The argument astonishingly deduces a conclusion of the easiness to get fatter for the particular group of people who snore at sleep， and accordingly recommends eating less and strengthening the intense of exercises to avoid such trend. While the arguer established his demonstration¹ on the tenable basis of a well-known discovery accepted by public， this argument， however， seems to me a wholly ramshackle one needed to scrutiny².

　　To begin with， what I cannot make clear since now is the leap from the mere³ fact of lacking exercise to the aptness for gaining weight， which sounds no necessary cause-and-effect relationship between them. It might be true of the evidence the arguer takes out to show that sleep apnea can interrupt the normal sleeping tempo⁴ and hence results the over exhaustion⁵ at diurnal⁶ work， which obliquely⁷ influence the exercises necessarily for these people. The extent of the arguer's inference can only reach this level， to further exploit the aftermath concerning the putting on weight still waits for more information， such as the authoritative⁸ report proving such potential nexus⁹， or otherwise， the arguer is only resting the assertion on a gratuitous¹⁰ assumption.

　　Another obvious cynosure¹¹ we facilely notice is the recommendation of eating less to relieve the inevitable¹² current for weight growing， which is more unsubstantial. In the whole article， the arguer's claim range only spread to the layer of lacking exercises， referring to the habits of diets is a sudden idea out of any sign predicted， thus acts the role of invalid¹³ deduction¹⁴. Also， the arguer presumptuously¹⁵ holds the conviction of “any” person who snores， ought to take the measure for stint¹⁶ eating， which works against commonsensical knowledge of treating different people by choosing different remedies， at all no two individuals are totally equivalent. Once escaping the condition of eluding¹⁷ such confusion， we are able to， too， recognize the suggestion of recommending those people's joining more exercises are， on the contrary， counterproductive. Even if the prerequisites¹⁸ of people's weight problem actually stems from this very case of fatigue¹⁹， then more activities mean more fatigue at daily time enjoyed by them， and the circulation undeniably switches to the opposite side.

　　To sum up， starting from the ridiculous basement to the final fallacious recommendation， the arguer cursorily²⁰ treat the gross deduction process， and add additional vulnerable announcement in the brittle²¹ body of the argument， which ultimately results the further discretion²² directly leads to its destiny of rebuff. （403 words）

　　——silentwings