argument188 eaglewatch NO.1 第一次作业 we are gters

eaglewatchUID: 2374680

188A new report suggests that men and women experience pain very differently from one another, and that doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications. When researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids—a painkiller—to 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, the women reported feeling much less pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women. This research suggests that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. In addition, researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.

In the report, the arguer claims that kappa opidids(KO) should be prescribed for women only and the effects of all medication should be reevaluated on men versus women , citing the "facts" and "evidence" :(1) the women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, reported feeling much less pain than the men when using KO; (2) the easing lasted longer in women. At the first glance, the argument seems to be somewhat convincing; however , further reflection reveals that it omits some substantial concerns that should be addressed in the argument, while the arguer ignores these. From the logical perspective , this argument suffers from several logical flaws.

First and foremost, the arguer attempts to prove that men and women experience pain very differently from one another, with the same dosage research. At the first eye, the survey itself appears to be plausible; however, with a thorough consideration concerning the reliability of the survey, the survey is lacking of some enough data to support it. On the one hand, the number of people participating into the survey is too little--only 20 men and 20 women. The low number of sampling cannot contribute to a real result. On the other hand , even if the sampling is enough, it is entirely possible that the different quality of human plays a far more significant role in determinating the result, rather than the effect of KO. To conclude, the survey is filled with flaws, needless to say the result.

Secondly, the arguer points out that KO should be prescribed for women only with the reason that women can suffer more than men under the research. As a matter of fact, if KO is only one effective drug can be used on human being safety, there is no other way can assuage the pain when they extract their teeth; however , the arguer belittles this possibility. What's more , can the wisdom teeth extraction illustrate the whole "result" that women can suffer more and longer than men? Obvious not. Common sense tells us that only the integrity can illustrate the integrity; the individual cannot. Nevertheless, the arguer fails to consider this link so that draw a wrong assumption and conclusion.

Finally, the arguer asserts that the effects of all medication should be reevaluated on men versus women. In my observation, even the effects between women and men on KO is really different, there is no plausible and perspective reasons to reevaluate all medication--after all almost the whole medication are under careful research in the lab. The progress of evaluating is in vain. Everyone knows that only a few medication is very different between male and female, nearly every drug can be used both. Although the difference exists , there is no doubt no enough necessity to reevaluate all. However, the arguer attempts to do so, ignoring above consideration.

To sum up my opinion, the argument suffers from several logical flaws discussed above because the evidence cited in this argument does not lend strong support to what the argument maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer had better make a great survey among a huge number of the sick , rather than only a few of them. In additionally, he would have to provide more information about KO especially when treating on different people. The last, the speaker would have to evaluate whether we should reevaluate all the medication. Therefore , if the argument had included the given factors discussed above, it could have became more thorough and logically acceptable.

[ 本帖最后由 liyue24 于 2008-8-2 11:31 编辑 ]