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.
The author’s conclusion is that people should drink Saluda Spring Water rather than tap water even when the first one is more expensive. The author’s line of reasoning is that laboratories studies show that Saluda Spring Water has several minerals for good health and has no bacteria. In addition, people from Saluda, where this water is bottled, are hospitalized less often than the nation-wide average. This argument has two important flaws. To begin with, laboratories show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several minerals for good health. However, the argument does not show any correlation between these two elements. It means that there is no any explanation that links minerals to good health for people who drinks this water. For instance, minerals can be difficult to digest, if so Saluda Spring Water would not be healthy at all. Additionally, this water could be healthy for people who have a normal diet, but unhealthy for people who consume a lot of water without ruling out. In this sense, more evidence is necessary to claim that Saluda Natural Spring Water is good for health because it contains minerals. Secondly, the author mentions that residents of Saluda are less often hospitalized than the nation-wide average thanks to the consumption of Saluda Natural Spring Water. Yet, other factors can cause a less rate of hospitalized people. For example, people in Saluda can be between 20’s and 30’s, and thus be healthier than the national...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document