argument51【Chasing For "6" Score作文互改小组】

桃太郎UID: 2275108

51.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."

In this argument, the conclusion endorsed by the arguer is that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. Adducing grounds to buttress this conclusion, the author provide a study of two groups patients which suffers a severe lack of evdience without convincing me that the assertion would be credible.
First and foremost, the argument rest on a gratuitous assumption that the secondary infections is no doubt to occur.However the author does not provide any information that the secondary infections is about to arise on the patients with severe muscle strain, or any evidence concerning the possibility of the secondary infections on the patients with muscle strain.Obviously, the argument can not convice us by the dubious assumption.
Secondly, the arguer fails to consider into account patients who are not suffer from severe muscle strain but muscle strain. The study of two groups of patients is only investigated for the severe muscle strain patients but not for all patients who suffer muscle strain.It is of great possibility that the antibiotics can help patients with severe muscle strain a quickly healing as well as make no difference in the patients with common muscle strain.Thus it is peremptorily to assert that all paitients should take antibiotics as part of their treatment base on a unilateral study.
Finally, the result of the study lacks credibility and therefore could not lend strong support to the arguer's conclusion the arguer maintains.On the one hand,the author does not provide any pertinent information regarding the patients of the two groups.And their age, sex and other physical features is not notified by the arguer.In all probability, the patients in the first group who take the antibiotics are of younger age or of better physical conditions than the patients in the second group who do not take the antibiotics. Therefore, the result can not reveal the fact that the antibiotics are of use during the recovery.In addition, the recovery extent also hinge on the expericens and profession level of the both doctors.In common sense, docor specializing in sports medicine are of more knowledge and experiences in the muscle strain problems.The patients of his recovering quickly may not attribute to the antibiotics but the high  level treatment and pertinency therapy.

当时用模考软件的时候题目号打错了....这个就没限时,大概写了一个多小时吧~
In conclusion, the argument is not compelling and not undeniable as it stands.Only with more persuasive evdience, along with more solid confirmation, can the argument be view as rational and verifable. To make it more logically acceptable, the arguer would have to present verifable justifications to demonstrate the specific details concerning the patients and the profession level pertinent the muscle strain of the doctors.