1010G零散版友作文互改帖（Argument）

MaydaysjUID：2805242

TOPIC: ARGUMENT89 - The following appeared in a newspaper published in the state of Celera.

"Speed limits on our state's highways should be eliminated in order to increase our state's prosperity. Because greater speed means more efficient travel, commercial deliveries will be faster, increasing business profits. Elimination of speed limits will also make driving more attractive to motorists, so that more people will use the highways, providing more highway toll revenues for the state. At the same time, safety on our highways will not be affected: daytime speed limits were eliminated last year in the western states of our country, and no significant increase in the number of accidents in these states has been reported."
DATE: 2010/8/2 9:41:09 自己修改稿多指教！谢谢~~

The author suggests an elimination of speed limits on highways of Celera to increase its prosperity. However, all demonstrations about the economic benefits of high speed and safety guarantee are full of flaws.
First of all, high speed elimination does not necessarily lead to commercial benefit and revenue increase. Greater speed can make commercial delivers faster only on the condition that the traffic is in good order. If there is no speed limit, it is quiet possible that some highway drivers want to overtake others which may cause the traffic condition into chaos. If it's the case, high speed elimination will not increase but decrease the travel efficiency and thus give a bad effect on business profit. Furthermore, vehicles for commercial deliver on Celera’s highways may not belong to Celera and therefore cannot make contributions to the state’s financial increase whatever their business benefit blossom. As for the point that high speed attracts more motorists and thus increases toll revenue, however, increasing number of motorists also means heavier burden on the maintenance. Suppose that another 100 motorists can get only $200 toll revenue while will cost $500 for maintenance, then could we say it’s worthwhile? Without weight the cost and revenue of traffic flow increase, it is unconvincing to conclude that great speed will do increase economic benefits.
Second, the author cites an example of the western stats to claims that high speed has little to do with safety. However, the testimony that "no significant increase “is vogue. Whether there is a great increase in traffic accidents or not in fact is unknown. Does it possible that researchers didn’t conduct a precise calculation survey and thus gave this inaccurate statistic result? Or does it possible that the proposers or officers supporting speed elimination conceal the fact deliberately? In a nutshell, the author should provide more convincing information to support that high speed has little thing to do with safety. In addition, even we concede the point mentioned above, it does not mean the same will do in state of Celera. There may be some differences between them in states population, condition of highway, and climate ect. Maybe the western states are in peripheral areas where there are little population and thus less vehicles on the highway which alone can guarantee low ratio of accidents. And if the climate in western states is stable, while state of Celera are full of hazards weather like tornadoes and rainstorm, then the traffic accidents will be undoubtly more in the latter. If so, eliminating speed limit will add insult to injury there. And since the western states only adopt speed limits elimination on daytime, it is inappropriate to extend it to Celera to night when the traffic accidents are more likely to happen.
Finally, even elimination of speed limit can boost commercial benefit and not affect traffic safety, it dose not lead to prosperity of Celera state. Toll revenue makes up of only negligible proportion of the almost every state revenue let alone commercial vehicles may not belong to Celera. To really increase Celera’s prosperity, what should be done is adjusting measures to local conditions, for examples, exploiting local resources, developing local state industry, and strengthening exchanges and cooperation with outside through the full use of highways.
To sum up, before hastily eliminating speed limits, the local officers should careful weight the benefit and cost to ensure economic propensity and traffic safety.

雨馨UID：2765070

TOPIC: ARGUMENT89 - The following appeared in a newspaper published in the state of Celera.

"Speed limits on our state's highways should be eliminated in order to increase our state's prosperity. Because greater speed means more efficient travel, commercial deliveries will be faster, increasing business profits. Elimination of speed limits will also make driving more attractive to motorists, so that more people will use the highways, providing more highway toll revenues for the state. At the same time, safety on our highways will not be affected: daytime speed limits were eliminated last year in the western states of our country, and no significant increase in the number of accidents in these states has been reported."
DATE: 2010/8/2 9:41:09 自己修改稿多指教！谢谢~~

The author suggests an elimination of speed limits on highways of Celera to increase its prosperity. However, all [the] demonstrations about the economic benefits of high speed and safety guarantee are full of flaws. [这个however表示强烈转折，但其实句子中的转折没有那么充分]

First of all, high speed elimination does not necessarily lead to commercial benefit and revenue increase. Greater speed can make commercial delivers faster only on the condition that the traffic is in good order. If there is no speed limit, it is quiet [quite] possible that some highway drivers want to overtake others which may cause the traffic condition into chaos. If it's the case, high speed elimination will not increase but decrease [increase和decrease不能这么用啦……not enhance but reduce] the travel efficiency and thus give a bad effect on business profit. Furthermore, vehicles for commercial deliver on Celera’s highways may not belong to Celera and therefore cannot make contributions to the state’s financial increase whatever their business benefit blossom. As for the point that high speed attracts more motorists and thus increases toll revenue, however, increasing number of motorists also means heavier burden on the maintenance. Suppose that another 100 motorists can get only $200 toll revenue while will cost $500 for maintenance, then could we say it’s worthwhile? [这个例子可能不符常识，建议去掉] Without weight the cost and revenue of traffic flow increase, it is unconvincing to conclude that great speed will do increase economic benefits.

