▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is ample support for the author’s claim that sucralose should not be used due to the health problems related to it. However, the professor gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author’s point. First, the professor insists that sucralose is not actually hazardous to human health. There are other ingredients such as potatoes, rice and starch that increase the insulin production in human body. So, the increase of insulin by sucralose means nothing. Plus In addition, many people who drink diet soda have obesity which causes diabetes. Thus, the reason that people who consume diet soda are more likely to develop diabetes is not because of sucralose, it is but because of their physical condition. This casts doubt the reading passage’s claim that people who eat sucralose have a greater risk of developing diabetes. Second, the professor contends that sucralose does not make dangerous chemicals when used for cooking. According to him, the laboratory test did not involve the real life ingredients when during the testing. The researchers have not found harmful chemicals in the food we eat when sucralose was used. Moreover, the tested the substances were at much higher temperature than people normally use for cooking. This counters the reading passage’s assertion that sucralose may produce harmful substances when used for cooking. Finally, the professor argues that there is no evidence that sucralose cause intense allergic reaction. People just hear the story in media and sort of imagine that they have the similar symptoms. In fact, numerous experiments have been conducted to determine whether sucralose is safe for human consumption and no one indicates that it causes severe allergic problems. This refutes the reading passage’s suggestion that sucralose can set off strong allergic reaction.
[Score] 28-30 [Feedback] - 아주 잘 쓰셨습니다 :) Reading과 lecture의 포인트들도 잘 짚어주었고 그 둘의 관계도 잘 설명해주었어요. 문법적 오류가 조금 있긴 하지만 minor mistake인 정도여서 큰 문제는 되지 않습니다~ |