Essay topics: 9. The following appeared in a health newsletter.
"A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets."
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
According to two studies, the author deposits that the reason for the increment of accidents by bicyclists is for the sake of security and safety sense appear by wearing the hamlet. Furthermore, he purposes that the government should implement an educational base to solve this issue instead of wearing a helmet. This assertation is based on a series of vague and shaky assumptions; thus, the conclusion is also doubtful. The following paragraphs will list these unwarranted surmises.
This first striking problem is about the hypothesis which is based on the existence of a link between the two studies. There is no clue that these two surveys are correlated and merely similarities among them are the duration of them. For instance, if the first study which focused on helmet wearing is conducted in a specific place such as A, but the second study about the increment of the accident is done in the city B; would be logic to link these two studies and assumed that the first study is the cause of the second study? Maybe in city A, during these ten years, the reported accidents have been declined. Or there is a possibility that the helmet wearing trend has not been a privilege in city B at these ten years. Both conditions cogently represent the shakiness of these surmises.
Even both studies had been done in the identical place with the same case studies, there is another issue with this newsletter. Indeed, it is unconvincing since it underestimates the other accident causes. The writer assumes that the safety of wearing a helmet makes bicyclist careless, there is no comprehensive clue that the accidents are because of the wearing helmet. The first parameter which should be listed in this letter is the type of accidents, whether it is an accident between the bicyclist and cars or bicyclist and the city elements such as a tree. For instance, if the type of accident is the crash between the car and bicycle, there is a feasibility that the incident occurs for the sake of a car driver’s carelessness. Without finding the type and cause of the accident, blaming the bicyclists for their carefree riding is not fear.
Finally, according to all these questionable and faint surmises, the letter purposes the implementation of education for trending the safe bicycling instead of wearing a helmet. At this step, even the above-mentioned surmises are approved by the satisfied backing evidence and reasons, there is no guarantee that the proposed method would be effective. What if the punishment works quickly and effectively? Since, based on the prolonged duration of bicycling, people have ideas about the safe and secure riding and they overlook them for the sake of their convictions. In this scenario, the monetary punishment could be more effective than the repetition of known information. As long as the author does not present data about the sufficiency of this proposed plan, it is doubtful.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned issues and assumptions explicitly depict that this newsletter and its conclusion are unreliable. It could be provable if the author shows two studies were considered the same study group, the only cause of the accident is wearing the helmet, and education would be effective to have control over this problem.
|Post date||Users||Rates||More about the essay|
|3 years 4 months ago||rlagusdk||66||Read full essay|
|3 years 4 months ago||hanmantlokare||50||Read full essay|
|3 years 4 months ago||tkhreim||66||Read full essay|
|3 years 5 months ago||aditheodosius||56.5||Read full essay|
|3 years 8 months ago||dypnani||50||Read full essay|
|4 years 2 months ago||alibaba||50||Read full essay|
|4 years 2 months ago||EugeneDubinchuk||50||Read full essay|
|4 years 4 months ago||vanooshe||70||Read full essay|
|4 years 5 months ago||brbrl||70||Read full essay|
|5 years 1 month ago||siamakd||40||Read full essay|
- tpo 27 (85)
- Improving schools is the most important factor in the successful development of a country (73)
- Tpo-extra writing 3 (3)
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? A person should never make an important decision alone. (70)
- TPO-Extra 2-integrated (3)
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People learn things better from those at their own level-such as fellow students or co-workers- than from those at a higher level, such as teacher or supervisors. (73)
- tpo-extra 1-integrated (3)
- Do you agree or disagree?It is more important for governments to spend money to improve internet access than to public transportation. (73)
- TPO53Independent Task-Many countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes; similar taxes are being considered for unhealthy foods. The policy of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy pro (80)
- tpo53 (3)