1010G【fish】agument188

azure9UID: 2789030

188. 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.

请于6月02日晚23点前提交作业。并把作业word文档发给互改的组员
1--->2指，1帮2改，2的作文给1改

第一次互改顺序：
1--->7
2--->9
3--->10
5--->11
7--->1
9--->2
10-->3
11-->5

第一次自改文上交的时间是：6月03日晚23点

第二次互改的顺序：
1--->9
2--->10
3--->11
5--->1
7--->2
9--->3
10-->5
11-->7




第二次自改文的上交时间是：6月05日晚23点

azure9UID: 2789030

The author of this argument claims that when pain medication is required, women should be given the kappa opioides while the men should have other kinds of pain medication. To support his conclusion, the author cites a research which involving 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted. However, I find the argument is flawed in several important respects.

To begin with, the sample of the research involved only 48 people, and then the author failed to give more information about the sample, so we can not believe that they are picked randomly. So I have good reason to doubt if the sample is representative enough to reflect the general appearance of those people as a whole. Perhaps, the women they choose all have their wisdom teeth extracted before that they have the experience to deal with such pain. While the men they picked was the first time to have this surgery, so they may lack of the experience to handle the pain it caused. Or perhaps, the women of this research were more tolerable to the pain than other people, and the men involved were less tolerable than average people. Therefore, the women felt less pain than the men. Since the arguer makes a claim about men and women in general, the sample for the research should be able to represent all.

Secondly, there could be many other factors which may be the causes of the paining. It is possible that men are more sensitive to the pain than women do. So even the men take the same dosage of the kappa opioids, they still felt painful cause they have much more nerve endings within their teeth. And there is another possibility that the women may eat something before or after the surgeon which can reduce the feeling of the pain, and the same, the men may eat something that would weaken the effort of the kappa opiodis. So the effort of the kappa opiodis can not be proved. Without ruling out those alternative explanations for the sample of the research, the author cannot defend the conclusion that based on the result of this research.

Finally, the suggestion that the men should take other kinds of pain medication is not fair. Since there was no evidence in the argument showed that the other kinds of the pain medication is more effective than kappa opioids do to the men. It is possible that even the kappa opiodis do weak effect on man than it do to women, it sill the most effective pain medication to the men. Without further research to prove that kappa opiodis is less effective than other pain medication, the conclusion that men should be given other kinds of pain medication can not be made.

In conclusion, the author’s evidence lends little credible support to his conclusion. To persuade me that the kappa opioids is more effective to women than men, the author need to give more information of the men and women chosen for the research and to prove that they can represent a whole. And authors also have to control other alternative factors to the research to make sure the kappa opiodis is the only factors that affect the feeling of the pain. Finally, the author should have some more other researches for the effect of other pain medications to the men to prove that they are really more effective than the kappa opiodis.

azure9UID: 2789030

改lty
In the argument presented above, the author concludes that kappa opioids(KO) should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication should be given to men. To support this conclusion, the author cites a report on a controlled experiment, in which women reported feeling much less pain than the men when they were administered the same dosage of KO. Moreover, the author mentioned that all medications should be reevaluated about their effects on men versus women. However, the argument is flawed in several important respects as follows.

First problem with the argument is that the report has many fallacies. On the one hand, since the research involved only 48 patients, these patients' respondences to KO cannot represent general patients' reactions.(Why?中間差一個原因的連接) On the other hand, there are many other possibilities, which can also make the women feel less painful than the men, such as women's natural tolerance in pain, the relaxing conversation between the women and the researcher,(so? it will make them relax?) and women's longer recuperative period after having their wisdom teeth extracted. Therefore, the study suggests nothing unless the author run it with more patients and put men and women in the same experimental environment.

Secondly, assuming that the experiment has been conducted in a proper way, the arguer unfairly generalize the conclusion that women should take KO whenever they need pain medication, and men should take other pain medication. For one thing, the author omits the probable side effects caused by KO. 【These effects may accelerate one's heartbeats, which is deadly to those patients with heart-attack and they may also cause problems in brain and central nervous system. 】我覺得這裡有一點牽強，用假設KO可能會有的副作用來反駁不應該讓女性都服用它，那其他藥也不是沒有副作用啊，這樣的假設雖然說的是KO的副作用，但其實已經把所有的藥品放到裡面了，這種假設是缺乏說服力的。For another, the author makes a cursory mistake that men should take another pain medication instead. It is entirely possible that KO for men is already the most effective pain medication. (很棒的反駁點，可以沒有深入去說)Without taking fully into account, the author cannot simply draw this conclusion.

Finely, even if the author's conclusion about who should take the KO is reasonable. However whether we should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is remained to be discussed. There is some possibility that many medications have just been evaluated few days ago, so reevaluation on them is becoming unnecessary. (這兩個可能性，前面那個反駁力弱，後面的反駁力強，但是卻沒有說得很清楚，為什麽沒有可能去重新監測這些藥品呢？工作量大還是什麽。這樣就把這個有很強反駁力度的點所清楚了，效果會比就表面談談兩個可能性要好，而且前面那個還有一點弱，放到後面提一提就好了)Besides, medications are diversity in thousands of areas in the medical field, which makes it impossible to reevaluate all these medications. Hence, without restrictions on the kinds of medications, to reevaluate medications will be useless and infeasible.

To sum up, I am not convinced that women should take KO whenever pain medication is required and men should take another pain medication instead. To strengthen this conclusion, the author have to assure me that the study was performed in a controlled environment where all other factors possibly affecting the result of the study remained constant. Furthermore, the author also need to reconsider his/her conclusion about whether women and men should be given KO and whether all medications should be reevaluated.

再次改lty的文章，發現進步不少，特別是在語言上！恩恩，繼續加油哦！文章邏輯整體上來說還是比較清晰的，就是在可能性的分析深度上稍微下一點功夫就好了，還有就是有的可能性提得有一點弱，其實并不是什麽大問題，卻被你提出來說，會有一點感覺偏離重點。

谦行天下UID: 2797557

In this argument, based on an unwarranted report, the arguer concludes a result that kappa opioinds(I use KOs instead) better to be prescribed for women than men. Since the report showed a different affect of KOs on men versus women, the arguer advices to evaluate the effects on male and female. Although in the first glance this argument seems to be reasonable, a scrutiny examination reveals how groundless this argument is.

Firstly, the cited report conducted experiment on a very small amount of samples, which is meaningless. The differences of 28 men and 20 women certainly could arise solely from random fluctuations. The larger of the size of the sample, the less likely the differences arise solely from random fluctuations. The study group should conduct the research of much more samples to make the result more persuasive.

Secondly, the author failed to rule out some other factors contributing to the different effect when the KOs was used in women and men. On one hand, the author states that same dosage of KOs was administered to men and women, which could be one contributing factor. As we all know, some drugs such as the anaesthetic carry out their effect by the ratio of dosage to weight of patient. Commonly, men are heavier than women. In that case, it is logical that men's reaction to KOs is lighter than women. On the other hand, how much do patients hurt contribute to the effect of the pain killer, too. If most of the women do not hurt that much compared to men, the result of the drug is explainable. Therefore, unless the author had proved that the only difference between male patients and female patients is their sex, the conclusion is scientific.

Last but not the least; the author omits the side effect of KOs, when she/he gave the advice to women regardless the pain medication is required. As we all know, many drugs have side effect that doctors avoid to use them. KOs could be one drug that impairs other function of human body. In this case, doctors should use the drug unless it is non-substitutable. The author is too hesitate to conclude that KOs should be prescribed to women on no condition. What' more, one drug might be effective on one kind of pain, if KOs could not ease the pain causing by other disease, the author's advise is meaningless.

All in all, to substantiate this argument, the author need provide a scientific report with larger sample sizes. The other factors except sex differences contributing to differences need to be rule out. To illustrate the author’s suggestions base on the report, more considerations about the side effect of KOs are required to be considered for a convincing argument.

-------------------第一次自改文-------------------------------------------------------------
In this argument, based on an unwarranted report, the arguer concludes a result that kappa opioinds(I use KOs instead) better to be prescribed for women than men. Since the report demonstrated a different effect of KOs on men versus women, the arguer advices to evaluate the effects on male and female. Although in the first glance this argument seems to be reasonable, a scrutiny examination reveals how groundless this argument is.

