[a习作temp]拍文互改小组作业argu51 第一次写 求砸 呵呵

meo1112UID: 2662486

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 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."



In this newsletter, the editorial put forwards that "secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain." He also adds that " all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. " To support The author's own assertion , a study on two different groups of patients suffering from muscle strain treated by different medical methods was cited. The essay itself suffers from its own logical problems and is therefore unconvincing.
    first of all , the so called "proved" connection between secondary infection and muscle strain has not given much thought to. The comparisons between two different groups of patients can never lead to the cause of secondary infections , and thus ,a indispensable connection to start this hypothesis is missing .
secondly, the writer fails to logically analyze the relationship between secondly infections caused by muscle strain and the function of antibiotics . It remains unclear that whether the antibiotic is helpful to the patients without side effects .The secondary infections could be treated by several kinds of medications , it is unfair to choose antibiotics from them without comprehensive understandings of its function and ,more significantly , the side effects , which might occurs when the antibiotics were used .
In addition , the conclusion is suspicious for the two samples are far more from comparable . The missing evidence, which exerts a profound influence during the experiment, to show that both groups are suffering from a similar severe muscle strain gives rise to a fallacy at the very beginning, for patients with heavier muscle strains need more recuperation time. Moreover, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine is a master of medications to cure patients injured during sports activities while a general physician emphasizes on the use of medication for ordinary patients With a disparate treat methods throughout the experiments , the recuperation time is no doubt different. Furthermore whether the sugar pills are helpful for the secondly infections is neglected, as a result of which , the comparison between the use of sugar pills and antibiotics is unconvincing.
    Finally , the author jumped to the conclusion that patients with muscle strains should take antibiotics as part of their treatment , but the other medications using during the treatment might be harmful after complicated chemical reaction with antibiotics .
In conclusion, the essay is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author must prove the relationships between secondary infections and muscle strains and antibiotics , meanwhile, a experiment with a comparable sample should be conducted .And the possibilities that the antibiotics and other medications taken give rise to harmful reactions should be ruled out.