Argument51 同主题写作 欢迎拍砖! 写的真不容易啊!

jupiterjoyUID: 161688

Argument 51    同主题写作  欢迎拍砖!

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."

写不出来! 吭哧~吭哧~
终于写出来了:victory:
不过, 不用general statement字数好象少了些.
我觉的自己这水平, 唉! 如果限时, 没法看了就:mad:

All patients hope that they'll be fine as soon as possible. The argument seems for the sake of the patients with their muscle stained, but the recommendation that all patients who have been diagnosed this kind of injuries should take antibiotics is unreasonable in fact.

First of all, there was not enough information about the study to sweep out all the doubts in the conduction. Though patients in the second group took placebos, the sugar pills, the proof that all other factors were the same was not offered. Health conditions of patients may be different. In specific, age, gender, weight, heart rate, blood pressure and many other indexes were likely to weaken the validity of the control. For example, a health young man who exercises everyday is most likely to recover sooner while an old lady with twice heart attacks would complain the pain in the leg caused by muscle strain for a longer time. It is also questionable whether the location of the injuries and the severity were the same.

Moreover, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine probably performed a better treatment on muscle injuries than a general physician. Since the doctor with more knowledge about sport medicine knew the details about the muscles better and may be more experienced when treating this kind of patients. Aside from antibiotics, whether other treatments benefit for the patients were available in both groups is unknown. From this aspect, the results of study did not lend strong support to the hypothesis.

In addition, the hypothesis overemphasized that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Even if the hypothesis was proved true, it was hasty to recommend all patients with muscle strain take antibiotics without knowing the specific information. It is unnecessary to add the medicine cost on patients without secondary infections or with relatively lighter strain. The allergy history of patients must be considered also. If a person who is allergic to an antibiotic took the same or similar medicine, it would cause other problems which might be worse than the muscle injuries. The troubles are avoidable by prescribing recipe based on every patient’s condition.

In sum, the arguer failed to make a logically acceptable argument. To prove the hypothesis, the author should develop better studies and collect more information about the patients to ensure the validity. To better the conclusion, the personal conditions should be taken into account. After all, there is no perfect treatment for everyone.

[ 本帖最后由 staralways 于 2006-3-5 17:58 编辑 ]

JackieXinUID: 2119346

写的比我好的了～汗颜啊。。。：（

白衣笨天使UID: 144754

All patients hope that they'll be fine as soon as possible. The argument seems for the sake of the patients with their muscle stained, but the recommendation that all patients who have been diagnosed this kind of injuries should take antibiotics is unreasonable in fact.[果然是没有restate 的开头，但是这样就可以了么？觉得好像等于一句话，“你的观点是没有道理的”，just in my opinion，事实上我不知道不复述的开头怎样写…]

First of all, there was not enough information about the study to sweep out all the doubts in the conduction. Though patients in the second group took placebos, the sugar pills, the proof that all other factors were the same was not offered. Health conditions of patients may be different. In specific, age, gender, weight, heart rate, blood pressure and many other indexes were likely to weaken the validity of the control. For example, a health young man who exercises everyday is most likely to recover sooner while an old lady with twice heart attacks would complain the pain in the leg caused by muscle strain for a longer time. [so具体的例子啊！赞！]It is also questionable whether the location of the injuries and the severity were the same. [我没想到这个…赞！]

Moreover, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine probably performed a better treatment on muscle injuries than a general physician. Since the doctor with more knowledge about sport medicine knew the details about the muscles better and may be more experienced when treating this kind of patients. Aside from antibiotics, whether other treatments benefit for the patients were available in both groups is unknown.[是不是有转而说可能有别的治疗方法在这两个组里？好像跟医生没有关系啊？为什么不另起一段？（纯属疑问句，绝不是反问。）] From this aspect, the results of study did not lend strong support to the hypothesis.

In addition, the hypothesis overemphasized that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Even if the hypothesis was proved true, it was hasty to recommend all patients with muscle strain take antibiotics without knowing the specific information. It is unnecessary to add the medicine cost on patients without secondary infections or with relatively lighter strain. The allergy history of patients must be considered also. [好简洁！想到我罗嗦的那一大段…汗啊！]If a person who is allergic to an antibiotic took the same or similar medicine, it would cause other problems which might be worse than the muscle injuries. The troubles are avoidable by prescribing recipe based on every patient’s condition.