Firstly, the cited report conducted an experiment on a very small amount of samples, which is meaningless. The differences between 28 men and 20 women certainly can not represent the general situation because there is large chance that the differences arise solely from random fluctuations. The larger of the size of the sample, the less likely the differences arise solely from random fluctuations. The study group should conduct the research of much more samples to make the result more persuasive.

Secondly, the author failed to rule out some other factors contributing to the different effect when the KOs was used in women and men. On one hand, the author states that same dosage of KOs was administered to men and women, which could be one contributing factor. As we all know, some drugs such as the anaesthetic carry out their effect by the ratio of dosage to weight of the patient. Commonly, men are heavier than women. In that case, it is logical that men's reaction to KOs is lighter than women. On the other hand, how much patients hurt contribute to the effect of the pain killer, too. If most of the women do not hurt that much compared to men, the result of the drug is explainable. Therefore, unless the author had proved that the only difference between male patients and female patients is their sex, the conclusion is scientific.

Last but not the least; the author omits the side effect of KOs, when she/he gave the advice to women. As we all know, many drugs have side effect that doctors avoid to use them. KOs could be one drug that impairs other function of human body. In this case, doctors should use the drug unless it is non-substitutable. The author is too haste to conclude that KOs should be prescribed to women on no condition. What' more, one drug might be effective on one kind of pain, if KOs could not ease the pain causing by other disease, the author's advise is meaningless.

All in all, to substantiate this argument, the author need provide a scientific report with larger sample sizes. The other factors except sex differences contributing to differences need to be ruled out. To illustrate the author’s suggestions based on the report, more considerations about the side effect of KOs are required to be considered for a convincing argument.

========第二次自改文===========谢polo===受益===
In this argument, based on an unwarranted report, the arguer concludes a result that kappa opioinds(I use KOs instead) better to be prescribed for women than men. Since the report demonstrated a different effect of KOs on men versus women, the arguer advises reevaluating the effects of all medications on male and female. Although in the first glance this argument seems to be reasonable, a scrutiny examination reveals how groundless this argument is.

Firstly, the cited report conducted an experiment on a very small amount of samples, which is meaningless. The differences between 28 men and 20 women certainly cannot represent the general situation because there is large chance that the differences arise solely from random fluctuations. The larger the size of the samples is, the less likely the differences arise solely. The study group should conduct the research involving much more samples to make the result more persuasive.

Secondly, the author failed to rule out some other factors contributing to the different effect when the KOs was used to women and men. On one hand, the author states that same dosage of KOs was administered to men and women, which could be one contributing factor. As we all know, some drugs such as the anaesthetic carries out their effect by the ratio of dosage to weight of the patient. Commonly, men are heavier than women. In that case, it is logical that men's reaction to KOs is lighter than women. On the other hand, the levels of patients' pain contribute to the effect of the pain killer, too. If most of the women do not hurt that much compared to men, the result of the drug is explainable. Therefore, unless the author had proved that the only difference between male patients and female patients is their sex, the conclusion is scientific.

Last but not the least; the author omits the side effect of KOs, when she/he gave the advice to women. As we all know, many drugs have side effect that doctors avoid to use them. KOs could be one drug that impairs other function of human body. In this case, doctors should use the drug unless it is non-substitutable. The author is too hasty to conclude that KOs should be prescribed to women on any conditions. What' more, one drug might be effective on only one kind of pain. If KOs could not ease the pain causing by other disease, the author's advice is meaningless.

All in all, to substantiate this argument, the author need provide a scientific report with larger sample sizes. The other factors except sex differences contributing to differences need to be ruled out. To illustrate the author’s suggestions based on the report, more considerations about the side effect of KOs are required to be considered for a convincing argument.

谦行天下UID: 2797557

改Anges
This argument bears several obvious logical flaws. The arguer asserts that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required and the effects of all medication on men versus women are supposed to be revaluated. Yet, it can be apparently found that all these assertion are based on a vague report without convincing proof.

First of all, there is no reference value in the cited new report thus making the argument unconvincing. It is 28 men and 20 women who took part in a research which was aimed to discover the different effects of kappa opioids prescribed for those research samples. The sample numbers of the two groups (a group of females & another group of males) are different, making it difficult to determine the average influence on participants from both gender groups. If the total number of the male group is higher than that of the female group, it may be likely that the probability of men suffering from more pain will much higher. As a result, whether the two groups of participants is affected differently by kappa opioids or how the influence is so vaguely outlined that the statistics provided by this report are not reliable. What’s more, the cited report is a new one which still has to endure the test of time. Such a fresh report can not be the sole consideration when making a conclusion.
//what is more important than the different size numbers between two groups is the number of sample sizes. Only when both groups of the sample sizes is large enough, random flunctuate can be rule out.

Secondly, besides the thoughtless choosing of sample numbers, the arguer fails to provide the background physical information of the participants which should also be a crucial factor influencing the easing of their pain. If the female participants were much healthier than the male ones on an average level, or if the major male participants had a predisposition to mouth diseases, those male participants would be more likely to suffer from pains for a longer time. In other words, a robust constitution or a weak one will lead to extremely different results of the research. Without mentioning any background information, the arguer can not come to his assertion.

Thirdly, just giving evidence from one report, the arguer makes a hasty conclusion that the kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. A research on people who were having their wisdom teeth extracted alone may have some reference value on mouth diseases. However, it can not represent other situation such as fracture or other kinds of neuralgia. Moreover, what men will act upon other pain suffering may also be different. Not beneficial for the easing of tooth problems, kappa opioids may be good at relieving the pain of men in other situation. Therefore, it is ex parte to conclude men should be given other kinds of pain medication.

In sum, lacking a comprehensive view of the general situation, the arguer fails to provide convincible[I could not find this word in dictionalry] evidence and illustration to support his assertion. To attest his assertion, it is advisable for him/her to give more professional researches and analyze the research results more comprehensively.
Agnes 的语言非常好！
一个比较大的毛病在于正文第一段的陈述，在做调查的时候，sample size要足够的大才能保证实验结果的可借鉴性。当样品量足够大的时候，两个group多一两个人都可以忽略了。

=========改人烟============================
In the argument presented above, the author concludes that kappa opioids(KO) should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication should be given to men. To support this conclusion, the author cites a report on a controlled experiment, in which women reported feeling much less pain than the men when they were administered the same dosage of KO. Moreover, the author mentioned that all medications should be reevaluated about their effects on men versus women. However, the argument is flawed in several important respects as follows.

First problem with the argument is that the report has many fallacies. On the one hand, since the research involved only 48 patients, these patients' respondence to KO cannot represent general patients' reactions. Perhaps the other patients' with KO may have the opposite respondence. On the other hand, there are many other possibilities, which can also make the women feel less painful than the men, such as women's congenital tolerance in pain, the relaxing conversation between the women and the researcher, and women's faster recuperation after having their wisdom teeth extracted. Therefore, the study suggests nothing unless the author runs it with more patients and put men and women in the same experimental environment.
//如果是put men and women in the some environment, how can the possiblity that 'women's congenital tolerance in pain' be rule out?

Secondly, assuming that the experiment has been conducted in a proper way, the arguer unfairly generalize the conclusion that women should take KO whenever they need pain medication, and men should take other pain medication. For one thing, the author omits the probable side effects caused by KO. These effects may accelerate one's heartbeats, which is deadly to those patients with heart-attack and they may also cause problems in brain and central nervous system. For another, the author makes a cursory mistake that men should take another pain medication instead. It is entirely possible that KO for men is already the most effective pain medication. Without taking the side effects and effectiveness of KO fully into account, the author cannot simply draw this conclusion.

Finely[Finally], even if the author's conclusion about who should take the KO is reasonable[仅是半个句子]. However whether we should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is remained to be discussed. Medications are diversity in thousands of areas in the medical fields, which makes it impossible to reevaluate all these medications because it sees like Penelope's web. Besides, There is some possibility that many medications have just been evaluated few days ago, so reevaluation on them is becoming unnecessary. Hence, without restrictions on the kinds of medications the author metioned, to reevaluate all medications will be useless and infeasible.

To sum up, I am not convinced that women should take KO whenever pain medication is required and men should take another pain medication instead. To strengthen this conclusion, the author have to assure me that the study was performed in a controlled environment where all other factors possibly affecting the result of the study remained constant. Furthermore, the author also need to reconsider his/her conclusion about whether women and men should be given KO and whether all medications should be reevaluated.

