[a习作temp] argument第一篇，求打击 [复制链接]

gary1943
UID: 2647529

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 15
寄托币: 566
注册时间: 2009-6-1
精华: 0
帖子: 5

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2010-8-17 22:36:45 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - The following appearedin a medical newsletter.

"Doctors have long suspected thatsecondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severemuscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of astudy of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treatedfor muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sportsmedicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Theirrecuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected.Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a generalphysician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they weretaking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantlyreduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would bewell advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."

正文：

In the argument, the author points out thatsecondary infections may interfere with healing after severe muscle strain basedon the results of a study conducted on two groups of patients. The study showsthat those who were treated by a professional doctor and took antibiotics aftermuscle injuries recovered more quickly than those who were treated by a generalphysician and took sugar pills. At last, the author further recommends that allpatients with muscle strain should take antibiotics during their treatment.Superficially, this argument might be somehow reasonable，however, it is unconvincing for several logical flaws in my opinion.

Obviously, the author's recommendation isbased on a critical hypothesis that secondary infections may keep patients fromrecovering after severe muscle injuries according to the argument. Thisassumption, however, is not well supported by the study which is statisticallyunreliable. For instance, the doctor may play a vital role in the treatment, ifso, Dr.Newland who specializes in sports medicine may have plenty ofexperience, which gives birth to the quicker recovering. Or perhaps, thosepatients who recovered more quickly may be much younger than those in the othergroup. Also, it is possible that the sugar pills given for Alton's patients mayhave some detrimental effects on recovering. Therefore, without providing moredetails about the study to eliminate other possibilities, the author cannotconfidently prove his hypothesis.

Even assuming that secondary infections mayaffect patients in healing from severe muscle strain, it is unfair to inferthat all the patients with muscle strain should take antibiotics. Firstly, theauthor offers no evidence to tell me that every patient will get secondaryinfections after severe muscle injuries, so does the patient with no secondaryinfections also need to take antibiotics?
Secondly, it is entirely possible thatsecondary infections do not affect patients when they get slight muscleinjuries, that means, these patients do not need to take antibiotics at all.

Additionally, the author overlooks thenegative effects that the antibiotics might bring about. For example, somepeople may have allergies to the antibiotics, such as an abnormal bloodpressure or a sudden cardiac arrest. Or perhaps, antibiotics may lead to somediseases like chronic endocrine dyscrasia or over nutrition. Without ruling outthese or other negative effects to human bodies, the author cannot convince methat giving antibiotics to all the muscle injured patients is a wiserecommendation.

Overall, this argument for antibioticsbased on a study indeed provides some valuable information and may be helpfulin treatment for muscle strain. Nevertheless, to better bolster the author'srecommendation that all the patients who suffer from muscle injuries shouldtake antibiotics, the author needs to show us abundant details about patientsand doctors of the study, and take every possible scenario intoconsideration.

谢谢大家了:p