The following appeared in an article in a consumer-products magazine:
"Two of today's best-selling brands of full-strength prescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid, Acid-Ease and Pepticaid, are now available in milder nonprescription forms. Doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full-strength Acid-Ease than for full-strength Pepticaid. So people who need an effective but milder nonprescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid should choose Acid-Ease."
This article essentially states that because Acid-Ease prescription medication is more commonly prescribed than Pepticaid, nonprescription strength Acid-Ease is a better choice than nonprescription Pepticaid. This argument fundamentally flawed. The author makes many assumptions that are not supported by the information provided; the author also makes sweeping statements about all people who need mild, effective medication for stomach acid relief.
Firstly, the author assumes that because doctors write more prescriptions for Acid-Ease than for Pepticaid, that Acid-Ease is a better product. It is not mentioned how long each product has been on the market. Pepticaid could be a new medicine that has come out recently whereas Acid-Ease has been available for a much longer time. This possible scenario would explain the discrepancy between the sales figures and nullify the argument that more sales means one product is better than the other.
Secondly, the author also assumes that the non-prescription versions of each medication are linear in terms of their effectiveness. Even if full-strength Acid-Ease is, in fact, a better product than full-strength Pepticaid; one cannot assume that nonprescription strength Acid-Ease is necessarily better than nonprescription strength Pepticaid.
Lastly, the author's statement attempts to target anyone who requires medication for the relief of excess stomach acid. It is not stated whether or not the two medications have the same active ingredient or the same side effects. It is possible that the two medications use different ingredients to achieve the same results - much like antihistamines that use similar doses of different ingredients to help people cope with allergies - therefore the conclusion reached by the author is too encompassing given the actual facts provided. To make the statement more plausible, the author should have narrowed down the scope of the target demographic to people who already find full-strength Acid-Ease effective but too strong, and may prefer the mild non-prescription strength version of Acid-Ease.
The author has reached a conclusion that is not supported by evidence, but rather a loose association between non-descript sales figures and sweeping assumptions about the medications themselves. In order to make a stronger statement, the author should have either addressed the assumptions through evidence or narrowed down his or her demographic scope.
"Two of today's best-selling brands of full-strength prescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid, Acid-Ease and Pepticaid, are now available in milder nonprescription forms. Doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full-strength Acid-Ease than for full-strength Pepticaid. So people who need an effective but milder nonprescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid should choose Acid-Ease."
This article essentially states that because Acid-Ease prescription medication is more commonly prescribed than Pepticaid, nonprescription strength Acid-Ease is a better choice than nonprescription Pepticaid. This argument fundamentally flawed. The author makes many assumptions that are not supported by the information provided; the author also makes sweeping statements about all people who need mild, effective medication for stomach acid relief.
Firstly, the author assumes that because doctors write more prescriptions for Acid-Ease than for Pepticaid, that Acid-Ease is a better product. It is not mentioned how long each product has been on the market. Pepticaid could be a new medicine that has come out recently whereas Acid-Ease has been available for a much longer time. This possible scenario would explain the discrepancy between the sales figures and nullify the argument that more sales means one product is better than the other.
Secondly, the author also assumes that the non-prescription versions of each medication are linear in terms of their effectiveness. Even if full-strength Acid-Ease is, in fact, a better product than full-strength Pepticaid; one cannot assume that nonprescription strength Acid-Ease is necessarily better than nonprescription strength Pepticaid.
Lastly, the author's statement attempts to target anyone who requires medication for the relief of excess stomach acid. It is not stated whether or not the two medications have the same active ingredient or the same side effects. It is possible that the two medications use different ingredients to achieve the same results - much like antihistamines that use similar doses of different ingredients to help people cope with allergies - therefore the conclusion reached by the author is too encompassing given the actual facts provided. To make the statement more plausible, the author should have narrowed down the scope of the target demographic to people who already find full-strength Acid-Ease effective but too strong, and may prefer the mild non-prescription strength version of Acid-Ease.
The author has reached a conclusion that is not supported by evidence, but rather a loose association between non-descript sales figures and sweeping assumptions about the medications themselves. In order to make a stronger statement, the author should have either addressed the assumptions through evidence or narrowed down his or her demographic scope.
