0910G 同主题写作第七期 ARGU101 大洋彼岸之风小组 By Juventusland

juventuslandUID: 2631955

The following appeared in a memo from the president of a company that makes breakfast cereals.

In a recent study, subjects who ate soybeans at least five times per week had significantly lower cholesterol levels than subjects who ate no soy products. By fortifying our Wheat-O cereal with soy protein, we can increase sales by appealing to additional consumers who are concerned about their health. This new version of Wheat-O should increase company profits and, at the same time, improve the health of our cosumers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Grounding on the study that who ate soybeans five times a week had lower cholesterol levels than subjects who did not, the president suggests that fotifying Wheat-O with soy protein can not only improve the health of our cosumers, but also increase company profits. However, it may not be as reasonable as the president thinks.
    First, although it is a fact that subejects who ate soybeans five times per week had significantly lower cholesterol than those who did not, the fact can not prove it is all due to soybeans. One possibility may be that
subjects who ate soybeans come from areas where are of abundant soybeans as well as other crops, so they
may eat some other things at the same time, such as maize or peas, which may lead to lowering cholesterol. To get the conclusion that soybeans can lower cholesterol need more detailed study.
    Even it is a fact that eating soybeans can lower cholesterol, it is not equal to soy protein can lower cholesterol. Soy protein, just a kind of ingredient, may be not effective to lower cholesterol while some other ingredients in soybeans play that role. The other possibility is that soy protein can not react to lower cholesterol by itself, and it needs joint action with other components in soybeans. What is more, even we assume that soy protein is effective, what may happen is that some particular ingredients in Wheat-O cereal impair or even counteract the effect witch soy protein has. So asserting that eating Wheat-O cereal can improve peoples’ health is not grounded.
    And there is no evidence that fortifying the product with soy protein can addict to more cosumers then increase sales to get more profits. In spite of that the new version may attract some new cosumers, at the same time, more soy protein may change or even spoil its taste, so regular cosumers may stop buying Wheat-O cereal because they can not adapt to the new taste. The result will be that the sales do not improve. And, assuming the sales increase, the company may not get more profits because fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein may add to the cost in material and, to protect the soy protein with being ruined may need higher-cost facilities.
    In sum, though the study gives us an objective fact, we need further studies to find out what is really effective to lower peoples’ cholesterol level and what things will influence its effect. And, the president needs to consider more to make a decision whether fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein after taking account of possible changed taste as well as increased cost, and take some experiments to affirm if the new version can improve peoples’ health.

juventuslandUID: 2631955

~对下时间

尾羽UID: 2482591

Grounding on the study that who ate soybeans five times a week(at least five times a week,不是五次，是至少五次，这里应该遵循原文的意思) had lower cholesterol levels（为什么level要加s?） than subjects who did not, the president suggests that fotifying （fortifying） Wheat-O with soy protein can not(cannot) only improve the health of our(their) cosumers(consumers), but also increase company profits. However, it may not be as reasonable as the president thinks.
    First, although it is a fact that subejects(subjects) who ate soybeans five times per week had significantly lower cholesterol than those who did not, the fact can not(cannot) prove it is all due to soybeans. One possibility may be that subjects who ate soybeans come from areas where are of abundant soybeans as well as other crops, so they may eat some other things at the same time, such as maize or peas, which may lead to lowering cholesterol. To get the conclusion that soybeans can lower cholesterol need more detailed study.

