ARGUMENT142 [Smile-A]第四次作业，求拍！

monica98UID: 2124796

OPIC: ARGUMENT142 - The article entitled 'Eating Iron' in last month's issue of Eating for Health reported that a recent study found a correlation between high levels of iron in the diet and an increased risk of heart disease. Further, it is well established that there is a link between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease, and red meat is high in iron. On the basis of the study and the well-established link
between red meat and heart disease, we can conclude that the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease, then, is most probably a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease.

必回拍！！
基本思路：1.高铁饮食－－》心脏病
               2.红肉——》心脏病，红肉里面多铁
结论：1 是 2 的作用或者体现
攻击：1.饮食里面未必又红肉
         2.即使红肉有铁也未必被吸收
         3.即使吸收了，肉里面还可能有其他的东西致病。
The arguer concludes that the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease is a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease.To justify it, the arguer cites the correlation in the article in Eating for Health, and a well established correlation between red meat and heart disease. Careful scrutiny of these evidence, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the conclusion.

First, the arguer unfairly assumes that the diet with high levels of iron in the cited article automatically involves the red meat. No information concerning the ingredient of the diet in the article is provided to substantiate the assumption, it is entirely possible that the diet mentioned in the article contains primarily vegetables or white meat instead of red meat. This case, if true, will serve to seriously weaken the rarionality of cited article as the evidence to support the function related to the red meat.

Second, even if the diet in the article consists of red meat, the arguer falsely equates the high levels of iron in red meat with the high levels of iron which can be absorbed by human body. Lacking such evidence to substantiate this assumption, perhaps only a small part of or even none of the iron in red meat could be absorbed by human. Thus, the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease

could have nothing to do with the levels in iron in red meat. Third, even if human body can effectively utilize the iron in red meat, the arguer fails to take in account high
levels of other elements in red meat which might trigger the heart disease. Without ruling out other possible ingredients in red meat for heart diseases, it is just as likely that certain protein in red meat is responsible for the heart disease, even perhaps such kind of correlation has been established in other study. Likewise,the correlation between iron and red meat has little to do with the heat diseases.

In sum, the argument is logically groundless and unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the arguer should provide detailed information about ingredient of the diet mentioned in the cited article. Other possible elements in red meat which could contribute to the heart disease should be considered. And the data about the absorption of iron of red meat by human body also is needed to better evaluate the argument.

[ 本帖最后由 monica98 于 2006-7-29 17:14 编辑 ]

EmmanuelleUID: 2231740

The arguer concludes that the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease is a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease.To justify it, the arguer cites the correlation in the article in Eating for Health, and a well established correlation between red meat and heart disease. Careful scrutiny of these evidence, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the conclusion.

First, the arguer unfairly assumes that the diet （讲一下这个diet是article的研究里面的，否则让人不太清楚）with high levels of iron in the cited article automatically（不太合适） involves the red meat. No information concerning the ingredient of the diet in the article is provided to substantiate the assumption, (加个连词)it is entirely possible that the diet mentioned in the article contains primarily vegetables or white meat instead of red meat. This case, if true, will serve to seriously weaken the rarionality(rationality) of (the)cited article as the evidence to support the function related to the red meat.（其实这个研究本身就有很大问题，也可提下其他方面，内容可能多点）

Second, even if the diet in the article consists of red meat, the arguer falsely equates the high levels of iron in red meat with the high levels of iron which can be absorbed by human body. Lacking such evidence to substantiate this assumption, perhaps only a small part of or even none of the iron in red meat could be absorbed by human. Thus, the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease could have nothing to do with the levels in iron in red meat.

Third, even if human body can effectively utilize the iron in red meat, the arguer fails to take in account high levels（其他未必一定要大量） of other elements in red meat which might trigger the heart disease. Without ruling out other possible ingredients in red meat for heart diseases, it is just as likely that certain protein in red meat is responsible for the heart disease, even perhaps such kind of correlation has been established in other study. Likewise（不太合适，可以用用in this case, if so）,the correlation between iron and red meat has little to do with the heat diseases.