In sum, the arguer failed to make a logically acceptable argument. To prove the hypothesis, the author should develop better studies and collect more information about the patients to ensure the validity. To better the conclusion, the personal conditions should be taken into account. After all, there is no perfect treatment for everyone. [这就是非模版式的结尾么？]


我这真不算改作文，一点儿意见都提不出来。汗！
我几乎就是欣赏了一下，你写的真是很好了，我觉得...:victory:
我都快不好意思贴我自己的了。
如果您有空就帮着指点一二，多谢多谢！
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

savagettUID: 2134686

All patients hope that they'll be fine as soon as possible. The argument seems for the sake of the patients with their muscle stained, but the recommendation that all patients who have been diagnosed this kind of injuries should take antibiotics is unreasonable in fact.
虽然按照模版的理论来说，这样的开头不够点题，但是我觉得不错。

First of all, there was not enough information about the study to sweep out all the doubts in the conduction.这样抽象的说,还不如直接说这个两组的比较不能证明结论 Though patients in the second group took placebos, the sugar pills, the proof that all other factors were the same was not offered. Health conditions of patients may be different. In specific, age, gender, weight, heart rate, blood pressure and many other indexes were likely to weaken the validity of the control. For example, a health young man who exercises everyday is most likely (more likely) to recover sooner while an old lady with twice heart attacks would complain the pain in the leg caused by muscle strain for a longer time. It is also questionable whether the location of the injuries 这个是想说受伤部位吧，用location有点怪，但我一时也想不出别的词，which part was injured? and the severity were the same.
数据比较不可靠


Moreover, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine probably performed 这里可以用一般式吧,下同.a better treatment on muscle injuries than a general physician. Since the doctor with more knowledge about sport medicine knew the details about the muscles better and may be more experienced when treating this kind of patients. Aside from antibiotics, whether other treatments benefit这个benefit作名词的话,解释是什么呢?治疗的好处?也应该说效果之类的吧,如果是动词的话,又有语法错误 for the patients were available in both groups is unknown. From this aspect, the results of study did not lend strong support to the hypothesis.
其他可能

In addition, the hypothesis overemphasized that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Even if the hypothesis was proved true, it was hasty to recommend all patients with muscle strain take antibiotics without knowing the specific information. It is unnecessary to add the medicine cost on patients without secondary infections or with relatively lighter strain. The allergy history of patients must be considered also. If a person who is allergic to an antibiotic took the same or similar medicine, it would cause other problems which might be worse than the muscle injuries. The troubles are avoidable by prescribing recipe based on every patient’s condition.
非此即彼
In sum, the arguer failed to make a logically acceptable argument. To prove the hypothesis, the author should develop better studies and collect more information about the patients to ensure the validity. To better the conclusion, the personal conditions should be taken into account. After all, there is no perfect treatment for everyone. 结尾说的好~

谢谢你的修改.
没有什么语法问题,厉害
关键是语言表达上还要更流畅一点
祝你限时写也写的一样好

白衣笨天使UID: 144754

多谢你的修改！

同奋！+UUUUUUUUU...

wenyuZUID: 2113611

已经把你的文章拷下来了哦！
我打算最先改你的哈，下午给你贴上来#
有缘有缘有缘呢！
把我的链接也贴过来，希望互相帮助啦、
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... e%3D1#pid1768227619
我也是新手，大家多多加油哦



All patients hope that they'll be fine as soon as possible. The argument seems for the sake of the patients with their muscle stained这个句子似乎结构有点问题，seems动词出来了，没有宾语了吧？, but the recommendation that all patients who have been diagnosed this kind of injuries should take antibiotics is unreasonable in fact.开头两句和后面的关系似乎连不是那样紧。避开了restate的模式，这很好，可是最好也要保证自己的模式能很有节奏的开篇，光为了避开RESTATE而跳进其他错误中，还是不值得的哦

First of all, there was not enough information about the study to sweep out all the doubts in the conduction. Though patients in the second group took placebos, the sugar pills, the proof that all other factors were the same was not offered. Health conditions of patients may be different. In specific, age, gender, weight, heart rate, blood pressure and many other indexes were likely to weaken the validity of the controlweaken the validity of the control这个用词可圈可点，学习中。。。l. For example, a health young man who exercises everyday is most likely to recover sooner while an old lady with twice heart attacks would complain the pain in the leg caused by muscle strain for a longer time. It is also questionable whether the location of the injuries and the severity were the same.说理很好，我也同样想到了用一个年轻力壮的男性和体弱多病的妇人做对比，可是用词用句上就相形见锉啦，学习学习。。。。