Second, the author cites an example of the western stats to claims that high speed has little to do with safety. However, the testimony that "no significant increase “is vogue. Whether there is a great increase in traffic accidents or not in fact is unknown. [这个论据不是很充分，因为对政府而言还是可以统计的，这个攻击文章中的既定事实可能不是很强力] Does it possible that researchers didn’t conduct a precise calculation survey and thus gave this inaccurate statistic result? Or does it possible that the proposers or officers supporting speed elimination conceal the fact deliberately? In a nutshell, the author should provide more convincing information to support that high speed has little thing to do with safety. In addition, even we concede the point mentioned above, it does not mean the same will do in state of Celera. There may be some differences between them in states population, condition of highway, and climate ect [etc]. Maybe the western states are in peripheral areas where there are little population and thus less  [fewer] vehicles on the highway which alone can guarantee low ratio of accidents. And if the climate in western states is stable, while state of Celera are full of hazards weather like tornadoes and rainstorm, then the traffic accidents will be undoubtly [undoubtedly] more in the latter. If so, eliminating speed limit will add insult to injury there. And since the western states only adopt speed limits elimination on daytime, it is inappropriate to extend it to Celera to night when the traffic accidents are more likely to happen.
[一大段中有三个小点可能较为混乱，伤其十指可能不如断其一指]

Finally, even elimination of speed limit can boost commercial benefit and not affect traffic safety, it dose [does] not [necessarily] lead to prosperity of Celera state. Toll revenue makes up of only negligible proportion of the almost every state revenue let alone commercial vehicles may not belong to Celera. To really increase Celera’s prosperity, what should be done is adjusting measures to local conditions, for examples, exploiting local resources, developing local state industry, and strengthening exchanges and cooperation with outside through the full use of highways.
[这点感觉想得很对，但是其实题目还有运输增快带来的经济效能，这里既然要驳就要包括，不然觉得有点以偏概全——虽然第一段说明过运输增快也可能不能带来经济效能，但这一段还是要包括比较好。]

To sum up, before hastily eliminating speed limits, the local officers should careful weight the benefit and cost to ensure economic propensity and traffic safety.
[个人比较喜欢这个结尾]

总体而言，对语言的把握可能还不够到位，自己已经修改过的稿子还有不少问题，建议用word和这个检查一下：
http://www.whitesmoke.com/free-online-checker
然后上考场的时候，也要注意避免很绕的句子和吃不准的表达

另外，感觉你思路是
1、不一定能带来经济效益
2、不一定没车祸
3、还有其他更好的方式带动经济效益
私以为，1和2换下位置，对逻辑和表达感觉更容易

还有就是，总体感觉，点很多，改批的似乎都没漏下，但详略不得当，并且相关的几点放在一个段落里，又没有顺畅的过渡。
个人意见是把握主要矛盾，攻击得彻底，但只要攻击几个重要错误，并且各占一段，对于我们这样没有语言表达优势的foreinger比较容易掌握。

个人意见，要批判吸收呀⋯⋯

zmy1029UID：2537885

改95L
The following appeared in a newsletter from a national astronomy association.

"Various sources are predicting higher-than-average temperatures across the country next winter, including in Sun City, the traditional location of our yearly winter conference. Higher winter temperatures are sure to result in higher-than-usual tourism in Sun City, a location already known for its attractive beaches and good weather. Hotels will have fewer rooms available, transportation will be more difficult to reserve, and public places such as parks and restaurants will be more crowded. These conditions are likely to significantly reduce attendance at the conference. We should therefore move our conference to a city less popular with winter tourists."

--------------------------------------------

The argument states that as Sun City, the famous tourist attraction and the traditional location of the association's yearly conference, would be warmer next winter, it would be much crowded during the association's yearly conference and thus reducing the attendance. Therefore, the conference should be moved to another city. That is, however, not so reasonable as it may seem to be.

A city known for its attractive beaches and good weather, according to the common sense, would be popular in summer but probably not so popular in winter because summer is the right season for swimming and sun bathing. Would there be more people in a warm winter than in summer that could occupy all the public areas a tourist attraction should have (句子不通)? Without answering this question with specific data, the higher temperature alone could not sufficiently support the idea that the city would be too crowded during the conference. 攻击点找对了,理由有点牵强吧, 据我所知, 滨海城市冬天游客的确多, 夏天太热,比如说海南岛. 你要说这点的话要吧理由说清楚,这段就都是一句话的意思,其他的全是模板. 可以说可能这个城市纬度怎样, 夏天和冬天气温差不多, 而且没有证据证明以前冬天游客就比夏天多……. 还有一点可以攻击的是温度升高没说升多少, 什一两度不会有很大的影响……

Even if the city is overloaded at that time, there is no evidence supporting that the condition would significantly reduce attendance at the conference according to the argument. People attend conferences for the content, not the environment of the location. Perhaps the members would attend the national astronomy association's yearly meeting in regardless of the crowd and the inconvenience. Since the logical chain between the condition in Sun City and the attendance of the conference is unclear, the soundness of the whole passage is weakened.

Moreover, there are other concepts that can avoid absence and keep the traditional location at the same time. For example, the association can make reservation for both the hotel rooms and the vehicles a long time before the conference and thus avoiding finding for the empty room or the transportation in the rush hour. Nevertheless, they can hold the meeting in the location far away from the beaches and the scenery spots as it would alleviate the possible situation. Failed to analyze these possible solutions, the conclusion of the argument is apparently not well-supported.


To sum up, the argument is not well grounded because lacking of enough supportive materials to prove that whether there is a causal relationship among the rising temperature, the congestion degree, the attendance and the suggestion. After all, it would be a pity to move from the traditional conference location just because the temperature there is higher-than-average.

语法没有大错误 说说你的逻辑问题吧
你在攻击的时候逻辑链不太清楚,东说一下西说一下,有的理由还有些强词夺理
作者的逻辑链是这样的
全国气温升高 → sun city气温升高 → 游客增加 → 房间减少 → 出席率减少 → 应该转移

你的顺序是 1.人不一定多 2.出席不一定少 3.出席率减少不一定转移
很明显有几个重点你没攻击到
第一个逻辑链 常见的问题  以多推少  你没有攻击
第三个逻辑链 可以这样说  游客增加 房间交通不一定拥挤,因为不知道sun city原来的情况,也许根本就没有供不应求的现象…….
还有一个可攻击重点就是攻击后果  转移了会怎样, 打破了传统不好, 换了地点参加者不熟悉,说不定反而会影响出勤率……..

建议你可以看看那个argument242题库分析,和argument版的精华帖, argument也是需要展开的,不是说一个理由再加模板,全是空话, 不要被北美范文误导了

以上个人意见,仅供参考,加油哦O(∩_∩)O

zmy1029UID：2537885

题目：ARGUMENT51 - 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 the argument, the author cites a study that two group of patients were treated for muscle injuries by taking antibiotics and sugar pills, the results is antibiotics group recuperated quicker than the other group without taking that medicine. In that case, the author infers that antibiotics have effect on treating secondary infections which prevent healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Hence, the author concludes antibiotics could make muscle strain patients heal quickly, therefore he or she recommends that antibiotics should be taken by all patients who are diagnosed with muscle train. However, the argument suffers from a series of poor assumptions, which render it unpersuasive.