鄙人感觉很好，没挑出大错，除了正文第一段有点自己搬石头砸自己的脚以外
语言有进步，还有人烟的攻击得十分全面。

lty900301UID: 2715509

Outline:
1.作者引用的report存在两个问题。一方面，数量太小，不能够具有代表性，另一方面，比男性感到的痛苦小，仅仅是由女性患者说的，没有科学依据。
2.作者在得出结论的时候，忽略了这种麻醉剂可能对女性使用者带来副作用，并且也没有充分考虑到也许KO这种麻醉剂对于男性患者来说已经是最有效的止痛剂了。
3.最后，作者认为所有的药都应该重新评估，但事实是有些药是近期才做过实验的，或者是有些药根本不会因性别而产生区别。此外，药的种类数以万计，要吧所有的药都进行重新评估是一件不可能的事情。因此，去重新评估所有药是不必要也不可行的。

In the argument presented above, the author concludes that kappa opioids(KO) should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication should be given to men. To support this conclusion, the author cites a report on a controlled experiment, in which women reported feeling much less pain than the men when they were administered the same dosage of KO. Moreover, the author mentioned that all medications should be reevaluated about their effects on men versus women. However, the argument is flawed in several important respects as follows.

First problem with the argument is that the report has many fallacies. On the one hand, since the research involved only 48 patients, these patients' respondences to KO cannot represent general patients' reactions. On the other hand, there are many other possibilities, which can also make the women feel less painful than the men, such as women's natural tolerance in pain, the relaxing conversation between the women and the researcher, and women's longer recuperative period after having their wisdom teeth extracted. Therefore, the study suggests nothing unless the author run it with more patients and put men and women in the same experimental environment.

Secondly, assuming that the experiment has been conducted in a proper way, the arguer unfairly generalize the conclusion that women should take KO whenever they need pain medication, and men should take other pain medication. For one thing, the author omits the probable side effects caused by KO. These effects may accelerate one's heartbeats, which is deadly to those patients with heart-attack and they may also cause problems in brain and central nervous system. For another, the author makes a cursory mistake that men should take another pain medication instead. It is entirely possible that KO for men is already the most effective pain medication. Without taking fully into account, the author cannot simply draw this conclusion.

Finely, even if the author's conclusion about who should take the KO is reasonable. However whether we should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is remained to be discussed. There is some possibility that many medications have just been evaluated few days ago, so reevaluation on them is becoming unnecessary. Besides, medications are diversity in thousands of areas in the medical field, which makes it impossible to reevaluate all these medications. Hence, without restrictions on the kinds of medications, to reevaluate medications will be useless and infeasible.

To sum up, I am not convinced that women should take KO whenever pain medication is required and men should take another pain medication instead. To strengthen this conclusion, the author have to assure me that the study was performed in a controlled environment where all other factors possibly affecting the result of the study remained constant. Furthermore, the author also need to reconsider his/her conclusion about whether women and men should be given KO and whether all medications should be reevaluated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
第一次自改

In the argument presented above, the author concludes that kappa opioids(KO) should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication should be given to men. To support this conclusion, the author cites a report on a controlled experiment, in which women reported feeling much less pain than the men when they were administered the same dosage of KO. Moreover, the author mentioned that all medications should be reevaluated about their effects on men versus women. However, the argument is flawed in several important respects as follows.

First problem with the argument is that the report has many fallacies. On the one hand, since the research involved only 48 patients, these patients' respondence to KO cannot represent general patients' reactions. Perhaps the other patients' with KO may have the opposite respondence. On the other hand, there are many other possibilities, which can also make the women feel less painful than the men, such as women's congenital
tolerance in pain, the relaxing conversation between the women and the researcher, and women's faster recuperation after having their wisdom teeth extracted. Therefore, the study suggests nothing unless the author run it with more patients and put men and women in the same experimental environment.

Secondly, assuming that the experiment has been conducted in a proper way, the arguer unfairly generalize the conclusion that women should take KO whenever they need pain medication, and men should take other pain medication. For one thing, the author omits the probable side effects caused by KO. These effects may accelerate one's heartbeats, which is deadly to those patients with heart-attack and they may also cause problems in brain and central nervous system. For another, the author makes a cursory mistake that men should take another pain medication instead. It is entirely possible that KO for men is already the most effective pain medication.
Without taking the side effects and effectiveness of KO fully into account, the author cannot simply draw this conclusion.

Finely, even if the author's conclusion about who should take the KO is reasonable. However whether we should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is remained to be discussed. Medications are diversity in thousands of areas in the medical fields, which makes it impossible to reevaluate all these medications because it sees like Penelope's web. Besides, There is some possibility that many medications have just been evaluated few days ago, so reevaluation on them is becoming unnecessary.
Hence, without restrictions on the kinds of medications the author metioned, to reevaluate all medications will be useless and infeasible.

To sum up, I am not convinced that women should take KO whenever pain medication is required and men should take another pain medication instead. To strengthen this conclusion, the author have to assure me that the study was performed in a controlled environment where all other factors possibly affecting the result of the study remained constant. Furthermore, the author also need to reconsider his/her conclusion about whether women and men should be given KO and whether all medications should be reevaluated.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
第二次自改


In the argument presented above, the author concludes that kappa opioids(KO) should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication should be given to men. To support this conclusion, the author cites a report on a controlled experiment, in which women reported feeling much less pain than the men when they were administered the same dosage of KO. Moreover, the author mentioned that all medications should be reevaluated about their effects on men versus women. However, the argument is flawed in several important respects as follows.
First problem with the argument is that the report has many fallacies. On the one hand, since the research involved only 48 patients, these patients' respondence to KO cannot represent general patients' reactions. Perhaps the other patients' with KO may have the opposite respondence. On the other hand, there are many other possibilities, which can also make the women feel less painful than the men, such as women's congenital tolerance in pain, the relaxing conversation between the women and the researcher, and women's faster recuperation after having their wisdom teeth extracted. Therefore, the study suggests nothing unless the author runs it with more patients and put men and women in the same experimental environment.

Secondly, assuming that the experiment has been conducted in a proper way, the arguer unfairly generalize the conclusion that women should take KO whenever they need pain medication, and men should take other pain medication. For one thing, the author omits the probable side effects caused by KO. These effects may accelerate one's heartbeats, which is deadly to those patients with heart-attack and they may also cause problems in brain and central nervous system. For another, the author makes a cursory mistake that men should take another pain medication instead. It is entirely possible that KO for men is already the most effective pain medication. Without taking the side effects and effectiveness of KO fully into account, the author cannot simply draw this conclusion.

Finally, even if the author's conclusion about who should take the KO is reasonable, whether we should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is remained to be discussed. Medications are diversity in thousands of areas in the medical fields, which makes it impossible to reevaluate all these medications because it sees like Penelope's web. Besides, There is some possibility that many medications have just been evaluated few days ago, so reevaluation on them is becoming unnecessary. Hence, without restrictions on the kinds of medications the author metioned, to reevaluate all medications will be useless and infeasible.

To sum up, I am not convinced that women should take KO whenever pain medication is required and men should take another pain medication instead. To strengthen this conclusion, the author have to assure me that the study was performed in a controlled environment where all other factors possibly affecting the result of the study remained constant. Furthermore, the author also need to reconsider his/her conclusion about whether women and men should be given KO and whether all medications should be reevaluated.

lty900301UID: 2715509

第一改——组长小C
错误 建议 提问 好词好句

The author of this argument claims that when pain medication is required, women should be given the kappa opioides while the men should have other kinds of pain medication(medications). To support his(this) conclusion, the author cites a research which involving 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted. However, I find the argument is flawed in several important respects.

To begin with, the sample of the research involved only 48 people, and then the author failed to give more information about the sample, so we can not believe(cannot believe感觉这里不太恰当, we are not informed that...或者你再想想换个更好的？) that they are picked randomly. So I have good reason to doubt if the sample is representative enough to reflect the general appearance（这个词你想表达那种对于药物的反应吧？appearance反在这不太理解你想表达什么意思） of those people as a whole. Perhaps, the women they choose all have(had) their wisdom teeth extracted before that（删掉） (这里应该有个表示因果的连接词，因此。。。)they have the experience(and skills) to deal with such pain. While the men they picked(前面那一句用的是一般现在时，这里也应该用一般现在时吧.) was the first time to have this surgery, so they may lack of the experience to handle the pain it caused. （这一点写的很详实，理解了你对我文章的建议，学习！！）Or perhaps, the women of this research were more tolerable to the pain than other people, and the men involved were less tolerable than average people. Therefore, the women felt less pain than the men. Since the arguer makes a claim about men and women in general, the sample for the research should be able to represent all.

