Cox: The consumer council did not provide sufficient justification for its action when it required that Derma-35 be recalled from the market.
βββββββββ β βββββββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββ ββββββ βββββββββββββ βββ ββ ββββββ ββββ βββ ββββ ββββββ ββ βββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββββββ βββ βββ βββββββββ βββ βββββββ βββββββ ββββββββββββ ββββ βββββββββ βββ β ββββββββββ ββββββ ββββββββ
Cox doesnβt make an argument, instead just claiming without support that the consumer council didnβt sufficiently justify its decision to pull Derma-35 from the market.
Crockett argues that Cox is wrong; in other words, that the council did sufficiently justify its decision. What was the justification? The council cited the side effect of blemishes, which Crockett says are a legitimate health concern. Crockett clearly believes that citing a legitimate health concern justified the councilβs decision.
Weβre looking for a point of disagreement. Cox and Crockett disagree about whether or not the councilβs decision was sufficiently justified.
Analysis by AlexandraNash
Cox and Crockett disagree over βββββββ
Derma-35 should remain ββ βββ ββββββ
blemishes are sometimes ββββββ ββ ββββββββββββ
the council based βββ ββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ ββ ββββββββββββ ββ ββ βββ ββββββ ββ βββββββββ
the council gave ββ ββββββββ ββββββ βββ βββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββββββββ
inflammation is a βββββββ ββββββ ββββββ