The implication that “Vitamin E is a proven antioxidant and may help in fighting cancer and heart disease” is another “claim attempting to imply connections between variables that may not actually exist (Bluman, 2005, P. 682). For example, Vitamin E is a proven antioxidant but, it is unclear or to what extent, how the vitamin will be helpful. In the claim it does not state that Vitamin E is directly affective in fighting cancer, and heart disease. Taking Vitamin E does not guarantee fighting cancer and heart disease because it is unclear how the Vitamin E will help when it is not clear how much Vitamin E the person should take, therefore, the claim remains ambiguous with no clarity. Who is claiming the Vitamin E for the cancer and heart disease, is it a doctor, pharmacist, scientist, or a parent. Also, we are unaware of the dosage of Vitamin E, and whether it should be taken daily or on alternating days. It does not claim who should take the Vitamin E, among adults, children, middle aged, active, non-active people, or is it for everyone. Taking too much Vitamin E may or may not be dangerous. This claim does not inform if there are unhealthy or ineffective doses. The usage of “may” can also be interpreted to “may not” making this claim unclear about the help in fighting cancer and heart disease. The reason I selected the “Vitamin E is a proven antioxidant and may help in fighting cancer and heart disease” is because implied connections are ambiguous and I have difficulty with vague claims, especially during a conversation. For example, at work when the supervisor claims that we might have a staff meeting at three o’clock, sends a message of uncertainty causing frustrations. The supervisor should say we are having a meeting today at three o’clock; making this an accurate claim and putting minds at ease.
I learned to be aware with the words “some”, “might help”, and “may help” because at work I need to be accountable for claims that I model to the assistants that work with me. The knowledge gained will broaden my awareness to stay away from expressing implications and research implied connections in text that may not exist.

In a recent article, the author states that 71% of adults do not use sunscreen. According to our textbook, “The first thing to consider is the sample that was used in the research study”(Bluman, 2005, P. 680). What method did the author use to get 71% adults to participate, and did the author use volunteers, unemployed, professionals, or students via technology?
The author’s claim about adults not using sunscreen could be because the retail stores do not have enough sunscreen to supply 71% of adults. However, the adults may not use sunscreen because they are not outdoors when the sun is bright and shinning, it is winter, or the adults are not thinking about protecting his or her skin. When the adults are inside a museum or at work then sunscreen is not being used. People are not going to wear sunscreen inside unlike; outside the people are prone to wearing sunscreen. Let’s look at this from a popularity aspect; did the author decide to randomly write an article for popularity because he is making a name for himself?
The author’s claim appears to be misleading because it is not clear who the 71% adults are, not enough evidence or broken down into categories. For example, gender, geographic location, adult professionals or otherwise, and ethnicity. Bluman, 2005 claims, that “When interpreting results from studies using small samples, convenience samples, or volunteer samples, care should be used when generalizing the results to the entire population (P. 681). If the author had stated 71% of adults do wear sunscreen when they are outdoors. Then the author’s claim would appear to be accurate because he or she probably used a sample of choice to come up with accurate results.
The reason I selected the Suspect Samples is because the author states that 71% of adults do not use sunscreen however, it is not clear who the adults are, which makes for a bias claim on the author’s article.
I learned that when writing or in conversation to be clear in stating my claim for accuracy. For example, if I state that 30% of children do not use the slide. It is not clear what children, age, location of the slide, and during what time of the day, therefore, making the claim misleading.

References
Bluman, A. G. (2005). Mathematics in Our World (Ashford University Custom Edition). United States: McGraw-Hill