On Heart Attack Prevention

"Eating a heavy meal may increase the risk of heart attack. A recent survey of 2,000 people who had had a heart attack revealed that 158 of them said they had eaten a heavy meal within 24 hours before their heart attack, and 25 of them said they had eaten a heavy meal within 2 hours before their heart attack. Eating and digesting food releases hormones into the bloodstream and temporarily increases heart rate and blood pressure slightly. Both of these things put stress on the heart. Therefore, people who are at risk of having a heart attack can lower that risk by not overeating."

The argument that suggests not to over eat in order to decrease the risk of heart attack is not logically convincing. It states that in a survey of 2,000 people who have suffered from heart attack had a heavy meal within 24 hours before the test, and also that Eating and digesting releases hormones into blood that increases the heart rate, leading to heart attack. This is not entirely logically convincing, and in the following essay I will point out these flaws and suggest ways to make the argument more sound.

First, merely 158 out of the 2000 people who suffered from heart attacked mentioned that they had a heavy meal within 24 hours before the attack occurred. This small amount of people could not fully serve as a representation of all the people who have heart attacks, not to mention the 2000 people who represent as a whole. It could possibly b that these 158 people had other conditions that led to heart decease.

Second, as mentioned before, other conditions may lead to the occurrence of heart attack. Research has point out that the chance of heart attack may increase if a family member has chronicle record of it. Also, severe exercise, nervousness or other activities that stress the heart may also result in a misinterpretation of the medical reports or heart attack.

Moreover, the kind of food that the people who had heavy meals were not stated. Since reports show that cholesterol and fat are the main cause of heart and vein clogging, it would be more logically satisfying if the author analyzed the different kinds of food were taken among the test and pointed out their specific health conditions .

To sum up, the argument fails to reach a logical argument due to the hasty generalization. It neglects the fact that many other reasons other that food could possibly result in heart attack, and also the fact that it induces its conclusion merely by a selected few. The argument could be more sound if it carefully examined each of the test subjects health conditions and controlled the food that they have eaten prior to the tests. By doing so they could possibly narrow down the results into a more precise cause and help prevent heart attacks.