argument51 【1106G】gelivable小组 第2次作业

鑫鑫小宁UID: 2795099

The report begins by stating the hypothesis that secondary infections retard the heal of muscle strain. The report states that by a study of two groups of patients the hypothesis is initially proved. Comparing the first group of patients who treated antibiotics by sports medicine specialist with the second who treated sugar pills by general physician, the study shows that recuperation time of first group is evidently quicker than respected. The report then continues by concluding that all muscle strain patients should be advised to take antibiotics.

The two inferences that the authentication of secondary infections obstructing the heal of muscle strain and all muscle strain patient should take antibiotics are chiefly depend on the study, but the study itself is unpersuasive and unreasonable in two respects. First, the sample selection is untold, without which any experiments make no sense. In this example, there is a extreme possibility that all patients in group one are healthier or younger. Even in general situations, the amount of the chosen patients which is will strongly influence the consequence, especially when it is few in number. The unknown sample quantity maybe make this study impacts by accidental events. Secondly, difference between two doctors is a fatal problem. Sports medicine specialist treating group one is likely more adept in muscle matters than the general physician who treat group two. Regardless these aspects make the study insignificance.

Even if ignoring the unreasonable of the study, concluding the two inferences only based on it is insufficient.No given evidence in the report shows that the patients in the study suffer a secondary infections, without which relation between secondary infections and retarded heal of muscle strain cannot be proved.In the second viewpoint, regardless the diversity of the patients, the author affirmed that they should all treated antibiotics. Nevertheless, the diversity of the patients is one of the most headache in medicine. For instance,  should antibiotics irritability and mild muscle injury be treated antibiotics? The deduction is too absolute.

Overall, the study seems judicious if the author declare the amount of the patients and uses similar doctors.Moreover, showing the patients are all suffer secondary infections in the study, the prove of the initial hypothesis will become logical. After all, it would be wise not to advise patients to take antibiotics before further measurement appears.