Secondly, there could be many other factors which may(这里的may就可以不要了，前面有了一个could be已经表示出一种可能。在用一个可能，就会显得句子结构不太好了。) be the causes of the paining. It is possible that men are more sensitive to the pain than women do.（给我的感觉，这一段要攻击的另一个点，和上面那段划线句的攻击点是同一个攻击点，都是男性比起女性更容易感觉到pain..这里只是给我的感觉，我也不太确信是不是有重复，求真相啊） So even the men take the same dosage of the kappa opioids, they still felt painful cause they have much more nerve endings within their teeth. And there is another possibility that the women may eat something before or after the surgeon（前面一段提到的women 可能会有以前拔过牙的经历。这里描述的是有可能women 吃了一些其它可能帮助减少痛苦的东西。这两个问题都是应该归咎于作者没有列出其它可能性，所以我觉得，把上一段的内容放下来会好一些。） which can reduce the feeling of the pain, and the same, the men may eat something that would weaken the effort of the kappa opiodis. So the effort of the kappa opiodis can not be proved. Without ruling out those alternative explanations for the sample of the research, the author cannot defend the conclusion that based on the result of this research.

Finally, the suggestion that the men should take other kinds of pain medication is not fair. Since there was no evidence in the argument showed that the other kinds of the pain medication is more effective than kappa opioids do to the men. It is possible that even the kappa opiodis do weak effect on man than it do to women, it sill(still) the most effective pain medication to the men. Without further research to prove that kappa opiodis is less effective than other pain medication, the conclusion that men should be given other kinds of pain medication can not be made.
//这里的三个攻击点，没有了argument里最后一句话的攻击。虽然攻击的方面少了，但是攻击的更加详实了。学习到了！！

In conclusion, the author’s evidence lends little credible support to his conclusion. To persuade me that the kappa opioids is more effective to women than men, the author need to give more information of the men and women chosen for the research and to prove that they can represent a whole. And authors also have to control other alternative factors to the research to make sure the kappa opiodis is the only factors that affect the feeling of the pain. Finally, the author should have some more other researches for the effect of other pain medications to the men to prove that they are really more effective than the kappa opiodis.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
第二次——小凝

In this argument, the arguer advocates that doctors should take sex difference into account when prescribing pain medications.（第一句话就得开始学习！） In support of this, the arguer cites a research showing that when injected the same dosage of kappa opioids, the women feel less pain than men and the efficacy last for a longer time. What’s more, from the research, the arguer also draws two conclusions: (1) kappa opioids is better for women than men in pain medication and men should take other drugs; (2) the researchers should revaluate(reevaluate) the effects of all medications on men versus women. This argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

One major assumption in short of legitimacy is the statistic number. In the experiment, the researcher only collects 28 men and 20 women and tries to trace out the sex difference in pain medication. Choosing samples in the experiments plays a key role when we do research. Generally speaking, to make the result convincing, the sample size should keep rather the same in the compared experiments while the research fails to do so. Obviously, with different sample size, the absolute numbers received from the two experiments is not comparable. Furthermore, the sample size should be large enough to avoid small probability event. In fields, such as economic forecast which is the hot spot in our society, data mining in computer science, thousands of even ten thousands of samples are needed to build models, so that the result can be close to reality.（记得你以前用过这句话？太棒了，可以自己写出一句通用的模板，学习学习再学习！！） Thus, only 28 men and 20 women mentioned in the argument are far from enough. Moreover, the arguer fails to show us whether these people share the same or similar characters in other areas, such as ages, health conditions, genetic diseases, etc. Nothing more can we peek from the argument, while such information is likely to cause a bias in the result.  

Another point worth considering is the arguer’s hasty generalization. We are informed（我觉得前后两句可以连起来，这样generalization指的是什么也就更清楚了） that kappa opioids is good to women for pain treatment, but for men, it is another picture. However, there are no other compared experiments to show how kappa opioids gets ahead of other pain medications. What’s more, there is little evidence showing that kappa opioids did help in the treatment. We do not know whether there are other factors unique in women that will influence the result of the research, such as hormone, metabolic mechanism, etc. Besides, the fact that kappa opioids may be helpful in the wisdom-teeth-extraction treatment does not indicate the same promising curative effect in other pain treatment. Based on this slim information, we can never evaluate the overall performance of kappa opioids.

Last but not least, the arguer mentions that the effects of all medications on men and women should be revaluated due to the result of research. However, even though there exists some difference between men and women in the treatment with kappa opioids, it does not mean that the same goes for all medications(感觉这一段话似乎就这里提到了一下并不是所有的药物都跟KO一样。因此我觉得可以再稍微展开一下。。), let alone the doubt whether the experimental result is convincing.

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer should present more facts that kappa opioids is indeed the best choice for women in pain medication. To solidify the argument, the arguer should enlarge the sample size in the experiments and provide more research to prove the effectiveness of kappa opioids.

//这不就是传说中的范文么~~~

agnes2010UID: 2794922

This argument bears several obvious logical flaws. The arguer asserts that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required and the effects of all medication on men versus women are supposed to be revaluated. Yet, it can be apparently found that all these assertion are based on a vague report without convincing proof.

First of all, there is no reference value in the cited new report thus making the argument unconvincing. It is 28 men and 20 women who took part in a research which was aimed to discover the different effects of kappa opioids prescribed for those research samples. The sample numbers of the two groups (a group of females & another group of males) are different, making it difficult to determine the average influence on participants from both gender groups. If the total number of the male group is higher than that of the female group, it may be likely that the probability of men suffering from more pain will much higher. As a result, whether the two groups of participants is affected differently by kappa opioids or how the influence is so vaguely outlined that the statistics provided by this report are not reliable. What’s more, the cited report is a new one which still has to endure the test of time. Such a fresh report can not be the sole consideration when making a conclusion.

Secondly, besides the thoughtless choosing of sample numbers, the arguer fails to provide the background physical information of the participants which should also be a crucial factor influencing the easing of their pain. If the female participants were much healthier than the male ones on an average level, or if the major male participants had a predisposition to mouth diseases, those male participants would be more likely to suffer from pains for a longer time. In other words, a robust constitution or a weak one will lead to extremely different results of the research. Without mentioning any background information, the arguer can not come to his assertion.

Thirdly, just giving evidence from one report, the arguer makes a hasty conclusion that the kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. A research on people who were having their wisdom teeth extracted alone may have some reference value on mouth diseases. However, it can not represent other situation such as fracture or other kinds of neuralgia. Moreover, what men will act upon other pain suffering may also be different. Not beneficial for the easing of tooth problems, kappa opioids may be good at relieving the pain of men in other situation. Therefore, it is ex parte to conclude men should be given other kinds of pain medication.

In sum, lacking a comprehensive view of the general situation, the arguer fails to provide convincible evidence and illustration to support his assertion. To attest his assertion, it is advisable for him/her to give more professional researches and analyze the research results more comprehensively.

自改一
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This argument bears several obvious logical flaws. The arguer asserts that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required and the effects of all medication on men versus women are supposed to be revaluated. Yet, it can be apparently found that all these assertions are based on a vague report without convincing proof.

First of all, there is no reference value in the cited new report thus making the argument unconvincing. It is just 28 men and 20 women who took part in a research which was aimed to discover the different effects of kappa opioids prescribed for those research samples. The sample numbers of the two groups (a group of females & another group of males) are too small to make the results convincing and representitive in general. Only when the sample sizes of both groups are large enough can the results persuasively outline the different influence lying in both gender.What’s more, the cited report is a new one which still has to endure the test of time. Such a fresh report can not be the sole consideration when making a conclusion.

Secondly, besides the thoughtless choosing of sample numbers, the arguer fails to provide the background physical information of the participants which should also be a crucial factor influencing the easing of their pain. If the female participants were much healthier than the male ones on an average level, or if the major male participants had a predisposition to mouth diseases, those male participants would be more likely to suffer from pains for a longer time. In other words, a robust constitution or a weak one will lead to extremely different results of the research. Without mentioning any background information, the arguer can not come to his assertion.

