argument5 [0710G Victors互助小组]第10次作业 by Lemon

lemon71500UID: 2335516

TOPIC: ARGUMENT5 - The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.

"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis."

In this argument the speaker predicted the potential profit of Perkins Phamaceuticals, a pharmaceutical company, for its new drug called Xylan which is effective to treat the arthritis, with some analysis and evidence to support this point. At first glance his/her statement seems to be reasonable and logical, in fact, it lacks a strong persuasion and some places are vulnerable and problematic.

According to the speaker, the number of people suffer arthritis will rise from 40 million to 60 million in his/her country, but s/he failed to indicate where does the anticipatory result come from. Maybe it is only a hypothesis that has not been demonstrated by some authoritative organizations. To use an unreliable number and base the whole argument on it is dangerous and easy to be challenged.

From the paragraph we can obtain the information that at present Xenon, which is produced by Becton Pharmaceuticals, would dominate the market of drugs for the treatment of arthritis, yet after its patent expiration in three years its market might be replaced by Perkins Pharmaceuticals. Obviously here the speaker makes an arbitrary assertion, since in the coming three years Xenon will be the best-selling drug, we have no evidence that it will disappear three years later, and with three years' profit and sale experience, there is a possibility that its price would be brought down in some extent.

Finally, we have not a thorough introduction about other kinds of medicines, when the patent on Xenon expires, maybe other new drugs can also challenge the status of these two existing ones. Here the speaker lacks a deep investigation, so his/her assumption bogged in a mistake of subjective imagination.

In sum, in this argument the author's evidences and statements are not substantial enough to support his/her point, if he want to manifest this conclusion is true, here needs a deep and thorough investigation around this topic, such as the exact information about the potential increase of patients, more details of the market development. Only that can s/he draw a conclusion which is more accurate and reliable.