Argument35【0906G 文以载道三月四月作文小组】第1周第1作业 thanks perfectattack

liuguaguaUID: 2569375

Argument35 【0906G 文以载道三月四月小组】第一周第一次作业 by liuguagua

ARGUMENT35 – The following appeared in the summary of a study on headachessuffered by the residents of Mentia.

"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, amedicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich insalicylates, for the past several decades food-processing companies have alsobeen adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercialuse of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the averagenumber of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study.Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also beused as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we canexpect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by theaverage citizen of Mentia."
【提纲】
1、  调查不可信，Respondents问题：
新增：调查是由当地居民组织的，所以研究的组织者收到置疑。
a)     调查数据和回复者的代表性问题；
2、  相关误认为时因果
a)     头疼的减少，不一定时水杨酸导致的；可能20年的调查中，这拨人还服用了其它的治头疼的药；
3、  让步即使上面OK，添加剂不一定导致头疼降低。
a)    过多的服用，可能还会恶化；
b)    将来生活的压力变大，节奏变快，会导致头疼上升。
【正文】
In this summary, the author concludes that a steady decrease of headachepersons are attributed to the new use of salicylates as the flavor additives.In order to support his conclusion, the author indicates that aspirins, onegroup of medical family as salicylates, are used to curb headache. In addition,the author also cites that a rising commercial use of salicylates is associatedwith the decline of headaches in a 20-year study on headache persons. Theargument seems reasonable at the first glance; however, close scrutiny revealsthat it leads little support to the author’s conclusion. A threshold problem with the argument involves the voluntary nature of theevaluation study. The author offers no evidence about the number or percentageof residents who participate in the procedure. In addition, the author fails toassure me that the study results can accurately reflect the situations of overallresidents where sslicylates were sold, and whether these respondents arerepresentative. It is entirely possible that people whose headaches aggravatedafter took in the salicylates refused to respond. Lacking any clear evidence tosubstantiate the reliability of the study, the author cannot attest any convincingconclusion let alone predicting the future situation.

The author observes a correlation between rising commercial unse ofsalicylates and decline of headaches persons; then concludes that the former isresponsible for the latter. However, the author cannot rule out other possibleexplations for the decline of headache persons. For instance, during the20-year study, it is entirely possible that the participants has a relax life,or advanced medical technology to inhabit the headache diseases, or with thehelp of other medicines to curb headaches. Each scenario might lead to declineheadaches in the last 20 years. Without accounting for these or some otherreasons, it is unfair to assert that salicylate is responsible for the declineof headaches.

Even assuming that salicylates has a positive effect on cure headaches, theauthor cannot predict that this trend will continue steady as usual since thenew use of salicylates as flavor addictives. With more use of salicylates inthe food, the effect on inhibiting the headaches might change into negativefunctions. Common senses make us know that s slight change in the structure ofa chemical compound will result in a significant variation in its biologicaleffect. Moreover, other factors may result in the rise number of headachepersons such as faster life step, stressed worke pre
ssure.  

In all, the argument isunpersuasive as it stands. The argument can be strengthened by providing clearevidences that the correlation is indeed a casual relationship- that using thesalicylates actually cause the decline of headaches. It could be betterassessed by supporting evidences that the future factors which affect theheadaches remain same as before.