argument51 我不想写A了。。。（GREAW小组）第六次作业

suyueUID：2181126

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - The following appeared in a medical newsletter.

"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."
WORDS: 400         TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2007/8/11 16:53:32

The argument concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To justify this conclusion the author notes a study about two groups of patients. However, after close scrutiny of each of these facts, I find this argument logically unconvincing in several respects.

Firstly, the author provides no evidence that the study's results are reliable. One reasonable study should adopt a scientific way in design and it's sample's number should have a statistical meaning. However, neither the design's method nor the numbers of the samples have been shown in the argument. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that the samples' number is too small to have a statistical meaning and the patients’ hurting degree is different. Without ruling out these possibilities, author cannot make his/her conclusion safely.


Secondly, even if the study's way has meaning in science, the author overlooks the fact that the two doctor's majors are different. Dr. Newland is specialized in sports medicine and Dr.  Alton is a general physician. There is a possibility that the doctor about the sports medicine is more specialize in treating the patients who severe muscle strain than the general physician. In other words, the first group's result may be result by the effect of Dr. Newland and have nothing to do with the antibiotics. Without accounting for these possibilities the author cannot justifiably conclude that the patients who have got the muscle strain should take the antibiotics.


Thirdly, the author cites that the first group's recuperation's time was 40 percent quicker than typically expected on average. It does not necessarily indicate that the drug has effect on each patient and all people who severe muscle strain should take the antibiotics. The author ignored the possibility that some people's recuperation have nothing to do with the medicine even the drug has some negative effect on several people. What is more other important information was failed to listed such as the patients 'diet, doctors' treatment, the patients’ average old of each group and so on. Lacking such evidence the author cannot reasonably draw any conclusion.


In sum, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. Before I can accept its conclusion, the author must provide better evidence that the study's way has meaning in science. To better assess the argument I would need more information about the two doctors' treatment and the patients' diet.  

晚来风急UID：2314775

The argument concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To justify this conclusion the author notes a study about two groups of patients. However, after close scrutiny of each of these facts, I find this argument logically unconvincing in several respects.Firstly, the author provides no evidence that the study's results are reliable. One reasonable study should adopt a scientific way in design and it's sample's number(size) should have a statistical meaning. However, neither the design's method nor the numbers of the samples have been shown in the argument. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that the samples' number is too small to have a statistical meaning and the patients’hurting degree(?) is different. Without ruling out these possibilities, author cannot make his/her conclusion safely(satisfying). 这段好象除了讲到size不够大的问题，没有别的什么具体的，other possibility也不够具体，可以具体说一下受伤者的hurting degree（不知道是不是这么说），也许受轻伤的使用未使用效果一样。 representativeSecondly, even if the study's way（the approaches applied by the study） has meaning in science, the author overlooks the fact that the two doctor's majors are different. Dr. Newland is specialized in sports medicine and Dr.  Alton is a general physician. There is a possibility that the doctor about the sports medicine is more specialize in treating the patients who severe muscle strain than the general physician. In other words, the first group's result may be result by the effect of Dr. Newland and have nothing to do with the antibiotics. Without accounting for these possibilities the author cannot justifiably conclude that the patients who have got the muscle strain should take the antibiotics. 觉得TS中可以提到have nothing to do with the antibiotics，而不是强调doctor's majors会更联系题目，可以下一句话这么说。Thirdly, the author cites that the first group's recuperation's time was 40 percent quicker than typically expected on average. It does not necessarily indicate that the drug has effect on each patient and all people who severe muscle strain should take the antibiotics. The author ignored the possibility that some people's recuperation have nothing to do with the medicine even the drug has some negative effect on several people. What is more other important information was failed to listed such as the patients 'diet, doctors' treatment, the patients’ average old of each group and so on.(可以略讲antibiotics与这些的关系，cause severe respond of an old patient to lead to damage the health, 不然这句有点让人迷惑 ) Lacking such evidence the author cannot reasonably draw any conclusion.In sum, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. Before I can accept its conclusion, the author must provide better evidence that the study's way has meaning in science. To better assess the argument I would need more information about the two doctors' treatment and the patients' diet.

论点是好的，在具体阐述时要注意和主题句联系更紧密。觉的有点蜻蜓点水，提到了可以再加一两句深化一下，直至主题句。个人浅见。很羡慕lz可以那么短时间写那么多。