The given argument discusses two views related to the development of allergies. The first is that exposure to certain irritants like dust or animal dander during childhood can lead to allergies since the body's immune system is not fully developed in children. The second view is that the development of the immune system is activated by exposure to certain types of bacteria in childhood. The arguer cites the results of a new study and claims that they support the second view. The conclusion derived by the author might appear logical and convincing at first glance. However, a more critical analysis of the justification supplied by the author has highlighted many questions. Therefore, the premises in their current form are not cogent and the argument is rife with unwarranted assumptions which make it more susceptible to attacks.
On the first facet, the author of the argument has not mentioned about the demographic region in which the study has been conducted. Maybe the study has been conducted in the area prone to allergies. Moreover, he has not provided the evidence for the study that has been conducted and it raises some questions. How many families were the subject for the study? He has also not mentioned about other factors that could have triggered allergies in the child. Maybe their homes situated in the places which are unhygienic and cleaning children and houses is not sufficient.
Secondly, the author has failed to examine the facts that what were the types of allergy that children encountered. It is likely that the allergies are genetic and they are having allergy because their parents have it or their grandparents had it. Moreover, allergies are developed from eating habits or using a certain kind of cosmetics or soap it's not just that cleaning children and house will be enough for avoiding allergies.
Additionally, there are other factors that develop allergies. Eating habits, playing habits and the environment in which you are. If a child is playing in mud then he is more likely to have an allergy than other who does not. If other child is having a certain allergy than it might transmit to other children with whom he/she is playing. Moreover, cleaning does not mean that you have successfully avoided the trouble of allergy until you do not clean with disinfectants. The children usually caught up the allergy by the bacterias and the irritants which are present in the environment despite cleaning.
In the crux, the author's argument is based on unsubstantiated presumptions. The author should have reinforced his argument with more evidence to make the case more convincing. However, the author failed to examine facts that there might be several other factors that could trigger an allergy in children and naively concluded, thereby rendering the argument indefensible.
The
given
argument
discusses two views related to the development of
allergies
. The
first
is that exposure to
certain
irritants like dust or animal dander during childhood can lead to
allergies
since the body's immune system is not
fully
developed in
children
.
The
second view is that the development of the immune system
is activated
by exposure to
certain
types of bacteria in childhood.
The
arguer cites the results of a new
study
and claims that they support the second view.
The
conclusion derived by the
author
might appear logical and convincing at
first
glance.
However
, a more critical analysis of the justification supplied by the
author
has highlighted
many
questions.
Therefore
, the premises in their
current
form are not cogent and the
argument
is rife with unwarranted assumptions which
make
it more susceptible to attacks.
On the
first
facet, the
author
of the
argument
has not
mentioned about the
demographic region in which the
study
has
been conducted
. Maybe the
study
has
been conducted
in the area prone to
allergies
.
Moreover
, he has not provided the evidence for the
study
that has
been conducted
and it raises
some
questions. How
many
families were the subject for the
study
? He has
also
not mentioned about
other
factors that could have triggered
allergies
in the child. Maybe their homes situated in the places which are unhygienic and cleaning
children
and
houses
is not sufficient.
Secondly
, the
author
has failed to examine the facts that what were the types of
allergy
that
children
encountered. It is likely that the
allergies
are
genetic and
they are having
allergy
because
their parents have it or their grandparents had it.
Moreover
,
allergies
are developed
from eating habits or using a
certain
kind of cosmetics or soap it's not
just
that cleaning
children
and
house
will be
enough
for avoiding allergies.
Additionally
, there are
other
factors that develop
allergies
. Eating habits, playing habits and the environment in which you are. If a child is playing in mud then he is more likely to have an
allergy
than
other
who does not.
If
other
child is having a
certain
allergy
than it might transmit to
other
children
with whom he/she is playing.
Moreover
, cleaning does not mean that you have
successfully
avoided the trouble of
allergy
until you do not clean with disinfectants. The
children
usually
caught up the
allergy
by the
bacterias
and the irritants which are present in the environment despite cleaning.
In the crux, the author's
argument
is based
on unsubstantiated presumptions. The
author
should have reinforced his
argument
with more evidence to
make
the case more convincing.
However
, the
author
failed to examine facts that there might be several
other
factors that could trigger an
allergy
in
children
and
naively
concluded, thereby rendering the
argument
indefensible.