To begin with, the author cities the study as the evidence to prove taking antibiotic is an effective means of treating secondary infection. However, the author provides no evidence that whether patients who involved the study have suffered secondary infection after muscle strain. If not, the result that antibiotics could shorten recuperation time prove nothing about the hypothesis that long recuperation time of muscle strain patients causes by secondary infection.

Besides, even assuming all the patients have secondary infections, the study still appears to be weakened by its questionable method and statistics. As we know, for an experiment to be accurate, it must be controlled, with a balance between the experimental and the control group, which means all the factors that potentially affect the results, should remain constant during the experiment. In the above study, unfortunately, three factors may impact on the results. First of all, there is no information about the patients involved in the study such as ages, backgrounds, physical condition and the severity of injury. It is possible that patients are younger, stronger, or injured more serious in the first group than those in the other group. Secondly, the author fails to consider the fact that doctors play a significant role throughout the treatment. In generally speaking, Dr. Newland who specializes in sports medicine have more experiment and professional skill in treating muscle than a general physician Dr. Alton. In this case, it is entirely possible the first group recuperated faster than the other group without antibiotics due to the treatment from sports medicine specialist. Thirdly, the sugar pills given to the second group is open to doubt. Perhaps sugar pills have side effect on secondary so that made the second group recuperated slower. In short, without ruling out all other possible factors may influence the result, the study cannot be a evidence to prove the hypotheses.

Finally, even if the author can substantiate all of the foregoing assumptions, the author’s assertion that all the patients diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics is unwarranted. Experience tells me, a part of people are allergic to antibiotics due to their physical constitution and genetic predisposition or they are in a special period such as pregnancy. Taking antibiotics mistakenly will cause uncomfortable like dizziness and shock. For that matter, the author’s conclusion is unjustifiable.

In sum, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. The author should provide better evidence about the information of patients, doctors and sugar pills to ensure the reliable of the study as evidence of the assumption. Furthermore, before making recommendation to patients, the author should make sure they do not have an allergy to antibiotics to guarantee their health.

这是自己先改过的,我很纠结第三段要不要分开,都是说的实验的问题, 但太长了
给点建议吧

雨馨UID：2765070

我又来了~改哪篇啊?92L的呢
zmy1029 发表于 2010-8-3 00:35

在此，有劳了～

The following appeared in a newsletter from a national astronomy association.

"Various sources are predicting higher-than-average temperatures across the country next winter, including in Sun City, the traditional location of our yearly winter conference. Higher winter temperatures are sure to result in higher-than-usual tourism in Sun City, a location already known for its attractive beaches and good weather. Hotels will have fewer rooms available, transportation will be more difficult to reserve, and public places such as parks and restaurants will be more crowded. These conditions are likely to significantly reduce attendance at the conference. We should therefore move our conference to a city less popular with winter tourists."

--------------------------------------------

The argument states that as Sun City, the famous tourist attraction and the traditional location of the association's yearly conference, would be warmer next winter, it would be much crowded during the association's yearly conference and thus reducing the attendance. Therefore, the conference should be moved to another city. That is, however, not so reasonable as it may seem to be.

A city known for its attractive beaches and good weather, according to the common sense, would be popular in summer but probably not so popular in winter because summer is the right season for swimming and sun bathing. Would there be more people in a warm winter than in summer that could occupy all the public areas a tourist attraction should have? Without answering this question with specific data, the higher temperature alone could not sufficiently support the idea that the city would be too crowded during the conference.

Even if the city is overloaded at that time, there is no evidence supporting that the condition would significantly reduce attendance at the conference according to the argument. People attend conferences for the content, not the environment of the location. Perhaps the members would attend the national astronomy association's yearly meeting in regardless of the crowd and the inconvenience. Since the logical chain between the condition in Sun City and the attendance of the conference is unclear, the soundness of the whole passage is weakened.

Moreover, there are other concepts that can avoid absence and keep the traditional location at the same time. For example, the association can make reservation for both the hotel rooms and the vehicles a long time before the conference and thus avoiding finding for the empty room or the transportation in the rush hour. Nevertheless, they can hold the meeting in the location far away from the beaches and the scenery spots as it would alleviate the possible situation. Failed to analyze these possible solutions, the conclusion of the argument is apparently not well-supported.

To sum up, the argument is not well grounded because lack of enough supportive materials to prove that there is a causal relationship among the rising temperature, the congestion degree, the attendance and the suggestion. After all, it would be a pity to move from the traditional conference location just because the temperature there is higher-than-average.

ljz1990UID：2837432

占楼改94


"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 the argument, the author cites a study that two group of patients were treated for muscle injuries by taking antibiotics and sugar pills, the results is antibiotics group recuperated quicker than the other group without taking that medicine. In that case, the author infers that antibiotics have effect on treating secondary infections which prevent healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Hence, the author concludes antibiotics could make muscle strain patients heal quickly, therefore he or she recommends that antibiotics should be taken by all patients who are diagnosed with muscle train. However, the argument suffers from a series of poor assumptions, which render it unpersuasive.(开头太长了而且有点混乱，可以简洁一点，大概把思路理清就可以马上反驳了The author draw a conclusion that all muscle strain patient should take antibiotics partly as their treatment according to a study, in which one group took antibiotics and treated by Dr. Newland while the other group take sugar pills and treated by Dr. Alton. In addition the study also prove a hypothesis about secondary infections and severe muscle strain. 你看这样好一点么)

To begin with, the author cities the study as the evidence to prove taking antibiotic is an effective means of treating secondary infection. （中心句不明显，把第一第二句话互换一下吧）However, the author provides no evidence that whether patients who involved the study have suffered secondary infection after muscle strain. If not, the result that antibiotics could shorten recuperation time prove nothing about the hypothesis that long recuperation time of muscle strain patients causes by secondary infection.（额，我觉得分析好像有点不够，显得有点单薄。）

