argument51【1106G】gelivable小组 第2次作业

lzcc1030UID: 2776987

The author suggests that all patients have muscle strain should take anibiotics as part of their treatment. To support his suggestion the author cites the treatment of two groups. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommadation.

First, the author provides no evidence that the two groups' patients are in the same degree of muscle strain. It is entirely possible that the first group of patient have light muscle strain while the other group's patients are badly injured.
It is also possible that the most patients in the second group are children and the old who are not strong enough to heal quickly. Without ruling out the reasons about the groups' circumstance, I can hardly accept the recommandation.

Secondly, even though there is no diffirence between the two group's patients, the author unfairly claims that it is the antibiotics that helps the first group to heal quicker. It is possible that Dr.Newland is more professional in the treating the patients who have muscle strain. Or he use much better medicine to treat the patients. Since the author doesn't rule out the diffirence between the two doctors so the recommandation is untenable.

Thirdly,the second group use sugar to take the place of antibiotic, it is possible that it is the sugar that ease up the effect of the medicine.Since the author provides no information about the concrete medicine the patients take, the recommadation is not reliable.

To sum up, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To bolster
the recommandation the author must provide evidence that the two groups' patients are in the same degree of muscle strain and they are in the same treatment.

tutuhedouUID: 2971121

1# lzcc1030
The author suggests that all patients have muscle strain should take anibiotics as part of their treatment. To support his suggestion the author cites the treatment of two groups. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommandation.

First, the author provides no evidence that the two groups' patients are in the same degree of muscle strain. It is entirely possible that the first group of patient 【这个表达有点怪哦
可能patients in the first group 比较好】have light muscle strain while the other group's patients are badly injured.
It is also possible that the most patients in the second group are children and the old who are not strong enough to heal quickly. Without ruling out the reasons about the groups' circumstance, I can hardly accept the recommandation.[病患程度不同]

Secondly, even though there is no diffirence between the two group's patients, the author unfairly claims that it is the antibiotics that helps the first group to heal quicker. It is possible that Dr.Newland is more professional in the treating the patients who have muscle strain. Or he use much better medicine to treat the patients. Since the author doesn't rule out the diffirence between the two doctors so the recommandation is untenable.【治疗手段不同】

Thirdly,the second group use sugar to take the place of antibiotic, it is possible that it is the sugar that ease up the effect of the medicine.Since the author provides no information about the concrete medicine the patients take, the recommadation is not reliable.【这个点我没考虑到呢
但论述有点单薄】

To sum up, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To bolster
the recommandation the author must provide evidence that the two groups' patients are in the same degree of muscle strain and they are in the same treatment.

总的来说
文章的主体部分基本都在一个框架内，但论述不够充分
另外，可以再找一些可以突破的点来攻击
比如实验推结论的合理性问题等等