Flaws in the Affirmative's argumentation: - Extrapolates an anecdote (i.e. a single datapoint) into a broad conclusion for other people that may not be true for others. ("I take fish oil and claim to not be crazy so you should take it too!") - Assumes cod liver oil "can't hurt". On the contrary, it certainly could hurt. In the exact same way that drinking too much water is life threatening, an overdose of cod oil could be dangerous for people with allergies to the components of cod liver oil. Cod liver oil could also have negative long term consequences that the uncited studies may point out.

The main line of the negative's argumentation rests that anyone suggesting that not only could cod liver oil tablets increase IQ, it could also some how freshen breath, must be insane. This means that in this debate, if we accept the Affirmative's claims that we will be smart and healthy like them, we will also actually become crazy enough to think that cod liver oil can give fresh breath. To top it off, the Affirmative also claims that we were once fish, and apparently not eating fish hurts us.

I therefore propose as a counter plan simply eating fish, which we know from several millennia of eating fish to be safe and healthy for most people, instead of consuming cod liver oil tablets.