A recently issued twenty-year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates. Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches.

The argument claims that there has been a decline in number of people who suffer from headaches in Mentia due to the increase in salicylates consumption.The argument asserts that adding salicylates to other foods would futher diminish the number of people who experience headaches. Stated in this way, the argument suffers from poor reasoning and ill-constructed cause and effect relation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that study has been conducted for twenty years and salicylates consumption is increased in that period since it is used as preservaties. This argument is stretch and undeveloped. For example, there is no information about how much increase in salicylates usage is observed. It might be the case that salicylates consumption is decreased, even if it is used as food preservatives, since some other foods also include salicylates and consumption of these food might decrease. In addition, the people of Mentia might prefer healtier lifestyle and do not purchase processed foods. If this is the case, they would not experience the effects of increased salicylates consumption. The argument would be much stronger if it clearly stated the approach to Mentia population to the processed foods and the consumption amount of other foods that include salicylates.

Second, the argument claims that the increase in salicylates consumption has leaded to decline in number of people who experience headaches. This is again very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate explicit relation between amount of exposition to salicylates and alleviation in headaches. The argumeny only explains that salicylates is in the same chemical family with the aspirin. However, this is not persuasive since the elements which are in same family might not show the similar effect on human health. In addition, there might be other reasons that are more likely to be the cause of lessening the headaches of Mertia’s populace such as the quality of the air. To illustrate, there might be factory which emit poisonous gases that cause headaches and this factory might be closed now. Hence, the headaches of people alleviate because of this. Furthermore, the overexposition to salicylates consumption might have reverse effect, salicylates might be beneficial in only small dosages. Consequently, the argument would be much clearer if it presented the reliable information about the theurapatic power of salicylates on headaches and the dosage it is effective.

Finally, the argument averts that as a result of increase consumption of salicylates , fewer people would suffer from headaches. Hence, salicylates usage is beneficial. This argument is not supported adequately because even if the salicylates alleviates the pain it might create other health problems. For example, pain killers also diminish pain however; they cause serious issues on liver. Moreover, the reverse effects of salicylates might not be known currently but they might be discovered in the future. Thus, promoting the usage of salicylates might cause more harm than good.

To sum up, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and therefore it is unconvincing. The argument would be much more stronger it explicitly demonstrated the total amount of increase in salicylates consumption in twenty year period. In order to assess the merits of a situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this case, theurapatic effect of salicylates on headaches should be presented. Without convincing answers to the questions about salicylates , the argument would remain unsupported and open to debate.