【big fish】2月24日习作Argument51-----by topran

topranUID: 2310216

费了牛鼻子劲，才码了444个字，好可怜~~
-----------------------------------------------------------
TOPIC: 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."
======================================

In this artical , the author recommend that doctors should adivise the patients who surfer from mascle strain to tale antibiotcs in their treatment . The recommendation has been supported by an experiment which ,in author's opinion, had proved that secondary infection keep patients healing from muscle strain . To me , both the experiment and the recommendation can not withstand scrutiny , the reasons are as follow.

To begin with , Let's look through the experiment: first, the author did not provide any information about two group of patients , did they
have the same state of illness? How about their medical history ? Were the ratio of male and female same in both study group? With out specific information , we can never know the experiment was based on the
unbiased samples which is the fundamental element in every compare experiment . Second, even if two group
of the patients is almost same, the author fails to tell us did the first group patients take other treatment beside antibiotics so as the second group did they take other practics besides suger pill? Thirdly , even if both groups just took pill without other treatment , we can still question that the effect of different doctor . There are some other weakness in this experiment , but with these three doulbt , we can not conclude that the experiment is scientific.

Then , let's analyze the conclusion which is deduced by the result of experiment. The author metioned that in the first group the recuperation time reduced by 40 percent than expected , without exact number of time we can not
use this 40 percent to compare with recuperation time in second group . Even though the author tell us that the time of second group was not reduced significantly , but there still possible that the time of second group is smaller than 0.6 multiply typical expected time of the first group.

Last ,even if we assume the experiment and the conclusion are both trustable which means the antibiotic drug do have some effect in the treatment of muscle strain , it is still unconvince to say the hypothesis has been proved because there is no information to point out that the antibiotics can heal the secondary infection . And the antibiotics works on certain group of people does not necessiarily means it works on every other patients .

To sum up , with out more convintional evidence , I can not accepted this recommendation . The author should provid more information about experiment to make it trust worthy and the conclusion should been got based on the more credible fact.

greekyUID: 2605662

1# topran
不好意思，耽搁了，我叉自己谢罪  现在改 好好的改

"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."
======================================

In this artical , the author recommend that doctors should adivise the patients who surfer from mascle strain to tale（take） antibiotcs in their treatment . The recommendation has been supported by an experiment which ,in author's opinion, had proved that secondary infection keep patients healing from muscle strain .(含糊了。定语从句套的太多，有点单一，都是~~~,that~~句型) To me , both the experiment and the recommendation can not withstand scrutiny , the reasons are as follow.

To begin with , Let's look through the experiment: first, the author did not provide any information about two group of patients , did they
have the same state of illness? How about their medical history ? Were the ratio of male and female same in both study group? With out specific information , we can never know the experiment was based on the
unbiased samples which is the fundamental element in every compare experiment （同样的问题，还是要再说清楚一点，或者可以拆开说。不明白的话单聊）. Second, even if two group
of the patients is almost same, the author fails to tell us did the first group patients take other treatment beside antibiotics so as the second group did they take other practics besides suger pill（我有点明白了，你以后不要着急用复杂句式，拆开写，其实不会太影响分数。莫着急）of different doctor . There are some other weakness in this experiment , but with these three doulbt（doubt） , we can not conclude that the experiment is scientific.

Then , let's analyze the conclusion which is deduced by the result of experiment. The author metioned that in the first group the recuperation time reduced by 40 percent than expected , without exact number of time (直接用time 太chnglish)we can not
use this 40 percent to compare with recuperation time in second group . Even though the author tell us that the time of second group was not reduced significantly , but there still possible that the time of second group is smaller than 0.6 multiply typical expected time of the first group.

Last ,even if we assume the experiment and the conclusion are both trustable which means the antibiotic drug do have some effect in the treatment of muscle strain , it is still unconvince(unconvincing) to say the hypothesis has been proved because there is no information to point out that the antibiotics can heal the secondary infection . And the antibiotics works on certain group of people does not necessiarily means it works on every other patients .

To sum up , with out more convintional evidence , I can not accepted(accept) this recommendation . The author should provid more information about experiment to make it trust worthy and the conclusion should been got based on the more credible fact.

总评一下：总体感觉论证性语言不够多，这样就会给人以主观化得感觉。这个问题是可以解决的，你要按不同的逻辑错误准备一些固定句型，到时候直接默写就ok了。莫着急，你没问题的。

topranUID: 2310216

2# greeky

好，姐姐我这就去看范文，背模板

missingusaUID: 2625832

请lz注意正确的发帖格式, 相关内容可以参考这个帖子:
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1042201

修改完后, 请通过站内短消息pm我一下, 谢谢^^