An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p

The author of this analytical piece asserts that New breed of millet is high in Vitamin A. So he thinks that people who has Vitamin A deficiency should take this new breed of millet. He further stated that farmers will get benefit from this new breed of millet because its cost is high. He ended up with the conclusion that Government should promote this new type of millet to combat Vitamin A deficiency. Counterproductively, close scrutiny of the facts, the argument suffers from many fallacies. The author had taken only limited factors in consideration before jumping to conclusion.Non consideration of additional factors has left argument vulnerable to skepticism and ambiguities.

First and foremost, The author stated that new type of millet is high in Vitamin 'A'. But is it really helpful? The author need to provide information about experiments or research taken place to substantiate his assertion. Even if it is helpful, but what are the other ingredients in this new type of millet? Is there any sideeffects from this new type of millet? The author has to provide information regarding this to make his argument more convincing.

Secondly,The author stated that cost of new type of millet is high. But Is only high cost can result in increase in profits of farmers? The author should provide information like what type of condition required by this new type of millet, which can make his argument more convincing. Moreover, Would people purchase this new type of millet even though cost is high? The author need to look into these factors before jumping to conclusion.

Finally, Is promoting by government only sufficient to combat deficiency of Vitamin A? The author failed to substantiate his conclusion. There could be other ways of combating deficiency of Vitamin A. The author need to look into this factors which can make his argument more credible.

In sum, The author's argument is not cogent enough to lead to the proposed prescription. But it can become admissible by providing evidences and information which are discussed above.