Even it is a fact that eating soybeans can lower cholesterol（这里前三段的第一句，也就是有下划线的部分，都出现了大豆能降低胆固醇的意思,感觉出现次数有点太多了，而且又都是段首，建议调整句子结构）, it is not equal to soy protein can lower cholesterol. Soy protein, just a kind of ingredient, may be not effective to lower cholesterol while some other ingredients in soybeans play that role. The other possibility is that soy protein can not(cannot) react to lower cholesterol by itself, and it needs joint action with other components in soybeans. What is more, even we assume that soy protein is effective, what may happen is that some particular ingredients in Wheat-O cereal impair or even counteract the effect witch(which) soy protein has. So, asserting that eating（eating 改成fortified）
Wheat-O cereal can improve peoples’ （people’s, people是复合名词，不能加s） health is not grounded. (这段让步思路好！)
    And there is no evidence that fortifying the product with soy protein can addict to(appeal to, addict to的用法应该是sb. addict to sth，是sb热爱或对入迷sth,也就是前者热爱后者，你用在这里，意思就变成产品热爱消费者了) more cosumers(consumers) then increase sales to get more profits. In spite of that the new version may attract some new cosumers(consumers), at the same time, more soy protein may change or even spoil its taste(改成the original taste,这个its taste应该是指Wheat-O原来的口味吧？但是,按照你这个句子的意思来看，是新产品改变了新产品的口味或者使得新产品的口味变得更糟，new version Wheat-O怎么能change or spoil new version Wheat-O’s taste?所以,这句话逻辑有问题，容易让人搞不清这个its指的是什么。), so regular cosumers(consumers) may stop buying Wheat-O cereal because they can not(cannot) adapt to the new taste. The result will be that the sales do not improve.（这句话感觉太中文化了，可以跟前一句话合并起来） And, assuming the sales increase,（even if assuming that the sales has increased,） the company may(这一个句子里就出现了三个may,除此以外，文章中用的may次数也多了点。。。)
not get more profits because fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein may add to the cost in material and, （这个and和逗号很奇怪，建议干脆删了逗号）to protect the soy protein with being ruined may need higher-cost facilities. (protect A with B，意思是用B来保护A，你这里的意思难道是用被破坏来保护大豆蛋白?我想应该是这样吧：to protect the soy protein from being ruined that may need higher-cost facilities.)
    In sum, though the study gives us an objective fact(objective，我觉得通常是表示一种肯定，而原文里那个study其实是漏洞百出，用在这里太绝对了，这里写some facts就好了), we need further studies to find out what is really effective to lower peoples’ cholesterol level and what things will influence its effect. And(and,作为还有、另外的意思，也用了很多遍，建议换成moreover, additionally, in addition, furthermore等), the president needs to（must） consider more to make a decision whether fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein after taking account of possible changed taste as well as increased cost, and take some experiments to affirm if the new version can improve peoples’ health.（这句话看不懂。。。）

总的来说思路还是有的，但是行文和句子有待优化，有些很明显是中文的语序，应该多注意句子结构的多样化；还有就是词语显得有些贫乏，重复使用的词语太多，重复的次数也过多（need\and\cannot…）。建议多看看范文，从中挖出一些好句子和词语来背一下，用到自己的文章里去。另外，你对cannot和consumer的拼写，可能记忆有误，因为你从头到尾都拼错了。
以上纯属个人观点~~欢迎讨论

juventuslandUID: 2631955

重新稍微改了下，把一些很低级的错误改掉了，稍微调整了下句式~~期待66大刀阔斧的改我这篇吧。。~
    Grounding on the study that who ate soybeans at least five times a week had lower cholesterol level than subjects who did not,the president suggests that fotifying Wheat-O with soy protein can not only improve the health of their consumers,but also increase company profits.However,the reason may not be as reasonable as the president thinks.
    First,although it is a fact that subejects who ate soybeans at least five times per week had significantly lower cholesterol than those who did not,the fact can not prove it is all due to soybeans. One possibility is that  subjects who ate soybeans come from areas where are of abundant soybeans as well as other crops, so they  may eat some other things at the same time, such as maize or peas, which lead to lower cholesterol level.To get the conclusion that soybeans can low cholesterol need more detailed study.
    Even it is a fact that eating soybeans can lower cholesterol, it is not equal to that soy protein can lower cholesterol. Soy protein, just a kind of ingredient, perhaps be not so effective to lower cholesterol while some other ingredients in soybeans play an important role. And that soy protein can not react to low cholesterol by itself can be the other possibility.In addition,it is possible that soy protein need joint action with other chemicals in soybeans. Moreover, even we assume soy protein is effective, what may happen is that some special ingredients in Wheat-O cereal impair or even counteract the effect that soy protein has.So asserting that eating Wheat-O cereal can improve peoples’ health is not grounded.
    And there is no evidence that fortifying the product with soy protein can appeal to more consumers then increase sales to get more profits.In spite of that the new version may attract some new consumers, at the same time, more soy protein may change or even spoil the original taste,so regular consumers chooses stop buying Wheat-O cereal because they can’t adapt to the new taste. As a consequence,the sales don’t improve. additionally, assuming the sales increase, the company probably even get fewer profits because fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein add to the cost in material and protecting the soy protein with being ruined need higher-cost facilities.
    In sum, though the study gives us an fact,we need further studies to find out what is really effective to lower people cholesterol level and whether existing some substances in original Wheat-O cereal will impair its effect. Furthermore, the president should consider more to make a decision whether fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein after taking account of possible changed taste as well as increased cost in the new version and of whether the new version can improve peoples’ health via more experiments.