寄托天下 寄托天下
查看: 1018|回复: 1

[a习作temp] Argument5 本人的第三篇 请各位尽情拍砖 [复制链接]

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
1
寄托币
341
注册时间
2009-1-31
精华
0
帖子
9
发表于 2009-8-4 10:40:42 |显示全部楼层
5.The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper. "Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis."

In the argument, the author asserts that Perkins Pharmaceuticals Company will more profitable in the next ten years. To strengthen this argument, the author provides a statistics showing the number of people with some form of arthritis will increase from 40 million to 60 million in the over twenty years. The author also cites supporting evidence indicating the competitor of the Perkins Pharmaceuticals---Becton Pharmaceuticals’ patent on Xenon will expires in three years. In the end the author provides a study report that 70% of most extreme cases of arthritis will prefer to choose the Xylan. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

First and foremost, the argument claims that the number of people with some form of arthritis will increase from 40 million to 60 million in the over twenty years and automatically assumes that these patients all have ability to buy and eat the medicines. However this might not be case. The author obviously overlooks other possibility for this phenomenon. For example the patients are too poor to afford the payment of medicine, or perhaps the patients have other treatment to cure the arthritis without eating the medicines. Without ruling out such possibilities, I cannot accept the author' point.

Second, even assuming all patients will buy the medicine to cure this suffer, the arguer unfairly think that as Becton pharmaceutical patent on Xenon is gone, Perkins pharmaceutical will get all market ratio of arthritis medicine. As the argument tells us that other companies will able to produce a cheaper version of the drug, if the price of other drug is lower than one of Xylan, I can image that selling of Xylan will not be a good situation.

Third, even I concede that the Perkins pharmaceutical will get all market of arthritis; the author fails to consider possibility difference between Becton and Perkins pharmaceutical and Xenon and Xylan drug. Indeed, the Becton pharmaceutical becomes be a profitable company because of the drug Xenon. The Xenon in the Becton pharmaceutical has some special reasons to be success such as good advertisement or super-low price. The most possibility is that the Xenon has better effect than Xylan. However we do not hope the Perkins pharmaceutical adapts the same ways to sell their drug. Without thinking about these alternatives, we cannot accept that the Perkins pharmaceutical must be a profitable company like Becton pharmaceutical.

Finally, the author unfairly indicates a study facing the serious arthritis of patients will be suitable for the common patients. In the one side, common sense tells us that the smaller the sample, the less liable the result is. For the serious patient, perhaps these patients have lost enough confidence to win the Disease, or perhaps the Xylan is only effective for the serious patients. Without considering these important factors, this conclusion is unconvincing.

To sum up, the author's conclusion about Perkins Pharmaceuticals Company will more profitable in the next ten years is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence, such as a survey about the scarification of all patients who use the Xylan and a research about the difference between about Xenon and Xylan. To better assess the problem, I would also needs to know what strategy the Becton pharmaceutical used.
回应

使用道具 举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
1
寄托币
341
注册时间
2009-1-31
精华
0
帖子
9
发表于 2009-8-6 08:20:45 |显示全部楼层
ding

使用道具 举报

RE: Argument5 本人的第三篇 请各位尽情拍砖 [修改]
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

问答
Offer
投票
面经
最新
精华
转发
转发该帖子
Argument5 本人的第三篇 请各位尽情拍砖
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-991947-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
报offer 祈福 爆照
回顶部