argument188 0906G 永不言弃互改小组 第二周第一次作业 by MYcolting 2＃

MYcoltingUID: 2563080

188.A 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 beprescribedor 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.




The arguer concludes when doctors describe for men or women should have a critical thoughts and he think the effect of the medicine have much more difference between them. To support the assumption, he cites that there are 48 persons participates in an experiment and report women have less pain and long effects than men. From the weaken survey, we can point out several flaws easily, which is render it unconvincing.

To begin with, the arguer's assumption is based on the survey which only has 28 men and 20 women in the experiment. I think the arguer has the false analysis in the evidence. In common sense, we know if the survey is more convincing, it must have the random samples and the sample must be sufficient. From the argument, we know the survey only contains 48 persons. Whereas, we don't know whether the survey is random, but we know the samples of experiment are merely short. Or maybe women have more bear the pains than men or most of the 20 women are more tolerant than men. In addition, the amount between women and men are not balance. Perhaps much of the women don't like to complain the ache. And the arguer cites the reports of those persons as one of the evidence is unconvincing.

Furthermore, even if the quantity of samples are more convincing, nevertheless, merely from who were have the wisdom teeth extracted to reach the conclusion. From the disease we can't conclude other illnesses is the same situation, moreover, the it is only a sickness for human being. Maybe it will be the opposite result when someone has an operation. Admittedly, although it maybe true in some case, in the illness it has some differences between male and female, we can’t reach the conclusion either. From the argument, we can't seem the sickness could instead other disease. So the witness is less convincing.

Thirdly, the arguer has the false extending, when it is presume the effect of kappa opioids (KO) is more persuasive. Nevertheless, the dosage represents the other homogeneous medicine. Perhaps the certain ones have the reverse effect on other persons, or maybe, men will have less pain and long affection than women when the doctor give them other type of dosage.. Without more experiments, I can't assure the effect of other homogeneous medicine is the same to it. And the evidence is unconvinced to us.

Finally, admittedly, even though the evidence of the above is convincing. Should we reevaluate the effects of all medicine? It is confused me that the experiment is the only exam about the effect of dosage and means the effects of other medicine are in vain. We must have more experiments to supports the extreme assumption.

In sum, the argument has several flaws unconvinced me that doctor should distinguish the description of men and women. In the argument, I can conclude the arguer not only cites the uncertain evidence, but have an extreme conclude. To strengthen the evidence the researcher should have much more convincing experiments