Argument51 [越洋农场站队]第7次作业 monkeycola

monkeycolaUID: 2206472

51The 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."

这篇A存在以下缺陷
1.前提不成立。作者没有任何资料证明患者容易二次感染，尤其是肌肉拉伤的患者是否更容易二次感染。
2 实验的代表性 作者没有提供任何有关患者的资料 例如性别 年龄 身体状况，这些都是影响治疗的因素
3。作者没有提供两名医生的信息，可能前一个医生经验丰富，有治疗二次感染的经验，而后一个不是很有经验，
又超时了，晕！！！:L:vomit: 458字
:vomit:In this argument,the arguer recommends that the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In order to support the recommendation ,the arguer points out that according to the recent study,the doctor proved the hypothesis that secondary infection may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain.The arguer also mentions that the study consists of two groups of people,and people in one group take antibiotics during the treatment recovered soon than another group of peole who take sugar pills.However,the recommendation relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumption and therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

In the first place,the arguer unfairly assumes that the patients who get muscle strain will get the second infections easily.The arguer provides no evidence that the second infection is inevitable or the patients who have muscle strain will definitely get second infections.Even if the patients with muscle strain will get second infection with high possibility,the patients could take treatments ahead of time to prevent second infections.Without providing sufficient evidence,the hypothesis is not persuasive.

In the second place,the result of this study is not statistically reliable to support the hyperthsis.The arguer provides no information about the patients in these two groups.Commen sense informs us that the physical body,age,sexual and even psychology could influence the recuperation time of a patient.It is quite possible that the patients in the first group are all young,and patients in the second group are all in old age.Or perhaps the patients in the first group are all male,and another group are all female.So in this situation,the people in the first group will recover sooner.Without ruling out there factors,the result of this studay is not convincing to support this hyperthesis.
In the second place,the arguer provides no evidence about these two doctors.The expertise of a doctor also plays a significant role during the process of the recuperation for the patients.It is possible that Dr. Newland is an expert who in very good at cure the muscle strain,and during the treatment he could also use other physical treatments to help the patient recuperate.However, Dr. Alton in another group is a general physician who is not good at treat the diagnosis and he could not very help the patients get recover.Without consider this factors,it is unfairly to justify the effectiveness of antibiotics.

In the third place,the arguer unfairly assumes that the patients who get muscle strain will get the second infections easily.The arguer provides no evidence that the second infection is inevitable or the patients who have muscle strain will definitely get second infections.Even if the patients with muscle strain will get second infection with high possibility,the patients could take treatments ahead of time to prevent second infections.Without providing sufficient evidence,the hypothesis is not persuasive.

In sum,the recommendation is not persuasive and convincing as it stands.To strengthen the recommendation,the arguer needs to prove the patients with muscle strain are quite possible get second infection.In addition,the arguer needs more information to assure the reliability of that study.To evaluate the recommendation,the arguer also need to convince the effectiveness of the antibiotic and the expertise of these two doctors.

nostrumUID: 2124189

In this argument,the arguer recommends that the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In order to support the recommendation ,the arguer points out that according to the recent study,the doctor proved the hypothesis that secondary infection may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain.The arguer also mentions that the study consists of two groups of people,and people in one group take antibiotics during the treatment recovered soon than another group of peole who take sugar pills.However,the recommendation relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumption and therefore unpersuasive as it stands.对原文的restate有点长，精简下

In the first place,the arguer unfairly assumes that the patients who get muscle strain will get the second infections easily.The arguer provides no evidence that the second infection is inevitable or the patients who have muscle strain will definitely get second infections.Even if the patients with muscle strain will get second infection with high possibility,the patients could take treatments ahead of time to prevent second infections.Without providing sufficient evidence,the hypothesis is not persuasive.这里可以分受伤的轻重来说下，注意文中有severe的字样
In the second place,the result of this study is not statistically reliable to support the hyperthsis.The arguer provides no information about the patients in these two groups.Commen sense informs us that the physical body,age,sexual and even psychology could influence the recuperation time of a patient.It is quite possible that the patients in the first group are all young,and patients in the second group are all in old age.Or perhaps the patients in the first group are all male,and another group are all female.性别歧视，怎么女的就比男的好的慢？嗯嗯嗯？真的，别的是玩笑，性别歧视的问题在美国人那里是个敏感话题。而且ETS的眼中，妇女和黑人总是受到同情的，我们作阅读要有这个意识么，对吧？So in this situation,the people in the first group will recover sooner.Without ruling out there factors,the result of this studay is not convincing to support this hyperthesis.
In the second place,the arguer provides no evidence about these two doctors.The expertise of a doctor also plays a significant role during the process of the recuperation for the patients.It is possible 不是可能，就是这么回事，文中说的很清楚that Dr. Newland is an expert who in very good at cure the muscle strain,and during the treatment he could also use other physical treatments to help the patient recuperate.However, Dr. Alton in another group is a general physician who is not good at treat the diagnosis and he could not very help the patients get recover.Without consider this factors,it is unfairly to justify the effectiveness of antibiotics.

