argument203,求往死里拍……

gestorbenUID??3003461

The speaker drew the conclusion that treatment in smaller, non-profit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals, which primarily supported by the statement stressed that the average length of a patient’s stay at the small, non-profit hospital in the town of Saluda is much shorter than that of the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville. Moreover, the speaker provided another example that the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. In addition, the speaker pointed out that the Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, which may prove the patients get more nursing care. Furthermore, the speaker indicated that there are few complaints about service at the local hospital, which seems to be a further evidence of the importance of nursing care and employees. The argument appears to make itself coherently logical, however, from my point of view, this argument reveals its X logical flaws.
First of all, as mentioned in the argument, the average length of a patient’s stay at the Saluda hospital is two days, and that of Megaville hospital is six days. However, the statistics show no meaningfulness. From one aspect, the survey results are completely unreliable because the speaker just provided two hospitals as samples, which are obviously not representative. From another, even these two hospitals are able to stand for all hospitals, the average length of a patient’s stay can be affected by the patients’ physique, the kind of disease, and patient’s financial situation, etc. It explains nothing at all, not to mention the quality of treatment.
The speaker put forward annother example that the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital, which is seemingly credible. We must still be reminded that these two hospitals are not absolutely representative. Saluda hospital is a small hospital, by the psychological effects, residents may look for help in larger hospital nearby like Megaville hospital rather than local hospital, if they have severe health problems. Saluda hospital have a high cure rate might simply because it doesn’t have to deal with intractable problems like Megaville hospital does.
Besides, the speaker empasized that the Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, which may prove the patients get more nursing care. And it’s indicated that there are few complaints about service at the local hospital, which seems to be a further evidence of the importance of nursing care and employees. Nevertheless, Saluda hospital has more employees per patient and less complaint can not necessarily prove it has better quality. We have reasons to believe that this data results from its lack of patients. Smaller the basic number is, larger the denominator is. Even Saluda hospital has enough patients to substantiate the percentage, there’s no guarantee the patients would get better nursing care from the employees. Additionally, there are so many element potentially influential not included, for instance, people live in town may act nicer their public health organization.
In conclusion, such data are too probabilistic to support its claim. The argument can only be logically convictive and realistic if it had included the factors discussed above.