Please critique!

[pandeyrav]

ESSAY QUESTION: The following appeared in an article in a medical journal: "The major increase in new cases of adult-onset diabetes during the past decade is the result of poor nutrition, which is itself the result of a lack of government control over the quality of foods available at low prices. If the government placed more emphasis on proper nutrition by requiring that food manufacturers include more vitamins and minerals in their products, the rate of adult-onset diabetes would be reduced significantly."

YOUR RESPONSE: The author puts forth a weak and unsound argument. There are several conspicuous flaws to the argument. The argument can be divided into two distinct parts, each of which lacks credibility and could use supporting facts to make itself complete, comprehensive and more likely to pass a logical scrutiny.

The first part of the argument talks about increase in adult-onset diabetes in the past decade and finds poor nutrition to be the reason behind it. However, it falls in the face of penetrating but valid questions, such as: Were any studies conducted in the previous decade that tried to find out the reasons for new cases of adult-onset of diabetes ? If any such studies were conducted, what were the results of such studies ? Do the results agree or contradict any findings from previous studies ? Are adults that take vitamin and mineral supplements less prone to diabetes? Has any clinical research been carried out that shows that diabetes can be reversed with nutritious food? Have any studies tried to find out the relationship between adult lifestyle and occurrence of diabetes? Answers to these questions would not only serve as proof to the statement, but also draw a trend about reasons for adult-onset diabetes, if any.

The second part of the argument holds the government responsible for not exercising price control over quality of foods available and wishes the government would mandate addition of more vitamins and minerals in food. Here the argument looks the weakest. It does not answer questions such as: Are naturally occurring foods insufficient in vitamin and mineral content ? Is there any credible proof that prices of quality foods are artificially kept high and hence beyond the reach of common population? Has the government put forth any policies that attempt to ensure that a minimum level of quality is maintained in foods sold in market ? Has the government put in place any mechanisms that verify the quality of foods periodically? Has the government increased or reduced its spend on efforts to find a cure for adult-onset diabetes ? Does addition of extra vitamins and minerals make a food item prohibitively expensive ? What effects, if any will a government price control have on the economy? Will such an effect outweigh the possible benefits?

The third part of the argument draws a conclusion that is based on weak and unsupported facts and can at best be termed mere conjecture. However, if the argument is expanded to logically and reasonably answer the questions that have been raised above, it would become logical, comprehensive and more likely to be agreed to.