ARGUMENT200 决战830TM，8月15日作业，xdjms拍啊，必回拍

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

共用时间：42分4秒     420 words
限时还要加强

200.Statistics collected from dentists indicate that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. This evidence suggests that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. Thus, dentists who advertise to attract patients should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients.


The author suggests that the advertisement of dentists should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients, on the basis that statistics collected from dentists indicate that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. Seemingly logic at first glance, close scrutiny into the argument will reveal that the suggestion lacks credibility.

The first problem of the suggestion arises from the survey on which the author relies the whole argument. The arguer does not mention the total number of male and female patients; neither does it mention what the sample size is. If the number of male patients outnumbers female ones greatly, say three times or more, it cannot be derived that men are more likely to be distressed. Another possibility is that the total number of men and women who faint is quite small, maybe only three men and one woman faint, then the difference may primarily derive from randomness.  

Moreover, even assume that it is true that the male are more likely to faint in face of dental work than the other gender, the suggestion that dentists should target men in their advertisement is still doubtful. Whether a group should become the target of an advertisement depends on how many people in that group are potential buyers of the product, in this case, the dental work. If only a very small percentage of men have the need, interest or financial ability to have dental job done, then it is unwise to aim this group as the target. In another case, if most men have fixed dentists, it is useless to advertise.

Last but not the least, if I were to concede that the main target of the advertisement should be the male patients, whether emphasizing both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff could work is still questionable. There may be some factors that attract the male consumers more than anesthetic techniques and the staff sensitivity. Alternatives could be the effect of the dental work, the price and the convenience of transportation from the place they live to the dental clinics. If so, addressing merely anesthetic techniques and staff sensitivity would be insufficient.

To sum up, the evidence lends scant support to the author's suggestion on advertisement. To strengthen the argument, the author should provide more detailed survey statistics and market reports, maybe of the ratio of male who are worrying about having dental work, the proximate number of the potential consumers, and what they are concerning most.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-16 at 11:38 ]

vivimathUID: 2127036

The author suggests that the advertisement of dentists should target the male consumercomsumers and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients, on the basis that statistics collected from dentists indicate that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. Seemingly logic at first glance, close scrutiny into the argument will reveal that the suggestion lacks credibility.

The first problem of the suggestion arises from the survey on which the author relies the whole argument. The arguer does not mention the total number of male and female patients; neither does it mention what the sample size is. If the number of male patients outnumbers female ones greatly, say three times or more, it cannot be derived that men are more likely to be distressed. Another possibility is that the total number of men and women who faint is quite small, maybe only three men and one woman faint, then the difference may primarily derive from randomness.  

Moreover, even assume that it is true that the male are more likely to faint in face of dental work than the other gender, the suggestion that dentists should target men in their advertisement is still doubtful. Whether a group should become the target of an advertisement depends on how many people in that group are potential buyers of the product, in this case, the dental work. If only a very small percentage of men have the need, interest or financial ability to have dental job donesee a dentist"or "have their teeth cured", then it is unwise to aim this group as the target. In another case, if most men have fixed dentists, it is useless to advertise.

Last but not the least, if I were to concede that the main target of the advertisement should be the male patients, whether emphasizing both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff could work is still questionable. There may be some factors that attract the male consumers more than anesthetic techniques and the staff sensitivity. Alternatives could be the effect of the dental work, the price and the convenience of transportation from the place they live to the dental clinics. If so, addressing merely anesthetic techniques and staff sensitivity would be insufficient.这一段你似乎已经承认了止痛药和。。。敏感对广告的作用，敏感不表示不紧张，重要应该是技术好这一段感觉不是很好，个人意见

To sum up, the evidence lends scant support to the author's suggestion on advertisement. To strengthen the argument, the author should provide more detailed survey statistics and market reports, maybe of不懂maybe of the ratio of male who are worrying about having dental work, the proximate number of the potential consumers, and what they are concerning most.写的很好啊，加油！

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

The author suggests that the advertisement of dentists should target the male consumers and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients, on the basis that statistics collected from dentists indicate that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. Seemingly logic at first glance, close scrutiny into the argument will reveal that the suggestion lacks credibility.

The first problem of the suggestion arises from the survey on which the author relies the whole argument. The arguer does not mention the total number of male and female patients; neither does it mention what the sample size is. If the number of male patients outnumbers female ones greatly, say three times or more, it cannot be derived that men are more likely to be distressed. Another possibility is that the total number of men and women who faint is quite small, maybe only three men and one woman faint, then the difference may primarily derive from randomness.  

Moreover, even assume that it is true that the male are more likely to faint in face of dental work than the other gender, the suggestion that dentists should target men in their advertisement is still doubtful. Whether a group should become the target of an advertisement depends on how many people in that group are potential buyers of the product, in this case, the dental work. If only a very small percentage of men have the need, interest or financial ability to see the dentists, then it is unwise to aim this group as the target. In another case, if most men have fixed dentists, it is useless to advertise.

Last but not the least, even if I were to concede that the main target of the advertisement should be the male patients, whether emphasizing both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff could work is still questionable. The author provides no evidence that anesthetic techniques and staff sensitivity could attract men, or even cause them to faint less. Maybe it is the effect of the dental work, the price and the convenience of transportation from the place they live to the dental clinics weigh more in the minds of male consumers than whether they would faint. If so, addressing merely anesthetic techniques and staff sensitivity would be insufficient.

To sum up, the evidence lends scant support to the author's suggestion on advertisement. To strengthen the argument, the author should provide more detailed survey statistics and market reports concerning the ratio of male who are worrying about having dental work, the proximate number of the potential consumers, and what they are concerning most.