【challenge yourself小组】第二次作业 argu 203

superjiang001UID：2300426

ARGUMENT203 （最新JJ排11位）
- The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."

Before the conclusion that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals has been made, we should reconsider the data provided by author from several other respects. The author seems to have assumed that shorter length of patients’ stay and higher cure rate among patients in nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda than that of for-profit hospital in city of Megaville lead to his conclusion that treatment in hospital of Saluda is better than that of Megaville, which may mask other potentially significant factors and may cause severely health problem of patients both in nonprofit and for-profit hospital.

First of all, the data of patients provided by the author is not accurate itself. The author fails to give us the specific information about the two groups of patients. We have no ideas of their health condition, medical records, ages, and so forth. Maybe most of the patients of nonprofit hospital in Saluda are young men, and they earn a higher opportunity to recover in a short time for in most cases they get a better health conditions if the patients in hospital of Megaville are generally older. In addition, maybe most of the patients in nonprofit hospital in Saluda are injected with some relevant antibodies before, and thus they have a limited chance to be severely harmed by the diseases they got before again, which means the cure rate among these patients in the Saluda hospital is higher comparing to patients in hospital of Megaville if they infect a kind of bacterium for the first time.

Secondly, the author does not tell whether the two hospitals do the same job towards treatment. For example, maybe the Saluda hospital only designed for those who get themselves tiny little health problems, such as headache, catching a cold, getting a fever, and so forth. In this type of situation, most of the time recover will be less than two days, even hours, and the cure rate is definitely high. Conversely, if the hostipal of Megaville only designed for big surgeries or some kind of uneasily curable diseases, say, triple bypass, often the time of recovery is longer than just a few days, even more than several months. Thus, I can not accept the author’s conclusion unless he or she gives me some more details about the hospitals.

Finally, the author can not assert that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is better in quality just by observing data of recovery time and cure rates, other elements also weigh heavily in this process. For example, after the treatment the patient need to be taken good care of in various aspects, such as enough relax, clean and fresh air, a professional nurse, even good food. The big hospital may possess sufficient money to provide such kind of services and can better help the patients to get rid of illness as soon as possible. However, the small hospital may lack of the competence to provide good environment as the big hospital can do. Sometimes some small hospitals are not even able to supply enough sickrooms for the patients. Thus, we should judge the treatment of a hospital not only by paying attention on cure rates, also through the services of the hospital can provide after the patients’ cure time.

In sum, before the conclusion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospital is reached, a more strictly controlled legitimate study is needed.

tongdawpUID：2500696

ARGUMENT203 （最新JJ排11位）
- The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."

Before the conclusion that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals has been made, we should reconsider the data provided by author from several other respects. The author seems to have assumed that shorter length of patients’ stay and higher cure rate among patients in nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda than that of for-profit hospital in city of Megaville lead to his conclusion that treatment in hospital of Saluda is better than that of Megaville, which may mask other potentially significant factors and may cause severely health problem of patients both in nonprofit and for-profit hospital.
（开头段有点陌生哈，如果不是从范文里找到出处的话，建议还是按照大部分的范文定一个模板比较保险。）

First of all, the data of patients provided by the author is not accurate itself. The author fails to give us the specific information about the two groups of patients. We have no ideas of their health condition, medical records, ages, and so forth. Maybe most of the patients of nonprofit hospital in Saluda are young men, and they earn a higher opportunity to recover in a short time for in most cases they get a better health conditions if the patients in hospital of Megaville are generally older. In addition, maybe most of the patients in nonprofit hospital in Saluda are injected with some relevant antibodies before, and thus they have a limited chance to be severely harmed by the diseases they got before again, which means the cure rate among these patients in the Saluda hospital is higher comparing to patients in hospital of Megaville if they infect a kind of bacterium for the first time.
（这段的两个他因举得有点牵强，这个错误有点偏吧）

Secondly, the author does not tell whether the two hospitals do the same job towards treatment. For example, maybe the Saluda hospital only designed for those who get themselves tiny little health problems, such as headache, catching a cold, getting a fever, and so forth.（反过来说，一般不太严重的患者更倾向于去小的非营利性的医院，因为离得近或者便宜，感觉更有说服力些） In this type of situation, most of the time recover（改为recovering time或者time for recovering） will be less than two days, even hours, and the cure rate is definitely high. Conversely, if the hostipal of Megaville only designed for big surgeries or some kind of uneasily curable diseases, say, triple bypass, often the time of recovery is longer than just a few days, even more than several months.（这句同上） Thus, I can not accept the author’s conclusion unless he or she gives me some more details about the hospitals.

