Argument98 马上要考试了，麻烦大家看下！考完一定以砖头回报！谢谢

situhuiziUID: 160284

Argument98
The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
'In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps, a concentrated solution of Nadasept killed 40 percent more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During a subsequent test of Nadasept at our hospital in Saluda, that hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection than did any of the other hospitals in our group. Therefore, to prevent serious patient infections, we should supply Nadasept at all hand washing stations throughout our hospital system.'

In the argument, the arguer recommends that the hospitals should supply Nadasept(N) at all hand washing stations throughout the hospital system to prevent serious patient infections. To bolster the assertion, the arguer cites the result of a test and study that the N could reduce the patient infection. Nevertheless, close scrutiny of the argument reveals several logical problems,rendering it unpersuasive.

To begin with, as for the laboratory study, the arguer fails to provide any evidence that the N would take the same effect in the hospital. Perhaps the N would kill more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps in the laboratory due to the certain circumstance such as constant temperature in the lab, but in the hospital N could not have the similar effect, even be less useful than the liquid hand soaps. Moreover, the arguer does not inform other effects of N. Perhaps, the N has some side effect and could cause some diseases.

Secondly, the arguer unfairly assumes that the test in the hospitals is statistically reliable. Nevertheless, the arguer provides no evidence to confirm such assumption. It is entirely possible that the sample of the study is not sufficient in size and could not be representative of the allover population of the patients. Unless the arguer could substantiate the sample of the study is sufficiently representative, any conclusion could be not safely make based on the study. Moreover, the arguer overlooks other factors, which would responsible for the decreasing cases of patient infection. Perhaps, the hospital in S has fewer cases of infection than any other hospital before using the S. Or perhaps, this hospital takes some other actions to prevent the patient infection.

In addition, even if the arguer could substantiate the forgoing assumptions, the claim that supplying the N at all hand-washing stations would prevent serious patient infections is still unwarranted. Perhaps, the N has little effect to prevent the serious patient infections. Moreover, the arguer provides no assurance that all the hospital system should necessarily use the N. Perhaps, the patient infections are not common, and the cost of supplying N is quite high. If so, there is no need to require all the hand washing stations to use N.

In sum, as it stands the argument is unreasonable. To make it more logically convincing, the arguer should provide clear evidence that the N would actually reduce the infections in the hospitals and would also prevent serious infections, the study is statistically reliable,and the changes is necessary in all the hospitals.

situhuiziUID: 160284

自己顶一下啦,大家帮帮忙吧~不修改,提点意见也可以啊~感激不尽啊

lawrence1984UID: 178326

Argument98
The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
'In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps, a concentrated solution of Nadasept killed 40 percent more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During a subsequent test of Nadasept at our hospital in Saluda, that hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection than did any of the other hospitals in our group. Therefore, to prevent serious patient infections, we should supply Nadasept at all hand washing stations throughout our hospital system.'

In the argument, the arguer recommends that the hospitals should supply Nadasept(N) at all hand washing stations throughout the hospital system to prevent serious patient infections. To bolster the assertion, the arguer cites the result of a test and study that the N could reduce the patient infection. Nevertheless, close scrutiny of the argument reveals several logical problems.（加了都好就不能用分词结构吧？） rendering it unpersuasive.（开头好！）

To begin with, as for the laboratory study, the arguer fails to provide any evidence that the N would take the same effect in the hospital. Perhaps the N would kill more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps in the laboratory due to the certain circumstance in the lab, but in the hospital N could not have the similar effect, even be less useful than the liquid hand soaps. Moreover, the arguer does not inform other effects of N. Perhaps, the N has some side effect and could cause some diseases.（我觉得这段的论证很不具体，不是certain ，而应该举出确定的circumstance,你觉得呢？）

Secondly, the arguer unfairly assumes that the test in the hospitals is statistically reliable. Nevertheless, the arguer provides no evidence to confirm such assumption. It is entirely possible that the sample of the study is not sufficient in size and could not be representative of the allover population of the patients. （经典句式）Unless the arguer could substantiate the sample of the study is sufficiently representative, any conclusion could（要加not吧？） be safely make based on the study. Moreover, the arguer overlooks the possibilities, which would（be） responsible for the decreasing cases of patient infection.(这句写的很粗糙) Perhaps, the hospital in S has fewer cases of infection than any other hospital before using the S. Or perhaps,（是不是可以用it is equally possible that呢？） this hospital takes some other actions to prevent the patient infection.（这里的论证比第一段要好。）

