argument38 第二篇限时习作，高频，来个互拍吧

shenzhenhuaUID: 2241271

"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."
字数：400          用时：0:30:00          日期：2006-8-31

In the analysis, than arguer concludes that in order to reduce the absenteeism in the schools and workplaces, the Ichthaid must be used in daily life. To substantiate the conclusion, the author cites a study in nearby East Meria. The argument also points out that colds are the reason most frequently given for absences. The major assumption underlying it is that using fish can prevent people suffering from colds and therefore can contribute to asterism reduces. However, careful scrutiny of the argument reveals it suffers from several fallacies and therefore is not convincing.

The threshold problem of the argument is that it unfairly rests on the fact that colds are the major excuses for absences. Actually, no evidence in the editorial shows the causal relationship between it. Some other affairs such as cars stalked in the road, something wrong happened to the watch are also frequently used as the reasons for absences. Scant some firm evidence about the relationship of colds and these other factors between absences, the argument is questionable.

Secondly, there is no warranted information available to justify the relationship between fish eating and the less times to visit doctors for colds in East Meria. To establish the cause relationship of them, a myriad of other factors should be considered. For example, it is highly possible that though people get colds frequently, they do not always appeal to doctors. Another feasible factor is that it is some another food but not fish which always be eat in East Meria causes the decline of colds. Falling to rule out those and other factors involved in the problem, the argument is still untenable.

Moreover, the arguer provides no assurance that the study's results are statistically reliable. To establish a cause relationship between the results and the phenomenon, the sample of the study must be sufficient in size and reprehensive of the overall people in East Meria. Additionally, whether the respondents were chosen randomly and answered according to their own views are also important to convince us. Lacking these evidences, the arguer can not firmly rest on it.

In summary, the argument has several ostensible flaws which render it logically unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the arguer needs to provide clear evidence about the relationship between colds and the reason for absenteeism. Furthermore, to better evaluate the arguer’s claim, I need to know more details about the study.