argument51【加州阳光】第7次作业 你拍一！我拍一！

benniUID: 2166321

------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.'


------提纲------
1、首先，连医生都不一样，能说明问题么？
2、没有病人的数量、性别、年龄、身体状况blablabla...
3、有没有副作用？


------正文------
In the newsletter, the speaker recommends that all patients with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of treatment. To support this recommendation, the author points that in a study of two groups of patients, the ones taking antibiotics recuperated in much shorter time than the others taking sugar pills. Close scrutiny of the evidence, however, reveals that it lends little support to the recommendation.  

To begin with, the speaker attempts to establish a casual connection between two facts- taking antibiotics and relatively short recuperation time. However, this argument is based on an oversimplified analysis of the reason of fast recuperation, and hence the relationship is doubtful. Firstly, the two groups were treated by two different doctors who even do not in the same field. It is entirely possible that Dr. Newland who specializes in sports medicine, is more proficient at muscle strain, while Dr. Alton-a general physician-does not have sufficient experience to handle patients with this disease. If so, the two groups of people would certainly have the different recuperation time. Secondly, the author fails to inform readers whether sugar can impact the muscle strain. What if the sugar would impede the cure of this disease? To sum up, without considering the other factors related to the recuperation time, this argument is inconvincible.

In the second place, the study cited by the author is too vague to be informative. Why? We are not informed any information about the patients other than they have the same illness. Actually, there are several factors, which influence the study, such as the number, sex, age, and health condition of all patients. Perhaps there were respectively only two persons in each group and obviously, four people fail to construct a sufficiently large sample so as to be representative of all the muscle strain patients. Or perhaps the ones in the study were all female, which leads this study meaningless to male patients. It is also possible that the quickly recuperated ones are all teenage sports men while the others are aged people. In a word, without ruling out detailed information about patients in this study, this study contributes nothing of value for readers to assess the recommendation.

Finally, the arguer commits the fallacy of “hasty generalization”. Even assuming that the antibiotic can indeed serve to help the recuperation of muscle strain and thus efficiently help avoid the secondary infections, it does not follow that antibiotics is appropriated for any patient. What if antibiotics has certain by-product which would do harm to patients’ other organs? It is also possible that some people are allergic to antibiotics. As a result, it is rather superficial to claim that all the patients with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of treatment.

In conclusion, the recommendation relies on some suspicious assumptions that make it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the argument the author must provide clear evidence-perhaps by the way of a valid study- that the short recuperation time is the result of taking antibiotics. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know more detailed information about the patients in the study.