Argument51 求拍啊~~~有提纲~~谢谢啦

jellyechoUID: 2687438

Argument 51   未限时   字数646
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."
*******************************************************************
提纲如下：

（1）调查：没有样本数量，两组人的年龄，健康状况，生活状况，病情也可能不尽相同

（2）因果：第一组比第二组好得快并不一定是因为服用了抗生素所致，有可能并没有二次感染，但专供运动医学的医生比综合医师治疗方法好。

（3）范围：并不是所有肌肉扭伤都很严重，并不是所有人都适用抗生素。

********************************************************************

Simply based on the unfounded hypothesis, the author draws the conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In order to substantiate this conclusion, the author cites the result of a recent survey in support of the recommendation. On the surface, this may seem as a sound idea, but careful weighing on closer analysis, we find that it omits some substantial concerns that should be addressed in the argument. From the logical perspective, this argument suffers from three crucial logical flaws.

In the first place, the author furnishes no evidence that the study's patients are representative of the overall group of people who suffer from the severe muscle strain. The author cursorily consider that the two groups of patients in the study are as similar as possible. Whereas, the patients in the two groups might have several differences. For instance, they may have dissimilitude in age, health condition, diet ingredient, and living environment and maybe even their states of muscle strain are not same. All of these may lead to the study be unfaithful. Moreover, we are not informed about the size of the sample in the study; the smaller the sample, the less reliable the study's conclusion. In short, without accounting for such possible differences between the patients in the two groups and the missing of the sample's size, the study is constrainedly to be characteristic. The author cannot rely on it to draw any firm conclusion about whether all the patients who are diagnosed with serve muscle strain should be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.

In the second place, even if it is true that the study of the two groups of patients is authentic, a direct correlation between the antibiotics and healing quickly after severe muscle strain does not necessarily prove that the former causes the latter. While a high correlation is a strong evidence of a causal relationship, in itself it is not sufficient. The author must also account for all other possible factors leading to healing quickly after severe muscle strain. For example, it might be not the antibiotics make the patients heal quickly, but the doctor who specializes in sports medicine. Considered the doctor who specializes in sports medicine is more professional than the general physician in treating muscle strain, it is very possible that his prescription is much more efficacious than the general physician's. Furthermore, with the professional treatment given by the doctor specializes in sports medicine, the first group of patients might not have secondary infections at all. Lacking evidence that healing quickly after severe muscle strain were similar in all such respects, the author cannot justifiably conclude that the antibiotics is the primary cause, or even a contributing cause, of healing quickly.

In addition, while it is true that the study is representative of the overall group of people who suffer from the severe muscle strain, and that the antibiotics cause healing quickly, this is not suitable for everyone. Firstly, not all of the patients who suffer from muscle strain are so serious that they do will have the secondary infections. On the other hand, some patients are extremely sensitive to antibiotics, so that they cannot be advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.

Judging from all evidence offered, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment is not well-founded. To make the argument more convincing, the author would have to make the study more comprehensive and rife. Additionally, he would have to make the two groups of patients treated by the same doctor. Consequently, if the argument had included the given factors discussed above, it would have been more through and logically acceptable.