Please give feedback and a rating on my AWA Argument essay

The stimulus, a part of Kaplan Premier's Online Writing Practice, was embedded in the Flash document and couldn't be copied, but I guess it should be clear from the first paragraph. Thank a ton in advance!

*****************************

The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.

First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.

Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.

Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.

In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.