0910G [Just do it]argument51 by二月蓝

二月蓝UID: 2643877

0910G [Just do it]argument51

The arguer concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To bolster this assertion the arguer cites a study with respect to two groups of patients whom are treated with different therapies.
After all, the arguer does offers some relevant evidences, and the assumptions underlying this argument are not without merits. However, although the conclusion sounds indeed reasonable at first thought,
a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and several logical flaws may seriously undermine this argument.

First of all, the argument mentions two groups of patient and they are treated with two doctors. One of them specializes in sports medicine and the other one is le general physician. The doctor who specializes in sports medicine may be more professional in treating patients with muscle strain. He could use many more useful methods such as convalescent treatment.   Thereby the
two groups may accept different treatments and the result is unbelievable.

In addition, the author fails to provide any information concerning the two groups of patients. The first group of patient may be younger and stronger than the second one. They could recover more quickly than the old patients whether they are took with antibiotics or not.
In fact, differences between these two groups of patients might clearly outweigh the similarities. Thus the author cannot rely on this false analogy to bolster his recommendation.

Moreover, the author also fails to provide any information about if the sugar pills have an affirmative effect on patients or not. If the sugar pills have a negative effect on the patients, the recuperation time is not comparable. The auther should offer some literatures which can confirm the sugar pills take no efforts on the patients. The sugar pills are impossible to assess the validity and reliability of the survey.

Finally, the two groups are only samples, they can’t represent all people.
According to the argument, the auther believed that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In fact, not all the patients could take the antibiotics. Some of them are sensitive to the antibiotics and some of them have no reaction against the antibiotics. Thus the arguer cannot rule out the potential possibility that all patients would be advised to take antibiotics.

To sum up, the conclusion lack credibility because the argument have different samplesand treatment which can’t strong support what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide us more evidence.

leopard2009UID: 2596872

0910G [Just do it]argument51

Thearguer concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strainwould be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.To bolster this assertion the arguer cites a study with respect to twogroups of patients whom are treated with different therapies. After all
, the arguer does offerssome relevant evidences, and the assumptions underlying this argumentare not without merits. However, although the conclusion sounds indeedreasonable at first thought 感觉与前一句话有重复, a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and several logical flaws may seriously undermine this argument.

感觉有点重复，可以直接去掉after all到however的内容

Firstof all, the argument mentions two groups of patients and they aretreated with two doctors. One of them specializes in sports medicineand the other one is le /a general physician. The doctor who specializesin sports medicine may be more professional in treating patients withmuscle strain. He could use many more useful methods such asconvalescent treatment.   Thereby the
two groups may accept different treatments and the result is unbelievable.

感觉有点绕，可以直接第一句话就讲明问题所在，然后再说其它可能性。

Inaddition, the author fails to provide any information concerning thetwo groups of patients. The first group of patient may be younger andstronger than the second one. They could recover more quickly than theold patients whether they are took
with antibiotics 应该用主动语态哈took antibiotics or not. In fact, differences between these two groups of patients might clearlyoutweigh the similarities. Thus the author cannot rely on this falseanalogy to bolster his recommendation.

Moreover,the author also fails to provide any information about if the sugarpills have an affirmative effect on patients or not. If the sugar pillshave a negative effect on the patients, the recuperation time is notcomparable. The auther should offer some literatures which can confirmthe sugar pills take no efforts on the patients. The sugar pills are impossible to assess the validity and reliability of the survey. 这句话没怎么懂哈

Finally, the two groups are only samples, they can’t represent all people.
According to the argument, the auther believed that all patients whoare diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to takeantibiotics as part of their treatment. In fact, not all the patientscould take the antibiotics. Some of them are sensitive to theantibiotics and some of them have no reaction against the antibiotics.Thus the arguer cannot rule out the potential possibility that allpatients would be advised to take antibiotics.

这一段第一句主题句和后面展开论述的内容好像并不一致哈

Tosum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the argument have/may havedifferent samplesand treatment which can’t strong/strongly support what thearguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have toprovide us more evidence.

感觉思路还是很清楚，开头很好，很简洁。只是在论述中有时还是比较绕，直接一点可能会更好。

一点不完全对的见解，大家可以继续探讨哈。

二月蓝UID: 2643877

感谢，回头我研究下，套模板的，呵呵

二月蓝UID: 2643877

非常感谢，指点的很好，我做了修改，请下面同学点评   

    The arguer concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strainwould be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.To bolster this assertion the arguer cites a study with respect to twogroups of patients whom are treated with different therapies. However, although the conclusion sounds indeed reasonable at first thought , a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and several logical flaws may seriously undermine this argument.

    Firstof all, the argument mentions two groups of patients and they aretreated with two doctors. One of them specializes in sports medicineand the other one is a general physician. The two groups may accept different treatments. The doctor who specializesin sports medicine may be more professional in treating patients withmuscle strain. He could use many more useful methods such asconvalescent treatment.   The two groups may accept different treatments and the result is unbelievable.

    Inaddition, the author fails to provide any information concerning thetwo groups of patients. The first group of patient may be younger andstronger than the second one. They could recover more quickly than theold patients whether they took antibiotics or not. In fact, differences between these two groups of patients might clearlyoutweigh the similarities. Thus the author cannot rely on this falseanalogy to bolster his recommendation.

    Moreover,the author also fails to provide any information about if the sugar pills have an affirmative effect on patients or not. If the sugar pills have a negative effect on the patients, the recuperation time is notcomparable. The auther should offer some literatures which can confirmthe sugar pills take no efforts on the patients. The sugar pills are impossible to assess the validity and reliability of the survey.

