【1010G精英组】ARGUMENT51 F组回收站

xmaszztUID: 2796708

改微微。。
In this argument, the author states that to have a better cure, patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To support this conclusion, the author illustrate with two comparative trials. The first group of patients was treated by a doctor who has a specialty in sports medicine and took antibiotics throughout the treatment. At the same time, patients in the second group were treated by a general physician without antibiotics but the sugar pills. In the end, the first group’s patients recuperate 40% quicker than the second group’s. (觉得首段简单称述下内容和摆明自己立场就可以了，这样有点累赘了) But after the examination of this supporting evidence, I found the argument specious in several points.

To begin with, even the doctors are not sure about whether the secondary infections have influences on the healing of the patients; how the author could estimate that the infection will absolutely happen and it’s the antibiotics which keep the infections away help to the treatment of muscle strain. What’s more, the author didn’t give the demonstration of the functions of sugar pills, maybe the infection didn’t occur but it’s because of the sugar pills have some side-effects that leading to the slower recuperation.（论述因果错误）

Moreover, the validity of the survey is doubtful. The author didn’t offer us the information about the patients in the test. If the first group is consist of the young, and the second group is full of elders, the age may also be a factor that effect the time of recuperation. Apart from this, the differences of gender, health condition and other characteristic which will possibly impact the result should be taken into account as well. （论述实验样本的缺陷）

Finally, the author ignored the factor which comes from the different treating method of the two doctors. The first doctor, Dr. Newland was a specialist in sports medicine. He has more experiences about the muscle strain treatments than the second doctor, who is a general physician. Dr. Newland always deals with the patients hurt in the sports activities and he knows more on how to treat them. In addition, it’s possible that it’s by other medicine or treating methods Dr. Newland used to the patients but not the antibiotics that bringing a better effect to the treatment. （还是称述论据的缺陷：两对照组情况不同）

In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To consummate it the author should offer us a statistic on the probability of getting infected after the muscle strain. The research which could demonstrate that patients in the same physical condition, same symptom and treated by the same treatment program, the using of antibiotics could lead a quicker recuperation is also needed to make the argument persuasive.

理解起来很通顺~~~问题有：
1 错误的顺序，正如你的提纲，2和3都是论据的错误，我觉得可以提到1的前面说；先说论据的错误，再称述论据推结论的错误
2 原文的建议有以偏概全的错误，最好还是说下吧~~~我觉得一般这种论据推结论的的错误-比如因果错误，类比错误，以偏概全，以全概偏-都属于比较大的错误