argument51 欢迎来拍，留链接必回拍，谢谢！

littleheavenUID: 191407

argument51
[题目]“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.”

提纲：
1研究问题：忽略了研究中对照两组研究对象在其他方面的差异，体质，年龄，职业等等是不是有可比性？
2即使研究是在两组人情况基本相同的条件下进行的，也不一定是抗生素起了作用，可能存在他因。医生的治疗方式，经验，水平不同，糖丸的影响（潜在的副作用），都有可能导致治疗结果的差异。比如，运动医学的专家可能比另一个综合医师更好的处理肌肉损伤的问题。
3 即使抗生素有作用，也不能建议所有被确诊为肌肉损伤的患者服用抗生素作为辅助治疗。副作用要考虑进来，比如，过敏。

Before prescribing antibiotics to all patients with muscle strain, the evidence given in the argument should be examined from several other angles. The arguer seems to have assumed that taking antibiotics has effect on the healing of severe muscle strain without examining any other factors which may have affected the results of the study.

First of all, for an experiment to be accurate, it must be controlled, with a balance between the experimental and the control groups. In the above study, though, we know nothing about the ages, general health, and vocations of the patient involved. We also do not know the first group patients were of the same age, general health, and vocation as the second one. Further, if the first group patients in the study were very young and thus their recuperation might be quicker just because of their age. The same is true of their general health. If they exercised regularly and ate healthily, their quick recuperation might have nothing to do with the use of antibiotics and might simply be a indication of a healthy lifestyle.

Even if the patients in the study were of the same condition such as ages and general health, the arguer unfairly assumes that a quicker recuperation was due to the use of antibiotics. Since the first group were treated by Dr. Newland, who specializes in sports medicine, it is highly possible that Dr. Newland was more experienced and capable to deal with muscle strain than the doctor of the second group, who was just a general physician. In addition, we are not informed the effect of sugar pills on treating muscle strain. Perhaps sugar pills played an adverse role on the treatment and thus affected the time of average recuperation of the second group in the study. In short, without ruling out such alternative explanations, the argument cannot ensure a cause-effect relationship between antibiotics and the recuperation of muscle strain.

Finally, even assuming that antibiotics causes the quick recuperation of muscle strain, the arguer’s suggestion that all patients with muscle strain would take antibiotics as part of their treatment is dubious at best. The arguer overlooks the possibility that antibiotics might have side-effect that might make antibiotics inadvisable for some of people. If certain people are highly allergic to the antibiotics, we should seek substitute despite the effectiveness of the antibiotics.

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. The study fails to be strictly controlled and the conclusion is questionable at best.

zhengzheng1026UID: 168914

Before prescribing antibiotics to all patients with muscle strain, the evidence given in the argument should be examined from several other angles. The arguer seems to have assumed that taking antibiotics has effect on the healing of severe muscle strain without examining any other factors which may have affected the results of the study.

First of all, for an experiment to be accurate, it must be controlled, with a balance between the experimental and the control groups. In the above study, though, we know nothing about the ages, general health, and vocations of the patient(s)involved. We also do not know the first group patients were of the same age, general health, and vocation as the second one. (这两句是不是有点重复，我明白你的意思是先说一下作者没交代这些情况，再说即使有这些情况，也不一定一样，要是这样的话，何不在后面用个even if 或even though 这样的说法呢)Further, if the first group patients in the study were very young and thus their recuperation might be quicker just because of their age. The same is true of their general health. （感觉有点别扭）If they exercised regularly and ate healthily, their quick recuperation might have nothing to do with the use of antibiotics and might simply be a indication of a healthy lifestyle.

Even if the patients in the study were of the same condition such as ages and general health, the arguer unfairly assumes that a quicker recuperation was due to the use of antibiotics. Since the first group were treated by Dr. Newland, who specializes in sports medicine, it is highly possible that Dr. Newland was more experienced and capable to deal with muscle strain than the doctor of the second group, who was just a general physician. In addition, we are not informed the effect of sugar pills on treating muscle strain. Perhaps sugar pills played an adverse role on the treatment and thus affected the time of average recuperation of the second group in the study. In short, without ruling out such alternative explanations, the argument cannot ensure a cause-effect relationship between antibiotics and the recuperation of muscle strain.

Finally, even assuming that antibiotics causes the quick recuperation of muscle strain, the arguer’s suggestion that all patients with muscle strain would take antibiotics as part of their treatment is dubious at best. The arguer overlooks the possibility that antibiotics might have side-effect that might make antibiotics inadvisable for some of people. If certain people are highly allergic to the antibiotics, we should seek substitute despite the effectiveness of the antibiotics.（个人认为第三段的批驳点主要是all 和 severe,因为你让步承认the study can justify the hypothesie,所以应该根据hypothesis推断，因为有过敏、副作用这些因素不是all  hypothesis是severe，所以如果是轻伤，所以也不用）

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. The study fails to be strictly controlled and the conclusion is questionable at best.（有时间的话结尾可以再说一点，会比较保险）
ps:不知道为什么，我一直不喜欢在文章里用we，觉得有不客观之嫌，呵呵，个人意见

zhengzheng1026UID: 168914

另外　感觉你的文章很像ETS的一篇范文　呵呵～～模仿的痕迹比较重

littleheavenUID: 191407

多谢指点！！这篇文章就是看了范文后很受“启发”才写的，嘻嘻！以后多多交流呀

[ 本帖最后由 littleheaven 于 2006-3-8 08:14 编辑 ]

zhengzheng1026UID: 168914

第三段这样　层次好　并且也比较好写～～～