Intern
Joined: 23 Mar 2017
Posts: 12
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
WE:Engineering (Other)
Please review my first AWA . URGENT as exam is day after tomorrow.
[#permalink]
04 Oct 2019, 09:05
PROMPT
The following appeared in an article in a health–and–fitness magazine:
“Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good
health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are
hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem
expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
-----------------------------------
Essay
The argument claims that residents of Saluda, small town where the water is bottled and whose residents drink expensive Saluda Natural Spring water, make a wise investment in good health by drinking it instead of tap water. Stated in this way, the argument conveys a distorted view of the situation. The argument also fails to mention several key factors basis on which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on the assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak/unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that bottled water contains minerals in the quantity that is sufficient for the human body. This statement is a stretch as the argument doesn’t shed the light on whether the required quantity of key minerals is present. For example, Calcium, a mineral required by the body, should be present in 50ppm concentration to consider whether the water is healthy. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that the concentration amount of each key mineral is sufficient as per the human body requirement.
Secondly, the argument assumes that several minerals that are present are the ones that are required by the human body i.e. there are not any essential minerals that could be essential to the body but are not present in bottled water. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any evidence stating that all the minerals present in the water are the ones required to be fit. If the argument had provided evidence that all the mineral that are the key minerals required by the body are present then the argument would have been more convincing.
Finally, the argument takes into consideration the fact that the less hospitalization of the residents is only because of drinking bottled water. For Instance, Resident of Saluda could be more active physically and are regular with their exercises which in turn could lead to better health and less hospitalization. Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impressions that claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing that drinking bottled water is a wise investment in health for residents of Saluda. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentions all the relevant facts about the flaws discussed above.
---------------------------
Suggetions/ Advices most welcome