寄托家园留学论坛

标题: 关于Argument166有点问题... [打印本页]

作者: ryo61    时间: 2009-8-7 14:04:56     标题: 关于Argument166有点问题...

看了下之前的讨论 还是觉得很混乱...
第一次发帖 如果有什么不合要求的地方版主谅解下~

1.People should not be misled by the advertising competition between Coldex and Cold-Away, both popular over-the-counter cold medications that anyone can perchase without a doctor's prescription.
2.Each brand is accusing the other of causing some well-known, unwanted sie effect: Coldex is known to contribute to exisintg high blood pressure and Cold-Away is known to cause drowsiness.
3.But the choice should be clear for most health-conscious people: Cold-Away has been on the market for much longer and is used by more hospitals than is Coldex.
4.Clearly, Cold-Away is more effective.

166最明显的攻击点就是3.上市时间长与被医院使用并不代表就更有效
除了这句话之外 前面的两句话我就觉得很诡异 不知道怎么反驳才好
是不是可以说 这个advertising competition里面的accuse可能夸大了side-effect 虽然看起来Coldex的更坏 但其实不是那么严重?

还有这两个药是非处方药 是不是说明医院的选择不代表药效

这文段里面有些词我觉得不知道怎么理解
existing high blood pressure 到底是说导致了短暂的血压升高 还是一个长期性的副作用 这个existing不是现存的意思么...
另外就是 well-known unwanted 是这个accuse的内容么 还是说这是个事实不能反驳?




欢迎光临 寄托家园留学论坛 (https://bbs.gter.net/) Powered by Discuz! X2