argument51【07-10G Superstar大帖】8.1 by Huaxinluobo

huaxinluoboUID: 2326780

可能昨天写的多了，今天一点感觉也没有，很麻木，根本没能写完，郁闷中。。。

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: 398          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-8-1

In this argument the letter suggest that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To get support the letter cites the result of a study. However, after scrutiny, I find both the conclusion and the study problematic.

Firstly, the writer unfairly assumes that muscle injuries are equal to muscle strain and both of them lead to the same secondary infections. But no evidence is given to prove it. For that matter, it is entirely possible that there are many differences between muscle injuries and severe muscle strain, which may result in that any conclusion from the study is not applicable to muscle strain and the suggestion unreliable.  For example, maybe muscle injuries can not lead to secondary infections at all, or the kinds of virus in infections are different of those of muscle strain. So, unless the writer can prove that muscle injuries are equal to muscle, I can not be convinced that the suggestion is reliable.

Secondly, the conclusion of result rests on the assumption that the condition of the two groups of patients and the treatment of the two groups are same except the use of antibiotics.  However, the assumption is not justified by sufficient evidence. Lacking evidence, it is possible that patients in the first groups are in better health condition, or their injuries are less severe than the second group, or they receive a better treatment from Dr.Newland who specialize in sports medicine that Dr.Alton who is a general physician. Any of these possibilities, if true, could be responsible for the result of the study and thus the conclusion that antibiotics function is diminished. So, unless the writer rules out other possible reasons for the quicker recovery of the first group, the letter can not convince me that antibiotics are effective and the suggestion is reasonable.

Finally, the writer get to the conclusion too hastily even if the result of the study is valid and reliable in proving that antibiotics are effective in the treatment of muscle strain, for the writer ignores the possible negative effect brought about by antibiotics. For example, maybe some patients are too sensitive to antibiotics in which case the health and even life of patients may be endangered. So, before making the suggestion the letter need to take more factors into consideration.

To sum up, …