kaolaliang Arugment51 【Cracking AW】

kaolaliangUID: 2758807

The topic says the antibiotic could cure the patients quicker than expected. To support this subject, the writer cites two groups of doctors make a compare with the antibiotic use or not, the result shows antibiotic is benefit for patients. I find this argument logically unconvincing in several respects.

First of all, the second group's sugar pills may cause bad effect in the healing procedure. The second team may not think about the effort of sugar pills, if the sugar pill worse the condition of the patients' muscle, the period of being health is certainly longer.

As for the second operation the writer don’t tell us the severity of injuries, physical conditions of the two groups of patients. Because of the more injury condition leads the second operation had taken more time than first one. Does the writer figure it? Moreover the lab’s physical condition also makes a different result. Meanwhile how many patients are involved in each group? There are almost only five, which is not a large number to support the operation data, and whether the two operations have the same number of patients or not, which the writer doesn’t claim it.
Even assuming number and level of their injury are not a problem, the writer should find the real reason about the faster recover of the first group that took antibiotics. Two groups of doctors make the different. The first group was treated by a expert in sports medician, while the other one's was a general physician. It is possible that Dr.Newland, doctor of the first group, is more skillful in the field of muscle injuries than Dr. Alton. Or maybe, even their skill is in the same level, the former spent more time and more concern about these patients, while the other one, was busy taking care of his/her other patients out of this study. So, to make the result of the study accurate, at least it should use the same doctor for two groups or clearly state the two doctors' skills and other effection are the same.

Even though all these problems stated above are fixed, the argument can not be a strong one as well. The central false for this study is its treatment process. The writer's states that the first group used antibiotic and the second one use sugar pills seems logical. However, the use of other medicine are ignored. Did they use other medicines that would affect the result of the study? Did they use the same medicine? Did other medicine that makes the different result? Without the statement of this, this research can not be regarded as a study at all.
Overall, the reasoning behind the results of the study seems logical as presented above. However, before the advise being made, the writer should evaluate all possible flaws in this study.

ajivaUID: 2654700

评论见附件~多多交流哈~