argument51 [076G飞跃小组]cager第二次作业 求拍

cagerUID: 2267706

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: 399         TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-2-26

The medical newsletter suggests that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To bolster the suggestion, the arguer cites a study that the group, taking antibiotics and directed by Dr. Newland, heals faster than the other group who are  in direction of Dr. Alton and given sugar pills. Close scrutiny of the study, leads many flaws of the argument.

First of all, there is no information about the instances of the two groups. It is possible that the group who take antibiotics are slight muscle strain, while the other group suffer heave muscle strain. Also perhaps the group taking antibiotics are strong youth, the other one are someone who are fainter. For that matter, the study has lost the capability of comparison. Oppositely, if the patients of the two groups are exchanged, the opposite outcome may come about. Hence, the study is unbelievable if the samples of the two groups are not identical.

Secondly, the two groups are directed for recuperation by different doctors respectively.  Maybe Dr. Newland has more affluent experience and skills than Dr. Alton, and Dr. Newland adopts some additional methods, which are helpful for heal of muscle strain to cure his patients. And also perhaps some discrepancies of life custom exist between the two groups which result into the disparate outcome of them. In that case, the study can not be considered as valid. I am unconvinced of correction of the study if these possibilities are not excluded.

Even if the doubts referred above all have been accounted for, the arguer still ignores many important factors of the feasibility to spread the method. First, we must make clear that whether or not the antibiotics will have negative affect on patients. We should also know that whether the antibiotic is applicable for people in all age sections. If the antibiotic does bad for human, the method will not move through. Moreover, the expense for the antibiotics may be out of purchasing power of people. In that case, the suggestion will not be advisable either.

All in all, the argument can not convince me that the antibiotics indeed has better effect on patients suffered from muscle strain if the arguer does not provide more evidences. And many aspects should be considered such as price, bad effects. Besides, the arguer could think about some other methods which are superior

syjoliUID: 2296328

up一下,,,,写的不错哦。。