argument203【1106G】gelivable小组 第3次作业 NEW

MrTomUID: 2904037

结论：treatment in smaller ,non-profit hospitalsis more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger , for profithospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger,for-profit hospitals.

证据:
small non-profithospital in the town of Saluda
Large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville
隐含条件：两家医院的设备，病人数量，工作人员数量，病人病症的严重程度，以及其他条件都相同。

	Average length of patient’s  stay	Cure rate	Employees per patient	Complaints received
Saluda	Two days	Twice	more	Few
Megaville	Six days

******************************************************************************************************
In the feature story , the editor claims that the treatment in the Saluda hospital is more economical and of better quality than that in the hospital in Megaville. To support his conclusion, he provides data of average length of a patient's stay, the cure rate, the rate of employees per patient and number of complaints. It is attempting to agree with the editor's conclusion. However, careful analysis could reveal several problems with this argument.

To begin with, the editor provides the fact that the patients in Saluda hospital stay less time and have a higher cure rate. Nevertheless, these data are not enough to indicate Saluda hospital is of better quality. One alternative explanation is that the Megaville hospital receives more seriously ill patients and has a greater total patients’ number. Considering it is for-profit and large, Megaville hospital is more likely to own more sophisticated treatment facilities and have more experts. Thus the alternative explanation seems reasonable and the editor fails to offer other information either of the patients or of the hospital to support his conclusion.

Moreover, the data shows that the Saluda hospital has a higher ratio of employees-per-patient and the editor believes this is an indication of good quality. But having more employees taking care of patients dose not equal to high treatment quality. It could be a result from small patients' number and less sophisticated curing devices. It is true in some big hospitals with advanced equipment that few faculties could take care of more patients. Since there are no evidence to clear this doubt, the conclusion is weakened. Besides, maybe due to greater patients' number and server sickness which need operations or special treatments, there are more complaints in Megaville hospital. Again, this does not reflect good quality absolutely.

Finally, the editor asserts the Saluda hospital is more economical but still lack of direct evidence. Without comparing the running cost, the funds they received and the profits they make, it is hard to figure out which one is more economical. May be the Megaville hospital can contribute a lot to the local economy since it is for-profit and large while the Saluda contributes none and may even needs financial support from local economy.

In sum, the editor's argument cannot be taken seriously as it stands. To strengthen it, the editor must offer more details of the facilities, number of patients and faculties ,the level of the sickness which they usually treat, and better explain the financial condition of them.