Besides, even assuming all the patients have secondary infections, the study still appears to be weakened by its questionable method and statistics. As we know, for an experiment to be accurate, it must be controlled,（逗号去掉） with a balance（平衡？？？没看懂哦，可能是我也不知道，如果是正确用法请告知，呵呵） between the experimental and the control group, which means（in which会不会好些？） all the factors that potentially affect the results,（逗号不要） should remain constant（constant？？可以这样用吗，这里的对比只有两个组，用the same会不会好些？） during the experiment. In the above study, unfortunately, three factors （影响因素其实还挺多，说是三个有点绝对，other factors 就够了）may impact on（on 不要） the results. First of all, there is no information about the patients involved in the study such as ages, backgrounds（什么background是职业吗，说background太宽泛）, physical condition and the severity of injury. It is possible that patients are younger, stronger, or injured more serious（更严重？怎么会好的更快） in the first group than those in the other group.（分析不够充分哦，可以再稍微一两句说明一下,因为更年轻……所以好的更快） Secondly, the author fails to consider the fact that doctors play a significant role throughout the treatment. In generally speaking, Dr. Newland who specializes in sports medicine have more experiment and professional skill in treating muscle than a general physician Dr. Alton. In this case, it is entirely possible the first group recuperated faster than the other group without antibiotics due to the treatment from sports medicine specialist. Thirdly, the sugar pills given to the second group is open to doubt. Perhaps sugar pills have side effect on secondary so that made the second group recuperated slower. In short, without ruling out all other possible factors may influence the result, the study cannot be a evidence to prove the hypotheses.（恩，我觉得你第二段可以分开来说，好看一些，也可以展开的更充分。其实要说起来，第一个点也是关于这个实验的严谨性的问题，重点就在攻击这个实验，最后一点只是顺带说一下，分开来应该没问题，个人意见）

Finally, even if the author can substantiate all of the foregoing assumptions, the author’s assertion that all the patients diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics is unwarranted. Experience tells me（common sense好些，经验毕竟是你个人的经验）, a part of people are allergic to antibiotics due to their physical constitution and genetic predisposition or they are in a special period such as pregnancy. Taking antibiotics mistakenly will cause uncomfortable like dizziness and shock（shock是怎么来的?）. For that matter, the author’s conclusion is unjustifiable.（是不是还要加进扭伤的程度，每个人的扭伤程度不一样，是否抗生素对每种扭伤都有效）

In sum, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. The author should provide better evidence about the information of patients, doctors and sugar pills to ensure the reliable of the study as evidence of the assumption. Furthermore, before making recommendation to patients, the author should make sure they do not have an allergy to antibiotics to guarantee their health.

条理还算蛮清晰，但是某些地方说理不够充分。语言虽然有些地方比较别扭整体来说还流畅吧，或许多练练就好，额我是菜鸟就不乱给你说了。还有一个，我在想是不是大家都这样写，虽然没做过这个题目，但是觉得很熟悉，如果要我写，估计也八九不离十，然后语言还差点。不知道94楼大虾有咩高见啊。。。。

ljz1990UID：2837432

42.The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.
"In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea's main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign."
临近城市Bellegea的政府为促进其落后的经济，去年开展了一项对生态旅游的广告推广。今年到达Bellegea主要机场的外国游客数量翻了一番，人均收入增加了10％。为增加Paraterra居民的收入并保护我们有限国土的天然环境，我们也应该推广生态旅游。为保证我们广告策略的成功，我们应该雇佣Bellegea现任国家旅游局的主任来担任广告的顾问。

The proposal above recommends that, in order to raise people's income and preserve the natural environment, Paraterra(P) should  promote ecotourism and the advertising campaign of neighbour country Bellegea (B), and hire the current director of B's National Tourism Office as consultant as well. The reasoning given seems at first glance sound, while it quite not the case when looked in details.

1.        机场人数增加 不等于 旅游业兴旺 他们不一定是来旅游的 会议或者是转机（这个或者另一个附近机场航空线路改变或者低票价） 就算是来旅游的 是生态游吗 音乐会足球赛呢不一定是因为这个广告推广 而且double这个数字需要质疑

First of all, the foreign visitors’ number doubled is not equal to the growth in ecotourism. For one, the number doubled fails to give comprehensible information. If the foreign visitors' number is very small in the past, then the raise could be not that significant. For another, the foreigners arrive at B airport for other purposes but not ecotourism. It could be well possible they are arriving just for transfer or business or academic conferences, rock music festivals, football or tennis tournament?


2.        人均收入增长不代表B的经济有了好转，首先是10%如果是通货膨胀人均收入本来就是增长的。就算经济有了好转，其中旅游业占到的份额又有多少，农业工业，

Furthermore, the author concludes too harshly that the 10% income raise per capita result in the advertise campaign. Consider the possible situation that B's lagging economy happens due to its inflation, not only the income per capita but also the commodity price increases, and the latter is greater in increasing rate than the former. Then the purchasing capacity per capita is in fact decreasing, which serves no good to the people's better life even though their income rises.

Moreover, the author fails to take the other factors cause the income raise. It could be well possible that the income raise is due to agriculture and industrial   development while ecotourism only contribute little in the income raise. In addition, even if they come to ecotourism, is it due to the advertising campaign? The reason these foreign people decide to visit B could well be the recommend of their friends who returning from B but not the advertising campaign.

3.        承认这个广告成功推动了旅游业拉动经济增长，在B地适用在P适用吗，旅游景点，交通，风俗。对比一下。可行性。而且要雇用旅游局主任，这个广告的成功（如果是的话），不是，或者不止是他一个人的功劳，而且他对P的情况不了解，合适吗能胜任吗？负面作

Another important factor must be considered that P's situation is quite different from B's. The author provide no evidence that p have well enough travelling resource. P is a tiny country as the author states, it could possibly happen that P didn't have that much places satisfying the visiting condition, or the visiting resort in P had already be fully even over exploited? Whether the relevant facilities and services around are easy to access? Besides, the author have to be well aware of the traffic information, the local traditions and customs to assess the feasibility, the cost and side effects contained of carrying out the advertising campaign in a whole.

