The following report appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council."An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East

The author of this argument has taken two ostensibly unrelated facts and has come to a conclusion that is not supported by the argument. In addition , the writer has made sweeping recommendation based on assumption. Although fired up and ready to go, the residents of West Meria should look out for omissions in reasoning made by the author and ask hard questions before accepting the diurnal use of dietray supplement Ichthaid.

The assumption that cold is the only reason for abseentism at workplaces and school is largely erroneous. What proof does the author cites for this fact. It is probable that since cold is so common, it serves as a convenient excuse for anyone wanting to take an off from school or work. Had the author cited any doctor certificates submitted by employees and students, then his would have justified the authors recommendation. While cold can be prevented by Ichthaid, can the same be said for abseentism. Thus, in the absence of concrete evidence such as doctor certificates and statistical data regarding cold, the claim that cold is a major reason for absenteeism, totally falls apart.

Secondly the assumption that residents of West Meria eat fish and make few visits to doctors, is there by, largely unrelated. The writer assumes that this is an example of cause and effect. What evidence exits to support this? First, the reader should ask to know if East Meria's residents visit doctor to treat every cold. It is likely that many people treat their colds themselves, after all, there is no cure. Next they should ask how many of cold sufferers are habitual fish eaters. If East Merian's do, in fact, contract fewer colds than average, they maybe taking other preventive measures. Is there any evidence that they take vitamin C? They maybe taking large quantities of fruits and vegetables which maybe rich in vitamin C. They maybe eating their fish with lots of lemon, a fruit rich in vitamin C. Therefore the link between eating fish and making fewer visits to doctor is not fairly convincing.

Thirdly, the authors assumption that eating the supplement Icthaid is equivalent to eating fish. Icthaid is a supplement and will tend to lose much of its nutritional value while being processed. Moreover lethal substances are added to such products for scaling their expiry time. The expense for having this supplement on a diurnal basis can have a negative impact on the health, or to paraphrase Marie Antoinette, "Let them eat fish."

Thus in it's present form the argument lacks the vital statistics and evidence to determine the veracity of claims made by the author. It is based on several assumptions, most blatant of which are debunked above. The author should provide more reports, statistic reports from doctor, regarding cold, otherwise his prediction of Ichthaid being a good way to prevent cold, is likely to be a pipe dream.