[a习作temp] 0910G 同主题写作第七期 Argument101 NLT小组 By McNeil [复制链接]

McNeil
UID: 2272415

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 3
寄托币: 659
注册时间: 2006-11-11
精华: 0
帖子: 80

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2009-6-26 01:29:04 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

人生中的第一篇Argument，多多指教，拜托各位了

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: (543)

Grounding on the study that subjects who have meals of soybeans five times a week had significantly lower cholesterol levels than subjects who ate no soy products. The author accordingly asserts that soy protein should add in the Wheat-O cereal in order to increase the consumers who care about their health and the profits of the company, simultaneously, enhance the health level of the consumers of the Wheat-O. However, the argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.

People who ate soybeans at least five times per week had lower cholesterol in compare with the people who do not eat, which is the basic evidence of the assertion, has its own problems in the following aspects. First and foremost, there is no relative research can clarify that it is indeed the soybeans which could reduce the cholesterol levels. Then, the specific data after the reduction is not show by the memo, which do not mean the numeric value is under the threshold of the High Blood Fat or the High Blood Pressure, etc. Last but not least, other reason is not taken into account and other factors which may influence the conclusion that the soybean is the only reason to reduce the cholesterol are not overcome. These statement made above might be some weak points of the basic evidence of the speaker’s argumentation.

Moreover, even though the basic theory that the soybeans protein is of miraculous functions in reducing the cholesterol, several points which could not support the argumentation are still existed.

Between Wheat-O cereal with soy protein and increase of sales, there is no correlation of necessity. The favor of the new product may not be accepted by the masses, which will leads to the decline of the new product sales in spite of the ascent. Also, the best-seller Wheat-O, if not the only product of the company, the profits of the whole enterprise would not skyrocket. Other products might be sale in the recession which might cause the slump of the volume of the whole enterprise, and then the increase will go up in smoke. The cost problem is another problem for the president to consider. Any product has its specific cost problem, either does Wheat-O cereal. Adding soybean protein will increase the cost of the new product, and then the price will be a controversial problem of tremendous importance. Setting the price to high could be a cushion against the pressure which brings by the new product which has soybean protein in, but may lose the former market and reduce the profits which brings by the Wheat-O cereal. On the other hand, lower price causes too much pressure to the company itself and the more sales of the low price new product the more serious losses which shoulders up by the company.

From the analysis made above, whether to upgrade the ingredient of the Wheat-O cereal depends on the accurate function of soybean and the policy towards the breakfast market. We could draw the conclusion which is the optimal advice to the president of the company, that in order to increase the sales of Wheat-O cereal even the profits of the company, more research on the function of the soybean protein and the market of breakfast are badly needed.

uphill struggle~ blood sweat & tears~~