argument51 FlY AW 作文组

kckUID: 2214868

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: 248          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2006-6-21
提纲:
1.攻击数据样本是否足够
2.实验中的差别以及其他因素可能导致这个结果
3.由一次实验并不足以得出可信的结果,而且是否会有副作用也不一定


   The argument concludes that antibiotics should be prescribed for patients who suffered from muscle strain. To prove this conclusion, the author cites a recent study which shows that the group of patients who took antibiotics regularly during the cure process recovered 40 percent quicker than typically expected while those who didn't take antibiotics failed to experience such a decrease in recovery time. However, after careful examination, the study flaws in several aspects, which render the recommendation unconvincing as it stands.
   First of all, the argument fails to give out detailed describe of the patients who anticipated the study. Then the two groups of people are representative of all patient with muscle strain is open to question. The fewer the number of these people is, the less reliable the conclusion will be.
Even assuming that the two groups of people are statistically reliable, the author unfairly assumes that the antibiotics are responsible for the significant decrease in recovery time. Common sense tells us that many other factors may lead to such a result. For instance, it possible that other medications used during the study results in such an improvement; or it is possible that this group of people has better physical condition than common people and therefore their recuperation time was quicker than typically speed. Besides, the argument also indicates that the doctors of the two groups are quite different in their experience of curing muscle strain. And it was just this difference caused the significant difference in the recuperation time. Without considering and ruling out such factors, the author can hardly convince me that antibiotics are effective in curing muscle strain, let alone draw any reliable conclusion.
   In addition, even assuming that antibiotics did play a vital role in decreasing the recuperation time during the study, it is hastily to conclude that antibiotics would be proper and effective for all patients who have muscle strain. The reason for this lies in two aspects: first, only one study may not be able to sufficiently give out any reliable results; second, whether using antibiotics will cause any side-effect is still unknown.
   In sum, the recommendation is unconvincing as discussed above. To strengthen it, the author should provide more information about the study to show that antibiotics are as effective as it mentioned. Moreover, the argument would be more convincing if results from more studies could be available.

empyrealUID: 2220816

不是一组的，内什么，明天帮你看下，先睡觉先