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 the past several decades, food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia.“
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The writer’s premise is that salicylates – naturally occurring chemicals present in some fruits, vegetables, and nuts – have been manipulated into commercial products, such as foods. Their use has contributed to a decrease in the number of reported headaches. The author then presents evidence to support this claim, specifically citing a twenty-year study in which participants reported fewer headaches after consuming foods with salicylates. This claim rests on the assumption that the naturally occurring salicylates found in various foods could effectively treat headaches and that this use is new.
However, this assumption is problematic. First, no indication naturally occurring salicylates contain any of the chemicals found in the commercial products. Salicylates may cause headaches. A 2009 report in the Journal of Headache and Pain suggests that salicylates may trigger migraines and cluster headaches by causing constriction of blood vessels. Second, the consumption of salicylates as a preservative is relatively new, and there has been no long-term study to suggest that this use has caused a decline in the number of headaches. The claim is therefore based on an unsupported assumption. Third, the implication that “more research” is needed before commercial products containing salicylates can be accepted as treatments for headaches is questionable. If salicylates cause headaches, would more and prolonged consumption of those foods lead to fewer headaches? Why would more and prolonged consumption of foods containing salicylates lead to fewer headaches if this is not the case?
While this premise is flawed, the author’s argument is not. The hypothesis states that “many” foods contain salicylates, and “many” foods have been used as preservatives. However, the author later says that the addition of preservatives to food has been a new phenomenon. Although this is true if salicylates can cause headaches, then using these chemicals as preservatives is unnecessary. Therefore, the author’s argument does not hinge on this assumption. Instead, the author tries to bolster his argument by stating that the consumption of salicylates has increased in the past few decades and that the use of these chemicals as preservatives is new. However, neither of these statements is unique, and it is possible that the use of preservatives in food has been increasing for some time. In addition to this, the consumption of salicylates as a preservative may be a recent phenomenon. Therefore, this argument is not undermined by this assumption.
The argument would also not fail if the assumption concerning the reduction in the number of reported headaches was incorrect. If salicylates as preservatives cause headaches, then the number of reported headaches would not decrease, and the author’s premise would therefore be proven false. Consequently, it would be prudent for the writer to conduct more research before claiming that unsupported assumptions and unsubstantiated findings are accurate.