In the third place,the arguer unfairly assumes that the patients who get muscle strain will get the second infections easily.The arguer provides no evidence that the second infection is inevitable or the patients who have muscle strain will definitely get second infections.Even if the patients with muscle strain will get second infection with high possibility,the patients could take treatments ahead of time to prevent second infections.Without providing sufficient evidence,the hypothesis is not persuasive.我觉得这个错误算是比较重要的一个，可以安排在前面
In sum,the recommendation is not persuasive and convincing as it stands.To strengthen the recommendation,the arguer needs to prove the patients with muscle strain are quite possible get second infection.In addition,the arguer needs more information to assure the reliability of that study.To evaluate the recommendation,the arguer also need to convince the effectiveness of the antibiotic and the expertise of these two doctors.
还有没有找到的很重要的就是，文章中说severe， may，就是说很严重的有可能，那么这里应该好好做一下文章

GREkidUID: 2146489

字数上满有优势的

geniegoUID: 201395

In this argument,the arguer recommends that the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In order to support the recommendation ,the arguer points out that according to the recent study, the doctor proved the hypothesis that secondary infection may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain.The arguer also mentions that the study consists of two groups of people,and people in one group take antibiotics during the treatment recovered soon[sooner] than another group of peole who take sugar pills.However,the recommendation relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumption and therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
[我觉得这段对原文的复述有点罗嗦了，简要说明一下逻辑上的因果错误]

In the first place,the arguer unfairly[我觉得用unfairly不是非常合适，不公平？不公正？] assumes that the patients who get muscle strain will get the second infections easily[原文没有涉及这点，这是推测的结果，直接攻击会不会站不住脚，或者不要放在一开头，简要两句引申一下原文].The arguer provides no evidence that the second infection is inevitable[很好的词] or the patients who have muscle strain will definitely get second infections.Even if [过渡的很漂亮]the patients with muscle strain will get second infection with high possibility,the patients could take treatments ahead of time[闪光] to prevent second infections.Without providing sufficient evidence,the hypothesis is not persuasive.[结尾的这句不够饱满]
[这点的确是题目中最大的逻辑错误，但是我觉得这点可落笔的地方很少，陈述上再作一些充实]

In the second place,the result of this study is notstatistically reliable[闪光] to support the hyperthsisp[hypothesis].The arguer provides no information about the patients in these two groups.Commen sense informs us that the physical body,age,sexual and even psychology could influence the recuperation time of a patient.It is quite possible that the patients in the first group are all young,and patients in the second group are all in old age[就直接old不是简洁].Or perhaps the patients in the first group are all male,and another group are all female. So in this situation, the people in the first group will recover sooner. Without ruling out there factors, the result of this study is not convincing to support this hyperthesis[hypothesis].

In the second[third] place,the arguer provides no evidence about these two doctors.The expertise of a doctor also plays a significant role during the process of the recuperation for the patients.It is possible that Dr. Newland is an expert who in [is]very good at cure[curing] the muscle strain,and during the treatment he could also use other physical treatments to help the patient recuperate. However, Dr. Alton in another group is a general physician who is not good at treat the diagnosis and he could not very help the patients get recover. Without consider [considering] this factors it is unfairly to justify the effectiveness of antibiotics.

In sum,the recommendation is not persuasive and convincing as it stands.To strengthen the recommendation,the arguer needs to prove the patients with muscle strain are quite possible get second infection.In addition,the arguer needs more information to assure the reliability of that study.To evaluate the recommendation,the arguer also need to convince the effectiveness of the antibiotic and the expertise of these two doctors.
[我觉得文章的主次不明，三段都差不多，没有重点的论述集中在某一点
另外，缺乏闪光的句子，开头还是结尾都是无可挑剔
写得比较稳当，但是不够出彩，建议你看附件的一篇文章，里面的第二篇]

[ 本帖最后由 geniego 于 2006-7-24 11:43 编辑 ]