0910G [try best] 第四次作业 argument101 by heliapple

heliappleUID: 2621347

101.The following appeared in a memo from the president of a company that makes breakfast cereals.

"In a recent study, subjects who ate soybeans at least five times per week had significantly lower cholesterol levels than subjects who ate no soy products. By fortifying our Wheat-O cereal with soy protein, we can increase sales by appealing to additional consumers who are concerned about their health. This new version of Wheat-O should increase company profits and, at the same time, improve the health of our customers."

By stating a survey which shows people consume more soybeans have lower cholesterol levels, the president assumes that this survey shows that soybeans is good for health because it could reduce the amount of cholesterol in human body. Based on this assumption, the president suggests that by adding soy proteins into their cereal, their new product could attract more customers and help the company make more profit.  It seems that this argument is persuasive, but it actually has serious flaws which make it unconvincing as it stands.

Firstly, there is no evidence support the president's assumption that it is the consumption of soybeans brings down the level of cholesterol. The mere fact that people who ate soybeans more often had lower cholesterol level could not serve as the evidence to prove the president's assumption. It might be other food intake took effect in reducing the level of cholesterol but not the soybeans. Or might be some food ate more often increased the cholesterol level.  All these alternatives could explain the survey cited by the president, but none of them could support the president’s assumption.

Moreover, even though the consumption of soybeans could reduce the amount of cholesterol in blood, the effective substance might not be the soy protein. It could be other substance in the soybeans, such as some special vitamins or ions. Thus the supplementary soy proteins in the cereal might not act as it is supposed to do to attract more customers who care about their health and improve the health of their customers.

In addition, the new version of Wheat-O might not attract more customers by adding the soy proteins but facing the risk of losing some customers it already has. The addition of soy protein may render some consumers who have allergy to soybeans stop purchasing it anymore. Some consumers who don't like the flavor of soybeans may also stop buying it. In addition with the failure of attracting more consumers, the overall population of its consumers might decrease in the opposite and consequently leading into a decreasing in its profit.

To sum up, in order to make this suggestion more convincible, the memo should  provide more evidence to show that  soybeans really reduce the level of  cholesterol and good for health, moreover, it also need to clarify that the substance which take effect is soy proteins but not other substance in the soy beans. At last, a survey about the consumers' preference should be made to show its cereal in the new version could attract more consumers but not lose more patrons.