argument60留链互拍

velmawhiteUID: 2394088

题目：ARGUMENT60 - The following appeared in the health section of Glenntown's local newspaper.
"Several national medical studies suggest that older people who have pets tend to enjoy better health than those who do not have pets: those who have pets have lower rates of high blood pressure and arthritis. It seems clear that having to care for an animal promotes good health for the older person. Therefore, Glenntown should establish a program to give a small pet such as a dog or cat to all of its citizens who are over the age of 65. This will help to insure that our senior citizens enjoy good health and have fewer medical bills."
字数：612          用时：上午 12:30:00          日期：2008-1-19

提纲：养动物降低有高血压和哮喘地的人的发病率 养动物能提高人们的健康
      应该建立项目让所有人养动物65岁以上
      养动物有助于保证年长的人的好的健康，少的医疗清单。

In this argument, the arguer suggests that by establishing a program citizens aged of over 65 in Glenntown should care for a pet. To support his suggestion, he cites a study that shows the old people who have pets tend to be healthier than who have not. In addition, he assumes that this program insure the citizens enjoy good health and have fewer medical bills. It seems logical, but after careful scrutiny, it is full of flaws and it might be wiser to do a survey whether the old citizens are willing to keep pets before establishing the program.

To begin with, the arguer illogically assumes that people should care for an animal in order to promotes（promote） good health for the older person. The premise is that to keep pets decrease the rates of high blood pressure and arthritis. Nevertheless, people have lower rates of high blood pressure is not representitive（representative） that people's health condition as a whole. To evaluate whether a person is healthy is a complex process. Think about: people in hospital for an over-round heathy(healthy) examination, they, more often than not, includes an extensively various examinations such as blood pressure, blood quality and the function of liver and so on. So even if to keep pets can bring about the lower risk on high blood pressure and arthritis, people will also suffer from other disease. As the arguer lose sight of fact that the well-rounded healthy condition does not depend on the lower rates of just these two kind of ills, the suggestion that to have a pet can promotes good health for the older person is irridiculous（ridiculous）.

In addition, even if to keep pets can improve the health, it does not warrantee the citizens enjoy good health by establishing a program to give a pet to old citizens. It is most likely, to an even worse, to cause side effect on the old persons. Not all of the older person like small pets, and not all of the citizens who are over the age of 65 want to do any more activities and as it is known to keep pets need to do such activities as feeding and cleaning for them. Also perhaps if the old one is very poor and can not afford a pet. If so, to establish such a program will be most likely bring about dissatisfaction to some extent.

Moreover, even if this program can insure the citizens keep good health, that（health， which） is not to say it can insure fewer medical bills. The health condition of the local is not indicated in this argument. On one hand, it does not provide evidence to show whether the citizens are likely to suffer from the two ills. If the local old persons originally have low rates of high blood pressure and arthritis without keeping a pet, and to care for a pet will have little significance on improvement of these two ills. On the other hand, the condition of local people suffering from ills rather than these two is not specified. If the majority of the citizens are suffering from a desease（disease） of liver, and they still have to pay for the medical bills. Without considering and ruling out those possible factors, the arguer can not draw the firmly conclusion.

To sum up, the arguer fails to suggest that to establish the program can improve the old citizens' health condition. To strengthen the argument, the arguer should have to provide the healthy condition of the local old citizens. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about whether the old citizens are willing to care for pets.

红字我自己改的