Argument59 同主题 一个早上的时间啊>_<

lilymermaidUID: 2126609

Argument59

The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.
"According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity—that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun."

Before informing people of avoiding flu by less exposure to the sun, the evidence given in the argument should be examined from several other angles. The researchers seem to make assumption that staying longer in the sun makes people be at particular risk for flu without examining any other factors which may have affected the flu epidemics. (57)

First of all, according to the argument above, the author draw the conclusion based on the available medical records. However, these records were only available for 300 years. It is possible that long before 300 years there were records about flu epidemics, though not being found yet. That is to say many other flu epidemics years, which were probably not sunspot activity years, were not available to the researchers, how could they make those conclusions by only 6 times?(79)

Meanwhile, the astronomic records about heavy sunspot activity years are also insufficient. What about other sunspot activity years? Maybe in 20 records of those years only 6 years happen to be flu epidemics periods, while others are the years when less people got flu. The writer fails to provide more facts to have a general look over the history, which makes the available records less persuasive. (66)

Additionally, even if the sunspot activity is concerned with the expansion of flu, which is, of course, an unwarranted assumption, it does not follow that the solar energy is the fatal reason for the flu epidemics. Many other factors contributed to the spread of flu. For instance, these were times when global weather conditions were changeable and natural disasters were frequent. Or, perhaps, during these years, the society was unstable, the medical techniques were poor, people became destitute and homeless, moving around all the time, which easily caused the prevalence of flu. In this case, avoiding direct contact with flu catchers or keeping aeration is more affective than avoiding to the exposure to the sun in preventing flu epidemics. (119)

Besides, the author fails to go into particulars about what “prolong” means. For example, compared to 10 minutes an hour means prolongation, but is in relative shortener when compared to 24 hours. Before persuading people not to “prolong” heliotherapy, which is just good to flu treatment, a more complete research on the exposure time will be helpful. (57)

To sum up, the conclusion was based on the coincidence between the medical records and astronomic record. To solidify the argument, the arguer would have to provide concrete evidence that long exposure to the sun directly affect the epidemics of flu. (41)

extensionUID: 2189820

Argument59

The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.
"According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity—that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun."

Before informing people of avoiding flu by less exposure to the sun, the evidence given in the argument should be examined from several other angles. The researchers seem to make assumption that staying longer in the sun makes people be at particular risk for flu without examining any other factors which may have affected the flu epidemics. (57)(觉得开头方式挺好,不过我还是习惯于罗列论据)

First of all, according to the argument above, the author draw the conclusion based on the available medical records. However, these records were only available for 300 years. (觉得这句话有了点歧义: 这些记录只在300年间能看到啊?)It is possible that long before 300 years there were records about flu epidemics, though not being found yet. That is to say many other flu epidemics years, which were probably not (heavy)sunspot activity years, were not available to the researchers, how could they make those conclusions by only 6 times?(79)

Meanwhile, the astronomic records about heavy sunspot activity years are also insufficient. What about other sunspot activity years? Maybe in 20 records of those years only 6 years happen to be flu epidemics periods, while others are the years when less people got flu. The writer fails to provide more facts to have a general look over the history, which makes the available records less persuasive. (66)

Additionally, even if the sunspot activity is concerned with the expansion of flu, which is, of course, an unwarranted assumption, it does not follow that the solar energy is the fatal reason for the flu epidemics. Many other factors contributed to the spread of flu. For instance, these were times when global weather conditions were changeable and natural disasters were frequent. Or, perhaps, during these years, the society was unstable, the medical techniques were poor, people became destitute and homeless, moving around all the time, which easily caused the prevalence of flu. In this case, avoiding direct contact with flu catchers or keeping aeration is more affective(effective) than avoiding to(去掉) the exposure to the sun in preventing flu epidemics. (119)(觉得这一段分析很好)

Besides, the author fails to go into particulars about what “prolong” means. For example, compared to 10 minutes an hour means prolongation, but is in relative shortener when compared to 24 hours. Before persuading people not to “prolong” heliotherapy, which is just good to flu treatment, a more complete research on the exposure time will be helpful. (57)

To sum up, the conclusion was based on the coincidence between the medical records and astronomic record. To solidify the argument, the arguer would have to provide concrete evidence that long exposure to the sun directly affect the epidemics of flu. (41)

从思路到结构都感觉不错, 值得学习!

lilymermaidUID: 2126609

谢谢你：）

本想限时完成，可是半小时至写好了一半（狂汗），于是索性求质量了。

嗯，再接再厉，向“in time”进发！