In addition, whether to hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign awaits further consideration. Since the success in B's campaign, if it is, does not or not only owe to the director only but the group as a whole, possibly still, he could even have no idea about the P's current situation, it hard to say that B's director is qualified for the work.

4.        P还想保护环境，但是生态旅游能保护环境吗，恰恰相反吧

Last but not least, the author fails to convince me that ecotourism could preserve the natural environment. If the advertising campaign attracts a great many people to participate in ecotourism, the natural would environment inevitably bear much heavy burden. Even with good management, the waste might be throw about, the animals habits might be disturbed by people activities, which is harmful even critical for the environment preserving.

P 要推动经济增长保护环境是个很好的想法，借鉴B地的做法也是好的。但是应该有更周全的考虑，权衡各方因素，弄清B p两地的不同，或者多参考，而不是只盯在B上面。
It is a good idea to provide more income and preserve the natural environment as well as to consult B's situation, while P's minister need more comprehensive consideration, get all the factors weighted, and be clear about the difference between P and B. If not, the conclusion the author is too inadequate too be sound.


第一篇，没有用AWP。写的挺乱的，因为可以写的点太多了不知道详细写哪些，按什么顺序写，这还是删改了一些的。求指导。。。

MaydaysjUID：2805242

多谢，有劳了！！ 92# 雨馨

雨馨UID：2765070

我又来了（顺便征人互改作文⋯⋯下周五就考了⋯⋯TAT）
抱走97L

42. The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.
"In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea's main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign."
临近城市Bellegea的政府为促进其落后的经济，去年开展了一项对生态旅游的广告推广。今年到达Bellegea主要机场的外国游客数量翻了一番，人均收入增加了10％。为增加Paraterra居民的收入并保护我们有限国土的天然环境，我们也应该推广生态旅游。为保证我们广告策略的成功，我们应该雇佣Bellegea现任国家旅游局的主任来担任广告的顾问。

The proposal above recommends that, in order to raise people's income and preserve the natural environment, Paraterra(P) should  promote ecotourism and the advertising campaign of [as 才对，用of的话，是P为B去做嫁衣了] neighbor [neighbour] country Bellegea (B), and hire the current director of B's National Tourism Office as [a] consultant as well. The reasoning [reasons] given [by the argument] seems at first glance sound [seem sound at first glance 更顺一些] while it [is] quite not the case when looked in details. [这里有一个比较别扭的地方，即given和looked的主体不一样，会造成误解，所以要分开指名或换个句式]

1.        机场人数增加 不等于 旅游业兴旺 他们不一定是来旅游的 会议或者是转机（这个或者另一个附近机场航空线路改变或者低票价） 就算是来旅游的 是生态游吗 音乐会足球赛呢不一定是因为这个广告推广 而且double这个数字需要质疑

First of all, the foreign visitors’ number doubled is not equal to the growth in ecotourism. For one, the number doubled fails to give comprehensible information. [这个有点过于绝对，你能说人家不一定、不有效，不能说人家不可理解吧] If the foreign visitors' number is very small in the past, then the raise could be not that significant. [这句话我明白是说如果人少，double一下也不能说明问题，但是这句话变成英文非常模糊，感觉没说清楚，不如举具体的数字和例子] For another, the foreigners arrive at B airport for other purposes but not ecotourism. It could be well possible they are arriving just for transfer or business or academic conferences, rock music festivals, football or tennis tournament? [这个当然可能，但是注意原文的意思是，这个上涨和推广生态旅游的时间是吻合的，所以有逻辑关系。应该举例说明同时有其他可能导致人数上升。]
[For one和For another我觉得比较别扭……如果你是看范文看下来的当然也可]

2.        人均收入增长不代表B的经济有了好转，首先是10%如果是通货膨胀人均收入本来就是增长的。就算经济有了好转，其中旅游业占到的份额又有多少，农业工业，
[这两个观点距离其实很大啊，为什么放在一起？而且文中没有说经济好转，只说人均收入增加。重点应该是人均收入增加并不一定是因为推广生态旅游。]

Furthermore, the author concludes too harshly that the 10% income raise per capita result in [comes from 不然逻辑关系颠倒了] the advertise campaign. Consider the possible situation that B's lagging economy happens due to its inflation, not only the income per capita but also the commodity price increases, and the latter is greater in increasing rate than the former. Then the purchasing capacity per capita is in fact decreasing, which serves no good to the people's better life even though their income rises. [问题跟上文是一样的，要体现他因的性质，你说通胀，也要说可能当时正好有通胀，不说明就说10%来自于通胀是很奇怪的]

Moreover, the author fails to take the other factors [that may] cause the income raise [into consideration]. It could be well possible that the income raise is due to agriculture and industrial   development while ecotourism only contribute little in the income raise. [同样的问题，不赘述了] In addition, even if they come to ecotourism, is it due to the advertising campaign? The reason these foreign people decide to visit B could well be the recommend of their friends who returning from B but not the advertising campaign.

3.        承认这个广告成功推动了旅游业拉动经济增长，在B地适用在P适用吗，旅游景点，交通，风俗。对比一下。可行性。而且要雇用旅游局主任，这个广告的成功（如果是的话），不是，或者不止是他一个人的功劳，而且他对P的情况不了解，合适吗能胜任吗？负面作

Another important factor must be considered that P's situation is quite different from B's. The author provides no evidence that p [P] have well enough travelling resource. P is a tiny country as the author states, it could possibly happen that P didn't have that much places satisfying the visiting condition, or the visiting resort in P had already be fully even over exploited? Whether the relevant facilities and services around are easy to access? Besides, the author have to be well aware of the traffic information, the local traditions and customs to assess the feasibility, the cost and side effects contained of carrying out the advertising campaign in a whole.

