Argument51 限时．．不太理想．．

susan8940UID: 160449

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: 405          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-3-26

The author asserts that any patients who suffer from muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of treatment, because secondary infections will keep them from quick healing. Unfortunately, the author fails to provide enough evidence to support a series of assumptions, so the argument is more or less unconvincing as it stands.

First, the experiment mentioned is far from convincing. Since the two groups are treated with totally different doctors, and there is little evidence to show whether all patients tested are suffering from the same muscle injury, there are many other factors may influence the results of this experiment. Perhaps the former doctor is more professional in curling muscle injuries, so the former group heal quicker. Or perhaps the sickness of the former group is easier to recover than the later one. If so, we can never conclude the antibiotics contributes to the quick healing of the first group.

Further, even if the results of the experiment is true, we can never assure that secondary infections keep patients of muscle strain from quick healing, because there is almost no evidence to show whether the two groups in the experiment are really infected. Maybe those patients are not suffering from secondary infection because of careful treatment of the doctors, then the antibiotics of course is unnecessary in preventing patients from infections. Thus the conclusion that secondary infections keep people from healing is totally questionable.

Finally, even though we admit that secondary infections truly cause lower healing, the author's conclusion to give all patients of muscle strain antibiotics is seemingly still questionable. After all, samples of the experiment above are patients suffering from muscle injuries instead of muscle strain, so it is entirely possible that muscle strain will never lead to secondary infection, as a result, antibiotics is not a bit helpful to those muscle strain patients, despite its strong effectivity on quick healing of muscle injuries. Even worse, too much antibiotics may harm those patients' health. Since the author does not offer effective evidence to show the function of antibiotics on healing of muscle strain, the conclusion drew is far from warranted.

In sum, as the lack of important evidence, the argument is far from perfect. To bolster it, the author must provide detailed evidence to show that the two groups in the experiment are kept in the same circumstance and suffering from the same disease, also, they are truly infected after treatment. Even if so, we can never conclude that all patients suffering from muscle strain should try antibiotics as well, unless more accurate experiments about the function of antibiotics on healing muscle strain are taken.

pippo1983UID: 172110

The author asserts that any patients who suffer from muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of treatment, because secondary infections will keep them from quick healing. Unfortunately, the author fails to provide enough evidence to support a series of assumptions, so the argument is more or less (这里怎么能说差不多)unconvincing as it stands.

First, the experiment mentioned is far from convincing. Since the two groups are treated with totally different doctors, and there is little evidence to show whether all patients tested are suffering from the same muscle injury, there are many other factors may influence the results of this experiment. Perhaps the former doctor is more professional in curling muscle injuries, so the former group heal quicker（题目都说了一个是运动专家一个是普通医生，这里扩展下多好啊）. Or perhaps the sickness of the former group is easier to recover than the later one. If so, we can never conclude the antibiotics contributes to the quick healing of the first group.

Further, even if the results of the experiment is true, we can never assure that secondary infections keep patients of muscle strain from quick healing, because there is almost no evidence to show whether the two groups in the experiment are really infected. Maybe those patients are not suffering from secondary infection because of careful treatment of the doctors, then the antibiotics of course is unnecessary in preventing patients from infections. Thus the conclusion that secondary infections keep people from healing is totally questionable.

Finally, even though we admit that secondary infections truly cause lower healing, the author's conclusion to give all patients of muscle strain antibiotics is seemingly still questionable. After all, samples of the experiment above are patients suffering from muscle injuries instead of muscle strain, （muscle injury he strain 到底是什么区别？那拿到一个是外伤，一个是内伤？）so it is entirely possible that muscle strain will never lead to secondary infection, as a result, antibiotics is not a bit helpful to those muscle strain patients, despite its strong effectivity on quick healing of muscle injuries. Even worse, too much antibiotics may harm those patients' health. Since the author does not offer effective evidence to show the function of antibiotics on healing of muscle strain, the conclusion drew is far from warranted.

In sum, as the lack of important evidence, the argument is far from perfect. To bolster it, the author must provide detailed evidence to show that the two groups in the experiment are kept in the same circumstance and suffering from the same disease, also, they are truly infected after treatment. Even if so, we can never conclude that all patients suffering from muscle strain should try antibiotics as well, unless more accurate experiments about the function of antibiotics on healing muscle strain are taken.