argument51 第一次限时 求拍~~

ella_dylUID: 2595060

51
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."
WORDS: 411       TIME: 00:30:00     DATE: 2010-3-6 下午 12:30:00

In the newsletter, the author advocates that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should be advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To justify this claim, the author cites a preliminary result of a study of two groups of patients. Compared with the group which did not take antibiotics, patients from another group recovered more quickly. Although this argument seems reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived.

The threshold problem is that there is no detailed information about the study. It is highly possible that the two groups are not comparable. We are not informed of their age, gender or other physical information. Perhaps, members of the group taking antibiotics were younger who were more likely to recover quickly. Moreover, severity of illness of each group is also unknown. It is likely that symptom of patients from the antibiotics group was much more lighter than the other group.

In addition, treatment of each group could be different. Doctor of antibiotics group is a sports medicine expert while doctor of another group is a general physician. Common sense tells us that doctor specializing in sports medicine is more likely to perform better when treating muscle strain. Also, the group which did not take antibiotics were given sugar pills. Whether sugar pill is bad for recovery is unknown. If so, it would seriously weaken the author's claim.

Another fundamental flaw is that the author unfairly assumes that infection is the only factor which influences recovery. Besides infection, other factors such as fatigue should also be considered. Common sense tells us that patients who have received enough rest will surly recover quickly than those who have not.

Moreover, not all patients need to use antibiotics as part of their treatment. Since not every patient who is diagnosed with muscle strain suffers from infection, the extension of antibiotics may not bring benefits. Instead, inappropriate use of antibiotics may case serious consequences. The author fails to consider that some patients may be allergic to antibiotics. Some antibiotics, such as penicillin, are fatal to those allergic patients. If so, the consequence would be catastrophic.

In sum, the conclusion reached in this argument is invalid and misleading. To strengthen the argument, the author should provide evidence that it is antibiotics, not other factors, that contributed to the quick recovery of certain group. Moreover, the author has to examine carefully that whether this antibiotics is suitable for all patients before making hasty conclusion.

yvaine.jUID: 2755389

to ella:

用severity代替seriousness可能更好一点
另外那个作者在文中是不是潜在设定了antibiotics leads to the quicker recuperation?这个里面存在的错误因果关系是不是可以作为攻击点呢....

那个.....我也写了argument51....就发在这个专区里面....能不能帮我看看？提提意见呢.....THX~