[i习作temp] argument188 [复制链接]

423165179
UID: 2649312

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 240
注册时间: 2009-6-6
精华: 0
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2009-7-20 21:16:37 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由 423165179 于 2009-7-20 21:33 编辑

TOPIC: ARGUMENT188 - A new report suggests that men and women experience pain very differently from one another, and that doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications. When researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids-a painkiller-to 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, the women reported feeling much less pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women. This research suggests that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. In addition, researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.

In this report the author concludes that kappa opioids should widely be prescribe to women whereas the man should be given other kinds of pain medication. To support his conclution the author cites the repport which suggests that men and woman experience pain very differently from one another and the kappa opioids seems to play better effect on women than on man. This process of analysis looks reasonable at first sight, while as we are not informed about the random of the examples ' seclection in the report, whether the other experimental design is appropriate, or do all medications have different effect on men versus woman, this anaysis seems unconciving.

The threshold problem of this argument is that we can find no sign of such procedures for random sampling, whether it covers all the ages, all the health conditions throughout human lives. If the reseachers only choose the twenties or teens
as their examples, we can seriously doubt that this outcome of the research gives rather the generalization reflect a certain age periode's situation rather than a general generalization reflect the human's character. In addition, the number of the samples in the research seems too small. As we all known, the fewer and more biased the samples are, the less reliability the research to be. The author must show the random of his samples' selection and subjoin the number of the samples to make this research a stronger support to his conclution.

Secondly, since the reseachers uniquely provide the kappia opioids to the samples, it is clearly insufficient to show the general differences the painkiller brings to between man and woman. The mere fact that kappia opoids has a better effect on woman cannot explain that all painkillers have a better effect on woman versus on man, it is entirely possible that the kappa opioids' better affect on woman is just a coincidence, other painkillers may not have the same character. And it is unfounded to define pain only through wisdom teeth extraction, since we can doubt that woman is just unsensitive towards teeth extraction.

Thirdly, the assumption that kappa opioids has very good influence on woman' painkilling is insuffencient to prove that woman should be prescribed kappa opioids whenever pain medication is required, and it is also unknown whether other medcines will have a better control over man's body pains than kappa opioids.

Finally, the author hints that since the different effect of kappa opioids towards man and woman, researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medication on man and woman. Although the reevaluate maybe necessary from common sence, we cannot owe the necessity to the the different effect towards man and woman made by the kappa opoioids, as kappa opoioids is only a kind of painkiller and it cannot represent the whole medication.

To sum up, the author need to show the random and representational of the general the samples in the research are, and to find more supports that woman is better prescribed kappa opioids than other painkillers. Only after all these detailed demonstration process this argument becomes more sounded.

md 等我考完了我要吃鸡翅膀，鸡腿腿，鸡抄手……