In addition, whether to hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign awaits further consideration. Since the success in B's campaign, if it is, does not or not only owe to the director only but the group as a whole, possibly still, he could even have no idea about the P's current situation, it hard to say that B's director is qualified for the work. [这一句好绕，建议拆开]

4.        P还想保护环境，但是生态旅游能保护环境吗，恰恰相反吧

Last but not least, the author fails to convince me that ecotourism could preserve the natural environment. If the advertising campaign attracts a great many people to participate in ecotourism, the natural would environment inevitably bear much heavy burden. Even with good management, the waste might be throw about, the animals habits might be disturbed by people activities, which is harmful even critical for the environment preserving.
[生态旅游本来就是要保护环境的……这一点可能很难驳倒]

P 要推动经济增长保护环境是个很好的想法，借鉴B地的做法也是好的。但是应该有更周全的考虑，权衡各方因素，弄清B p两地的不同，或者多参考，而不是只盯在B上面。
It is a good idea to provide more income and preserve the natural environment as well as to consult B's situation, while P's minister need more comprehensive consideration, get all the factors weighted, and be clear about the difference between P and B. If not, the conclusion the author is too inadequate too be sound.


第一篇，没有用AWP。写的挺乱的，因为可以写的点太多了不知道详细写哪些，按什么顺序写，这还是删改了一些的。求指导。。。

总体而言，我觉得有比较明显的问题是：
在语言方面，感觉特别绕，而且很多表达不是错，而是诡异（当然也有可能我水平不够）建议不要生硬地套用好句子之类的⋯⋯
在论证方面，感觉你还不是特别理解他因的论证方法，不是说可能有其他解释就可以了，而是要进一步说明其他情况也非常可能发生……（我表达不好，建议多看看范文体会）
在结构方面，还是有什么都攻击，但都不是特别有力的感觉。其实Argument不需要面面俱到，在你的6个段落中，选3个重要且能有力攻击的比较好。

在整体思路方面，攻击两个主要论据，然后攻击不能照搬照抄我觉得是可以的。

个人意见啦，大家多交流咯^^

雨馨UID：2765070

TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.

"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
WORDS: 538          TIME: 00:24:06          DATE: 2010-8-4 15:46:06

The argument listed several facts to show the small, nonprofit hospital in Saluda is better than the large, for-profit hospital in Megaville thus concluding smaller, nonprofit hospitals are better than larger, for-profit hospitals. Ignoring different conditions between Saluda hospital and Megaville hospital and taking the two isolated examples to represent all the hospitals, the argument is not well-grounded.

A large city hospital as Megaville hospital is, would face much severe diseases than Saluda hospital, the small, nonprofit hospital according to our common sense because when we catch small diseases, we choose local hospital and when we get into serious diseases, we turn to large hospitals. Therefore, there is no wonder that the average length in Megaville hospital is three times longer than that in Saluda hospital. Take an extreme example, if one hospital cures cancer in 6 days while another hospital cures bad cold in 2 days, is the latter better than the former? Similarly, it might explain the relatively lower cure rate in Megaville hospital as well. Imagine if Saluda hospital is full of local people with headache and throat congestion while Megaville hospital is full of people from a large area with heart attack and brain disorder, how can we blame Megaville hospital for its low cure rate? Without further statistics of the diseases in the two hospitals, it is too hasty to judge the treatments basing on those facts.

Megaville hospital may face not only the more serious diseases but also the more patients for its larger scale. It is entirely possible that Megaville hospital has more employees, especially the employees of higher degrees, than Saluda hospital but it has to treat many more patients than Saluda hospital that lower its employees-per-patient data. And as Megaville might have a better employee team, it does not necessarily link to its medical performance. Nevertheless, the number of complaints may largely affected by the number of patients. See if there was 100 patients in Saluda hospital and 10 of them complained about service while there was 1000 patients in Megaville hospital and 20 of them complained about service, Megaville would be consider to have better service than Saluda. Therefore, the argument should provide more data of the number of the patients in these hospitals to support its conclusion better.

However, even if Saluda hospital does give better treatments than Megaville hospital, it is too justify saying smaller, nonprofit hospitals are of better quality than larger, for-profit hospitals. There was no evidence, according to the argument, sufficiently proves that Saluda hospital is a typical small, nonprofit hospital and Megaville hospital is a typical large, for-profit hospital. What if Saluda hospital is the best small, nonprofit hospital while Megaville hospital is the worst large, for-profit hospital in the country? Much more examples of both small and large hospitals are needed to judge the two types of hospitals as two groups.

To sum up, the argument might be partly true but quite limited. Beyond the isolated data, much more background materials are needed to judge Saluda hospital and Megaville hospital while even more evidences are needed to judge small, nonprofit hospitals and large, for-profit hospitals. Making conclusion basing on just a few direct comparisons is not so reasonable after all.

SweeetLinUID：2865909

TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.

"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
WORDS: 538          TIME: 00:24:06          DATE: 2010-8-4 15:46:06
文中红色为修改和建议部分。
     The argument listed several facts to show the small, nonprofit hospital in Saluda is better than the large, for-profit hospital in Megaville thus concluding smaller, nonprofit hospitals are better than larger, for-profit hospitals. The argument is not well-grounded, ignoring different conditions between Saluda hospital and Megaville hospital and taking the two isolated examples to represent all the hospitals (, the argument is not well-grounded).
    A large city hospital as Megaville hospital is, would face much(more) severe diseases than Saluda hospital, the(a) small, nonprofit hospital according to our common sense, because when we catch small diseases, we will choose local hospitals and(while) 转折关系when we get into serious diseases, we will turn to large hospitals. Therefore, there is no wonder that the average length of a patient's stay (加上of所有格内容变得更加清晰) in Megaville hospital is three times longer than that in Saluda hospital. Take an extreme example, （if one hospital cures cancer in 6 days while another hospital cures bad cold in 2 days, is the latter better than the former? ）感觉这个反问句所举的例子不是很合理，病人平均的住院时间并不等于治愈时间。Similarly, it might explain the relatively lower cure rate in Megaville hospital as well. 前面的反问句用于此处还是有说服力的。Imagine if （假设是不是应该等于假如，两个词有重复之嫌）Saluda hospital is full of local people with headache and throat congestion while Megaville hospital is full of people from a large area with heart attack and brain disorder, how can we blame Megaville hospital for its low cure rate? Without further statistics of the diseases in the two hospitals, it is too hasty to judge the treatments basing on those facts.

