【big fish】习作1.3 argue No.5---by rachelwang712

rachelwang712UID: 2757860

argue5.
The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.
"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis."

提纲
1在20年的增长，可能在20年中出现新的药物，所以X不一定是最好的药物
2X的药物的patent什么时候过期没有提
3clinical提到的有效是针对最极端的，而更大多数的ordinary,mild cases没有提到效用

The argumentation presented in the business section is well presented but weak in its reasoning. The correlation, drawn casually after careless analysis, between the prospective of the medical firms and the prediction in arthritis cases, calls for re-examination, were the conclusion be reached.

To begin with, with the development of technology so rapid, it is doubtful that whether Xylan or Xenon will remain the top medicine over such a long period of time. Admittedly, the hiking number of arthritis cases in the coming future leads inevitably to the greater demand for drugs to treat it. However, considering the significant increase, pharmaceutical companies may find it rewarding to invest in new anti-arthritis drugs development, thus triggering a surge of various medicine of that use, which, very likely, include a better kind than existing ones. In other words, assuming a medicine firm to be the most lucrative in a decade simply because it is producing an effective sort of drugs now lacks cogency.

Another fact should be mentioned if the author is to make his article more convincing. It is when the paten on Xylan expires. In the groomy prediction for Xenon, that its patent is expiring plays a major role. The same would be true if Xylan's patent were to be expired in a couple of years. To be more eloquent, the author needs to provide such information.

Lastly, the failure of the clinical studies mentioned in the article to support the arguer's point can never be overstressed in that outstanding performance of Xylan in the surveyed patients only proves its effectiveness in treating extreme cases while the milder ones are never addressed in the survey. More surveys should be conducted to show how Xylan works for ordinary patients.

To sum up, the point made in the article is undermined by the arguer's disregard of the changes and possible improvement in drugs treating arthritis in 20 years' span, the expiration time for Xylan's patent and the effectiveness of Xylan for milder cases.

kingwyf87UID: 2457409

The argumentation presented in the business section is well presented(两个presented有些别扭) but weak in （its删） reasoning. The correlation, drawn casually after careless analysis, between the prospective of the medical firms and the prediction in arthritis cases, calls for re-examination, were the conclusion be reached（主干是The correlation were the conclusion be reached？表达的是什么意思呢？）.

To begin with, with the development of technology （so rapid删）, it is doubtful that whether Xylan or Xenon will remain the top（best） medicine over such a long period of time. Admittedly, the hiking number of arthritis cases in the coming future leads inevitably to the greater demand for drugs(感觉drugs更像毒品 呵呵 可能美剧看多了 medicine) (to treat it). However, considering the significant increase, pharmaceutical companies may find it is rewarding to invest in  new anti-arthritis drugs (development), thus triggering a surge of various medicine of that use, which, very likely, include (show) a better kind (perfermance) than existing ones. In other words, assuming a medicine firm to be the most lucrative in a decade simply because it is producing an effective sort of drugs now lacks cogency( lacks cogency有点头重脚轻了断句一下或者前提应该会好些).

Another fact should be mentioned if the author is to make his article more convincing. It is when the paten on Xylan expires（这句话表达不对哦）. In the groomy（这个词不对） prediction for Xenon, that its patent is expiring plays a major role. The same would be true if Xylan's patent were to be expired in a couple of years later. To be more eloquent, the author needs to provide such information.

Lastly, the failure of the clinical studies mentioned in the article to support the arguer's point can never be overstressed in that outstanding performance of Xylan in the surveyed patients only proves its effectiveness in treating extreme cases while the milder ones are never addressed in the survey.（这句又太长 一下都没看明白） More surveys should be conducted to show how Xylan works for ordinary patients.

To sum up, the point made in the article is undermined by the arguer's disregard of the changes and possible improvement in drugs treating arthritis in 20 years' span, the expiration time for Xylan's patent and the effectiveness of Xylan for milder cases.


总体的来说能找到反驳点，语言除了有个别句子写得过长外，还是比较流畅。字数稍有点不够，可多加一两个反驳点。

missingusaUID: 2625832

麻烦lz把标题改下把, 可以参照这个帖子:
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1042201-1-1.html