The citizens of Forsythe have adopted more healthful lifestyles. Their responses to a recent survey show that in their eating habits they conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they did ten years ago. Furthermore, there has been a fourfold increase in sales of food products containing kiran, a substance that a scientific study has shown reduces cholesterol. This trend is also evident in reduced sales of sulia, a food that few of the healthiest citizens regularly eat.

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.


The author concludes that the citizens of Forsythe have adopted a more healthy lifestyle. The evidence cited to support this argument includes the survey which recommends that the eating habits of citizens are close to the government nutritional recommendations than it was ten years ago. Also, the sale of food product that scientifically reduces cholesterol is increased. At first, the argument seems plausible. On scrutiny, it is found to be rife with holes and assumptions.
Firstly, the author incorrectly assumes that citizens have adopted a healthy lifestyle based on a survey. The survey is always conducted on a group of people which can not be concluded for the whole population. Also, the nutritional demand of the body certainly changes with time. The nutrition required for the body 10 years ago maybe now the daily requirement of citizens. As the environment is changing, the living conditions of human is changing drastically. Adaption of a human being to nature requires some necessary food habits which may not be necessary 10 years ago. Another faulty assumption of the author is based on the sale of food products containing Kiran, a substance which can reduce cholesterol. As it is mentioned, the food product is scientifically proven to reduce cholesterol but there is no evidence of its effect on the human being, it can not be concluded that food products can do a positive effect on citizen's health. Therefore, the argument is based on faulty assumptions and is subsequently not logically strong.
Secondly, the argument fails to consider certain factors that can affect the outcome differently. For Instance, the food product containing Kiran, which reduces cholesterol may reduce other nutritional requirements of the body as well. It may be possible that food substances might affect adversely on the human body by slowly decreasing the nutritional value. As, the author has not mentioned any other benefits of the food substance, it requires more analysis before declaring it as a healthy food product. Furthermore, the need for nutrition for citizens may be completely different from citizens 10 years ago. As the human body keeps evolving, the nutritional requirement of the body can not be standardized. Also, the age group involved in the survey can make a major difference in the outcome. It could be a possibility that a certain age group is following a nutritionally balanced diet as compared to others. Hence the argument remains oblivious to those factors and is thus weak.
Thirdly, the argument cites data that is inconsistent and full of loopholes. The increase in the use of food products containing Kiran reduced the sale of Sulia which is a regular food product of healthiest citizens. As the food product containing Sulia is already proven and tested on the citizens of Forsythe, it is possible that it contains all the nutritional values and thus is healthy for the citizens. But reducing the consumption of Sulia may adversely affect the citizens of Forsythe as it is already a proven healthy product and has shown positive results on citizens. Therefore, reducing the consumption of Sulia may affect the citizens and hence needs to be analyzed better before diverting to another food product. Additionally, the percentage of citizens surveyed to conclude the healthy lifestyles is not mentioned by the author which can also change the result.
Hence, it is concluded that the argument's conclusion that the citizens have adopted a healthy lifestyle is ill-supported by the premises mentioned in the argument. However, the argument can be strengthened to some extent by providing the details including the other nutritional benefits of food products containing Kiran and the number of citizens involved in the survey. Despite the scope of improvement the argument written is irrational, illogical, and completely inconclusive.