Megaville hospital may face not only the more serious diseases but also the more patients for its larger scale. It is entirely possible that Megaville hospital has more employees, especially the employees of higher degrees, than Saluda hospital but it has to treat many more patients than Saluda hospital that lower its employees-per-patient data. And as Megaville might have a better employee team, it does not necessarily link to its medical performance.（此处可以更加直接地指出这也是M医院收到的指责比较多的原因，更加清楚明了，不然一遍看过去只看出了你解释S的员工较多的原因，而最终的目的应该是解释M受指责的原因，呵呵） Nevertheless, the number of complaints may be largely affected by the number of patients. （See可省略） if there was 100 patients in Saluda hospital and 10 of them complained about service while there was 1000 patients in Megaville hospital and 20 of them complained about service, Megaville would be considered to have better service than Saluda.（这句话是不是误解了原文的意思，应该是S比M好） Therefore, the argument should provide more data of the number of the patients in these hospitals to support its conclusion better.

However, even if Saluda hospital does give better treatments than Megaville hospital, it is too justify saying smaller, nonprofit hospitals are of better quality than larger, for-profit hospitals. There was no evidence, according to the argument, sufficiently proves that Saluda hospital is a typical small, nonprofit hospital and (while) Megaville hospital is a typical large, for-profit hospital. What if Saluda hospital is the best small, nonprofit hospital while Megaville hospital is the worst large, for-profit hospital in the country? Much more examples of both small and large hospitals are needed to judge the two types of hospitals as two groups.

To sum up, the argument might be partly true but quite limited. Beyond the isolated data, much more background materials are needed to judge Saluda hospital and Megaville hospital while even more evidences are needed to judge small, nonprofit hospitals and large, for-profit hospitals. Making conclusion basing on just a few direct comparisons is not so reasonable after all.

对于开头和结尾我自己也不是很擅长，主要是开头要开门见山地指出ARGUMENT中主要的谬误，结尾提出一些建设性的建议。此文中，似乎没有提到economic的问题。鄙人能力有限，如果有些地方有误，还请谅解！！O(∩_∩)O哈哈~

SweeetLinUID：2865909

OPIC: ARGUMENT51 - 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."
WORDS: 696          TIME: 1:08:09          DATE: 2010/8/4

第一次用模考软件写完完整的一篇，由于没有计时，居然用了这么长的时间，zz~~~ :loveliness:
   The argument is presented that some patients may have secondary infections after they have severe muscle strain, the use of the antibiotics can effectively heal the secondary infection, then the author makes an arbitrary conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. The author ignores the corrected relationship between the severe patients and some ordinary patients, the incidence rate of secondary infection after one is diagnosed with muscle strain.
    As it is mentioned in the first sentence, secondary infections may happen after severe muscle strain. Some patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain may not develop into the secondary infection. To say the least, someone who has severe muscle strain may also keep out of secondary infection which depends on the physical and mental conditions of the patients. Someone who is strong and active may be lower probable to be infected with the secondary infection than someone who is weak and negative. The physical and mental conditions may affect the recuperation time much more than the use of medicines. Moreover, some patients who are not diagnosed with severe muscle strain may have lower possibility to have secondary infections. Secondary infection may happen after some patients who are diagnosed with severe muscle strain do not have their treatment in time or careless protect of their disaster.  In a word, someone with the muscle strain may not develop into secondary infections in high possibility.
     Meanwhile, there may be some other medicines more useful than antibiotics to heal the muscle strain. Patients can have many choices that they can take them instead of taking antibiotics. Antibiotic may have some other effects on the patients that does not very good to the health of the users. For example, antibiotics may affect the sleep of the users that they are sleepy during the daylight however they are energic in the night, somehow may affect some teenager patients to grow up abnormal , somehow fast or slowly. The correct use of medicine is so important that it can heal the disaster without any other bad effects.
      When it comes to the analogy experiment mentioned in the argument, it is confusing that how about the differences of the patients and the directors. We can see in the argument that the director of the two experiments is different in their major and the field they touched. It is a big problem that the different directors from different fields may treat their patients in a very different way. Dr Newland, who are specializes in sports medicines, may have much experiences in the treatment of the sports hurts. The patients in his group may obtain more professional treatments than the other that their recuperation time is short. However, Dr Alton, a general physician, may have more considered the patients in the ordinary way as usual as the other patients. Even the physical and mental conditions of the patients in the two groups are so different that it is difficult to identify whether it is mostly the contribution of antibiotics. For instance, the first group of patients is stronger and more active than the second group, and they are more matching the treatment of the Dr, they have more confidence in their director. Their recuperation time can be short. The sugar pills used in the second group may also have a negative effect on the healing of the patients. Sugar pills may result in destroying the regular time period of the patients for the blood glucose rises. After all, the comparison experiment is not well organized that it does not have many convincing effects.
       The author should make a more detailed and persuasive experiment according to the rule of the analogy experiment in order to  make persuasive argument, such as choose some patients with the similar severe of the muscle strain, dividing them into four groups, guaranteeing that each of the group contains five or more patients. One of the groups take antibiotics regularly, the second take sugar pills regularly, the third take placebo, the fourth take both antibiotics and sugar pills. The directors must from the same field.

SweeetLinUID：2865909

帮顶，求改。。。:lol

韵9090UID：2874129

占位改103#

我的：
TOPIC: ARGUMENT16 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper from a citizen of the state of Impecunia.

"Two years ago our neighboring state, Lucria, began a state lottery to supplement tax revenues for education and public health. Today, Lucria spends more per pupil than we do, and Lucria's public health program treats far more people than our state's program does. If we were to establish a state lottery like the one in Lucria, the profits could be used to improve our educational system and public health program. The new lottery would doubtless be successful, because a survey conducted in our capital city concludes that citizens of Impecunia already spend an average of $50 per person per year on gambling."