Moreover, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine probably performed a better treatment on muscle injuries than a general physician. Since the doctor with more knowledge about sport medicine knew the details about the muscles better and may be more experienced when treating this kind of patients.可以再多说点，我就先妄加我的意见了哈。In this sense, the less recuperation time in the first group may due to the better treatment of the doctor, rather than the influence of antibiotics as expected.加的不好还请多见谅，我觉得多扣题就好啦 Aside from antibiotics, whether other treatments benefit for the patients were available in both groups is unknown. From this aspect, the results of study did not lend strong support to the hypothesis.最后一句话说得笼统了哦，是怎样的不能支持呢，大概写成个从句就能说明的哦，比如: from this aspect, for the vague relationship between antibiotics and the less recuperation time, the results of study did not lend strong support to the hypothesis

In addition, the hypothesis overemphasized that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain这句话有点突然哦，你也就只给出个overemphasized的结论，可是凭什么呢？原由呢？其实原文也就只是给出个CLAIM， 也没有具体阐明，为什么就一定是over呢？这样的问题可以避开不谈的，因为原文其他的漏洞都足以够批驳的了. Even if the hypothesis was proved true, it was hasty to recommend all patients with muscle strain take antibiotics without knowing the specific information. It is unnecessary to add the medicine cost on patients without secondary infections or with relatively lighter strain. The allergy history of patients must be considered alsoalso be considered. If a person who is allergic to an antibiotic took the same or similar medicine, it would cause other problems which might be worse than the muscle injuries. The troubles are avoidable by prescribing recipe based on这个短语用得不是很恰当哈，换成according to如何？ every patient’s condition.

In sum, the arguer failed to make a logically acceptable argument. To prove the hypothesis, the author should develop better studies and collect more information about the patients to ensure the validity. To better the conclusion, the personal conditions should be taken into account. After all, there is no perfect treatment for everyone.结尾结得好！两方面兼顾了。学习中。。。。
总的来说，是篇值得偶学习的文章哈。说理方面丰富，段落的分布也不错。只是有些原文的小漏洞如果不能完全批驳明白的话，还不如忽视这些哦。
文采方面有出色的地方。但如果再在节奏上紧凑些就好了，这样的批驳的会更有力。可以把有些地方改成疑问句或反问句的哦！
呵呵，尽力给你改了哦，但偶的能力有限，多多包涵哈。

[ 本帖最后由 wenyuZ 于 2006-3-6 16:07 编辑 ]

wenyuZUID: 2113611

你也是学是生物的吗？也考6G吗？哪个学校呢？
呵呵，我觉得多有缘的哈。我的QQ是17343715，有空了加我哦
一起加油啦！
以后关注你的作文帖子哈

nt03UID: 2182145

All patients hope that they'll be fine as soon as possible. The argument seems for the sake of the patients with their muscle stained， but the recommendation that all patients who have been
                       拼写错误strain
diagnosed this kind of injuries should take antibiotics is unreasonable in fact.
应加上with

    First of all， there was not enough information about the study to sweep out all the doubts in the conduction. Though patients in the second group took placebos ， the sugar pills， the proof that all other factors were the same was not offered. Health conditions of patients may be different. In specific ， age， gender ， weight ， heart rate ， blood pressure
       逗号应该去掉
and many other indexes were likely to weaken the validity of the control. For example ， a health young man who exercises everyday is most likely to recover sooner while an old lady with twice heart attacks would complain the pain in the leg caused by muscle strain for a longer time. It is also questionable whether the location of the injuries and the severity were the same.

    Moreover, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine probably performed a better treatment on muscle injuries than a general physician. Since the doctor with more knowledge about sport medicine knew the details about the muscles better and may be more experienced when treating this kind of patients. Aside from antibiotics, whether other treatments benefit for the patients were available in both groups is unknown. From this aspect, the results of study did not lend strong support to the hypothesis.这段很好，句子用得也到位。但是，最好这段开头有个总结句。比如,the author ingore the possibility that different doctors may give different treatment.之类的.

In addition, the hypothesis overemphasized that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Even if the hypothesis was proved true, it was hasty to recommend all patients with muscle strain take antibiotics without knowing the specific information. It is unnecessary to add the medicine cost on patients without secondary infections or with relatively lighter strain. The allergy history of patients must be considered also. 这个的提出也非常棒。If a person who is allergic to an antibiotic took the same or similar medicine, it would cause other problems which might be worse than the muscle injuries. The troubles are avoidable by prescribing recipe based on every patient’s condition.

    In sum， the arguer failed to make a logically acceptable argument. o prove the hypothesis ， the author should develop better studies and collect more information about the patients to ensure the validity. To better the conclusion ， the personal conditions should be taken into
better后面应该有个动词。
account. After all， there is no perfect treatment for everyone.

[ 本帖最后由 nt03 于 2006-3-7 14:52 编辑 ]