GRE作文范文 Argument-28

"A new discovery warrants a drastic change in the diets of people living in the United States. Two scientists have recently suggested that omega -3 fatty acids (found in some fish and fish oils) play a key role in mental health. Our ancestors, who ate less saturated fat and more polyunsaturated fat, including omega -3 fatty acids, were much less likely to suffer from depression than we are today. Moreover, modern societies---such as those in Japan and Taiwan---that consume large quantities of fish report depression rates lower than that in the United States. Given this link between omega -3 fatty acids and depression, it is important for all people in the United States to increase their consumption of fish in order to prevent depression."

嘉文博譯Sample Essay

In this argument, the arguer states that because of a new discovery, there should be a drastic change in the diets of people in the United States - an increase in their consumption of fish to prevent depression. To support the argument, the arguer cites two scientists who have suggested that omega - 3 fatty acids, found in some fish and fish oils, play a key role in mental health. The arguer further claims that our ancestors ate less saturated fat, more polyunsaturated fat, and were much less likely to suffer from depression than people today. He or she also states that modern societies such as Japan and Taiwan consume large quantities of fish and report depression rates lower than the United States. This argument is based on problematic reasoning and therefore must be rejected.

First of all, the arguer cites as evidence two scientists who have suggested that omega-3 fatty acids play a key role in mental health. This is problematic for two reasons - only two scientists are mentioned, and they have only suggested a link, which is far from having proved it. There are no studies cited other than that two unnamed scientists have merely suggested a link, which is far from strong evidence that all people in the United States should drastically change their diets.

Secondly, the arguer states that our ancestors ate less saturated fat and more polyunsaturated fat, including omega-3 fatty acids, and that they were much less likely to suffer from depression than people today. There is no proof of this given in the argument, merely the arguer's statement or opinion. Furthermore, assuming the truth of these statements, there are many other contributing factors to an increased rate of depression today over that of our ancestors. For one thing, depression is much better diagnosed now whereas in the past it was likely to be just written off as simply "a case of the blues". Advances in medical knowledge have enabled people to not only be diagnosed as being depressed but also treated for the problem. In the past it was likely that cases of depression were underreported due to ignorance of the problem or the stigma associated with any type of mental illness. Additionally, lifestyle factors other than diet have contributed to problems with depression today. Excessive debt, increased social pressures and pressure at work are all contributing factors to depression that are bigger problems for people today than for their ancestors. Diet alone probably has nothing or very little to do with the increase in cases of depression.

Finally, the arguer cites Japan and Taiwan as modern societies that eat large quantities of fish who report lower rates of depression than the United States. Once again, there are many other factors to consider besides diet for the discrepancy. Cultural differences, lifestyle differences and the stigma of admitting that one is suffering from depression could all alter the reporting rates of depression in these other countries. There is no direct causal link demonstrated between the consumption of fish and omega-3 fatty acids and a lower rate of cases of depression in these societies outside of the United States. Additionally, the arguer states that all people in the United States should increase their consumption of fish to prevent depression, but it is possible that many people already eat enough fish or do not need to prevent depression as they have no problems in that regard.

In summary, the argument is based on some very tenuous reasoning including the mere suggestion of a link between omega-3 fatty acids and mental health by only two scientists and some anecdotal evidence of lower depression rates in countries that consume large quantities of fish. Without strong evidence of a direct causal link between eating fish, omega-3 fatty acids and depression, the argument fails to convince.

(640 words)

參考譯文

下文是一份健康雜志上某篇文章的一部分：

"一項(xiàng)新的發(fā)現(xiàn)證明，生活在美國的民眾有必要在飲食上進(jìn)行巨大的改變。最近有兩位科學(xué)家暗示，Ω-3脂肪酸(發(fā)現(xiàn)于某些魚類和魚油中)對于大腦的健康有著重要作用。我們的祖先吃較少的飽和脂肪和較多的多不飽和脂肪，包括Ω-3脂肪酸，所以與我們今天相比，不易患憂郁癥。再者，某些現(xiàn)代社會(huì)--例如食用大量魚類的日本和臺灣--據(jù)說比美國患憂郁癥的比率低?？紤]到Ω-3脂肪酸與憂郁癥之間的這種聯(lián)系，很有必要讓所有的美國人增加食用魚類，以便防止憂郁癥。"

