Hey everyone!
If someone took his or her time to read through my AWA for a second and give some feedback, I would definitely appreciate it
)
TOPIC:
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires." The author of the statement above concludes that people nowadays are not as concerned about regulating their red meat and fatty cheese intake as they were a decade ago. He draws his conclusion upon citing one store and 2 restaurants that seem to be in the same street. Clearly, this generalization is faulty since it draws a conclusion about people in general based on a sample that is undoubtedly too limited.
First, he cites Heart´s Delight, an organic store, and the fact that in that store chese made with high butterfat content is sold. By doing so, the author implies that the availabilty of fatty cheese must mean that people care less about their intake of fatty cheese. However, availabilty is not necessarily directly related to consumption. For example, producing enough sweet-sour flavored cheese to seel it to the whole population doesn´t mean that the whole population is actually going to buy it. Moreover, even if a representative sample size bought the mentioned fatty cheese from the store, maybe those people have a specific diet that requires the cheese or maybe the cheese contains certain ingredients that cannot be found in any other product. That way, as much as people might be concerned about their intake of the fatty cheese, they possibly do not have any other option.
Secondly, the author bases his evidence on a limited geographical area. All the cited locations are located next to each other; consequently, even if people in that specific area were less concerned about their red meat and fatty cheese intake, one wouldn´t be able to draw a conclusion about the entire population. Eventually, the cited region is especially known for those products, thus people go there for a very specific reason once in a lifetime rather than regurarly, meaning that they are indeed concerned about the mentioned intake.
Third of all, in order to draw a meaningsful comparison between now and a decade ago, one must compare the relative population seizes and their respective intakes of red meat and fatty cheese. Otherwise, although more people possibly buy such products nowadays, the ratio could be much lower than a decade ago because of a population increase; this would imply that although overall intake increased, people are more concerned about the matter than they were a decade ago.
As presented, the argument is inconclusive and omits vital aspects in order to draw a sound conclusion. Factors such as the sample size and whether it is representative, the relative numbers concerning consumption and availability of a product versus consumption of that product have to be taken into account before a concise and valid point.can be established.