In addition, even if the arguer could substantiate the forgoing assumptions, the claim that supplying the N at all hand-washing stations would prevent serious patient infections. Perhaps, the N have（has） little effect to prevent the serious patient infections. Moreover, the arguer provide(s) no assurance that all the hospital system should necessarily use the N. Perhaps, the patient infections are not common, and the cost of supplying N is quite high. If so, there is no need to require all the hand washing stations to use N.

In sum, as it stands the argument is unreasonable. To make it more logically convincing, the arguer should provide clear evidence that the N would actually reduce the infections in the hospitals and would also prevent serious infections, and the study is statistically reliable.(总体来说还好，但是第一段的论证不够具体，全文的论证不太充分，一定细节化！祝你成功！)

situhuiziUID: 160284

好的,谢谢~可能是因为限时的缘故吧,有点紧张,很多方面就没有注意到了~

beatleslwqUID: 178933

Argument98
The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
'In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps, a concentrated solution of Nadasept killed 40 percent more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During a subsequent test of Nadasept at our hospital in Saluda, that hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection than did any of the other hospitals in our group. Therefore, to prevent serious patient infections, we should supply Nadasept at all hand washing stations throughout our hospital system.'

In the argument, the arguer recommends that the hospitals should supply Nadasept(N) at all hand washing stations throughout the hospital system to prevent serious patient infections. To bolster the assertion, the arguer cites the result of a test and study that the N could reduce the patient infection. Nevertheless, close scrutiny of the argument reveals several logical problems rendering it unpersuasive.个人认为如果能具体指出问题比简单复述要好些

To begin with, as for the laboratory study, the arguer fails to provide any evidence that the N would take the same effect in the hospital. Perhaps the N would kill more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps in the laboratory due to the certain circumstance in the lab, but in the hospital N could not have the similar effect, even be less useful than the liquid hand soaps. Moreover, the arguer does not inform other effects of N. Perhaps, the N has some side effect and could cause some diseases.这里我想还说并没有可以和其他品牌做比较，或者放到最后

Secondly, the arguer unfairly assumes that the test in the hospitals is statistically reliable.the result of the test is reliable 因为后面不止说了statistically Nevertheless, the arguer provides no evidence to confirm such assumption. It is entirely possible that the sample of the study is not sufficient insufficientin size and could not be representative of the allover population of the patients. Unless the arguer could substantiate the sample of the study is sufficiently representative, anyno conclusion could be safely make based on the study. Moreover, the arguer overlooks the possibilities, which would responsible for the decreasing cases of patient infection.the possibilities that other facts may be responsible for~~~ Perhaps, the hospital in S hashad fewer cases of infection than any other hospital before using the S. Or perhaps, this hospital takestook some other actions to prevent the patient infection.还可以举其他可能，如治疗条件好，病人本身体质好等

In addition, even if the arguer could substantiate the forgoing? assumptions, the claim that supplying the N at all hand-washing stations would prevent serious patient infections.谓语呢？ Perhaps, the N have little effectineffective to prevent the serious patient infections？. Moreover, the arguer provide no assurance that all the hospital system should necessarily use the N. Perhaps, the patient infections are not common, and the cost of supplying N is quite high. If so, there is no need to require all the hand washing stations to use N.

In sum, as it stands the argument is unreasonable. To make it more logically convincing, the arguer should provide clear evidence that the N would actually reduce the infections in the hospitals and would also prevent serious infections, and the study is statistically reliable.and is necessary in all hospitals

situhuiziUID: 160284

谢谢,我已经在原文上面做了一定的修改,欢迎大家继续提意见~
还有一个问题就是forgoing使用的不对吗？我好象看到过这样的用法，但是具体记不清楚了，大家讨论下吧
还有酸碱度怎么说哦？也就是说中性环境应该怎么表达？谢谢

situhuiziUID: 160284

自己顶一下

situhuiziUID: 160284

大家帮忙改下吧,我后天就要考试了~回来一定报答啊