Finally, the argument suffers from a critical flaw in its conclusion when the writer states that doctors should not recommend moderate exercise for their patients, instead stating that they should only encourage vigorous outdoor exercise on a daily basis. This conclusion is supported by absolutely no evidence in the argument - indeed moderate exercise is not even mentioned until the end of the editorial. Additionally, the argument fails to take into account that the study only addresses men, not women or children that are also doctors patients. Furthermore, for some men, women or children, outdoor vigorous exercise on a daily basis might actually be detrimental to their health, such as those at risk for a heart attack or living in harsh climates.
In summary, the writer fails to show that doctors should recommend vigorous daily outdoor exercise rather than moderate exercise whether it is for men, women or children. To strengthen the argument, evidence should be presented that directly links strenuous outdoor exercise on a daily basis for men as well as all doctors patients before any such recommendation should be adopted. This weak argument might actually cause more damage to patients health than it would prevent.
下述文字刊登于某健康与健美杂志的社论栏:在一项有关运动对长寿的影响的研究中,医疗研究人员在为期20年的时间中跟踪调查了500名中年男性。被调查对象代表着该国若干个不同地区的形形色色的职业,他们对每年度调查中的二个问题――你运动的频繁程度如何?运动的力度如何?――作出回答。在所有作出回答的人中间,那些汇报说几乎每天都从事剧烈户外运动的男性,其寿命要高于那些汇报说每周只从事一次或二次轻微运动的男性。鉴于本项研究在长寿与运动之间所确立的明显关系,大夫们不应向其病人建议适度的运动,而应该鼓励病人每天从事剧烈的户外活动。
【GRE备考资料:Issue写作范文详细解析(9)】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01