argument51 同题作文

lovingraulUID: 2130978

“Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.”

In this analysis, the author sates that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.. To substantiate this recommendation, the author cites the preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. However, as discussed below, this argument suffers certain statistical flaws and other critical problems, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

the threshold problem with the argument is that the author’s sweeping claim that taking antibiotics is effective in treating muscle injuries depends on the assumption that the survey is statistically reliable. However, the author lends no support that this is the case. From the survey quoted in the argument, however, we find no sign of such procedures for random sampling, and have good reason to doubt if the sample is representative enough to reflect a diverse cross section of the population of the patient, as we all know the resistance to illness varies from male to female, young to old, and diverse occupations. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that the subjects studied were those who were healthy inherently. Therefore, any decision aimed at the demand to prescribe antibiotics as treatment must be based on more thorough investigation to gather sufficient data in order to narrow down and locate the actual causes of the problem.

Even assuming that the patients are representative of each member within that group, this argument lacks sufficient information about how the study was conducted to determine what conclusions, if any, can be drawn from it. The experiment’s results are reliable only if all other factors that might affect the healing process remained constant during the experiment; however, the author provided no evidence it is the case. In the absence of this evidence, the disparity in the average recuperation time can be readily explained by other factors other than the deficiency of antibiotics; perhaps the respectively doctor who specializes in sports medicine and the general physician skewed the averages, or perhaps the sugar pills offset the cure effect or even had some side effect on the patients. Any of these scenarios, if true, would cast considerable doubt on the argument’s conclusion that it is the antibiotics that heal the patients.

Granted that all the factors are stable during the survey, by concluding that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment, the author seems to assume without supporting evidence that this is the case. While it is true that a few patients recovered from injuries in accordance with the treatment, this is not necessarily true of everyone within that group. We are not informed there is need for every individual to take antibiotics regardless of other superior healing on patients without secondary infections, or the likely side effect on exceptional cases in which people allergic to antibiotics led to an introduced limit. Thus, without additional samples from diverse condition, I cannot accept the author’s sweeping generalization that all patients should order such antibiotics.

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that conclusion reached in this argument is invalid and probably misleading. To bolster the recommendation the author would need to provide clear evidence that exact data about the survey. To better assess the author’s projection, it would be useful to know more concrete information about the characteristics about antibiotics.

小桶UID: 2183657

In this analysis, the author sates that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.. To substantiate this recommendation, the author cites the preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. However, as discussed below, this argument suffers certain statistical flaws and other critical problems, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

the threshold problem with the argument is that the author’s sweeping claim that taking antibiotics is effective in treating muscle injuries depends on the assumption that the survey is statistically reliable.[有点绕，断一下句会好点] However, the author lends no support that this is the case. From the survey quoted in the argument, however, we find no sign of such procedures for random sampling, and have good reason to doubt if the sample is representative enough to reflect a diverse cross section of the population of the patient, as we all know the resistance to illness varies from male to female, young to old, and diverse occupations.[diverse前少个介词，结构也不对称] Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that the subjects studied were those who were healthy inherently. Therefore, any decision aimed at the demand to prescribe antibiotics as treatment must be based on more thorough investigation to gather sufficient data in order to narrow down and locate the actual causes of the problem.

Even assuming that the patients are representative of each member within that group, [说反了吧]this argument lacks sufficient information about how the study was conducted to determine what [the] conclusions, if any, can be drawn from it. The experiment’s results are reliable only if all other factors that might affect the healing process remained constant during the experiment;[不是实验条件持续不变，而是两组应该除了antibiotic的各种条件应该是一样的] however, the author provided no evidence it is the case. In the absence of this evidence, the disparity in the average recuperation time can be readily explained by other factors other than the deficiency of antibiotics; perhaps the respectively doctor who specializes in sports medicine and the general physician skewed the averages[句子不完整], or perhaps the sugar pills offset the cure effect or even had some side effect on the patients.[这个假设太牵强了] Any of these scenarios, if true, would cast considerable doubt on the argument’s conclusion that it is the antibiotics that heal the patients.[两个他因都是一带而过，论证不深入]

Granted that all the factors are stable during the survey, by concluding that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment, the author seems to assume without supporting evidence that this is the case.[这不能当作主题句把] While it is true that a few patients recovered from injuries in accordance with the treatment, this is not necessarily true of everyone within that group. We are not informed there is need for every individual to take antibiotics regardless of other superior healing on patients without secondary infections,[we are这句读不懂] or the likely side effect on exceptional cases in which people allergic to antibiotics led to an introduced limit. Thus, without additional samples from diverse condition, I cannot accept the author’s sweeping generalization that all patients should order such antibiotics.

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that conclusion reached in this argument is invalid and probably misleading. To bolster the recommendation the author would need to provide clear evidence that exact data about the survey. To better assess the author’s projection, it would be useful to know more concrete information about the characteristics about antibiotics.

句型，用词感觉都很不错，甘拜下风，但逻辑不强，对每个攻击点都是草草带过，建议看看寄托上 论论证深入的帖子