- 最后登录
- 2007-8-13
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 2315
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2005-8-19
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 帖子
- 6
- 精华
- 1
- 积分
- 2083
- UID
- 2130338
 
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 2315
- 注册时间
- 2005-8-19
- 精华
- 1
- 帖子
- 6
|
Argument51 第7篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧!
------摘要------
作者:寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间:54分0秒 294 words
从2006年5月22日8时34分到2006年5月22日9时54分
------题目------
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.'
------正文------
The medical newsletter claims that secondary infections keep patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. The writer comes to this conclusion by contrasting two groups of patients in a study who have been treated differently. However, the conclusion in the newsletter is not convincing enough to be accepted by ordinary people.
First of all, no evidence indicates that the reduction of recuperation time in the study exactly results of the diet with antibiotics. Though it is demonstrated that the first group of patients who have taken antibiotics recuperate much quicker than the second group who have only been given sugar pills, the result can be influenced by many factors, such as the general conditions of the patients and the abilities of the doctors, which have been ignored by the writer.
On one hand, the general conditions of the patients, such as ages and healthy status are not examined. It is commonly known that the younger the patient, the quicker the recuperation, and the stronger the patient, the easier the recuperation. If the average age of the first group is considerably younger than that of the second group, the young age can contributed greatly to the reduction of recuperation time. Similarly, if the average healthy status of the first group is significantly better than that of the second group, the perfect healthy status can result apparent reduction of recuperation time. As a result, without carefully examining the general conditions of the patients, it is unreasonable to attribute the reduction of recuperation time simply to antibiotic pills.
On the other hand, the obvious difference of the treating abilities between the two doctors has not been taken into account. The newsletter mentions that the first group were guided by Dr. Newland, a specialized sports medicine doctor, while the second group were treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician. Generally, a specialized sports medicine doctors is much better educated and more experienced in the treatment of muscle injuries than a general physician. The first group may have benefited greatly from Dr. Newland's excellent specialized knowledge and efficient treating schemes, and thus managed to recuperate much faster than the second group. Therefore, without detailed comparison between the two doctors, it is unverified to attribute the reduction of recuperation time only to antibiotic pills.
Besides, even though the reduction of recuperation time is mainly caused by antibiotics, no additional information shows clear relationship between such antibiotics and severe muscle strain, which is focused in the hypothesis, as the injury situations of the patients in the study are not mentioned. If most patients in the study are not severely injured, the result of the study cannot be associated with the hypothesis at all.
In conclusion, without examining the general conditions of the patients and the treating abilities of the doctors as well as the injury situations in the study, it is unsubstantiated either to claim that the reduction of recuperation time results from antibiotics, or to take the result of the study as an evidence of the hypothesis. Thus the result of the study mentioned in the newsletter cannot become a convincing proof of the hypothesis that secondary infections keep patients from recuperating quickly severe muscle strain. |
|