argument51 FLY AW作文组 (补交作业)

flycc28UID: 2164453

argument51:
51The following appeared in a medical newsletter.
"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."
逻辑顺序:
1. Secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain= all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment
2.
破题:
1.题目的假设-二次感染一定会发生,但是文中没有任何资料表明二次感染会发生在肌肉病人身上和或者肌肉病人容易发生二次感染.
2论断引用一组分组研究,但是首先研究并没有提供任何与两组病人相关的资料(病人的年龄,性别,身体状况,),有可能服用抗生素一组的病人比较年轻身体好或者另外一组的人体制普遍不好,就不能说明是抗生素而不是其他原因使病人恢复更快.
3.另外医生的经验和水平也会影响病人的康复速度,运动医生可能更有水平.没有服用抗生素的一组服用了糖片,而文章没有给出糖片会不会影响病人的恢复速度.所以这两组研究不能说明抗生素能使病人恢复更快.
4.抗生素除了杀菌之外还可能带来其他一些副作用.
结论：为加强说服力，论者还应该进一步提供有关肌肉拉伤的病人中二次感染的概率有多少，并提供一份科学的研究，证明在相同医生、相同病征、相同病人生理条件以及其他治疗手段、环境相同的情况下，抗生素是能使病人早日康复。

In this paragraph, the speaker assumes that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Then provides a result of a study of two groups the support his assumption, in the end, he concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. The argument does make some sense at first glance. On meticulous reflection, however, some intolerable fallacies make the arguments incredible.
In the first place, the arguer states that the secondary infection which will happen undoubtedly may prevent some of patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Unfortunately, there are not any evidences indicating that the secondary infection will occur on patients who suffer muscle strain inevitably or they are easily to get secondary infected. If it the hypothesis doesn’t happen, the advice that people who are diagnosed muscle strain should take antibiotics is rootless basically.

In the second place, the argument derives from a study, the statistical information of which is suspicious due to absence of the basic data of ages, sex, health condition of the two groups. For instance, if the people from the group who take the antibiotics are almost young and strong, or the universal condition of health of the second group is not well, the people from two groups will be affected differently by the antibiotics in essence. Therefore, it won’t support to take a conclusion that the quicker recuperation is due to antibiotic rather than other factors.   

Moreover, the unknown craft level of the doctors makes the argument unpersuasive. Doctors specialized in sports medicine may be better at sport illness such as muscle strain than general physician. And the positive or negative function of sugar pill eat by the group   is also unknown. It’s possible that the sugar pill will restrain the recuperation of muscle patients. With these unknown factors, we cannot say that antibiotics lead the quicker recuperation from the study of the two groups.

In the forth, there some side-effect may be brought for the using of the antibiotics.

To make the arguments more convincing, the speaker should provide relevant evidence on the rate of secondary infection among the muscle strain patients, and the study is worked out among people who are at the same condition, then concludes that antibiotics can make the recuperation quicker.