【夏花绚烂】Argument51-by drm-33 求猛拍！

drm-33UID: 2759202

求猛拍！ 有拍必回！！

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - 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: 606
TIME: 00:47:00
DATE: 2010-3-31 23:33:43



The arguer's recommendation of advising those who are diagnosed with muscle strain to take antibiotics as part of their treatment sounds warranted at the first sight, but when in deeper insight into the information given in the argument, we had to say that some specific details and important data should be described in the argument, which if included, will make the argument more convicing.

The arguer makes the prior assumption without convicing evidence and then does not present enough information about control and experimental groups. We can see that in the very first beginning, the arguer assumes the patients who suffer from severe muscle strain are doomed to secondary infections without any data or evidence to verify that possibility. If they are under professional care and can keep their good fit through daily mild exercise, they may not be likely to get secondary infections. Then, the arguer presents two groups of patients without specifying their ages, health conditions, careers, life habits, etc, which will largely effect the results of the study. If in the first group, the patients are in their youth or say, in good health and have good recuperation abilities that do not need antibiotics, while in the second group, the patients are from 60-70 years old, who have endured the muscle strain for years and have less ability in itself to recuperate. Or if the first group, the patients have a far less chance of being hurt in muscle because of their careers in a more safer place and the extent of muscle strain is less than those in the second group, thus the first group patients have a shorter period for the treatment of muscle injuries and the extent of muscle injuries maybe more easy to be treated regardless of the doctors' professional skills or the medicine which is given by their doctors. Unless the arguer puts the two groups in the same age, health conditions, careers and life habits or so, the arguments has several important points to be justified in order to make the argument sound warranted.

Further, when talking about the different doctors who treat these groups in the study, we suspect the effectiveness of the result that bring about to us. In the first group, the doctor specializes in sports medicine, while in the second group, the doctor is a general physician who might know less about the details of the cause and methods of cure to muscle strain than the doctor who specialized in sports medicine in first group does. Also, Maybe the arguer failed to mention in the argument that besides the antibiotics and sugar pills taken by the patients, those patients in the first group get extra methods of treatment which do help or even play a vital role in their treatment in muscle strain while in the second group do not. And it seems that the arguer evades other related information except for the insufficient information given in the argument which might be crucial in determining the final result of the study, and thus the result of the above study might be misleading somehow.

Without ruling out possibilities regarding sufficient information about the experimental and control groups and the necessary comparison about the doctors in these two groups, along with attempting to generalize all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain without persuading us that the patients in the study are representative of all patients, even, we do not know any information about the ages, health conditions, life habits or careers that can be applied in some extent to all patients, the arguer just cannot justifiably made the recommendation in such a simple way.

cherry_mixUID: 2731553

The arguer's recommendation of advising
those who are diagnosed with muscle strain to take antibiotics as a part of their treatment sounds warranted at the first sight, but when in deeper insight into the information given in the argument, we had to say that some specific details and important data should be described in the argument, which if included, will make the argument more convincing.(句意我可以看懂，但是我觉得你开头段，只用了一句话，这个句子未免太长了，没有节奏感，还有一个问题是，开头段不仅仅要举出作者的结论，还要指出他支持结论的一些主要论据，以及有哪些错误也要简单提下，这里没有看到。)
The arguer makes the prior assumption（这个assumption是什么？） without convincing（拼写错误，已经帮你改了） evidence and then does not present enough information about control and experimental groups（这是什么错误，你应该说出来，中心句都应该把攻击点说出来，仅仅说不充分的信息是不准确的）. We can see that in the very first beginning（in the beginning就可以了）, the arguer assumes that the patients who suffer from severe muscle strain are doomed to have secondary infections （这应该是两句话，without后面的和arguer的assumes没有逻辑关系）without any data or evidence to verify this possibility. If they are under professional care and can keep their good fit through daily mild exercise, they may not be likely to get secondary infections（做运动就可能会防止继发感染？）. Then, the arguer presents two groups of patients without specifying their ages, health conditions, careers, life habits, etc, which will largely effect the results of the study.（这是你攻击的第二点，应该另起一段了，此外这句动宾搭配有问题，你的主谓宾是the arguer presents patients, arguer怎么表明病人？你应该说在arguer的论述中，怎样怎样） If in the first group, the patients are in their youth or say, in good health and have good recuperation（换形容词） abilities that do not need antibiotics, while in the second group, the patients are from 60-70 years old, who have endured the muscle strain for years and have less ability in itself（themselves）
to recuperate（这句话不完整，if引导了条件从句后，后面的结论是什么，你要不就不要加if，在陈述时加上may之类的词）. Or if the first group, the patients have a far less chance of being hurt in muscle （题中已经说了，他们是muscle strain）because of their careers in a more safer place and the extent of muscle strain is less than those in the second group, thus the first group patients have a shorter period for the treatment of muscle injuries and the extent of muscle injuries maybe more easy to be treated regardless of the doctors' professional skills or the medicine which is given by their doctors. （你这句话说的是extent被治疗，主语有问题）Unless the arguer puts the two groups in the same age, health conditions, careers and life habits or so, （unless表示除非，你的上下句没有形成逻辑）the arguments has several important points to be justified in order to make the argument sound warranted.
Further, when talking about the different doctors who treat these groups in the study, we suspect the effectiveness of the result that bring about to us.（错误是什么？） In the first group, the doctor specializes in sports medicine, while in the second group, the doctor is a general physician who might know less about the details of the cause and methods of cure to(换curing) muscle strain than the doctor who specialized in sports medicine in first group does. Also, Maybe the arguer fails（前面都是一般现在时，这里继续，不要用过去）
to mention in the argument （要么提前，要么去掉）that besides the antibiotics and sugar pills were taken by the patients, those patients in the first group get extra methods of treatment which do help or even play a vital role in their treatment in muscle strain while in the second group do not（时态你调整一下，统一）. And it seems that the arguer evades other related information except for (except for用的不对)the insufficient information given in the argument which might be crucial in determining the final result of the study, and thus the result of the above study might be misleading somehow.（还有的情况是什么？你要说出来）
Without ruling out possibilities regarding sufficient information about the experimental （用名词）and control groups and the necessary comparison about the doctors in these two groups（句子结构应该调整，两个and这么用是很奇怪的）, along with attempting to generalize all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain without persuading us that the patients in the study are representative of all patients, even, we do not know any information about the ages, health conditions, life habits or careers that can be applied in some extent to all patients, the arguer just cannot justifiably made the recommendation in such a simple way. （结尾段，你也是用了一句话，这样做是很不对的，我建议你把你要说的分开，自己也要注意句子间的逻辑关系，你这么一团下来，考官会觉得不知道你在说什么，一般一个正常句子两三个从句最多了，另外，我建议你再看下argument的格式问题，结尾段一般都是指出arguer的结论有误，然后提出一些建议，怎么使得他的argument可以变得让人信服，这些你都没有说）

drm-33UID: 2759202

2# cherry_mix



谢谢哈~ 改得很认真！