Argument5【0710G Victors互助小组】第10次作业

fengyinyangUID: 2321139

Argument 5
The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.
"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis."

In this argument, the arguer concludes that PP will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company whose new drug, Xylan, is preferred over Xenon in the most extreme cases of arthritis in clinical. To substantiate the conclusion, the argument points out that the patent on the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, Xenon, which is made by Bp, expires in three years and other company will then be able to produce a cheaper vision of the drug. A careful examination will reveal how groundless it is.

Firstly, the author unfairly assumes that the patent on Xenon will make the profit of BP company decrease and no longer the most profitable pharmaceutical company. The conclusion can only be draw if BP never develop new medicine which maybe more effective to the arthritis. However, if a company wants to survival in the competition, it can not stay still. Moreover, the Xenon may has won a good reputation and a large market share for BP and after three years, if they can reduce the price, Xenon can also be the best-selling medicine.

Secondly, it is inaccurate to say that Xylan enables the BB to be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. The author provides no evidence to support that this is the case, nor does the author establish a causal relationship between the clinical use in the most extreme cases of arthritis and profit. If the normal one can be easily cured by Xenon, why should patients choose Xyler? Furthermore, the arguer doesn't mention the patent of Xyler. If the patent also expires soon, then PP will have no advantage over BP.

Thirdly, the arguer overlooks other company which can invent new medicine as well and the other disease that can also bring along the profit. If other company can create a new medicine which is more effective for the arthritis, the most profitable pharmaceutical company can be other company. Even if the PP can control the largest share of medicine for arthritis, other companies which may dominate the market of other medicines can still be the most profitable pharmaceutical company.

In summary, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidences concerning the patent of Xyler, the price of Xenon after 3 years. To better evaluate the argument, the arguer should aslo show that whether Xyler are more effective in some unserious arthritis.