Thirdly, just giving evidence from one report, the arguer makes a hasty conclusion that the kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. A research on people who were having their wisdom teeth extracted alone may have some reference value on mouth diseases. However, it can not represent other situation such as fracture or other kinds of neuralgia. Moreover, what men will act upon other pain suffering may also be different. Not beneficial for the easing of tooth problems, kappa opioids may be good at relieving the pain of men in other situation. Therefore, it is ex parte to conclude men should be given other kinds of pain medication.

In sum, lacking a comprehensive view of the general situation, the arguer fails to provide convincing evidence and illustration to support his assertion. To attest his assertion, it is advisable for him/her to give more professional researches and analyze the research results more comprehensively.

谢谢小谦啦~你的建议很受用！



=========================

还没有人帮我改....暂时不能发自改二了

agnes2010UID: 2794922

一改小谦-------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this argument, based on an unwarranted report, the arguer【这两句句子的主谓不一致~】concludes a result that kappa opioinds(I use KOs instead) better to be prescribed for women than men. Since the report showed a different affect【affect是动词哦~这里要用effect】 of KOs on men versus women, the arguer advices to evaluate the effects on male and female. Although in the first glance this argument seems to be reasonable, a scrutiny examination【学习了！】 reveals how groundless this argument is.

Firstly, the cited report conducted experiment on a very small amount of samples, which is meaningless. The differences of 28 men and 20 women certainly could arise solely from random fluctuations.【这是什么意思啊？是专门的说法吗？】 The larger of the size of the sample, the less likely the differences arise solely from random fluctuations. The study group should conduct the research of much more samples to make the result more persuasive.
【研究中的样本量太少】在说明原因的时候最好能在具体详细一些，可能是理解力不强，我乍一看没有特别看懂~呵呵

Secondly, the author failed to rule out some other factors contributing to the different effect when the KOs was used in women and men. On one hand, the author states that same dosage of KOs was administered to men and women, which could be one contributing factor. As we all know, some drugs such as the anaesthetic carry out their effect by the ratio of dosage to weight of patient. Commonly, men are heavier than women. In that case, it is logical that men's reaction to KOs is lighter than women. On the other hand, how much do patients hurt contribute to the effect of the pain killer, too. If most of the women do not hurt that much compared to men, the result of the drug is explainable. Therefore, unless the author had proved that the only difference between male patients and female patients is their sex, the conclusion is scientific.
【可能还有其他原因会造成影响的不同】

Last but not the least; the author omits the side effect of KOs, when she/he gave the advice to women regardless【regardless好像一般都与of连用吧，而且regardless是副词】 the pain medication is required. As we all know, many drugs have side effect that doctors avoid to use them. KOs could be one drug that impairs other function of human body. In this case, doctors should use the drug unless it is non-substitutable【不可替代的 学习~】. The author is too hesitate to conclude that KOs should be prescribed to women on no condition.【这句的表述有问题，什么叫作者太犹豫不决而不能总结……，我觉得这里应该用草率之类的词代替】 What' more, one drug might be effective on one kind of pain, if KOs could not ease the pain causing by other disease, the author's advise is meaningless.
【忽略了kos的副作用】

All in all, to substantiate this argument, the author need provide a scientific report with larger sample sizes. The other factors except sex differences contributing to differences need to be rule【ruled】 out. To illustrate the author’s suggestions base【based】 on the report, more considerations about the side effect of KOs are required to be considered for a convincing argument.

总结：
小谦的文章整体思路不错~如果个别论证能再具体些就更好啦~
个别语法错误什么的赶快改正吧~~但还是有许多好词好句值得学习~
加油！


===================================================================

一改polo-----

Giving some facts and analysis, the arguer makes a recommendation that men should be given other kinds of pain medication instead of kappa opioids, which should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required. The argument seems to be logical on the surface, while the recommendation is flawed in some critical aspects.

To begin with, the cited research cannot be representative for the general population due to the excessively limited quantity of the samples【这个表达好~我怎么没有想到呢~】 in the research, which just involves 48 patients. Moreover, the arguer does not give some relative details of the samples, such as the ages, the other medications they take and so forth, which can also have effects on the sensitivity to pain and make a difference on the final conclusion. Assuming that all the males are children while females are adults in the research, the children must be more sensitive to pain and have less forbearance than adults, which will enable the the children reported feeling much more pain than the women. Or perhaps the women may take other kinds of pain medication, which can release their pain, while the men may eat some irritative food or other kind of things, which may enhance sense of pain. In that case, the conclusion will suspected【做形容词吗？缺少谓语哦~】. In short, it is impossible to make any cogent conclusion【学习！】 unless the research is conducted in a controlled environment in which all factors were the same for women as for men.
【调查数据不具代表性，相关因素未考虑齐全~】polo对可能性的论证很丰富~不过好像和下面的比例有些失调~要不丰富一下下面的论证 或者把这一段的例子的叙述再精简些吧~个人建议哦~

Another problem with the argument is that the arguer thoughtlessly asserts that men should men should be given other kinds of pain medication without providing the comparison of curative effects【疗效】 between the kappa opioids and other pain medications. Perhaps kappa opioids is the most effective medicine for men up to now than any other pain medications. In addition, the arguer wrongly equals the pain caused by the extraction of wisdom teeth to the general pain. There could be some difference between them; therefore, the curative effects of the kappa opioids to the former pain cannot indicate the same effects to the general pain and it could even make the pain more serious.
【没有给出kappa opioids与其他止痛药疗效的对比】这个论点好独特啊~感觉很少有人会想到~赞一个

Last but not least, the arguer incorrectly generalizes the specific one situation to the general ones that the effects of all medications on men versus women should be reevaluated. Even the effects of kappa opioids on men and women are different, there is no reason for us to declare that the differences exist in all other medications.
【片面地得出了结论】这段好简短啊 感觉头重脚轻了呢~

To sum【没看到这种用法呢~是to sum up吧~】, with a flawed research and unreasonable analysis, the arguer makes a fallacious recommendation. To make it more convictive, the argue【arguer】 should conduct the research in a controlled environment in which all the other factors that could influence the final result are the same and constant, and provide the comparison with other medications.

总结：
polo的这篇文章很棒哦~尤其是第二部分的观点让人眼前一亮~
另外还有很多好词~值得学习！
比例的问题可能不同的人有不同的想法吧~总之这篇文章我觉得很不错~


========================================================

一改小V：

In the argument, the arguer concludes that women should be given Kappa opioids(K) while men should be given other kinds of pain medication when prescribing pain medications. To suggest this conclusion【suggest？是support吧~】, the arguer cites a research of 28men and 20women who were suffering their wisdom teeth extracted. A close scrutiny of this argument, however, it reveals several flaws.【学习~】

First, the mere fact that the women reported feeling much less pain and the easing of pain lasted longer than the men does not necessarily indicate that the differences in feeling pain between the women and the men are the function of using K-a painkiller. A number of other factors must be taken into consideration, such as the differences in physical, psychological conditions. It is quite possible that those women are almost healthy and strong youngsters, whereas those men are all elders with poor physics【这里是说体质吗？建议用constitution~】, which lead to women are more able to cover the pain. Or possibly there are a group of female athletes-having more experiences about pain-and male students, obviously, the former more easily【有点中式英语的味道~建议使用be more likely的结构】 feel less pain.
【调查本身不具代表性，没有考虑到其他的因素】感觉首句过于冗长，而结尾没有总结性的句子~个人读上去有些吃力~

Next, granted that men and women do experience pain very differently when taking K, the arguer unfairly assumes that K should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication given for men. However there is no guaranteed that it is the case, since the research does not provide comparisons between K and other painkillers. Perhaps there are many other painkillers having better effect both on women and men. Or perhaps the K is the best kind of pain medication for men.
【没有给出药物之间的对比，仅提供了k的疗效】观点很新颖~是我没有想到的~

Finally, even if doctors should consider these differences when prescribing painkillers, the arguer’s assertion that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is still unwarranted. Common sense informs us that there are immense differences in various medications. The painkillers cannot represent all medications. It is very likely that lots of medications totally have same effects of treatment on women and men besides K.
【结论过于绝对】

To sum up, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strength【strengthen】 the conclusion, the arguer should provide more relative researches in differences in overall respects of samples and more scientific evidence about the detailed function of K and other painkillers. To better assess the statement, I want to study more researches about the effects of other medicines on men versus women.