In sum, the argument is logically groundless and unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the arguer should provide detailed information about ingredient of the diet mentioned in the cited article. Other possible elements in red meat which could contribute to the heart disease should be considered. And the data about the absorption of iron of red meat by human body also is needed to better evaluate the argument.（也可以换个句式，用用主动）

结构很好，攻击点也是对的。第二点内容略显少了，再多点论证。其他我写在文章里面了。
个人意见，仅供参考。:)

[ 本帖最后由 Emmanuelle 于 2006-7-29 22:02 编辑 ]

xinxinwUID: 2144273

The arguer concludes that the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease is a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease.To justify it, the arguer cites the correlation in the article in Eating for Health, and a well established correlation between red meat and heart disease. Careful scrutiny of these evidence, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the conclusion.

First, the arguer unfairly assumes that the diet with high levels of iron in the cited article automatically involves the red meat. No information concerning the ingredient of the diet in the article is provided to substantiate the assumption, it is entirely possible that the diet mentioned in the article contains primarily vegetables or white meat instead of red meat. This case, if true, will serve to seriously weaken the rarionality of cited article as the evidence to support the function related to the red meat.是想攻击那个study么?最好明确提出来

Second, even if the diet in the article consists of red meat, the arguer falsely equates the high levels of iron in red meat with the high levels of iron which can be absorbed by human body. Lacking such evidence to substantiate this assumption, perhaps only a small part of or even none of the iron in red meat could be absorbed by human. Thus, the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease could have nothing to do with the levels in iron in red meat. 顺便骂作者一句也是应该的

Third, even if human body can effectively utilize the iron in red meat, the arguer fails to take in account high levels of other elements in red meat which might trigger the heart disease. Without ruling out other possible ingredients in red meat for heart diseases, it is just as likely that certain protein in red meat is responsible for the heart disease这个例子放到前一句话里面更好, even perhaps such kind of correlation has been established in other study. Likewise,the correlation between iron and red meat has little to do with the heat diseases.

In sum, the argument is logically groundless and unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the arguer should provide detailed information about ingredient of the diet mentioned in the cited article. Other possible elements in red meat which could contribute to the heart disease should be considered. And the data about the absorption of iron of red meat by human body also is needed to better evaluate the argument.

没有攻击最后一个环节。按照你的文章，即使我确定了，就是红肉里面的铁导致了红肉和心脏病之间的联系，那么能下结论，高铁食物对心脏病的关系就是红肉中的铁的作用么？这才是作者的最后结论

枫晰UID: 2123661

The arguer concludes that the correlation between high iron levels and heart disease is a function of the correlation between red meat and heart disease.To justify it, the arguer cites the correlation in the article in Eating for Health, and a well established correlation between red meat and heart disease. Careful scrutiny of these evidence, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the conclusion.

First, the arguer unfairly assumes that the diet with high levels of iron in the cited article automatically involves the red meat. No information concerning the ingredient of the diet in the article is provided to substantiate the assumption, it is entirely possible that the diet mentioned in the article contains primarily vegetables or white meat instead of red meat. This case, if true, will serve to seriously weaken the rarionality of cited article as the evidence to support the function related to the red meat.

Second, even if the diet in the article consists of red meat, the arguer falsely equates the high levels of iron in red meat with the high levels of iron which can be absorbed by human body. Lacking such evidence to substantiate this assumption, perhaps only a small part of or even none of the iron in red meat could be absorbed by human. Thus, the correlation between large amounts of red meat in the diet and heart disease could have nothing to do with the levels in iron in red meat. (这点似乎也不明显 )

Third, even if human body can effectively utilize the iron in red meat, the arguer fails to take in account high levels of other elements in red meat which might trigger the heart disease. Without ruling out other possible ingredients in red meat for heart diseases, it is just as likely that certain protein in red meat is responsible for the heart disease, even perhaps such kind of correlation has been established in other study. Likewise,the correlation between iron and red meat has little to do with the heat diseases.

In sum, the argument is logically groundless and unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the arguer should provide detailed information about ingredient of the diet mentioned in the cited article. Other possible elements in red meat which could contribute to the heart disease should be considered. And the data about the absorption of iron of red meat by human body also is needed to better evaluate the argument.

lz的比我还多了.,但是好像还是没有攻击的要点