[phoenix] Argument51 第五作业 by 3号 求P

ningbo1990UID: 2641538

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."
医生长期以来怀疑严重肌肉扭伤后的二次感染妨碍了一些患者迅速康复。这一假说现在被一项对两组患者的研究的初步结果所证实。第一组患者全部由专攻运动医学的Dr. Newland治疗肌肉损伤，他们在疗程中经常服用抗生素。他们的康复期平均比通常预期的快40％。第二组患者由综合医师Dr. Alton治疗，他们被给予糖丸，而患者相信他们在服用抗生素。他们的平均康复时间没有明显缩短。因此，任何被确诊为肌肉损伤的患者应被建议服用抗生素作为辅助治疗。

总字数：434 words (416 words before revising)
总时间：34:52.40 min

The argument seems well-reasoning at first, have several facets. First, there are some flaws about the study. In addition, the information the author gives is doubtful. There are other flaws I will discuss in turn.

Firstly, the study of these two groups is using two different doctors, one is Dr. Newland, and another is Dr. Alton. Because there is no information about them has the same experience and some skills of treating patients, we cannot conclude the conclusion. Maybe Dr. Alton is a green hand and lack of experience and Dr. Newland is an outstanding doctor and can deal with problems more effective than Dr. Newland, or maybe Dr. Alton is more careless than Dr. Newland. Also, their majors are different. Dr. Newland is good at sports medicine while Dr. Alton is physician. Maybe Newland is better in healing secondary infections than Alton. Also, the patients` information of these two groups is not given. Maybe the group of patients cared by Dr. Alton is very old and weak while that of Dr. Newland are young and strong, younger ones are recovery more quickly than older ones, or proper the people in group of Dr. Newland is much less than the group of Dr. Alton. So there cannot be the conclusion that antibiotics are more useful than sugar pills.

Moreover, the study should not choose two kinds of medicines on each of groups, thus will make no result. Maybe the sugar pills reduce the recovery of secondary infections, because we do not whether the patients can recovery more quickly when do not eat any medicines, there cannot conclude that antibiotics are effective. Also, we all know that taking too much antibiotics may result bad effect, the author can consider another kind of medicines.

At last, the author says that secondary infections may keep from healing quickly after severe muscle strain, there is no information about secondary infections must accrued in sever muscle strain patients. Maybe there are other reasons result in impeding patients recovery, such as the doctor may not very good, the patient do not eat medicine as the doctor told him or other virus keep from healing, not secondary infections.

In conclusion, the argument seems logical firstly still have some flaws. The argument should improve by using the same doctor and similar patients both on numbers and quality; it also need to set two groups, one take antibiotics, the other not, then it can testify antibiotics really helps recovery. Another improvement is the author should give the fact that secondary infections really result in keeping patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain.

第一次掐时间不看已经写过的提纲写Argu，
我知道很多不对的地方，希望猛批！