总结：
小V的文章一向思路很清晰啊~个人觉得挺不错~不过有些论述感觉不是很充分，建议再丰富一下~

===========================================
===========================================
===========================================

二改小C~
小C的一改还没有出~暂时不能改~

polosongruiUID: 2595436

占1

Giving some facts and analysis, the arguer makes a recommendation that men should be given other kinds of pain medication instead of kappa opioids, which should be prescribed for women
whenever pain medication is required. The argument seems to be logical on the surface, while the recommendation is flawed in some critical aspects.

To begin with, the cited research cannot be representative for the general population due to the excessively limited quantity of the samples in the research, which just involves 48 patients. Moreover, the arguer does not give some relative details of the samples, such as the ages, the other medications they take and so forth, which can also have effects on the sensitivity to pain and make a difference on the final conclusion. Assuming that all the males are children while females are adults in the research, the children must be more sensitive to pain and have less forbearance than adults, which will enable the the children reported feeling much more pain than the women. Or perhaps the women may take other kinds of pain medication, which can release their pain, while the men may eat some irritative food or other kind of things, which may enhance sense of pain. In that case, the conclusion will suspected. In short, it is impossible to make any cogent conclusion unless the research is conducted in a controlled environment in which all factors were the same for women as for men.

Another problem with the argument is that the arguer thoughtlessly asserts that men should men should be given other kinds of pain medication without providing the comparison of curative effects between the kappa opioids and other pain medications. Perhaps kappa opioids is the most effective medicine for men up to now than any other pain medications. In addition, the arguer wrongly equals the pain caused by the extraction of wisdom teeth to the general pain. There could be some difference between them; therefore, the curative effects of the kappa opioids to the former pain cannot indicate the same effects to the general pain and it could even make the pain more serious.

Last but not least, the arguer incorrectly generalizes the specific one situation to the general ones that the effects of all medications on men versus women should be reevaluated. Even the effects of kappa opioids on men and women are different, there is no reason for us to declare that the differences exist in all other medications.

To sum, with a flawed research and unreasonable analysis, the arguer makes a fallacious recommendation. To make it more convictive, the argue should conduct the research in a controlled environment in which all the other factors that could influence the final result are the same and constant, and provide the comparison with other medications.

------------------自改1 无比感谢agnes2010 （在互改的分组里没有安排你帮我改，无比感谢啊）------

Giving some facts and analysis, the arguer makes a recommendation that men should be given other kinds of pain medication instead of kappa opioids, which should be prescribed for women
whenever pain medication is required. The argument seems to be logical on the surface, while the recommendation is flawed in some critical aspects.

To begin with, the cited research cannot be representative for the general population due to the excessively limited quantity of the samples in the research, which just involves 48 patients. Moreover, the arguer does not give some relative details of the samples, such as the ages, the other medications they take and so forth, which can also have effects on the sensitivity to pain and make a difference on the final conclusion. Assuming that all the males are children while females are adults in the research, the children must be more sensitive to pain and have less forbearance than adults, which will enable the the children reported feeling much more pain than the women. Or perhaps the women may take other kinds of pain medication, which can release their pain, while the men may eat some irritative food or other kind of things, which may enhance sense of pain. If it were that case, the conclusion would be suspicious. In short, it is impossible to make any cogent conclusion unless the research is conducted in a controlled environment in which all factors were the same for women as for men.

Another problem with the argument is that the arguer thoughtlessly asserts that men should be given other kinds of pain medication without providing the comparison of curative effects between the kappa opioids and other pain medications. Perhaps kappa opioids is the most effective medicine for men up to now than any other pain medications. In addition, the arguer wrongly equals the pain caused by the extraction of wisdom teeth to the general pain. There could be some difference between them; therefore, the curative effects of the kappa opioids to the former pain cannot indicate the same effects on the general pain and it could even make the pain more serious.

Last but not least, the arguer incorrectly generalizes the specific one situation to the general ones that the effects of all medications on men versus women should be reevaluated. Even the effects of kappa opioids on men and women are different, there is no reason for us to declare that the differences exist in all other medications. Furthermore, there are millions of kinds of medicine in the current medical filed; hence, it would be an endless task to reevaluate all medications, which demands tremendous human and other resources. Based on the above analysis, to accomplish such a vast task will be meaningless and infeasible.

To sum up, with a flawed research and unreasonable analysis, the arguer makes a fallacious recommendation. To make it more convictive, the arguer should conduct the research in a controlled environment in which all the other factors that could influence the final result are the same and constant, and provide the comparison with other medications.

-----------------二改 无比感谢小凝 帮我发现的一个重大问题-----------------------

Giving some facts and analysis, the arguer makes a recommendation that men should be given other kinds of pain medication instead of kappa opioids, which should be prescribed for women
whenever pain medication is required. The argument seems to be logical on the surface, while the recommendation is flawed in some critical aspects.

To begin with, the cited research cannot be representative for the general population due to the excessively limited quantity of the samples in the research, which just involves 48 patients. Moreover, the arguer does not give some relative details of the samples, such as the ages,the body constitution, the other medications they take and so forth, which can also have effects on the sensitivity to pain and make a difference on the final conclusion. Assuming that all the males are in bad body constitution while females are in good fig in the research, the males can be more sensitive to pain and have less forbearance than females, which will enable the men reported feeling much more pain than the women. Or perhaps the women may take other kinds of pain medication, which can release their pain, while the men may eat some irritative food or other kind of things, which may enhance sense of pain. If it were that case, the conclusion would be suspicious. In short, it is impossible to make any cogent conclusion unless the research is conducted in a controlled environment in which all factors were the same for women as for men.

Another problem with the argument is that the arguer thoughtlessly asserts that men should be given other kinds of pain medication without providing the comparison of curative effects between the kappa opioids and other pain medications. Perhaps kappa opioids is the most effective medicine for men up to now than any other pain medications. In addition, the arguer wrongly equals the pain caused by the extraction of wisdom teeth to the general pain. There could be some difference between them; therefore, the curative effects of the kappa opioids to the former pain cannot indicate the same effects on the general pain and it could even make the pain more serious.

Last but not least, the arguer incorrectly generalizes the specific one situation to the general ones that the effects of all medications on men versus women should be reevaluated. Even the effects of kappa opioids on men and women are different, there is no reason for us to declare that the differences exist in all other medications. Furthermore, there are millions of kinds of medicine in the current medical field; hence, it would be an endless task to reevaluate all medications, which demands tremendous human and other resources. Based on the above analysis, to accomplish such a vast task will be meaningless and infeasible.

To sum up, with a flawed research and unreasonable analysis, the arguer makes a fallacious recommendation. To make it more convictive, the arguer should conduct the research in a controlled environment in which all the other factors that could influence the final result are the same and constant, and provide the comparison with other medications.

polosongruiUID: 2595436

zhan 2

----------------一改 小凝  乌啦啦----------------------------

In this argument, the arguer advocates that doctors should take sex difference into account when prescribing pain medications. In support of this, the arguer cites a research showing that when injected the same dosage of kappa opioids, the women feel less pain than men but suffered for a longer time（原文中the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women应该指的是止痛时间更长，效果更持久吧）. What’s more, from the research, the arguer also draws two conclusions: (1) kappa opioids is better for women than men in pain medication（应该还有建议men应该用其他的药）; (2) the researchers should revaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women. This argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

One major assumption in short of legitimacy is the statistic number. In the experiment, the researcher only collects 28 men and 20 women and tries to trace out the sex difference in pain medication. Choosing samples in the experiments plays a key role when we do research. Generally speaking, to make the result convincing, the sample size should keep rather the same in the compared experiments while the research fails to do so. Obviously, with different sample size, the absolute numbers received from the two experiments is not comparable. Furthermore, the sample size should be large enough to avoid small probability event. In fields, such as economic forecast which is the hot spot in our society, data mining in computer science, thousands of even ten thousands of samples are needed to build models, so that the result can be close to reality.（这个例子很棒，学习啦） Thus, only 28 men and 20 women mentioned in the argument are far from enough. Moreover, the arguer fails to show us whether these people share the same or similar characters in other areas, such as ages, health conditions, genetic diseases, etc. Nothing more can we peek from the argument, while such information is likely to cause a bias in the result.  

Another point worth considering is the arguer’s hasty generalization. We are informed that kappa opioids is good to women for pain treatment, but for men, it is another picture. However, there are no other compared experiments to show how kappa opioids gets ahead of other pain medications. What’s more, there is little evidence showing that kappa opioids did help in the treatment. We do not know whether there are other factors unique in women that will influence the result of the research, such as hormone, metabolic mechanism, etc. Besides, the fact that kappa opioids may be helpful in the wisdom-teeth-extraction treatment does not indicate the same promising curative effect in other pain treatment. Based on this slim information, we can never evaluate the overall performance of Discount(我水平太菜了，这句话是什么意思啊).

