A student is developing a counterclaim to this argument. Which counterclaim is the most fair and effective?

Question

(1 point)
Responses

People should avoid fish because studies have shown that people who eat fish regularly have a 22 percent higher risk of skin cancer.
People should avoid fish because studies have shown that people who eat fish regularly have a 22 percent higher risk of skin cancer.

Workers in the fishing industries are badly mistreated, and if you eat fish then you are supporting this horrible and unethical industry.
Workers in the fishing industries are badly mistreated, and if you eat fish then you are supporting this horrible and unethical industry.

Large fish such as grouper and bluefin tuna are known to have elevated levels of mercury, a toxic metal that can cause a wide range of health problems.
Large fish such as grouper and bluefin tuna are known to have elevated levels of mercury, a toxic metal that can cause a wide range of health problems.

People should avoid fish because the fish are treated cruelly from the moment they are caught until they are brought to market.
People should avoid fish because the fish are treated cruelly from the moment they are caught until they are brought to market.

Answer 1

The most fair and effective counterclaim to the argument that people should avoid fish due to a higher risk of skin cancer would be:

"Large fish such as grouper and bluefin tuna are known to have elevated levels of mercury, a toxic metal that can cause a wide range of health problems."

This counterclaim effectively addresses a specific health risk associated with eating certain types of fish, which complements the original argument about health risks rather than focusing solely on ethical concerns or treatment of workers. It provides a clear, relevant reason to consider the complexities of fish consumption beyond the risk of skin cancer.