- 最后登录
- 2020-8-11
- 在线时间
- 1013 小时
- 寄托币
- 4290
- 声望
- 30
- 注册时间
- 2007-7-15
- 阅读权限
- 40
- 帖子
- 214
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 3654
- UID
- 2363559
  
- 声望
- 30
- 寄托币
- 4290
- 注册时间
- 2007-7-15
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 214
|
发表于 2010-6-12 13:23:40
|显示全部楼层
51.The following appeared in a medical newsletter.
"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some
patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis
has now been proved by preliminary初步的 results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle
injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."
逻辑谬误:
1.
初步的结果不能代表全部。就算初步的结果能代表全部,但只有两个组,数据库不够,不具有说服力
2.
作者 没有给出两组的肌肉受损状况,可能两个组不一样,第一组比第二组更重说不定。两组病人都没有给出他们的年龄段,职业,还有健康状况,不排除有些人年轻,职业是运动员,比较健康的恢复情况比那些年老的,非职业的,不是特别健康的人恢复的更快。
3.
没有给出预先的期望值,40%这个数字不具有说服力。恢复时间不代表恢复效果。
4.
第二组恢复时间没有明显简短也一文不值,不排除是给的sugar pills起了作用,但也有可能病人们在服用其他的药物导致的药效。
5.
就算这两组的实验有用,不代表以后所有的病人都可以使用抗生素。不是所有的人都适用抗生素。而且,不是所有肌肉受损的人会suffer from secondary infections.
6.
不排除有可能两个医生使用了其他的恢复方法
By providing the two groups’ experiment results, the author hastily made the conclusion that antibiotics were advised to be involved into the treatment for all patients who had suffered from the muscle strain. It seems reasonable from the first glance, however, deeply analysis of his evidences, revealing that none of them lend credible support for his assertion.
First of all, by providing the preliminary result of the experiment, inferences that the ultimate result remains the same is unconvincing as it stands. That is, the two groups’ experiment results are not sufficient enough to prove doctors’ suspicion that secondary infections may drag the healing progresses of muscle strain patients’. More related experiments should be arranged for better proof of this suspicion.
Moreover, the data offered by the author is far more less thus could not support the result. Also, we have no idea about the background of the two groups. For the sake of making the results more persuasive, the muscle severity index should be noticed. It is entirely possible that the first group’s situation is much less serious than the second group, which aptly expresses the faster recuperation time. Furthermore, implicit information such as age classes, vocations, and healthy conditions of these patients should be given out. As we all know, the elders, non-professional athletes and unhealthy people are compared to be recovered slower.
Thirdly, the author irrelevantly equates the recovery time with recovery effect. The first group’s 40 percent faster recovery rate does not mean that the effect is 40 percent beyond the expectation. Not to mention the expected recuperation rate is unknown. Possibility that for better recuperation, more time is needed cannot be ruled out. Also, the negative effects which led to the insignificant abatement on the recuperation time could be the sugar pills’ or some other unnoticed pills taken by the patients
What is more, the author arbitrarily ascribes the treatment effect to the use of antibiotic pills. How does it work is open to us all. Allowing for the different therapies and different doctors, it is entirely possible that patients of the different groups have taken other treatments which results in the diverse effects. Also, what should be noticed is that not all the people can use antibiotics as some people have allergies to them.
In the end, granted that the antibiotic works to some extent, the author neglects the fact that not all the people who get muscle strain would suffer from the secondary infections. If that is the case, the use of antibiotics means nothing at all.
In sum, the author should offered more information about the patients and do more experiments. Only in this way could he find the best treatment to the muscle strained patients.
|
|