ARGUMENT51

jeileeUID: 2298006

也挺希望...这是最后一次发A了,明年....真的不想再发了55555555555.......
还是没写完.......还是很混乱........看了范文还是一头水.........WHATEVER,努力吧~!


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: 479        

In the analysis, the arguer states that antibiotics should be used in the healing of all patients of muscle strain. To substantiate this statement, the arguer provides the suspicion of the doctors that secondary infections would do harm to the recuperation of such patients, and then cites the result of a study to prove the suspicion and illuminate the antibiotics do help such patients recovery more quickly. Compelling as the argument is at the first place, a careful and deeply inspection would reveal how flimsy and groundless it is.
To begin with, the study that provided by the arguer could not serve as a sufficient evidence for it suffers many flaw as follows. Firstly, the arguer fails to provide the conditions of the patients, such as their age, sex, how serious their muscle strain are, which would serious influence the recuperation time of patients as well. For example, if patients in Group One are younger that those in Group two, they may spend less time to recovery as their physical condition are better. Secondly, the arguer neglects the possible effect that different doctors may have on the patients. Obviously, doctor who specializes in sports medicine would have more experience than general physician in healing muscle strain. Therefore, Group One may do exercises that would do good to the recuperation under the guide of doctors, which would certain lead to a less recuperation time. Finally, the factor of sugar pills may also contribute to the longer recuperation time of patients in Group Two, as no attestation has been shown that sugar pills would not do harm to the recovery of patients. Thus, without ruling out these possibilities that may contribute to the same result of the study, the result may be unconvincing.
Furthermore, even if the result of the study do show that antibiotics can shorten the recuperation time, thus can prove the hypothesis of the doctors, it still far to come to the conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics. Observing the suspicion that mentioned in the argument, the doctors have suspected that secondary infections "may" keep "some" patients from healing quickly after "severe" muscle strain. The arguer confused us by providing fallacious premise that "all" patients are certain to get "severe" muscle strain and would "certain" lead to secondary infections, which completely misunderstand what the truth is. Thus, not all patients should take antibiotics as their hurt may not be severe, and they may not get secondary infections.
Last but not the least, even if all mentioned above turn out to be true, the arguer still fails to draw a convincing conclusion as he neglects to take the side-effect of the antibiotics into account. Patients that may sensitive to the antibiotics should not take it as it would do nothing but aggravate the state of an illness.
To sum up, the arguer should provide more details and do more research such as the exact condition in two groups, the possible side-effect of antibiotics and so on, before which I would suspend my trust on the conclusion that all patients should take antibiotics.

[ 本帖最后由 jeilee 于 2007-7-27 11:15 编辑 ]

iq28UID: 2152875

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: 479        

In the analysis, the arguer states that antibiotics should be used in the healing of all patients of muscle strain. To substantiate this statement, the arguer provides the suspicion of the doctors that secondary infections would do harm to the recuperation of such patients, and then cites the result of a study to prove the suspicion and illuminate the antibiotics do help such patients recovery more quickly. Compelling as the argument is at the first place, a careful and deeply inspection would reveal how flimsy and groundless it is.

To begin with, the study that provided by the arguer could not serve as a sufficient evidence (用来证明什么的evidence？不去阐述证明对象的事实不能称之为evidence，同样也无法攻击作者的思路) for it suffers many flaw as follows. Firstly, the arguer fails to provide the conditions of the patients, such as their age, sex, how serious their muscle strain are, which would serious influence the recuperation time of patients as well. For example, if patients in Group One are younger that those in Group two, they may spend less time to recovery as their physical condition are better. Secondly, the arguer neglects the possible effect that different doctors may have on the patients. Obviously, doctor who specializes in sports medicine would have more experience than general physician in healing muscle strain. Therefore, Group One may do exercises that would do good to the recuperation under the guide of doctors, which would certain lead to a less recuperation time. Finally, the factor of sugar pills may also contribute to the longer recuperation time of patients in Group Two, as no attestation has been shown that sugar pills would not do harm to the recovery of patients. Thus, without ruling out these possibilities that may contribute to the same result of the study, the result may be unconvincing. （段落内部本身的攻击还是很成熟的。bingo）

Furthermore, even if the result of the study do show that antibiotics can shorten the recuperation time, thus can prove the hypothesis of the doctors, （what假说？请指代明确。）it still far to come to the conclusion that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics. Observing the suspicion that mentioned in the argument, the doctors have suspected that secondary infections "may" keep "some" patients from healing quickly after "severe" muscle strain. The arguer confused us by providing fallacious premise that "all" patients are certain to get "severe" muscle strain and would "certain" lead to secondary infections, which completely misunderstand what the truth is. Thus, not all patients should take antibiotics as their hurt may not be severe, and they may not get secondary infections.（不够一针见血。最关键的问题在于，所有的情况，包括使用抗生素使得康复速度变快，甚至都不能证明infection是否发生了。）

Last but not the least, even if all mentioned above turn out to be true, the arguer still fails to draw a convincing conclusion as he neglects to take the side-effect of the antibiotics into account. Patients that may sensitive to the antibiotics should not take it as it would do nothing but aggravate the state of an illness.

To sum up, the arguer should provide more details and do more research such as the exact condition in two groups, the possible side-effect of antibiotics and so on, before which I would suspend my trust on the conclusion that all patients should take antibiotics.

相比你的issue而言，argument已经差不多到了可以应试的水平了。
be relaxed。考场上加油。