[Big Fish]03月20日Argument162--By Sansouci

SansouciUID: 2755036

ARGUMENT162.
A recent study shows that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia. Interestingly, Asians, on average, eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. It turns out that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which have been found to possess disease-preventing properties. Thus, North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression.
In this argument, the author claims that by eating soy on a regular basis is facilitate to prevent fatigue and depression on North Americans. To substantiate the conclusion, the author cites a recent study, which shows that North Americans suffer larger more chronic fatigue and depression times than Asians. Additionally, the author provides an interesting phenomenon-North Americans are not like Asians who eat 20 grams of soy per day on average, and verified that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones which possess disease-preventing properties. Nevertheless, no matter how convincible this argument first appearance, I remain skeptical toward its conclusion due to several vital fallacies made by the arguer.

First of all, the author didn’t provide any accurately relevant statistics about the recent study, so we cannot believe the result of recent study is real. If the quantity of sample is too small or the respondent in this study is not representative, so the result of study, North Americans suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia, is actually inconvincible. It is entirely possible that body constitutions are very different between Asians and North Americans, or North Americans stand much more pressure than Asians. Thus, due to there are no relevant statistics about this study, it is hardly make me believe that the study’s result is grounded.

Even if I accept that the study is warranted, the author also unfairly assumes that usually eating soy is helpful to North Americans preventing fatigue and depression. Despite it turns out to be that soy contains phytochemicals which called isoflavones available disease-preventing, but it is uncertainly that isoflavones can effectively prevent fatigue and depression. What’s more, there are only mentioned “prevent”, how about those whose have already suffered fatigue and depression? So we can be convinced only if the author provides evidence that isoflavones are effective to prevent fatigue and depression.

At last, I still remain skeptic about whether soy is suitable for North Americans’ diet or not. It is well-known that physiques are greatly difference between Asians and North Americans. Maybe Asians could digest and absorb soy very well, however, soy are not well suit with North Americans’ digest system even influence North Americans daily diet.

In conclusion, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author would provide related statistics about study. What’ more, the author must give evidence to make sure eating soy on a regular basis are effectively avoid fatigue and depression to North Americans.

jjooyyUID: 2704028

In this argument, the author claims that by eating soy on a regular basis is facilitate to prevent fatigue and depression on North Americans. To substantiate the conclusion, the author cites a recent study, which shows that North Americans suffer larger more chronic fatigue and depression times than Asians. Additionally, the author provides an interesting phenomenon-North Americans are not like Asians who eat 20 grams of soy per day on average, and verified that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones which possess disease-preventing properties. Nevertheless, no matter how convincible this argument first appearance, I remain skeptical toward its conclusion due to several vital fallacies made by the arguer.

First of all, the author didn’t(时态要统一) provide any accurately relevant statistics about the recent study, so we cannot believe the result of recent study is real. If the quantity of sample is too small or the respondent in this study is not representative, so the result of study, North Americans suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia, is actually inconvincible. It is entirely possible that body constitutions(?) are very different between Asians and North Americans, or North Americans stand much more pressure than Asians. Thus, due to there are no relevant statistics about this study, it is hardly make me believe that the study’s result is grounded. 3无study不一定要批，有些强词夺理呢。。

Even if I accept that the study is warranted, the author also unfairly assumes that usually eating soy is helpful to North Americans preventing fatigue and depression. Despite it turns out to be that soy contains phytochemicals which called isoflavones available disease-preventing, but it is uncertainly that isoflavones can effectively prevent fatigue and depression. What’s more, there are only mentioned “prevent”, how about those whose have already suffered fatigue and depression? So we can be convinced only if the author provides evidence that isoflavones are effective to prevent fatigue and depression.

At last, I still remain skeptic about whether soy is suitable for North Americans’ diet or not. It is well-known that physiques are greatly difference between Asians and North Americans. Maybe Asians could digest and absorb soy very well, however, soy are not well suit with North Americans’ digest system even influence North Americans daily diet.

In conclusion, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author would provide related statistics about study. What’ more, the author must give evidence to make sure eating soy on a regular basis are effectively avoid fatigue and depression to North Americans.
最后一点我还没想到 学习了。。
还是那句话 基础语法要掌握，不然写再好的句子也没有用 be+V.错误结构太多了