argument51【snickers小组】by zhangwanying

zhangwanyingUID: 2775533

argument 51 by zhangwanying

lornazhangUID: 2743693

The argument is far from well-reasoned due to several questionable flaws. First, necessary diagnosis were not made to identify whether the patients are primarily infected; additional, no necessary observation and proper statistical analysis are applied to evaluate secondary infections' effect upon recuperation time; further, the author makes an unjustifiable or maybe dangerous recommendation according to his conclusion drawn from this invalid experiment.(模仿例文写的不错嘛)

To begin with, we should make certain the definition of "secondary infection'. It means, after an animal was infected with a kind of pathogenic microoganism, body was then infected again with another kind of microoganism owing to lowered body resistance. The purpose of the research is to identify and evaluate the relationship between secondary infection and the suspected longer convalescence in severe muscle strain. Therefore, to ensure that these two groups of patients with severe muscle strain were incipiently infected is a necessary requisite to the validity in this experiment. However, the selection of patients didn't meet this basic requirement, and could have greatly affected the accuracy of the experiment. It is at（去掉） likely that a percentage of them are not initially infected at all, thus, no matter these ones would suffer from infection later or not, it has little or nothing to do with secondary infection.

In addition, no effective measures are taken to correlate patients' secondary infections and the length of convalescence. To conduct the experiment in a scientific way, the doctors should keep monitoring their condition of infection, diagnose and differentiate those who were suffered from secondary infection and whose who （这两个怎么拥在一起）are not, and then scientifically analyze the data recorded. Unfortunately, however, （冗余一个就够）although the pseudo antibiotics --- sugar pills, could have precluded the influence of psychological factors to some extent, this experimentation（experiment） is not processed in a proper and valid way to focus on the main point of the hypothesis. For example, the author fails to rule out the possibility that the only very few patients got secondary infections in the experiment. In fact, only if sufficient evidence is provided to show that in the first group, not only the recuperation time was obviously reduced, but also there were  less patients who suffer from secondary inflections and these inflections were well restrained, while the other group was just in the opposite condition, will it be more persuasive to claim that secondary inflections keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain, and antibiotics are effectual to prevent and cure secondary inflection.

Finally, it is irrational for the author to conclude that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics for treatment. More and more cases are now reported about the side effect of overusing antibiotics, and in clinical medicine, "prudent use of antibiotics" are highly advocated. Even it might be beneficial for some sufferers （suffering from）of inflections caused by severe muscle strain to take antibiotics, however, when it comes to the large amount of patients who are not inflected, especially those who merely get mild muscle strain, it would be unreasoned to treat them with antibiotics.

In sum, it is too hasty for the author to claim that the hypothesis has now been proved just based on an experiment with no proper subject selection, no scientific methods and no necessary statistical analysis. And his irresponsibility recommendation of commonly using antibiotics may lead to abuse of antibiotics, which is quite possible to bring about unexpected consequences.  

写的挺好，比我写的好，很充分，比以前大有进步，用词也不冗余了，很好值得我学习
只是字数是不是太多了 考试时能写完吗

zhangwanyingUID: 2775533

又改了一遍；密码是群号

daniexiaUID: 2403405

arguemnt 51 zhangWY 评 daniexia.doc (29.5 KB, 下载次数: 3)

2010-11-28 20:40:12 上传

下载次数: 3

不好意思有点晚了