argument51 kiara第一篇习作 恳请高手指点 有拍必回

秦殇0925UID: 2731963

In the letter, the author recommends all the patients who suffer from muscle strain take antibiotic to inhibit the secondary infection. In order to support the recommendation, the author cites a primary study in which two groups of muscle strain patients are treated by two different doctors, in the end, the group of patients that take antibiotic recuperate faster than the group do not. However, several logical flaws in the newsletter render the recommendation unpersuasive, as discussed below.

To begin with, the author falsely assumes the comparative quality of treatment and medicine used, instead of any other factors, are responsible for the comparative effect. The argument ignores the strong possibility that the difference on patients’ physical condition might be a main factor influencing the result of the study. For instance, the patients in the antibiotic group are relatively strong, or they might have already received some treatment before the study. Yet the argument fails to provide any information regarding the difference between the two groups of patients. Unless the author rules out such kind of possibilities, the argument cannot draw any firm conclusion based on the study.
Even there are no big differences between the patients in the two groups, author neglect some other difference between the doctor's treatments. The doctor of the antibiotic group specializes in treating such sports medicine might give the patients some extra medicine and advise them to do some effective exercises which might be the most direct reason why the patients in this group recover faster than the control group. If so, the fact would seriously weaken the author’s claim that antibiotic is the reason solely responsible for the faster recovering. Lacking evidence that whether taking real antibiotic is the only difference between the two doctors’ treatment renders the result of the study which the recommendation relies on unreliable.

Even assuming that the result of the study is reliable, the author falsely draws a general conclusion that all the patients who suffers from the muscle strain should take antibiotic during the treatment. The argument provides no information that the survey’s respondents are representative of the overall population who have muscle strain. The author fails to show any evidence that the conclusion can typify all other such kind of patients.

Based on my analysis above, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen it, the author should offer some information regarding whether the result of the study has been influenced by some differences between the patients and the difference between the doctors’ treatment. To better assess the recommendation, I also need the author use strong evidence to prove the conclusion can be applied to all the patients who have muscle strain.