      In this argument, the arguer concludes that Impecunia should establish a state lottery like the one in Luria, which supplements tax revenues for education and health. To support the claim, the arguer points out Lucria's improvements on education and health, such as the spending of money on per pupil and health program that treats lots of people. In addition, he indicates the average money citizens of Impecunia spend per year cited from a survey. At the first glance, the conclusion seems to be somewhat convincing, however, further reflection tells me that the argument suffers from some fallacies.
      First and foremost, the arguer commits a fallacy of false analogy. The arguer simply assumes that Lucria' success can be copied by Impecunia, which is unwarranted for he does not provide any evidence to prove that the economic situation and other factors such as the population and personal income as well as the health program between Lucria and Impecunia are similar. If Impecunia has more pupils than those in Lucria, it is likely to happen that the average amount of money spent on pupils from Impecunia will be cut. Likewise, we are not informed whether the health programs of the two states have the same quality though the one in Lucria treats far more people.
      Another weakness worth pointing out is that the survey conducted in the capital city is not representative to reflect the general attitude of the citizens about lottery. Mostly, citizens from capital city, who usually earn more money than those from rural places and thus lead better lives, tend to spend more money on amusement. Therefore, we have good reasons to doubt if the sample is large enough and representative as a whole. Besides, lottery is just a kind of gambling and we can not ensure all the money for gambling is totally used for lottery.
       Last but not least, even if the citizens spend an average of $50 per person per year on lottery, which is of course an unpersuasive assumption, it does not follow that they will spend their money on this specific lottery. Common sense tells us that most people purchase lottery just for the reason of regaining more money, they care only about the bonus and the rates instead of where the extra money will be used. Without further and adequate evidence, we cannot make a conclusion that the lottery would doubtless be successful.
       To sum up, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate the exact effects that the lottery bring to Lucria along with the detailed and credible evidence and information about the reason why Impecunia would gain the similar success. In addition, the arguer must provide the procedure on how to begin a state lottery and the way to satisfy the citizens to buy the lottery.

韵9090UID：2874129

OPIC: ARGUMENT51 - 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." WORDS: 696          TIME: 1:08:09          DATE: 2010/8/4

The argument is presented that some patients may have secondary infections after they have（我觉得这里的they have可以删掉吧，读着更顺） severe muscle strain and that the use of the antibiotics can effectively heal(这里用heal有点不合适。抗生素是用来防止继发感染的，而不是治愈。题目中用heal是说治愈肌肉拉伤。改成prevent) the secondary infection, Then(大写) the author makes an arbitrary conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. The author ignores the corrected relationship between the severe patients and some ordinary patients; the incidence rate of secondary infection after one is diagnosed with muscle strain.
    As it is mentioned in the first sentence, secondary infections may happen after severe muscle strain. However, some patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain may not develop into the secondary infection. To say the least, someone who has severe muscle strain may also keep out of secondary infection which depends on the physical and mental conditions of the patients. Someone who is strong and active may be lower probable to be infected with the secondary infection than someone who is weak and negative. The physical and mental conditions may affect the recuperation time much more than the use of medicines. Moreover, some patients who are not diagnosed with severe muscle strain may have lower possibility to have secondary infections than those seriously injured. Secondary infection may happen after（个人感觉用while更好） some patients who are(who are可以删掉把。周边的几个句式有点像) diagnosed with severe muscle strain do not have their treatments in time or careless protect of their disaster(这个地方语法有点奇怪，不是很明白。改成：carelessly protect they themselves from injuries).  In a word, someone with the muscle strain may not develop into secondary infections in high possibility.
     Meanwhile, there may be some other medicines more useful than antibiotics to heal the muscle strain（我觉得你这里没有理解对，抗生素不是直接治病的，是预防继发感染的）. Patients can have many choices that they can take them instead of taking antibiotics（Many other medicines which have the similar effects can take the place of antibiotics by patients.）. Common sense tells us that Antibiotic may have some other effects（side effects副作用） on the patients that does not very good(do harm) to the health of the users. For example, antibiotics may affect the sleep of the users so that they are sleepy during the daylight however they are(删) energic in the（at） night, somehow may affect some teenager patients to grow up abnormal , somehow fast or slowly. The correct use of medicine is so important that it can heal the disaster without any other bad effects（我觉得这段的攻击性不强，应该联系题目的最后一句“所有的患者都该服用抗生素”来展开。说明不同生病程度的人使用不同的药物）.
(这一段和下一段应该换位，从重要程度上来说)
      When it comes to the analogy experiment mentioned in the argument, it is confusing that how about the differences of(between) the patients and the directors. We can see in the argument that the directors of the two experiments is(are) different in their major and the field they touched(are in). It is a big problem that the different directors from different fields may treat their patients in a very different way. Dr Newland, who are(is) specializes(specialized) in sports medicines, may have much experiences in the treatment of the sports hurts. The patients in his group may obtain more professional treatments than the other that their recuperation time is short (改成从句：others, which may reduce the recuperation time). However, Dr Alton, a general physician, may have more considered the patients in the ordinary way as usual as the other patients. Even the physical and mental conditions of the patients in the two groups are so different that it is difficult to identify whether it is mostly the contribution of antibiotics. For instance, the first group of patients is stronger and more active than the second group, and they are more matching the treatment of the Dr, they have more confidence in their director(Dr. 后面是不是漏单词啊？). Their recuperation time can be short. The sugar pills used in the second group may also have a negative effect on the healing of the patients. Sugar pills may result in destroying the regular time period of the patients for the blood glucose rises. After all, the comparison experiment is not well organized that it does not have many convincing effects.
       The author should make a more detailed and persuasive experiment according to the rule of the analogy experiment in order to make a persuasive argument (so that it can rule out other possibilities that may be taken into account), such as choose some patients with the similar severe of the muscle strain, dividing them into four groups, guaranteeing that each of the group contains five or more patients. One of the groups take antibiotics regularly, the second take sugar pills regularly, the third take placebo, and the fourth take both antibiotics and sugar pills. The directors must from the same field(这里不需要写的这么详细，这是在你的正文中所涉及过的，只需提及即可。最后应该象征性的有一句比较明显的收尾句).

//你的水平比鄙人好多了。但是我觉得你应该压缩一下字数，考试时候很难完成这么多。你的正文第一段明显比后两段写的好。估计是时间紧吧， 。还有啊，每一段开头可以套模版的，结尾段也可以，这样语言多样化 ~~加油！
104# SweeetLin