"In a recent study, subjects who ate soybeans at least five times per week had significantly lower cholesterol levels than subjects who ate no soy products. By fortifying our Wheat-O cereal with soy protein, we can increase sales by appealing to additional consumers who are concerned about their health. This new version of Wheat-O should increase company profits and, at the same time, improve the health of our customers."


Based on a recent study about ingesting soybeans and lower cholesterol levels, the arguer simply assumes causal relationship between the two things which we take leave to doubt. Then we start to doubt the succedent conclusion. Let us get down to the fundamentals and agree that there maybe exist a sort of correlation that ingesting soybeans can lower individual’s cholesterol levels, but the causal relationship is unwarranted.

First of all, there are many questions about unstated procedure and subjects’ characters of the study. Let’s begin with what the quantity of the subjects is? Is there sufficient number of subjects involved in the study from which we can safely draw conclusion? Then we go on asking how the subjects choose from people? Are these subjects choosed randomly or strictly from the people who have the same initiative cholesterol levels? If the subjects are choosed randomly, then there is good chance that the initiative cholesterol levels of subjects who ate soybeans are lower than subjects who ate no soybeans,then the lower cholesterol levels has nothing to do with whether the subjects ate soybeans or not.

Secondly, we can dig our question deeper by asking: Are there other alternatives contributed to lower cholesterol levels of subjects who ate soybeans (let’s call it “subjects 1”) and comparatively higher cholesterol levels of subjects who ate no soybeans (let’s call it”subjects 2). We are kept from the information about the diet, life habits and practising rates of the two groups of subjects. Compared to subjects1, the higher cholesterol levels of subjects2 is maybe because they usually take too much fat and egg, nearly don’t practise once a week and maybe they are heavy smokers and alcoholic. Each of scenarioes would seriously undermine the validity of result of the study.

Thirdly, even if we concede that soybean is actually beneficial to the health of people. This does not necessarily mean that by adding soy protein to Wheat-O cereal one can attact more consumers who are concerned about their health. Before buying some product, consumer would consider many aspects of this product especially its taste and price. If Wheat-O cereal tastes worse or price is very higher than other brands of cereal which also are fortified with soy protein, I am afraid adding soy protein to Wheat-O cereal can not open the more market. Even if the new Wheat-O cereal is popular in the market, gain profits is still not the case if the increasing cost cover the profits from the sales.

Finally, we still need to discuss the term of ‘soybean’ with ‘soy protein’. Commen sense tells us that soy protein is distilled from soybean. But soy protein is as the same good effectiveness as soybean concerning to health of individuals. In the study, It is possible that some other substance in soybean is responsible for the lower cholesterol levels. The arguer fails to convince us again.

In conclusion, before extend use of soy protein to product like cereal, more well-rounded and thoroughly analysis should be done.