1010G【fish】agument188

凝羽欲翔UID: 2733350

Sorry~I'm late~

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. What’s more, from the research, the arguer also draws two conclusions: (1) kappa opioids is better for women than men in pain medication; (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 model, so that the result can be close to reality. 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 s 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 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.

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.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
一改 thx polo~发现自己忘前忘后的

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 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 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. 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 kappa opioids[敲错了~~].

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, 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.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
二改 thx Ity~

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 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 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. 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 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 reevaluated 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, let alone the doubt whether the experimental result is convincing. No one has ever found two blades of ribbon grass alike, nor can ever two medications share similar efficacy. It's a common sense that every pill has its unique characters, so it is unwarranted to generalize the mere fact of kappa opioids to all medications.

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.

凝羽欲翔UID: 2733350

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 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（我觉得这个论点放在这一段前面，相比起接下来的论点（比较长），位置上有点不恰当，因为一般比较重要的观点会放在前面，也写得比较长，不太重要的观点放在后面，写得比较短，个人意见呵呵~）. Assuming that all the males are children （感觉这里不应该涉及到children的问题吧？因为argu里提到的是women跟men，没一定年龄都不能说women跟men的，应该跟children没关）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（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. polo的逻辑挺不错哦，最喜欢看的就是一些上下承接的形容词，像thoughlessly，suspicious啊==的，好好学啊学~ 另外，polo，我想提个小小建议哦~有些论点，像第二段的“children are more sensitive than adults==> feeling more pain than adults”，我觉得这个作为论点可以，但是如果能引用一些research来说明这个问题就比较好了，如果不能，这样的论点还是少写为好，因为容易让别人觉得不太稳靠~个人意见~哈哈~ ---------------------------------------------------------- Revision of Frances 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（矛盾） of healing effect between men and women. Even I am not a professional doctor I still cannot agree these extreme viewpoints.（这种写法不错哦） 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（化学疗法）. 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（healing？） the illness at the same time owns its toxicity. To take drug as a placebo（安慰剂） 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（粗鲁的） 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Second Revision for 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, the arguer cites a research of 28men and 20women who were suffering from their wisdom teeth extracted. A close scrutiny of this argument, however, it reveals several flaws(前面的A close。。跟这里的it reveals。。是怎么联系的？不是很懂呢~前面是名词，后面是一个句子？？). 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, （感觉如果就是两个例子的话，将逗号改为and比较好呢）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（挺好的呢）. 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，（一般用however都会在后面加上“，”） there is no guaranteed（guarantee） 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（为什么前面说different medications have immense differences, 但是后面说totally have same effects 呢？不是很懂呢~）. 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.