人生第一篇ag，望大侠们给我狂风暴雨般的关爱。

yushuinanrongUID: 2788112

51，（医疗/建议/对比）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(3), although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced(1,2). Therefore, all patients(4) who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics(5) as part of their treatment."

The author of this newsletter concludes that all patients diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To justify this conclusion the author provides a study of two groups of patients ,the result of which, shows that the first group taking antibiotics significantly recuperate faster than the second group who only take sugar. I find this argument specious on several grounds.
To begin with, the author fails to provide any evidence that the result of the study are statistical reliable. In order to establish a strong correlation with antibiotics and the recuperation of muscle strain, the study’s sample must be sufficient in size and representative of overall patients suffered from muscle strain. lacking such evidence the author simply cannot convince me that antibiotics can be efficacious .
In addition, even if the result of the study, to some extent, are reliable, it is impossible to access the author’s conclusion. Since he has not considered the factors that the first group who take antibiotics are treated by a doctor who specialize in sports medicine. in sharp contrast ,the second group were treated under a general physician who might not familiar with injures on muscle strain . what’ more, the first group took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment, but the author has not informed me whether the second group regularly take pills. It is entirely possible that it’s just the difference of doctor’s experience and patients’ attitude towards the treatment that lead to the result. Without ruling out this alternative explanation, the author cannot justifiably give any conclusion.
Finally, given that the antibiotics truly has efficacy on treating muscle strain, the author assume too hastily that the antibiotics is fit for all patients diagnosed with muscle strain. he fails to consider the factor that different people have different body conditions ,it is likely that some people would benefit from the antibiotics but some might have no change after taking antibiotics or even become worsen. Besides, the author overlooks the possibility that taking antibiotics may result in other unknown side-effects. In short, without evidence that can rule out these considerations, the authors conclusion remains dubious at best.
In sum, as it stands the argument is widely unpersuasive. To bolster it the author must show the antibiotics can contribute to the recuperation of muscle strain in a direct way. perhaps making a reliable nation-wide study involving representative patients and sufficient in size is a good choice. To better assess the argument it would be useful to know whether the antibiotics have side-effects. It also need a long run and scientific study to testify.