Feb. 4th 冲刺作业 Argument57 by melody, 美丽G程小组

claire530UID: 2363559

57.The following appeared in a newsletter on nutrition and health.

"Although the multimineral Zorba pill was designed as a simple dietary
supplement, a study of first-time ulcer patients who took Zorba suggests
that Zorba actually helps prevent ulcers溃疡. The study showed that only 25
percent of those ulcer patients who took Zorba under a doctor's direction
developed new ulcers, compared to a 75 percent recurrence rate among ulcer
patients who did not take Zorba. Clearly, then, Zorba will be highly
effective in preventing recurrent ulcers and if health experts inform the
general public of this fact, many first-time ulcers can be prevented as
well."
攻击点
调查本身有问题：
1.STUDY的数据推不出结论。没有给出两组人的特征。有可能服用了Z药的人普遍身体好。或者有一个健康的饮食习惯。而没有服用的体质不如服用过的。况且，就算两组人的健康状况相当，不同的医疗条件和不同的医生有可能导致治疗结果的不同。
2. 有可能服用者服用了别的药物对治疗溃疡有效，Z有无效果不能从此处判定。
3. 样本有无代表性不得而知。很有可能很多服用了Z复发的人不愿意反映病情。
结论有误。防止首发这个说法有误。承认，就算能够防止复发，不一定能防止首发。很有可能这种药物促使产生了antibacterial immunity.


In the newsletter the author asserts that a kind of multimineral pill named Zorba was proved to be effective in preventing first-time ulcers. To support his assertion, a research consequence is given as evidence, in which shows the ulcer patients who have taken Z under doctor's direction has 50% less recurrence rate than the ones who have not. It seems reasonable from the first glance, however reveals several fallacies in deeper analysis.
In first place, what the study shows is dubious in several aspects as follows. Firstly, with the healthy levels of the two groups unknown, the data given by the study is suspicious. Supposing that group A( the one has taken Z) has an overall fitness level while group B is not, because of the better metabolism function, members of group A have a higher recovery ability than the other group, which properly express the 50% variance. Besides, under diverse conditions might also lead to the different recovering rate of the two groups. It is entire possible that group A has a much more developed curing techniques or gets more cares from the doctors while cases differ with group B. Possibilities cannot be ruled out if members of group A have had other kind of pill working well in curing ulcers. Moreover, the cooperation with the participants also needs to be taken into account when doing the research. Bias also exists in data if patients in group A have concealed their recurrence of ulcer for some purpose. All the possibilities above confute the conclusion that the lower rate of the recurrence of ulcer in group A attributes to the taking of Z pill.
Even if the data showed in the study is believable, and Z pill works effective in stopping recurrence of the ulcer, the conclusion that first-time ulcer also can be prevented is too hastily to be made. We all understand that in most cases our body would produce immunities against the bacteria once have been infected with. There is possibility that Z works as catalyst and promotes our body producing bacteria immunities against ulcers after we have got it once. In other words, Z would not make any sense before the generation of antibody, which explains the fact that having Z is ineffective to first-time ulcer patients.
In sum, to support the assertion, more detailed material of the study and the specific treatment effect the argument is indispensable for the sake of making it more convincing.

petricUID: 2719885

附件