//好像少了一段，就是你前面列出的作者的第二个结论revaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women，这个结论也有问题啊，再提及一下吧！

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer should present more facts that kappa opioids is indeed the best choice for women in pain medication. To solidify the argument, the arguer should enlarge the sample size in the experiments and provide more research to prove the effectiveness of kappa opioids.

//再一次领略了小凝超级强的语言功底和表达能力！学习学习再学习！！！！！建议大家都来学习一下

---------二改 小谦 对不起 改晚了 原谅------------
In this argument, based on an unwarranted report, the arguer concludes a result that kappa opioinds(I use KOs instead) better to be prescribed for women than men. Since the report demonstrated a different effect of KOs on men versus women, the arguer advices to evaluate(advises reevaluating) the effects （of all medications） on male and female. Although in the first glance this argument seems to be reasonable, a scrutiny examination reveals how groundless this argument is.

Firstly, the cited report conducted an experiment on a very small amount of samples, which is meaningless. The differences between 28 men and 20 women certainly can not(不分开的 cannot) represent the general situation because there is large chance that the differences arise solely from random fluctuations. The larger of the size of the sample(改为the size of the samples is), the less likely the differences arise solely from random fluctuations（觉得没必要再重复）. The study group should conduct the research of（换成involving吧） much more samples to make the result more persuasive.

Secondly, the author failed to rule out some other factors contributing to the different effect when the KOs was used in（to吧） women and men. On one hand, the author states that same dosage of KOs was administered to men and women, which could be one contributing factor. As we all know, some drugs such as the anaesthetic carrys out their effect by the ratio of dosage to weight of the patient. Commonly, men are heavier than women. In that case, it is logical that men's reaction to KOs is lighter than women. On the other hand, how much patients hurt（换成order of severity of patients's hurt试试） contribute to the effect of the pain killer, too. If most of the women do not hurt that much compared to men, the result of the drug is explainable. Therefore, unless the author had proved that the only difference between male patients and female patients is their sex, the conclusion is scientific.//这段不错！赞一个！

Last but not the least; the author omits the side effect of KOs, when she/he gave the advice to women. As we all know, many drugs have side effect that doctors avoid to use them. KOs could be one drug that impairs other function of human body. In this case, doctors should use the drug unless it is non-substitutable. The author is too haste（hasty） to conclude that KOs should be prescribed to women on no condition(这个可是“在任何条件下都不”啊，应该想说的是on any conditions). What' more, one drug might be effective on one kind of pain, if KOs could not ease the pain causing by other disease, the author's advise is meaningless.

All in all, to substantiate this argument, the author need provide a scientific report with larger sample sizes. The other factors except sex differences contributing to differences need to be ruled out. To illustrate the author’s suggestions based on the report, more considerations about the side effect of KOs are required to be considered for a convincing argument.
//文章整体感觉不错，结构清晰，内容充实，第二段很赞！就是觉得把题目中最后那个错误的推广给遗漏，我觉得有必要提及一下！

franceneUID: 2818958

According to the statement above, the author makes an assertion that all pain medications towards woman should prescribe kappa opioids, whereas those happened in man should give another painkiller instead. What is more, all medications, not only pain medication, should be reconsidered for the discrepancy of healing effect between men and women. Even I am not a professional doctor I still cannot agree these extreme viewpoints.


As we all know, prescribed drugs are strictly regulated by the doctor in medical circle. The reason for this constrain is that many prescribed drugs is still need a further clinical observation to testify its safety. The intake of prescribed drugs should carefully follow the doctor’s advices. But the argument above make a too imprudent conclusion which should make a cautious consideration about the prescribed drug.



To begin with, the better healing effect of kappa on women’s pain healing from extracted teeth cannot reason by analogy that it is entirely efficient to all of pain healing for women. Teeth extracted is a surgery rather physical while in other diseases caused pains may involve chemotherapies. Kappa’s side-effects with other chemical medicine is not shown in the statement. Thus the analogy that kappa is totally suitable for all the treatment for woman’s pain healing is unwarranted. And vice versa, with the same reasoning, it cannot be easily draw an conclusion that all man’s pan healing should not take Kappa as painkiller medical.

Secondly, the conclusion that all the pain medical healing therapy which need a painkiller or not should taka Kappa as their treatment medical is an extremely false notion. For one thing, every drug heals the illness at the same time owns its toxicity. To take drug as a placebo which is not necessary to the therapy will be no good for the patients. For another,prescribed drug is strictly restrained for the reason that excessive intake will make a drug abuse which will not only to heal the original illness but to cause more serious and harmful addictions. Long-time taking of unnecessary medicine will make a chronical drug-dependent symptom which cannot easily be healed in a short time. Consequencely, to take kappa to ease all the painful symptoms may be more hazardous to the case that the pain medication is not required.

Lastly, the suggestion that to evaluate all the effect of all medication on man and woman is unfeasible. Evaluation of all medication will cause great workload that is not worthy comparing to its reason unapparent difference of men and women. Why can’t we take this time to do more significant research on those more urgent serious diseases? On the other hand, by the proof above, it’s meaningless to do a research on a subject which covers all fields of medications. Medical research always appears by the form of case study.

To sum up, The author committed a false that make a hasty conclusion. To get a more convincing analysis , he/she still need more powerful proofs.


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

Thx for 小V!

Self-revised 1st Edition


According to the statement above, the author makes an assertion that all pain medications towards woman should prescribe kappa opioids, whereas those happened in man should give another painkiller instead. What is more, all medications, not only pain medication, should be reconsidered for the discrepancy of healing effect between men and women. Even I am not a professional doctor I still cannot agree these extreme viewpoints.


As we all know, prescribed drugs are strictly regulated by the doctor in medical circle. The reason for this constrain is that many prescribed drugs is still need a further clinical observation to testify its safety. The intake of prescribed drugs should carefully follow the doctor’s advices. But the argument above makes
too imprudent conclusions that the author took for granted that from one medicine research on a certain respect ,it can easily deduce the feasibility on many others conditions. No doubts that the conclusions have some fatal faults.


To begin with, the better healing effect of kappa on women’s pain healing from extracted teeth cannot reason by analogy that it is entirely efficient to all of pain healing for women. Teeth extracted is a surgery rather physical while in other diseases caused pains may involve chemotherapies. Kappa’s possible harmful effects with other chemical medicine are not shown in the statement. Thus the analogy that kappa is totally suitable for all the treatment for woman’s pain healing is unwarranted. And vice versa, with the same reasoning, it cannot be easily draw a conclusion that all man’s pan healing should not take Kappa as painkiller medical.

Secondly, the conclusion that all the pain medical healing therapy which need a painkiller or not should taka Kappa as their treatment medical is an extremely false notion. For one thing, every drug heals the illness at the same time owns its toxicity. To take drug as a placebo which is not necessary to the therapy will be no good for the patients. For another, prescribed drug is strictly restrained for the reason that impertinent intake will make a drug abuse which will not only to heal the original illness but to cause more serious and harmful addictions. For some methods to heal pain hurts involve long term takes of painkiller under most circumstances, yet long-time Taking of an unnecessary medicine will make a chronical drug-dependent symptom which cannot easily be healed in a short time. Consequencely, to take kappa to ease all the painful symptoms may be more hazardous to the case that the pain medication is not required.

Lastly, the suggestion that to evaluate all the effect of all medications on men and women is unnecessary.On one hand, evaluation of all medication will cause great workload that is not worthy comparing to its reason unapparent difference between men and women. Why can’t we take the time to do more significant research on those more urgent serious diseases? On the other hand, by the proof above, it’s meaningless to do a research on a subject to covers all fields of medications. Medical research always appears by the form of case study.Medical study is feasible only under a certain circumstance but never universal to the whole range.

