argument187

Ocean~SprayUID: 2847693

TOPIC: ARGUMENT187 - The following appeared as part of an article in a health magazine.

"A new discovery warrants a drastic change in the diets of people living in the United States. Two scientists have recently suggested that omega -3 fatty acids (found in some fish and fish oils) play a key role in mental health. Our ancestors, who ate less saturated fat and more polyunsaturated fat, including omega -3 fatty acids, were much less likely to suffer from depression than we are today. Moreover, modern societies-such as those in Japan and Taiwan-that consume large quantities of fish report depression rates lower than that in the United States. Given this link between omega -3 fatty acids and depression, it is important for all people in the United States to increase their consumption of fish in order to prevent depression."
WORDS: 445
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-7-27 10:50:46

This article concludes that all people in the United States should consume more fish to prevent depression, because as a new discovery suggests, the omega-3 fatty acids, which are found in some fish and fish oils, play an important role in mental health. Furthermore, the arguer mentions two comparisons, one is between ancestors and people nowadays, the other is between Taiwanese, Japanese, and Americans, to prove his conclusion. However, after careful considerations, I find this argument logically problematic in several aspects.

To begin with, the argument relies on a false assumption that the ancestors were less likely to suffer from depression than people today should not be merely distributable to their eating habits-less saturated fat and more polyunsaturated fat, including omega-3. Since no solid evidence proves that the other elements can be excluded. It is entirely possible that the ancient people were living in a less-pressured environment that they got fewer issues to worry about, so they did not get depressed; or maybe the ancient people had a total different diet that they ate more natural foods, which made them physically and mentally strong. The arguer fails to rule out such possibilities that the conclusion is not as sound as it stands.

The second mistake involves the fact that the societies such as Japan and Taiwan, who consumes a large quantity of fish, report lower rates of depression. However, we are not informed whether the concept of depression in these nations and regions are standardized and unified, or whether people in these districts are the concerned with their mental health to the same degree. Perhaps the American definition of depression is wider and people there are more concerned with their mental health, as a result, the reported rate of depression in the United States are higher. Therefore, to confirm the relationship between omega-3 and depression is too harsh and inadequate.

Finally, even if there is a link between the depression and the omega-3, it is unnecessary for all people in America to increase their consumption of fish. There are possibilities that most people there are mentally healthy, so the worries about depression can be a waste.

To sum up, to make the argument sounder, the arguer has to provide evidence that the ancient people are less likely to be in depression is truly because they ate more fish containing omega-3; and he also needs to prove that the consumption amount of fish is the key reason that differs the depression rate between Taiwan, Japan and America. To further convince us, he has to point out that all people in the United States are facing the threat of depression, so they need to consume more fish.

xiaohuimi291UID: 2760978

1# Ocean~Spray
This article concludes that all people in the United States should consume more fish to prevent depression, because as a new discovery suggests, the omega-3 fatty acids, which are found in some fish and fish oils, play an important role in mental health. Furthermore, the arguer mentions two comparisons, one is between ancestors and people nowadays, the other is between Taiwanese, Japanese, and Americans, to prove his conclusion. However, after careful considerations, I find this argument logically problematic in several aspects.
To begin with, the argument relies on a false assumption that the fact that the ancestors were less likely to suffer from depression than people today should (not) be merely distributable to(没查到这个词组) their eating habits-less saturated fat and more polyunsaturated fat, including omega-3. Since no solid evidence proves that the other elements can be excluded. It is entirely possible that the ancient people were living in a less-pressured environment that they got fewer issues to worry about, so they did not get depressed; or maybe the ancient people had a total different diet that they ate more natural foods, which made them physically and mentally strong. The arguer fails to rule out such possibilities so that the conclusion is not as sound as it stands.
The second mistake involves the fact that the societies such as Japan and Taiwan, Where people consume a large quantity of fish, report lower rates of depression. However, we are not informed whether the concept of depression in these nations and regions are standardized and unified, or whether people in these districts are the concerned with their mental health to the same degree. Perhaps the American definition of depression is wider and people there are more concerned with their mental health, as a result, the reported rate of depression in the United States are higher. Therefore, to confirm the relationship between omega-3 and depression is too harsh and inadequate.(这个论证精辟！)

Finally, even if there is a link between the depression and the omega-3, it is unnecessary for all people in America to increase their consumption of fish. There are possibilities that most people there are mentally healthy, so the worries about depression can be a waste.
To sum up, the argument is not well supported.(感觉这是必要的总结) To make the argument sounder, the arguer has to provide evidence that the ancient people are less likely to be in depression is truly because they ate more fish containing omega-3; and he also needs to prove that the consumption amount of fish is the key reason that differs the depression rate between Taiwan, Japan and America. To further convince us, he has to point out that all people in the United States are facing the threat of depression, so they need to consume more fish.(个人觉得中间的论述段要更丰富些才好，要尽量把因果推理都写清晰)