0910AW 同主题写作七期 ARGUMENT65 by xxhhtt

xxhhttUID: 2477361

提纲：
开头
本文基于一项。。。研究而得出了。。。结论。但是，研究结果并不能在逻辑上对结论提供强有力的支持。我将逐步讨论。                                                                                                                                          
正文                                                                                                                                    
1.the correlation does not mean soybeans cause the low 胆固醇
2.even if soybeans can reduce the content of 胆固醇，soybean protein may not have the same effect. Because protein is just one kind of nutritious elements in soybeans, it might be the case other elements or interaction of several element takes the effects
3even if protein is the effective element, would the cereal added soybean protein realistically improve people’s health? as we all know people’s health is affected by many factors such as diet, exercise .Moreover, low 胆固醇 in the morning might be not good for the health.
4. people concerns with health may not care too much about the content of 胆固醇. Might not appeals to them
5. Profit cost
结尾
Improved by providing convincing evidence that soybean protein can reduce the content of 胆固醇。To make the suggestion more persuasive the author also needs to demonstrate that many consumers would like to buy the product with higher price.

TOPIC: ARGUMENT101 - 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 customers."
WORDS: 402
TIME: 00:42:56
DATE: 2009-7-14 下午 12:06:18
                                                                                                               
In this memo, the author concludes that by fortifying their Wheat-O(WO) cereal with soy protein, they can increase company profits and improve the health of the customers based on a result of a study that subjects eat more soybeans had lower cholesterol level than those who ate no soy products. However, the result of the study does not lend strongly logical support to the conclusion. I will discuss in turn.


First of all, the author assumes that the correlation between the soybean and lower cholesterol level means that eating soybeans can reduce the cholesterol level. But the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to support this conclusion. It does not take the fact into consideration that subjects who ate soybeans more are inherently concerned with their health much. Their low cholesterol level might be caused by their carefulness with diet. Even if the soybeans could reduce the cholesterol level, soy protein may not have the same effect, as protein is just one nutritious element in soybeans.It is highly possible that other element or interaction of some elements in the soybean take the effect. Moreover, assuming that the protein is the effective element; would the cereal fortified with soy protein realistically improve people's health? As we all know that one's health is affected by many factors such as diet and exercise, not just the cholesterol level. In addition, low cholesterol level caused by a bowl of WO cereal in the morning might be not good for one's health. Furthermore, the protein might react with some component in the cereal which might produce some harmful element to one’s health. Therefore, the conclusion that WO cereal will improve customers' health lacks evidence making it unwarranted.

In addition, this product might not appeal to additional consumers who are concerned about their health, because no evidence provided by the author showed that those concerned about their health must care much about the cholesterol level. It might be that case only a tiny percentage of the additional consumers concern their cholesterol level.

Last but not least, it is necessary to point out that the author omits the extra-cost of fortifying WO cereal with soy protein. As profit is the factor of not only revenue but also cost, it is entirely possible that the cost of fortifying WO cereal with soy protein will offset even overweigh the revenue. Therefore, the conclusion that it should increase company profits is vulnerable.

To sum up, the memo is well presented but not well reasoned. It could be improved by providing convincing evidence that the soy protein can reduce the cholesterol level. Furthermore, before drawing the conclusion, the author would need to synthetically analyze both revenue and cost of the new product in order to make the profit warranted.

xxhhttUID: 2477361

楼下的来拍吧

eric_scutUID: 2304889

1# xxhhtt

In this memo, the author concludes that by fortifying their Wheat-O(WO) cereal with soy protein, they can increase company profits and improve the health of the customers based on a result of a study that subjects eat more soybeans had lower cholesterol level than those who ate no soy products. However, the result of the study does not lend strongly logical support to the conclusion. I will discuss in turn.


