|
In this argument the author reaches a conclusion that all people in America have to increase their consumption of fish to promise taking in certain omega-3 fatty acid in order to prevent depression. The basis for the recommendation is that the diet of our ancestors including omega-3 fatty acids results in low depression rate than modern Americans. An additional reason given in support of the recommendation is that less people in Japan and Taiwan suffer from depression because of fish diet which contains omega-3 fatty acids. A careful examination of the argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
The major problem with this argument is the unwarranted assumption that omega-3 fatty acids is the only element in solving depression for our ancestors. To establish a general causal relationship between omega-3 fatty acids and modern depression, other factors should be considered and eliminated[是不是应该是not be eliminated]. For example, pressure increases with the passing of time. Our ancestor did not live in a hurry which in our society often hampers the full development of our growing personality. They were not confronted with disabilities to buy an education for their children. [现在的美国人应该也不会面临这个问题把,这里没有搞清楚recommendation 的对象] But modern people are different. We are always worrying about job, salary and fame. In addition, living in a polluted environments [environment是不可数名词把] also aggravates the strain of mental effort. Whether these mental sick caused by non-existent element in ancient country can be cured by omega-3 fatty acids still open to doubt. The author's failure to investigate or even consider these possibilities renders the conclusion based upon it highly suspect.
Additionally, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that makes people in Japan and Taiwan to be away from the depression. While fish may be an important factor in preventing depression, it is hardly the only one. Other elements or factors which can alleviate or cure depression should be considerate. Perhaps the climate close to the sea benefits the disease[the disease改成relaxing the mental stress会不会好一点]. Or perhaps the healthy life style. To my certain knowledge, there are some similarities between Japanese and people in Taiwan. Both of them never eat too much during a meal in order to keep fresh. Nutrition balance is the most important feature of their dinner. In short, without ruling out other possible explanation for comparatively low rate of depression in these two areas, the author can not justifiably conclude that omega-3 fatty acids from fish were the cause of preventing depression.
Finally, the argument omits several other concerns that should be addressed. The argument assumes that the effectiveness of fish in the specific members reflects the general adaptability of all people in the USA. [但本人觉得前面用个让步会不会好一点Even if fish plays a key role in preventing depression,因为在这个观点以上的几点都是基于fish is not the vital factor]Yet, the author fails to offer any evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. Absent such evidence, it is just as likely that for allergic people, fish may produce side effect. For that matter, advertising fish diet would be dangerous. Without showing that omega-3 fatty acids are safe to those people who is allergic to fish, author can not convince me to increase fish consumption all over the country.
In conclusion, the author fails to validate the conclusion that fish benefit the people's depression. To solidify the argument, the author should provide more concrete evidence to prove that our ancestor had the same mental state caused by same factors as modern people. In addition, the author would have to rule out the abovementioned possibilities that would undermine the author's claim. 总体感觉:北美研究的好透阿 ~~~信手拈来就是这么完整的逻辑思维语言,榜样阿~~~ 有改的不对的地方请多多包涵和指正。 重要一点噢:好多单词打错了噢,有笔误也有单复数的问题 ! -----------------by Bellona
[ 本帖最后由 Bellona0428 于 2007-11-3 14:17 编辑 ] |