Argument51 【0710G-HIT坚持交作业小组作文大帖】第三次作业 ambitionxx

ambitionxxUID：2314730

希望大家猛拍，不要手下留情，对于昨天给我提出很多建议的战友表示感谢！

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - The following appeared in a medical newsletter.
"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."
WORDS: 413          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2007-8-1 上午 10:29:36

提纲：１：病人的病情没有搞清楚，有可能第一组比第二组原本就好，另外如病人的心情也可能影响
　　　　２：医生技术没有比较，如技术，是否采取其他手段治疗
　　　　３：医生给了病人糖药但并不代表吃了，另外糖药也不知对病情产生影响

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the antibiotics as part of their treatment should been take to all the patients who have the muscle strain. To substantiate this conclusion, the arguer points out that the first group of patients, treated by Dr. Newland with the antibiotics , recovered more quickly than the second group of patients, treated by Dr. Alton with sugar pills but told that they were taking antibiotic. Carefully scrutiny of the argument, however, I find some logical error.

First, there is not enough information to support that the backgrounds of the patients are similarity. As we all know, a patient who gets the disease has the many reasons. Maybe the first groups are better than the second group at first, so it is not astonishing to find that the former recovers more quickly than the latter. In addition, some other factors may influence the therapy, such as the ambient temperature, the mood of the patients. However, the arguer fails to provide the information, so I can't believe it.

Second, how long will the patients take to recover from the disease, is partly determined by the doctor, however, the arguer gives us little evidence about the doctors. It is entirely possible that the Dr. Newland is more special than the Dr. Alton in curing the muscle strain. In addition, every doctor has his special treatment, so the Dr. Newland may give other treatments, such as some healthy food, beneficial sports, which are useful to treatment. If so, the result may be highly suspect.

Finally, the arguer does not tell me whether these patients have taken the sugar pills although the patients are given the sugar pill, there is no evidence to support that they have taken the pills. It is possible that the patients do not take the pills. More badly, they may take some antibiotics at the other time. In addition, did this sugar pills have the effect on the patient? If so, the arguer could not get any conclusion from this result.

To summary, this argument is not persuasive as it sands. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to support this conclusion. At first, he has to tell us that the two groups of patients background, then he have to give the information about the two doctor. Finally, he should assure that second group of patients have taken the sugar pills, not taking any things. If we are informed this evidence, we will believe it.  



[ 本帖最后由 ambitionxx 于 2007-8-1 18:33 编辑 ]