Finally, the author can not（合并为cannot，而且cannot感觉有些生硬） assert that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is better in quality just by observing data of recovery time and cure rates, other elements also weigh heavily in this process. For example, after the treatment the patient need to be taken good care of in various aspects, such as enough relax, clean and fresh air, a professional nurse, even good food. The big hospital may possess sufficient money to provide such kind of services and can better help the patients to get rid of illness as soon as possible. However, the small hospital may lack of the competence to provide good environment as the big hospital can do. Sometimes some small hospitals are not even able to supply enough sickrooms for the patients. Thus, we should judge the treatment of a hospital not only by paying attention on cure rates, also through the services of the hospital can provide after the patients’ cure time.

In sum, before the conclusion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospital is reached, a more strictly controlled legitimate study is needed.

整体上看，作者的这三个错误有点相互交叉，没有明显的区别，逻辑结构不清晰，而且每段论证时所列举的他因也不是很有说服力；作者的语言读起来有点不够formal，基本没有使用典型的论证词。
建议看一些范文，或者新东方的讲义，对于argu，是可以使用模板的，而且一些典型的论证词和论证段落是可以借鉴的。

wanghugigiUID：2465119

Before the conclusion that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals has been made, we should reconsider the data provided by author from several other respects. The author seems to have assumed that shorter length of patients’ stay and higher cure rate among patients in nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda than that of for-profit hospital in city of Megaville lead to his conclusion that treatment in hospital of Saluda is better than that of Megaville, which may mask other potentially significant factors and may cause severely health problem of patients both in nonprofit and for-profit hospital.

First of all, the data of patients provided by the author is not accurate itself. The author fails to give us the specific information about the two groups of patients. We have no ideas of their health condition, medical records, ages, and so forth. Maybe most of the patients of nonprofit hospital in Saluda are young men, and they earn a higher opportunity to recover in a short time for in most cases they get a better health conditions if the patients in hospital of Megaville are generally older. In addition, maybe most of the patients in nonprofit hospital in Saluda are injected with some relevant antibodies before, and thus they have a limited chance to be severely harmed by the diseases they got before again, which means the cure rate among these patients in the Saluda hospital is higher comparing to patients in hospital of Megaville if they infect a kind of bacterium for the first time.

Secondly, the author does not tell whether the two hospitals do the same job towards treatment. For example, maybe the Saluda hospital only designed for those who get themselves tiny little health problems, such as headache, catching a cold, getting a fever, and so forth. In this type of situation, most of the time recover will be less than two days, even hours, and the cure rate is definitely high. Conversely, if the hostipal(hospital) of Megaville only designed for big surgeries or some kind of uneasily curable diseases, say, triple bypass, often the time of recovery is longer than just a few days, even more than several months. Thus, I can not accept the author’s conclusion unless he or she gives me some more details about the hospitals.
感觉举例有些强词夺理，按常理，没有医院是规划好只能看些头痛感冒之类的病的吧。
Finally, the author can not assert that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is better in quality just by observing data of recovery time and cure rates, other elements also weigh heavily in this process. For example, after the treatment the patient need to be taken good care of in various aspects, such as enough relax, clean and fresh air, a professional nurse, even good food. The big hospital may possess sufficient money to provide such kind of services and can better help the patients to get rid of illness as soon as possible. However, the small hospital may lack of the competence to provide good environment as the big hospital can do. Sometimes some small hospitals are not even able to supply enough sickrooms for the patients. Thus, we should judge the treatment of a hospital not only by paying attention on cure rates, also through the services of the hospital can provide after the patients’ cure time.

In sum, before the conclusion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospital is reached, a more strictly controlled legitimate study is needed.

基本同意ls的，第三个错误好像是一二的综述，反驳得不够有力。

superjiang001UID：2300426

多谢两位的指点，写这篇的时候不是很认真，谢谢！