Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument.
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.
The author of this argument has incorrectly assumed many facts and made certain inferences that might not hold true in all cases.
For once, the standard of living of an average North American is much higher than that of an Asian. Also being an industrialized region, a North American is exposed to an entirely different atmosphere than an Asian. Under these circumstances, drawing a comparison between these two diverse sets of communities is not guaranteed to yield accurate results.
The author does not have substantial evidence to claim that the presence of soy in the diet of Asians is actually keeping them in good health compared to their North American counterparts. There may be any number of reasons for this difference in figures, which the author has not bothered to look into.
The author also has not given any insight into the type of diet of an average North American or an Asian. If at all, this decline in the health conditions is based on the diet, then sufficient data has to be provided to substantiate this claim.
Also, the presence of isoflavones might be good in preventing a certain type of illness or a disease. But it is incorrect to assume that this ensures immunity or a cure for all types of diseases. Moreover, fatigue and depression are more of work related disorders than any conventional diseases. The author has to provide sufficient material or data to support his/her claim in this regard.
Taking all these reasons into account, stating that the absence of soy in the diet results in fatigue and depression and thus must be included in the diet is not meritorious. Nevertheless, if the author provides adequate data substantiating his/her insight in this regard, this inference might gain some credibility.
another good essay.
the first line of the second para seems a bit prejudiced and paradoxical. Japanese have a high standard of living. And if standard of living is an indicator, then poorer nations should have reported higher health disorders.
you could have said something about the diversity of diet in Asia. For instance, India accounts for a huge chunk of Asian population and soy is not a popular ingredient in the traditional Indian diet. What I mean to say is that, the survey may not have taken into account all of the Asian countries, instead focusing on the Oriental diet.
you seem to repeat the phrase, "author has to provide data/material", a lot. this tends to project a bad image regarding your vocabulary.
Now, I don't know how to rate this but my personal opinion would be 4/6.
For once, the standard of living of an average North American is much higher than that of an Asian.
You are making a new assertion here. It's not necessary to do this. The most important thing to say is that their logic is faulty. A correlation exists, but not necessarily a causal correlation.
Other factors are also at work, and I think you showed that very well. Nice job. Another point you might mention would be a point about how they could have improved their argument. For example, if they show good evidence about the benefits of soy, that'd be better!
:-)
