ARGUMENT188 还有五天 有拍必回哈~

nieyongUID: 2742661

TOPIC: ARGUMENT188 - A new report suggests that men and women experience pain very differently from one another, and that doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications. When researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids-a painkiller-to 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, the women reported feeling much less pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women. This research suggests that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. In addition, researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.
WORDS: 308
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/3/1 21:44:26
提纲：1. 调查的样本大小，代表性
               2. 调查仅仅根据人的痛觉，有主观性
              3. 不一定对所有女人有效， 所有男人就应该用别的
               4. 也并不一定要所有药都重新评估

请各位高手多多指教啊~~谢谢了~。
In the argument, the author concludes that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women once pain medication is needed while other painkillers should be given to men. Additionally, the author suggests that reevaluation ought to be made on the effects of all medications. To support his argument, the author cites a newly conducted report which shows the differences in the pain between men and women. The argument seems to be logical at the first glance. However, careful examination reveals that it lend little credible evidences to the author's conclusion.


A threshold problem involves the validity of the report. Samples for the research should be statistically reliable. Unfortunately, we find little sign of such procedures of sampling after close scrutiny of the report. thus doubting whether there is a large enough size of sample to sufficiently draw a conclusion. The research cited only cited 48 persons and not to mention the unequal numbers of men and women, then any evidences obtained from it is untenable. Because the argument provides no evidences that would rule out these interpretations, the result of the research is insufficient to support the author's conclusion.


Secondly, even assuming the report is valid enough to obtain the evidence, the result of the report is still dubious. The result of the research largely depends on the feeling reported by the respondents, however, common sense tells us that feeling is such a subjective concept, which can be easily influenced by minor changes of people, the mood or their tenacity for instance. To have a more convincing conclusion, the author should provide more objective evidences.


Furthermore, even assuming the statistics of the report are correctly obtained, as the case of extracting teeth cannot represent all the situations when people feel pains, the author fails to consider other factor that could lead to the differences in pain, the health of each for example. Medicine should be used according to the practical conditions of the patients. Every individual has it unique immune system and heredity, kappa opioids can never be applied to all women, and similarly we cannot regard the painkiller useless to every man. These scenarios, if true, may cast serious doubt upon the author's conclusion.


Last but not least, even assuming what have discussed about kappa opioids are concrete facts. We don’t necessarily require all medications to be reevaluated. After all, the huge cost of it should be taken into account and whether benefit will offset the time consumed is also doubtful. Also, not all medicines need consideration upon the difference between men and women, usually, it doesn’t make much difference.




On all accounts, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide more details to ensure the validity of the research. Moreover, to strengthen the logic of the argument, the author should rule out other factors that could also lead to different degrees of pain in men and women. Finally, to better assess the conclusion, we would need more information about the patient in order to use proper medicine.

PigwidgeanUID: 2759931

In the argument, the author concludes that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women once pain medication is needed while other painkillers should be given to men. Additionally, the author suggests that reevaluation ought to be made on the effects of all medications. To support his argument, the author cites a newly conducted report (此处最好加上逗号) which shows the differences in the pain between men and women. The argument seems to be logical at the first glance. However, careful examination reveals that it lend (lends吧？) little credible evidences to the author's conclusion.

A threshold problem involves the validity of the report. Samples for the research should be statistically reliable. Unfortunately, we find little sign of such procedures of sampling after close scrutiny of the report, thus doubting whether there is a large enough size of sample to sufficiently draw a conclusion. The research cited only cited 48 persons and not to mention the unequal numbers of men and women, then any evidences obtained from it is untenable. Because the argument provides no evidences that would rule out these interpretations, the result of the research is insufficient to support the author's conclusion.

Secondly, even assuming the report is valid enough to obtain the evidence, the result of the report is still dubious. The result of the research largely depends on the feeling reported by the respondents, however, common sense tells us that feeling is such a subjective concept, which can be easily influenced by minor changes of people, the mood or their tenacity for instance. To have a more convincing conclusion, the author should provide more objective evidences.

Furthermore, even assuming the statistics of the report are correctly obtained, as the case of extracting teeth cannot represent all the situations when people feel pains, the author fails to consider other factor that could lead to the differences in pain, the health of each for example. Medicine should be used according to the practical conditions of the patients. Every individual has it (its) unique immune system and heredity, kappa opioids can never be applied to all women, and similarly we cannot regard the painkiller useless to every man. These scenarios, if true, may cast serious doubt upon the author's conclusion.

Last but not least, even assuming what have discussed about kappa opioids are concrete facts, we don’t necessarily require all medications to be reevaluated. After all, the huge cost of it should be taken into account and whether benefit will offset the time consumed is also doubtful. Also, not all medicines need consideration upon the difference between men and women, which usually doesn’t make much difference.

On all accounts, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide more details to ensure the validity of the research. Moreover, to strengthen the logic of the argument, the author should rule out other factors that could also lead to different degrees of pain in men and women. Finally, to better assess the conclusion we would need more information about the patient in order to use proper medicine. (逗号去掉)

粗看了下，有一些小小的语法错误。
另外首段103字，算偏长的了。
最重要的，虽说argument重在纠错，但是个人觉得一定的组织结构还是需要的。在攻击的顺序上，最好还是先抓大的重点，把相对来说不是那么有力的放在后边。在楼主的这篇习作中，首先攻击了调查中的两点错误，但其实就我分析而言，这并不是最重大的错误。仔细分析一下，发现这个argument可以有以下两个前提：
1.K对女的有效，对男的没效。（即使该调查成立，但拨牙一项不能代表所有的情况。）
2.男女对疼痛的感受不同，即被楼主忽略的首句。（没有直接证据证明。而该调查存在的问题比较多。首先，人太少，没有代表性。其次，也许不是性别带来的不同，而是其他体质上的问题。没有说是否每一个女人都比每一个男人少说痛。第三，心理影响。报告的痛有心理作用，而医学关心的止痛是生理问题。不排除女的意志力坚强，所以少说痛。）

不知道楼主是否知道让步式攻击这种比较有力的攻击方式，就是我先假设调查是成立的，但是即使这样，结论也是不成立的；然后再说，何况这个调查根本就是漏洞百出的，比如……。

最后再如一些没必要对所有的药物进行评估之类的小攻击个人觉得可以归在一段，或者干脆和结尾段合并，稍微提一下即可。


=======================================
同剩下五天了，欢迎回拍~
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1070290&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D102