ARGUMENT51[FF小组] by alpsky有拍必回，欢迎互改

alpskyUID: 2438084

ARGUMENT51[FF小组] by alpsky有拍必回，欢迎互改

征友互改，共同进步
题目：ARGUMENT51- The following appeared in a medical newsletter.

"Doctors have long suspected thatsecondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severemuscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of astudy of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treatedfor muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sportsmedicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Theirrecuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected.Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a generalphysician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they weretaking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantlyreduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be welladvised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."

字数：373          用时：0:27:47          日期：2008-11-26

In this argument, the arguer recommendsthat all patients who diagnosed with muscle strain should be well advised totake antibiotics as part of their treatment. To support this claim, the arguercites the results of a study by comparing two group of patients with differenttreatment. As it stands, the argument suffers from several critical flaws asfollows.

First of all, it is unwarranted that everypatient after severe muscle strain can be infected twice. As only the secondaryinfections happened, the antibiotics are necessary. So without the evidenceshowing that secondary infections are the necessary result of muscle strain,the assumption is unconvincing.

In addition, the validity of the study isopen to doubt. Firstly, the arguer does not provide any information about thehealthy conditions of the two groups of patients. Maybe the former group ofpatients' healthy is better than that of the latter group. And also we do notknow whether the former group have taken other medicines except antibioticsthemselves or take some exercises which can make recovery much more quickly.Furthermore, as Dr. Newland is a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, hecan give many good advices to the patients, while Dr. Alton, a generalphysician, has no idea about this kind of illness and does not perform betterthan Dr. Newland. So without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer cannotget the results from the study.

Finally, even assuming that it is antibioticsthat reduce the patients' recuperation time, it does not follow that allpatients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to takeantibiotics as part of their treatment. The arguer does not provide thedisadvantages of antibiotics. It is highly possible that it has some kind ofnegative effect that some patients cannot take. So only that it has been provedthat antibiotics has no negative effect, that all patients can take it.

To sum up, we can safely conclude that theargument has several patent flaws. To make it logically acceptable, the arguershould provide more concrete evidence showing that antibiotics can reduce therecuperation time of patients after severe muscle strain. To better evaluatethe argument, we need to know more concerning the negative effect ofantibiotics.

duyuan3377UID: 2415765

In this argument, the arguer recommendsthat all patients who diagnosed with muscle strain should be well advised totake antibiotics as part of their treatment. To support this claim, the arguercites the results of a study by comparing two group of patients with differenttreatment. As it stands, the argument suffers from several critical flaws asfollows.

First of all, it is unwarranted that everypatient after severe muscle strain can be infected twice. As only the secondaryinfections happened, the antibiotics are necessary. So without the evidenceshowing that secondary infections are the necessary result of muscle strain,the assumption is unconvincing.
*论述如果可以在充分点就更好了~

In addition, the validity of the study is open to doubt. Firstly, the arguer does not provide any information about thehealthy conditions of the two groups of patients. Maybe the former group ofpatients' healthy is better than that of the latter group. And also we do notknow whether the former group have taken other medicines except antibioticsthemselves or take some exercises which can make recovery much more quickly.Furthermore, as Dr. Newland is a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, hecan give many good advices to the patients, while Dr. Alton, a generalphysician, has no idea about this kind of illness and does not perform betterthan Dr. Newland. So without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer cannotget the results from the study.


Finally, even assuming that it is antibioticsthat reduce the patients' recuperation time, it does not follow that allpatients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to takeantibiotics as part of their treatment. The arguer does not provide thedisadvantages of antibiotics. It is highly possible that it has some kind ofnegative effect that some patients cannot take. So only that it has been provedthat antibiotics has no negative effect, that all patients can take it.

To sum up, we can safely conclude that theargument has several patent flaws. To make it logically acceptable, the arguershould provide more concrete evidence showing that antibiotics can reduce therecuperation time of patients after severe muscle strain. To better evaluatethe argument, we need to know more concerning the negative effect ofantibiotics.

*我们两的提纲基本一样哈~~:)
*你限时已经很好了嘛~你的argu已经没什么问题了啊~加油过题库喽~~