[a习作temp] Argument51 by wcnk [复制链接]

wcnk
UID：2546550

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 4
寄托币: 312
注册时间: 2008-9-15
精华: 0
帖子: 2

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2010-2-11 16:45:34 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

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: 427

TIME: 00:45:30

本来能再快点的，不过查单词用了些时间~~
离规定时间还有距离~~

The argument above presents a sound case for arguing that all patients who are diagnosed with musical strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. By support the conclusion, the arguer offers us a survey which two groups of patients are taken different measurements, It may seem reasonable at the first sight. However, there are some question appears when further analysis are taken.

First, the survey is somewhat imprecisely investigated. The arguer has said in the survey that these two groups of people are treated by two doctors who are in different backgrounds; Dr. Newland is a specialist in sports medicine while Dr. Alton is a general typical physician. The difference between the two doctors may lead to the variation in experimental results. There is a possibility that other specific medicines are used to the patients which can accelerate their refreshment against muscle strain, and antibiotics is not the main reason. What's more, the sugar pills taken by the second group of patients may also infect the results, for we all know that sugar are doing no good to inflammation. Besides, the patients are differs to each other, so the result cannot be convincing if few patients are picked up, or and in special methods patients are selected.

Another problem the arguer doesn't distinguish muscle strain from secondary infections after sever muscle strain, which are different illness. Even the survey offered can be accepted, it fails to figure out whether taking antibiotics regularly can solve the problem or not. Maybe antibiotics are effective in curing only the muscle strain problem, but have nothing to do with the secondary infection.

What's more, even if we just take on the assumption that antibiotic is available on treating secondary infections after severe muscle strain--as the arguer claimed in the first, we cannot draw the conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with musical strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment, for the obvious reason that not all the patients would be secondly infected after severe muscle strain. And advices to take antibiotics as part of their treatment for patients who don't have the situation of secondary infection is not only a waste of money, but also a holding up to the recovery of the illness.

To sum up, if the arguer wants the conclusion be acceptable, more detailed investigation on different aspects such as whether antibiotic can cure the secondary infection after severe muscle strain, as well as the percentage of patient who tends to be secondly infected is essential.