In this argument ,the arguer concludes that a diet rich in dairy products may increase,instead of decreasing the risk of osteoporosis,alluding that we should limit the consume of such products for health's sake,To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the result of a study that those who have consisitantly consumed dairy products are more vulnerable than others to bone fracture,and fracture is a symptom of osteoporosis,hence more vulnerable to osteoporosis.It seems reasonable at first glance,a close examination with it ,however,will reveal several inherent flaws of it. In the first place, the argument is based on a gratuitous assumption that osteoporosis equals bone fracture, which is unwarranted.As we know; there may be alternative reasons such as sports and traffic accidents that cause bone fracture. Unless a convincing survey with the reasons of bone fractures of the inpiduals involved in the study is proposed that all fractures are caused by osteoporosis,the study will lend little support to the argument for its own representiveness is suspected. In addition, the arguer fails to takes into account the age, hobby and other relevant background of the inpiduals who participated the study.It is not just diary products that matter.It's possible, even probably, that those who like mounting as well as diary products.It's obvious that those climbers are more vulnerable to bone fracture, how can we owe the fracture to the diary products that he ate in the morning? Finally,the arguer ignores other factors such as genes,surroundings and habits that may have some bearings on osteoporosis,To trace the causes of osteoporosis to any single reason is to be miss the wood for the trees. To sum up, the argument is unconvincing due to several reasons state above .To Strength the argument, the arguer should establish a causal relation between osteoporosis and bone fracture, to make the argument more cogent, the arguer should initiate a survey with those people to determine that if the diary products are the genuine reason for fracture.Unless the arguer do these, the argument is not acceptable.
在這場爭論中，論述者得出結論，富含奶制品的飲食可能會增加，而不是減少骨質疏松的風險，暗示我們應該限制為了健康的消費類產品，為了支持這一結論，論述者援引了一項研究，那些有consisitantly食用奶制品的人比其他人更脆弱在骨折的結果，和骨折是骨質疏松癥的癥狀之一，因此更容易患骨質疏松癥。它似乎是合理的第一眼，仔細檢查它，然而，它將揭示一些內在的缺陷。首先，這個論點是基于一個錯誤的假設，骨質疏松癥等于骨折，這是毫無根據的。正如我們所知道的；有可能是其他原因如運動和交通事故造成的骨折。除非對參與研究的人骨折的原因提出了令人信服的調查，所有的骨折是骨質疏松癥引起的，該研究將為自己的代表性論點，借點支持被懷疑。此外，作者沒有考慮到年齡，愛好和個人參與研究的相關背景。這不僅僅是奶制品的問題。這是可能的，即使可能，那些喜歡以及奶制品安裝。很明顯，那些登山者更容易發生骨斷裂，我們如何能欠骨折對奶制品，他早上吃了嗎？最后，作者忽略了其他因素如基因，環境和習慣，可能對骨質疏松有軸承，追蹤引起骨質疏松的原因于任何單一的原因是錯過了木材的樹木。綜上所述，由于幾個原因狀態上面的論證是不能令人信服的。力量的論點，論證者應該建立骨質疏松和骨折之間的因果關系，使論證更有說服力，作者應該主動與那些人來確定的，如果日記產品斷裂的真正原因調查。除非通過做這些，爭論是不可接受的。
- 相關推薦
【奶制品能否減少患骨質疏松癥危險英譯文】相關文章：
愛尾之患原文及譯文09-23
柳永《柳腰輕·英英妙舞腰肢軟》譯文及鑒賞10-31
減少危險廢物危害性的計劃08-18
齊、楚之交善,惠王患之閱讀答案及譯文12-14
收入減少證明06-02
中國能否超越美國02-01
中國能否追上美國？01-28
吳文英《八聲甘州·陪庾幕諸公游靈巖》原文譯文及賞析11-29
《減少對土地的侵蝕》經典教案06-20