The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of a company that makes shampoo.
　　“A widely publicized study claims that HR2, a chemical compound in our shampoo, can contribute to hair loss after prolonged use. This study, however, involved only 500 subjects. Furthermore, we have received no complaints from our customers during the past year, and some of our competitors actually use more HR2 per bottle of shampoo than we do. Therefore, we do not need to consider replacing the HR2 in our shampoo with a more expensive alternative.”
　　The author’s conclusion is that the company does not need to replace the HR 2 in its shampoo with a more expensive alternative. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out that only 500 subjects were involved in the widely publicized study claiming HR 2 can contribute to hair loss after prolonged use. Also the author points out that the company has not received any complaints from customers during the past year and some of its competitors actually use more HR 2 per bottle of shampoo. Close scrutiny, however, reveals several logical flaws of this argument.
　　To begin with, the argument turns on the assumption that customers who did not complain were actually satisfied with the shampoo containing HR 2. However, it is not necessarily the case. Lacking more evidence, it is entirely possible that people express their displeasure simply by not purchasing such shampoo any more. The greater percentage of such people, the weaker the argument’s evidence as a sign of customer’s satisfaction with the shampoo is. Therefore, without more concrete information about the customers’ attitudes, the author cannot assume that the customers have no resistance to the shampoo.
　　Moreover, lacking more information about scientific study, it is unfair to claim deny the statistical reliability of the widely publicized study for it involved only 500 subjects. Probably such kind of studies require fewer participators than others. Therefore, it is entirely possible that 500 subjects are already enough to draw a convincing conclusion about the harm to hair caused by HR 2. If true, the conclusion will be seriously undermined.
　　Finally, lacking information about the selling condition of its competitors, I have good reason to doubt whether customers have already refused to buy shampoo produced by those companies, a reason leading to a sharp decrease in their revenues. Consequently, it is imprudent for the president to preclude the need of replacing the HR 2 in shampoo with some alternatives. Unless the author could provide other evidence showing the business success of its competitors which produce shampoo with more HR2, any prediction about the stable sale of such shampoo would be dubious at best.
　　In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unwarranted as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide better evidence that (1) those customers who did not complain about the shampoo are actually satisfied with it; (2) 500 subjects are not enough for a study to draw a reliable conclusion about the negative effect of HR2 (3) the competitors producing shampoo with more HR2 have stable or increased sale revenue.
　　以上为大家推荐了一些GMAT作文考试的实用模板，考生可以适当参考，并通过大量的写作练习来逐步提高自己的GMAT作文的写作水平，从而在GMAT考试中取得更好的成绩。