    Finally, the two groups are only samples and they can’t represent all people. According to the argument, the auther believed that all patients whoare diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In fact, not all the patients could take the antibiotics. Some of them are sensitive to it and some of them have no reaction against the antibiotics. Thus the arguer cannot rule out the potential possibility that allpatients would be advised to take antibiotics.

    Tosum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the argument may have different samplesand treatment which can’t strongly support what thearguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have toprovide us more evidence.

houpei0126UID: 2643060

The arguer concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To bolster this assertion the arguer cites a study with respect to two groups （这句话有点奇怪，不是很理解）of patients whom are treated with different therapies. However, although the conclusion sounds indeed reasonable at first thought, a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and several logical flaws may seriously undermine this argument.
    First of all, the argument mentions two groups of patients and they are treated with two doctors. One of them specializes in sports medicine and the other one is a general physician. The two groups may accept different treatments. The doctor who specializes in sports medicine may be more professional in treating patients with muscle strain. He could use many more useful methods such as convalescent treatment.   The two groups may accept different treatments and the result is unbelievable.
    In addition, the author fails to provide any information concerning the two groups of patients. The first group of patient may be younger and stronger than the second one. They could recover more quickly than the old patients whether they took antibiotics or not. In fact, differences between these two groups of patients might clearly outweigh the similarities. Thus the author cannot rely on this false analogy to bolster his recommendation.
    Moreover, the author also fails to provide any information about if the sugar pills have an affirmative effect on patients or not. If the sugar pills have a negative effect on the patients, the recuperation time is not comparable. The auther should offer some literatures which can confirm the sugar pills take no efforts （这个词组我没有查到你说的你个意思）on the patients. The sugar pills are impossible to assess the validity and reliability of the survey.
    Finally, the two groups are only samples and they can’t represent all people. According to the argument, the auther believed that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In fact, not all the patients could take the antibiotics. Some of them are sensitive to it and some of them have no reaction against the antibiotics（这个倒是不多见）. Thus the arguer cannot rule out the potential possibility that all patients would be advised to take antibiotics.
    To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the argument may have different samples and treatment which can’t strongly support what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to （不是很恰当）provide us more evidence.
整体来说挺不错的。但一些细节方面还待斟酌。
大家的写法基本差不多，或者可以有些创新的。继续努力哈~~

二月蓝UID: 2643877

The arguer concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To bolster this assertion the arguer cites a study with respect to two groups of patients whom are treated with different therapies. However, although the conclusion sounds indeed reasonable at first thought, a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and several logical flaws may seriously undermine this argument.
    First of all, the argument mentions two groups of patients and they are treated with two doctors. One of them specializes in sports medicine and the other one is a general physician. The two groups may accept different treatments. The doctor who specializes in sports medicine may be more professional in treating patients with muscle strain. He could use many more useful methods such as convalescent treatment.   The two groups may accept different treatments and the result is unbelievable.
    In addition, the author fails to provide any information concerning the two groups of patients. The first group of patient may be younger and stronger than the second one. They could recover more quickly than the old patients whether they took antibiotics or not. In fact, differences between these two groups of patients might clearly outweigh the similarities. Thus the author cannot rely on this false analogy to bolster his recommendation.
    Moreover, the author also fails to provide any information about if the sugar pills have an affirmative effect on patients or not. If the sugar pills have a negative effect on the patients, the recuperation time is not comparable. The auther should offer some literatures which can confirm the sugar pills make no efforts on the patients. The sugar pills are impossible to assess the validity and reliability of the survey.
    Finally, the two groups are only samples and they can’t represent all people. According to the argument, the auther believed that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In fact, not all the patients could take the antibiotics. Some of them are sensitive to it and some of them have no reaction against the antibiotics. Thus the arguer cannot rule out the potential possibility that all patients would be advised to take antibiotics.
    To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the argument may have different samples and treatment which can’t strongly support what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer should provide us more evidence.

dodoluluUID: 2641270

The arguer concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To bolster this assertion the arguer cites a study with respect to two groups of patients whom are treated with different therapies. However, although the conclusion sounds indeed reasonable at first thought, a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and several logical flaws may seriously undermine this argument.
    First of all, the argument mentions two groups of patients and they are treated with two doctors. One of them specializes in sports medicine and the other one is a general physician. The two groups may accept different treatments. The doctor who specializes in sports medicine may be more professional in treating patients with muscle strain. He could use many more useful methods such as convalescent treatment.   The two groups may accept different treatments and the result is unbelievable.
    In addition, the author fails to provide any information concerning the two groups of patients. The first group of patients may be younger and stronger than the second one. They could recover more quickly than the old patients whether they took antibiotics or not. In fact, differences between these two groups of patients might clearly outweigh the similarities. Thus the author cannot rely on this false analogy to bolster his recommendation.
    Moreover, the author also fails to provide any information about if the sugar pills have an affirmative effect on patients or not. If the sugar pills have a negative effect on the patients, the recuperation time is not comparable. The author should offer some literatures which can confirm the sugar pills make no efforts on the patients. The sugar pills are impossible to assess the validity and reliability of the survey.
    Finally, the two groups are only samples and they can’t represent all people. According to the argument, the auther believed that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. In fact, not all the patients could take the antibiotics. Some of them are sensitive to it and some of them have no reaction against the antibiotics. Thus the arguer cannot rule out the potential possibility that all patients would be advised to take antibiotics.
    To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the argument may have different samples and treatment which can’t strongly support what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer should provide us more evidence.
文章的整体和段落内的逻辑结构都十分清晰，读起来是一气呵成，我是挑不出什么毛病来了，真的挺不错地了，加油啦