The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin a medicine used to treat headaches Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates for t

The given summary of the study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia, tends to propose the use of Salicylates as flavor additives for foods. This conclusion is based on the belief that the use will lead to decrease in the number of headaches encountered in the city of Mentia. It relies on the assumption that, the same increase in commercial use of salicylates in food processing companies, will be encountered in the new use of salicylates too. There is a lot of evidence needed in order to effectively evaluate this argument. Without a mention of the required evidence, the argument will prove to be fallacious.

First of all, Salicylates are quoted to be the members of the chemical family as aspirin. But how much of the property does Salicylates have, to treat headaches must be ascertained. Just because, Saliclylates is a member of aspirin family, cannot guarantee that it will possess the same properties.

The foods which are naturally rich in salicylates must be further elaborated and whether they are being purchased by the people must also be made clear. Furthermore, the author quotes that, during the past 'several' decades, food processing companies havestarted to use salicylates as preservatives.The number of decades must be clearly presented, to solve the conflict, which is to follow in the argument. The author quotes that the commercial use of salicylates is rising on par with the steady decline in the averge number of headaches. This, is said to be a result of the study. But the number of participants taken for the study, their age group etc... must be mentioned to get a clear view of the study. Moreover, since the study was conducted for twenty years, we cannot exactly predict whether the decrease in headaches is due to the salicylates added to foods as preservatives, or those salicylates which naturally occur in foods.

Moreover, the author commits an error of correlation-causation. The rise in commercial use of salicylates happened the same time around, when the decrease in average number of headaches were reported. However, the decline in headches, can be due to a number of other reasons such as: the people becoming aware of their health, the incidence of headaches having been decreased in the past few years etc... Also, evidence has to be provided, whether all the people who have headaches, resort to foods containing salicylates. Because, there can be multiple ways to tackle headaches which have to be weighed against the use of salicylates.

The summary ends up in a hasty conclusion, basing its decision, on the recent findings of food-processing companies. These companies have found that salicylates can be used as flavor additives for foods. But even, if they are used, will those foods be readily accepted by the people? Also, the average number of headaches occuring are already reported to have dwindled. Then, there arises a doubt whether, the demand for foods containing salicylates in any form, will continue. If the demand decreases, then the recommendation will not hold good for implementation. When the link between headaches and foods containing salicylates, is not proved in the first hand, it will be too early to conclude that, introducing salicylates as flavor additives, will increase the sales and reduce the number of headaches.

Thus, in order to evaluate the given argument, lots of evidence needs to be furnished. Some of them include: Salicylates having the property of reducing the occurence of headaches, elaborate details of the study conducted, details regarding the persons interviewed for the study, relation between the use of salicylates in foods and decrease in the occurence of headaches, the effectiveness of the decision to use salicylates as flavor additives. These details must be provided, in order to evaluate the argument without any skepticism. Unless the argument is backed up with substantial evidence, it will remain fallible and unsuitable to be taken into consideration.