Can somebody please comment?

"In recent years, Braeburn Corporation has seen lagging sales of its food products. Just a few of the many food products Braeburn sells are soy products. Soy products have been shown to reduce rates of cancer. Because people care about reducing their risk of cancer, Braeburn should increase manufacturing of soy products. This will help Braeburn Corporation improve sales and increase profits."

How would you rate the accuracy of the above statement? Support your position with reasons and examples.


The argument concludes that increasing soy product manufacturing will lead to improved sales and increased profit to Braeburn corporation. This is because one of the company's small range products is soy. Soy actually reduces the rates of cancer. So people buy the soy product in order to reduce their risks toward cancer. Also there has been a lag in sales for the company in the past years. However, I find few unstated assumptions in the argument. First, the category of products upon which there is a lag of sales is not mentioned to consider. Also, the argument looks like it is completely biased on the soy products despite its low capacity to produce. Moreover, reduced risk of cancer cannot be a representation of all the benefits that people normally get.

First, the argument mentions about the lagging sales of the company's food products. The name or nature of products that face the sales lag were not mentioned in order to assess the basis. If the statement could have provided a hint on the nature of product, for example- natural food products, etc, then our focus on developing those would make sense.

Second, the statement points looks biased on the soy products. Without giving importance to other products of the company, only soy products were discussed despite the fact that the capacity for soy products is less. This means, the company needs more effort to increase manufacturing these products.

Finally, although the soy products reduce risk of cancer, they are not worth to the represent the whole range of products people benefit from. Also, this substantiation does not cover the entire population who buys the company's products.

To conclude, the argument, although talks about increasing joy products as a way to improve sales and increase products, should consider the above stated points in order to evaluate its plan to improve. If it reasons out well, on which product the company has lagging sales, the other product categories whose improvement could be beneficial and a better representative for the products rather than just the soy, the argument would be more acceptable and convincing.