argument51 请大家拍

paburawUID: 2204657

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - The 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."
WORDS: 416          TIME: 上午 12:30:00          DATE: 2006-7-8
1 调查有问题，两组样本是否具有可比性，具体的两组的年龄，性别以及疾病的严重程度都不知道，另外即使是40%如果是样本过小的话在统计学上也可能是没有意义的。
2 两个医生所采用的治疗方法是否一样，如果不一样的话，那两组的差异可能就是由本身治疗方案的不用所引起的，
3 所有的病人都要用抗生素太绝对了吧？

In this argument, the author concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should be suggested to take antibiotics in order to heal quickly. To bolster his suggestion, the author employs a study about two groups of patients who suffer from muscle strain, one group use antibiotics while the other group placebo. Nevertheless, this argument is specious in several respects.

To begin with, as for the study, it is not reliable itself, for the reason that the argument contains no information about whether two groups are comparable. If the basic aspects of subjects in tow groups are not similar enough, such as sex, age, degrees of severity of muscle strain, two groups would have difference regardless of using antibiotics. For example, it is entirely possible that one group's subjects are healthier than the other group; as a result, this group tends to heal more quickly than the other one. Until the author provides clear evidence about that two groups are comparable in statistics, his claim would be more reasonable than now. In addition, 4o percent quicker which seems to be significant superficially would amount to lack of statistical significance as well.

In the second place, the author does not tell us what kind of cure method of two doctors respectively. There is a good chance that two doctors adopt tow different plan to cure their own patients, since we know that one doctor is specializing in sports medicine while the other general physician. For that matter, the different results of two groups would be caused by their different cure method, rather than the use of antibiotics. If this is the case, the author cannot rely on this study to draw any sound conclusion about all muscle strain patient should use antibiotics.

Final and not least, the author's conclusion is based on the two assumptions that all muscle strain patients will cause secondary infections and that all muscle strain is severe. As the argument contains no evidence that everyone who suffers from muscle strain would cause secondary infection as well, the author commits a fallacy of overgeneralization. For those people who do not infect while have muscle strain, antibiotics accomplish nothing to help them heal.

In sum, this argument is not well-reasoned due to a couple of incredible evidence it stands. To better bolster conclusion, the author must provide clear evidence which might include the following: 1 the evidence that tow groups are comparable in statistics; 2 whether two doctors adopt the same method; 3 is it necessary for all muscle strain patient to take antibiotic medicine to help them heal quickly.