Consumer advocate: The introduction of a new drug into the marketplace should be contingent upon our having a good understanding of its social impact.
Conclusion (it is obvious, then)
There should be a general reduction in the pace of bringing to the marketplace new drugs that are now being tested.
Evidence
The introduction of a new drug into the marketplace should be contingent upon our having a good understanding of its social impact, but the social impact of the newly marketed antihistamine is far from clear.
Evaluate
The first two sentences would allow us to infer that . After all, introducing into market requires clear understanding of impact, and we don't have that clear understanding for he new antihistamine yet.
But the actual conclusion calls for a general reduction in the pace of brining new drugs to market.
It's kinda like if we said,
When we go from specific evidence to a general conclusion, we worry about Sampling issues. Is it fair to judge Patrick's teaching based on only one student? What if that student is an anomaly? What if there's a good reason for that student getting a lower score, and it doesn't apply to other students? Is that student's experience representative of the typical student in Patrick's classes?based on what happened with this new antihistamine, there should be a general reduction in the pace of bringing new drugs to the market", he has to assume that what happened with the new antihistamine is typical (or even slower) than the pace at which most other drugs have recently been brought to market.
Goal
We want more evidence that other drugs are being brought to the market before their social impact is clearly known, more evidence that we should slow our current pace of bringing drugs to the market, or something that rules out our objection of,