Argument51 argu第二篇，用时1小时10分

chenheng0528UID: 2610515

The author attempts to prove that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should use antibiotics as part of treatment to reduce healing time. By comparing one group of patients who took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment and then recuperation time was quicker than typically expected with the other group without antibiotics and then healing time was not significantly reduced, the argument seems logical.

However, the arguer fails to consider that there are many other alternatives to effect the result of survey. First, author does not mention the patients’ number of a group, and the number may be too small to prove that the survey’s result is convinced. Author does not point out whether there are differences in the two groups of patients’ condition either. If the patients’ condition in the first group is not severe as the other, maybe the patients can heal quicker for themselves rather than for taking antibiotics. Finally, the first group of patients was treated by a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, while the second group were treated by a general doctor. Most people would agree that a specialized doctor most likely do better than a general doctor on the certain illness. Then it is not surprising that the patients treated with the specialized doctor heal quicker than other patients.

Even if the survey result is warranted and acceptable, the argument remains questionable. The author advice all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. The premise of this advice is all patients with muscle strain must have secondary infections. But there is no evidence to prove that is true. Perhaps only one of ten patients would have secondary infections. In fact, most patients who have not secondary infections do not need to take antibiotics which may bring other questions such as side effects.

I have to say that it is arbitrary to advice all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. Before drawing this conclusion, the author should provide more reasonable evidences, such as what is the percentage that the patients with muscle strain tend to have secondary infections, and how are the antibiotics effect the treatments on the same situation.

chenheng0528UID: 2610515

自己顶一下，说说自己的问题：
1、题目中甚至有没看明白的地方，后悔没及早过一遍题库。
2、研究明白题目后，只找到一个错误点，又翻看其他人的提纲才又找了一条。
3、语言全部是模板，没时间去变换句型了（关键平时的句式累积也不足）。但愿这个在考试时不会被判雷同。、

总结：书到用时方恨少呀。

happy牧羊UID: 2662770

The author attempts to prove that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should use antibiotics as part of treatment to reduce healing time. （文中的结论并不是说减少治愈时间而是作为辅助治疗，个人觉得A还要严谨一点）By comparing one group of patients who took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment and then recuperation time was quicker than typically expected with the other group without antibiotics and then healing time was not significantly reduced, the argument seems logical.（这句可以简化一点）（另外你对作者的反对应该在第一段里面就说出来，不然会让人觉得没说完就戛然而止了）
However, the arguer fails to consider that there are many other alternatives to effect the result of survey. （这里应该是body开头吧，是不是黏贴错了？）First, author does not mention the patients’ number of a group, and the number may be too small to prove that the survey’s result is convinced. Author does not point out whether there are differences in the two groups of patients’ condition either. If the patients’ condition in the first group is not severe as the other, maybe the patients can heal quicker for themselves rather than for taking antibiotics. Finally, the first group of patients was treated by a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, while the second group were treated by a general doctor. Most people would agree that a specialized doctor most likely do better than a general doctor on the certain illness. Then it is not surprising that the patients treated with the specialized doctor heal quicker than other patients.（这一段总的来说比较单薄，虽然说到了作者的逻辑缺陷，却没有凸显出主次，最后我给你一个连接，你可以参考上面的分析；另外还忘了指出了药物其实本身的副作用也可能使治疗结果发生转变）

Even if the survey result is warranted and acceptable, the argument remains questionable. The author advice all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment. The premise of this advice is all patients with muscle strain must have secondary infections. But there is no evidence to prove that is true. Perhaps only one of ten patients would have secondary infections. In fact, most patients who have not secondary infections do not need to take antibiotics which may bring other questions such as side effects.（建议本段丰富一点，分开阐述这两点：并不是所有人都有二次感染；有的人可能对抗生素有过敏等副作用，虽然文中提到了这两点，但是杂糅起来似乎缺少了层次性）

I have to say that it is arbitrary to advice all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. Before drawing this conclusion, the author should provide more reasonable evidences, such as what is the percentage that the patients with muscle strain tend to have secondary infections, and how are the antibiotics effect the treatments on the same situation.（阿狗的结尾其实大同小异，不多加评论，多看优秀的习文就能写出最适合自己的结尾了，本人是anti-模板的）
这个是以前同主题写作的A51，请参考
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-419002-1-2.html

这是我写的第一篇，A38，希望能够互帮互助，谢谢~
http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/viewth ... 6amp%3Btypeid%3D102

灵感女孩UID: 2224424

首先要谢谢你拍我的文章~ 呵呵 说到做到 有拍必回！

感觉楼上评论得很到位~ 我就补充一些楼上没提到的吧（重复的省略）

The author attempts to prove that all patients who are diagnosed withmuscle strain should use antibiotics as part of treatment to reducehealing time. By comparing onegroup of patients who took antibiotics regularly throughout theirtreatment (and then 感觉这里用whose比较好） recuperation time was quicker than typicallyexpected with the other group without antibiotics （严格来说是who took sugar pills）（and then 同上） healing timewas not significantly reduced, the argument seemslogical.（能不能把作者的话paraphrase一下避免重复？）

However, the arguer fails to consider that there are many otheralternatives to effect the result of survey.（同意楼上，这个however应该放在第一段结尾，并且这里我觉得应该批评作者此调查结果不能支持结论，矛头应该指向最终结论，然后第二段开头再说还有其他因素影响调查结果）First, author does not mention the patients’number of a group（我的professor给我纠正过说尽量避免名词复数s',所以这里可以用the number of patients in a group,下同), and the number may be too small to prove that thesurvey’s result is convinced. The author does not point out whether thereare differences in the two groups of patients’ condition either. If thepatients’ condition in the first group is not severe as the other,maybe the patients can heal quicker for themselves rather than fortaking antibiotics. （这里可以让步，说即便调查样本相同，医生的质量不同）Finally, the first group of patients was treated bya doctor who specializes in sports medicine, while the second groupwere treated by a general doctor. Most people would agree that aspecialized doctor most likely do better than a general doctor on thecertain illness. Then it is not surprising that the patients treatedwith the specialized doctor heal quicker than otherpatients.

Even if the survey result is warranted and acceptable, the argumentremains questionable. The author advice all patients who are diagnosedwith muscle strain should take antibiotics as part of their treatment.The premise of this advice is all patients with muscle strain must havesecondary infections. But there is no evidence to prove that is true.Perhaps only one of ten patients would have secondary infections. Infact, most patients who have not secondary infections do not need totake antibiotics which may bring other questions such as sideeffects.

I have to say that it is arbitrary to advice all patients who arediagnosed with muscle strain to take antibiotics as part of theirtreatment. Before drawing this conclusion, the author should providemore reasonable evidences, such as what is the percentage that thepatients with muscle strain tend to have secondary infections, and howare the antibiotics effect the treatments on the samesituation.