▶ Your Answer : In the lecture, the lecturer claims that sucralose is not
hazardous. This casts doubt on the reading's assertion that the substance is
associated with the health issues/problems. First, the lecturer asserts that it is less likely to
consider sucralose as a cause of diabetes. To explain, the excess of insulin due to
consuming sucralose doesn't mean anything because other ingredients
trigger same results. Besides, physical condition is related to diabetes rather
than sucralose. This contrasts with the reading's claim that people consuming sucralose have a more
higher possibility of developing
diabetes. Second, the lecturer argues that sucralose doesn't
produce harmful substances when used for cooking. In fact, the researchers who
found the harmful substances created by heated sucralose and other
chemicals said that they heated them in to excessively higher
temperature than normal.<-좀 더 자세히 설명해주세요.(따라서 일반적으로 사람들이 요리할 때는 실험할 때만큼
높은 온도로 하지 않기때문에, harmful substances가 나올 일이 없다) This refutes the reading's
insistence that when used for cooking, sucralose produces harmful substances. Lastly, the lecturer maintains that sucralose doesn't
cause allergic reactions. To be specific, people's experiences that they felt
dizzy and headaches are unreliable, and they just imagined that sucralose had
triggered the symptoms because of the information from mass media. This rebuffs
the reading's point that sucralose can set off allergic reactions. Writing 0–30 score scale Fair-Good(22-26)
전체적으로 문법, 어휘적으로 문제 없이 매끄럽게
잘 쓰셨습니다. 핵심적인 내용들은 다 잘 포함하고 있는데, 두
번째 포인트에서 강연자가 제시한 정보를 설명한 뒤에 따라서 ~~~하다-라고
결론까지 내려주어야 뒤에서 ~~한 점에서 reading을
반박한다-는 것과 더 잘 연결되겠습니다. 수고 많으셨습니다^^ |