To sum up, The author committed a false that make a hasty conclusion. To get a more convincing analysis , he/she still need more powerful proofs.

franceneUID: 2818958

Revision of 小V


Revision of mistakes
Good expression to learn
Comments from the reviewer

In the argument, the arguer concludes that women should be given Kappa opioids(K) while men should be given other kinds of pain medication(s) when prescribing pain medications. To suggest this conclusion, the arguer cites a research of 28men and 20women who were suffering their wisdom teeth extracted. A close scrutiny of this argument, however, it reveals several flaws.
First, the mere fact that the women reported feeling much less pain and the easing of pain lasted longer than the men does not
necessarily indicate that the differences in feeling pain between the women and the men are the function of using K-a painkiller. A number of other factors must be taken into consideration, such as the differences in physical, psychological conditions. It is quite possible that those women are almost healthy and strong youngsters, whereas those men are all elders with poor physics, which lead to women are more able to cover the pain. <the reviewer thinks this is a very extreme case, the word “all” is too absolute that indicate the situation normally rarely happen. The author can change to other more persuasive ways to express it > Or possibly there are a group of female athletes-having more experiences about pain-and male students, obviously, the former more easily feel less pain.

Next, granted that men and women do experience pain very differently when taking K, the arguer unfairly assumes that K should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication given for men. However there is no guaranteed that it is the case, since the research does not provide comparisons between K and other painkillers. Perhaps there are many other painkillers having better effect both on women and men.
Or perhaps the K is the best kind of pain medication for men.
Finally, even if doctors should consider these differences when prescribing painkillers, the arguer’s assertion that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is still unwarranted. Common sense informs us that there are immense differences in various medications. The painkillers cannot represent all medications. It is very likely that lots of medications totally have same effects of treatment on women and men besides K.

<The reviewer suggests that the author can make more concrete examples to make further explanations instead of just describing a conclusion again and again>


To sum up, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strength the conclusion, the arguer should provide more relative researches in differences in overall respects of samples and more scientific evidence about the detailed function of K and other painkillers. To better assess the statement, I want to study more researches about the effects of other medicines on men versus women.

梦想在路上UID: 2812986

In the argument, the arguer concludes that women should be given Kappa opioids(K) while men should be given other kinds of pain medication when prescribing pain medications. To suggest this conclusion, the arguer cites a research of 28men and 20women who were suffering their wisdom teeth extracted. A close scrutiny of this argument, however, it reveals several flaws.

First, the mere fact that the women reported feeling much less pain and the easing of pain lasted longer than the men does not necessarily indicate that the differences in feeling pain between the women and the men are the function of using K-a painkiller. A number of other factors must be taken into consideration, such as the differences in physical, psychological conditions. It is quite possible that those women are almost healthy and strong youngsters, whereas those men are all elders with poor physics, which lead to women are more able to cover the pain. Or possibly there are a group of female athletes-having more experiences about pain-and male students, obviously, the former more easily feel less pain.

Next, granted that men and women do experience pain very differently when taking K, the arguer unfairly assumes that K should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication given for men. However there is no guaranteed that it is the case, since the research does not provide comparisons between K and other painkillers. Perhaps there are many other painkillers having better effect both on women and men.
Or perhaps the K is the best kind of pain medication for men.

Finally, even if doctors should consider these differences when prescribing painkillers, the arguer’s assertion that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is still unwarranted. Common sense informs us that there are immense differences in various medications. The painkillers cannot represent all medications. It is very likely that lots of medications totally have same effects of treatment on women and men besides K.

To sum up, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strength the conclusion, the arguer should provide more relative researches in differences in overall respects of samples and more scientific evidence about the detailed function of K and other painkillers. To better assess the statement, I want to study more researches about the effects of other medicines on men versus women.

---------------------辛苦的分割线----------------------------------------------------------------
自改一
In the argument, the arguer concludes that women should be given Kappa opioids(K) while men should be given other kinds of pain medication when prescribing pain medications. To suggest this conclusion, the arguer cites a research of 28men and 20women who were suffering their wisdom teeth extracted. A close scrutiny of this argument, however, it reveals several flaws.

First, the mere fact that the women reported feeling much less pain and the easing of pain lasted longer than the men does not necessarily indicate that the differences in feeling pain between the women and the men are the function of using K-a painkiller. A number of other factors must be taken into consideration, such as the differences in physical, psychological conditions. It is quite possible that those women are almost healthy and strong youngsters, whereas those men are all elders with poor physics, which lead to women are more able to cover the pain. Or possibly there are a group of female athletes-having more experiences about pain-and male students, obviously, the former more easily feel less pain.

Next, granted that men and women do experience pain very differently when taking K, the arguer unfairly assumes that K should be prescribed for women and other kinds of pain medication given for men. However there is no guaranteed that it is the case, since the research does not provide comparisons between K and other painkillers. Perhaps there are many other painkillers having better effect both on women and men. Or perhaps the K is the best kind of pain medication for men.

Finally, even if doctors should consider these differences when prescribing painkillers, the arguer’s assertion that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is still unwarranted. Common sense informs us that there are immense differences in various medications. The painkillers cannot represent all medications. It is very likely that lots of medications totally have same effects of treatment on women and men besides K.

To sum up, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strength the conclusion, the arguer should provide more relative researches in differences in overall respects of samples and more scientific evidence about the detailed function of K and other painkillers. To better assess the statement, I want to study more researches about the effects of other medicines on men versus women.

梦想在路上UID: 2812986

怎么看两次互改是一样的呀？
同一次里两两互改
是不是弄错了

-----------------为了分割的分割线-----------------------------------------------------------------------
改 03Francene
修改建议 总结评论 好词好句
According to the statement above, the author makes an assertion that all pain medications towards woman should prescribe kappa opioids, whereas those happened in man should give another painkiller instead. What is more, all medications, not only pain medication, should be reconsidered for the discrepancy of healing effect between men and women. Even I am not a professional doctor I still cannot agree these extreme viewpoints.

As we all know, prescribed drugs are strictly regulated by the doctor in medical circle. The reason for this constrain is that many prescribed drugs is still need a further clinical observation to testify its safety. The intake of prescribed drugs should carefully follow the doctor’s advices. But the argument above makes a too imprudent conclusion which should make a cautious consideration about the prescribed drug.
//处方药使用需谨慎。【感觉这一段驳斥的点和作者的结论没有关系，你是想说不能随便就下结论给女的吃K给男的吃别的而应该临床试验，是吗？很牵强，作者没说给男的吃的其他药没有经过临床实验呀。】

To begin with【建议放上一段，感觉有点怪】, the better healing effect of kappa on women’s pain healing from extracted teeth cannot reason by analogy that it is entirely efficient to all of pain healing for women. Teeth extracted is a surgery rather physical while in other diseases caused pains may involve chemotherapies. Kappa’s side-effects with other chemical medicine is【are】 not shown in the statement【这个解释不太能说明你这段的观点，副作用对牙痛和其他痛一样都不好呀。】. Thus the analogy that kappa is totally suitable for all the treatment for woman’s pain healing is unwarranted. And vice versa, with the same reasoning, it cannot be easily draw an【a】 conclusion that all man’s pan healing should not take Kappa as painkiller medical.
//对拔牙止痛效果好不说明对所有止痛效果好。
Secondly, the conclusion that all the pain medical healing therapy which need a painkiller or not should taka Kappa as their treatment medical is an extremely false notion. For one thing, every drug heals the illness at the same time owns its toxicity. To take drug as a placebo【好专业的词！】
which is not necessary to the therapy will be no good for the patients. For another, prescribed drug is strictly restrained for the reason that excessive intake【作者没说要多吃，不要自己加】
will make a drug abuse which will not only to heal the original illness but to cause more serious and harmful addictions. Long-time taking【同样，作者没说要长期吃】 of unnecessary medicine will make a chronical drug-dependent symptom which cannot easily be healed in a short time. Consequencely, to take kappa to ease all the painful symptoms may be more hazardous to the case that the pain medication is not required.
//甭管虾米痛都要用K作为止痛片是错的。一是药三分毒，二过量服用有害。【这段的解释没能很好的支持你的观点】
Lastly, the suggestion that to evaluate all the effect of all medication on man and woman is unfeasible. Evaluation of all medication will cause great workload that is not worthy comparing to its reason unapparent difference of men and women. Why can’t we take this time to do more significant research on those more urgent serious diseases? On the other hand, by the proof above, it’s meaningless to do a research on a subject which covers all fields of medications. Medical research always appears by the form of case study.
//评估所有药是不可行的。【建议改成，评估所有药是没必要的，更有说服力】
To sum up, The author committed a false that make a hasty conclusion. To get a more convincing analysis , he/she still needs more powerful proofs.

本着互相学习的前提，拍的有点直白，希望别介意，本人意见仅供参考啦~~~~