First of all, the author assumes that the correlation between the soybean and lower cholesterol level means that eating soybeans can reduce the cholesterol level. But the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to support this conclusion. It does not take the fact into consideration that subjects who ate soybeans more are inherently concerned with their health much. Their low cholesterol level might be caused by their carefulness with diet. Even if the soybeans could reduce the cholesterol level, soy protein may not have the same effect, as protein is just one nutritious element in soybeans.
It is highly possible that other element or interaction of some elements in the soybean take the effect. Moreover, assuming that the protein is the effective element; (这个分号用法有点怪，上网查了一下也没得出确信的答案，还请权威人士解读) would the cereal fortified with soy protein realistically improve people's health? As we all know that one's health is affected by many factors such as diet and exercise, not just the cholesterol level. In addition, low cholesterol level caused by a bowl of WO cereal in the morning might be not good for one's health. Furthermore, the protein might react with some component in the cereal which might produce some harmful element to one’s health. Therefore, the conclusion that WO cereal will improve customers' health lacks evidence making it unwarranted. (降低胆固醇水平 –> 促进健康，这个推论我觉得不要去辩驳)

In addition, this product might not appeal to additional consumers who are concerned about their health, because no evidence provided by the author showed that those concerned about their health must care much about the cholesterol level. It might be that case only a tiny percentage of the additional consumers concern their cholesterol level.


Last but not least, it is necessary to point out that the author omits the extra-cost of fortifying WO cereal with soy protein. As profit is the factor of not only revenue but also cost, it is entirely possible that the cost of fortifying WO cereal with soy protein will offset even overweigh the revenue. (好句) Therefore, the conclusion that it should increase company profits is vulnerable.


To sum up, the memo is well presented but not well reasoned. It could be improved by providing convincing evidence that the soy protein can reduce the cholesterol level. Furthermore, before drawing the conclusion, the author would need to synthetically analyze both revenue and cost of the new product in order to make the profit warranted.

总体写得很好，逻辑清晰，错误很少
J
但是，说下我的一点感想，你驳斥了原文5个错误（第二段3个+第三段1个+第四段1个），驳斥点太多，每个点展开的也就少了，除非你的全文字数很多。

iloveusa2009UID: 2650557

In this memo, the author concludes that by fortifying their Wheat-O(WO) cereal with soy protein, they can increase company profits and improve the health of the customers based on a result of a study that subjects eat more soybeans had lower cholesterol level than those who ate no soy products. However, the result of the study does not lend strongly logical support to the conclusion. I will discuss in turn.


First of all, the author assumes that the correlation between the soybean and lower cholesterol level means that eating soybeans can reduce the cholesterol level. But the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to support this conclusion. It does not take the fact into consideration that subjects who ate soybeans more are inherently concerned with their health much. Their low cholesterol level might be caused by their carefulness with diet. Even if the soybeans could reduce the cholesterol level, soy protein may not have the same effect, as protein is just one nutritious element in soybeans.It is highly possible that other element or interaction of some elements in the soybean take the effect. Moreover, assuming that the protein is the effective element; would the cereal fortified with soy protein realistically improve people's health? (Argument中尽量少用问句)As we all know that one's health is affected by many factors such as diet and exercise, not just the cholesterol level. In addition, low cholesterol level caused by a bowl of WO cereal in the morning might be not good for one's health. Furthermore, the protein might react with some component in the cereal which might produce some harmful element to one’s health. （这一条反例找得比较牵强吧？）Therefore, the conclusion that WO cereal will improve customers' health lacks evidence making it unwarranted.

In addition, this product might not appeal to additional consumers who are concerned about their health, because no evidence provided by the author showed that those concerned about their health must care much about the cholesterol level. It might be that case only a tiny percentage of the additional consumers concern their cholesterol level.

Last but not least, it is necessary to point out that the author omits the extra-cost of fortifying WO cereal with soy protein. As profit is the factor of not only revenue but also cost, it is entirely possible that the cost of fortifying WO cereal with soy protein will offset even overweigh the revenue. Therefore, the conclusion that it should increase company profits is vulnerable（用unconvincing比较好吧？）.

To sum up, the memo is well presented but not well reasoned. It could be improved by providing convincing evidence that the soy protein can reduce the cholesterol level. Furthermore, before drawing the conclusion, the author would need to synthetically analyze both revenue and cost of the new product in order to make the profit warranted.

基本上没什么大问题，第一段太长，可以分开两段写，一段写低胆固醇不意味着健康，另一段写大豆蛋白粉不能等同于大豆。