold would not be enough motivation for people to decide to spend their money and see the doctor. Equally possible is that the number of doctors is small and people live farther away will encounter difficulty in arriving at the doctors'. Even if i concede that people in East Meria is in perfect health state, it might be the case that the climate or other factors, rather than fish, leads to the health of people. For example the East Meria might be located near the sea and as common sense points out, the climate near the sea is quite mile without big temperature difference between day and night, which reduce the risk of catching cold. And it is quite reasonable that people near seashore have more fish since fish is really common there. If either possibility is true, fish is not the crucial factor in curing or preventing cold and the argument would lose its support.

Even if fish is responsible for the decrease of cold, whether lchthaid is effective of the function is doubtable. I can think of a myriad of components that might be effective in fish rather than lchthaid. Such components include different kinds of proteins and fat, even some special vitamins existed in the fish meat. Nevertheless, completely no evidence show that among such various kind of substance, lchthaid is what really effective. At least experiment about the test of such substance on volunteers should be conducted before making a conclusion. Therefore, lacking such evidence, the argument cannot convince me effectively.

Even if I concede that lchthaid is the crucial substance in curing disease, the use of it might not lead to a lower absenteeism, since cold might not be the real reason for people's absence, in other words, people are not completely honest. As a matter of fact, albeit the most frequently reason given for absences, people might use cold as an excuse to make their situation of some kind of emergency and escape the punishment of regulations in school and work, considering the punishment, if any, for sick leave is considerable light than other excuses. For example, a student might say he caught cold but actually staying at home and play a newly issued games. Therefore, without investigation to offer the number of people who really catch cold, the argument fail to convince me.

All in all, the argument is not as convincing as it stands. More investigation is needed before a final conclusion can be made.