在這一論證中，論證者說到，由于一項(xiàng)新的發(fā)現(xiàn)，應(yīng)該大大地改變美國人的飲食：增加魚類的食用量以防止憂郁癥。為了支持其論點(diǎn)，論證者引用了兩位科學(xué)家的研究，他們指出魚和魚油中所含的Ω-3脂肪酸對于大腦的健康具有重要的作用。論證者進(jìn)而聲稱，我們的祖先吃飽和脂肪較少，多不飽和脂肪較多，所以與我們相比少患憂郁癥。他/她還說到，諸如日本和臺灣這類現(xiàn)代社會(huì)大量食用魚類，而且據(jù)說比美國患憂郁癥的比率低。這一論證的推論是有問題的，因此不能接受。 首先，論證者援引兩位科學(xué)家的研究，他們暗示Ω-3脂肪酸對大腦的健康起著重要作用。這句話在兩方面存在問題：僅僅只有兩位科學(xué)家，而且他們只是暗示某種聯(lián)系，而這種聯(lián)系遠(yuǎn)未得到證明。除了兩位沒有署名的科學(xué)家只是提到這一聯(lián)系之外，作者沒能援引其他任何研究，遠(yuǎn)不能構(gòu)成強(qiáng)有力的證據(jù)來說明美國的所有人都應(yīng)該大大地改變飲食習(xí)慣。

其次，論證者說到，我們的祖先較少食用飽和脂肪而較多食用多不飽和脂肪，包括Ω-3脂肪酸，而且，他們比今天的人們較少患有憂郁癥。但是，論證中沒有提出證據(jù)來證明這一點(diǎn)。它只不過是論證者的一種說法或看法。再者，即使假定這些都是真實(shí)無疑的，仍有許多其他因素致使我們今天患憂郁癥的比率比我們祖先的高。其一是現(xiàn)在憂郁癥更易被診斷出來，而過去很可能只把它看作"不高興"而一筆勾銷。醫(yī)學(xué)的進(jìn)步，使人們不但可以診斷憂郁癥而且還可以醫(yī)療。在過去，很可能由于對憂郁癥的無知或者與神經(jīng)病相關(guān)的論點(diǎn)而沒有將它們充分報(bào)告出來。此外，除了飲食外，生活方式的因素也會(huì)導(dǎo)致今天的憂郁癥。債務(wù)過重，漸增的社會(huì)壓力，工作中的壓力等，這些都是導(dǎo)致憂郁癥成為一個(gè)我們今天比我們的祖先更為嚴(yán)重的問題。飲食自身可能與憂郁癥的增多無關(guān)或者關(guān)系甚微。 最后，論證者列舉了日本和臺灣作為實(shí)例來證明，象這樣一些大量食用魚類的現(xiàn)代社會(huì)，其憂郁癥發(fā)病率低于美國。再一次，除了飲食導(dǎo)致這一差別之外，還有許多其他因素需要考慮。文化的不同，生活方式的不同，以及承認(rèn)自己患憂郁癥所會(huì)帶來的恥辱，可能都會(huì)改變這些國家或地區(qū)報(bào)告憂郁癥的比率。在食用魚類和Ω-3脂肪酸與美國之外的那些社會(huì)里憂郁癥發(fā)病率低之間，作者并沒有證明某種直接的因果聯(lián)系。此外，論證者聲稱，在美國的所有人都應(yīng)該增加魚類的食用量以防止憂郁癥。然而，很有可能已有許多人吃了足夠的魚類，或者根本就不需要防止憂郁癥，因?yàn)樗麄兏揪筒淮嬖诖祟悊栴}。 總之，該項(xiàng)論證基于非常脆弱的推理，包括兩位科學(xué)家僅僅在Ω-3脂肪酸與大腦健康之間所暗示的聯(lián)系，以及一些軼聞趣事式的證據(jù)來說明食用大量魚類的國家和地區(qū)憂郁癥發(fā)病率低。因?yàn)闆]有有力的證據(jù)表明吃魚、Ω-3脂肪酸與憂郁癥之間的因果關(guān)系，這篇論證不能令人信服。