半个小时写出来啦 大家看一下

Question:

The following appeared in an article in a consumer-products magazine.

`Two of today's best-selling brands of full-strength prescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid, Acid-Ease and Pepticaid, are now available in milder nonprescription forms. Doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full-strength Acid-Ease than for full-strength Pepticaid. So people who need an effective but milder nonprescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid should choose Acid-Ease.~

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

********************

Your Answer:

Citing the statistic that more prescription medication for full-length AE than Pep are prescribed by doctors,the argument recommends that people in need of an effective but milder nonprescription medication should choose AE.Close scrutiny of the evidence in the argument reveals that it does not lend credible support to the author's recommendatin.
First,a threshold issue inherent in the argument is the switch of concept in the conclustion.The statistics the author cites is all about full-length prescriptions,
the recommendation states that patients should choose AE when they need an effective nonprescription medication.Unless the author clearly specifies that those two forms of medication have the same effect on the disease,I cannot accept the author's argument.
Secondly,the author assumes that doctors prescribe more AE for patients because AE is a more effective and milder treatement of the disease.The author fails to consider a myrid of other factors that may influence the doctor's choice.It is entirely possible that since those two kinds are essentially the same in effect but AE is more expensive in average,more prescriptions of AE will surely incur more revenues.If this is the case,the author's assumption that AE is more effective since more doctors prescribe it amounts to little more than conjecture.
  Moreover,given that AE is generally more effective and milder in treating the disease,the author does not provide sufficient evidence to prove that those people mentioned in the argument are representative of the overall population in general.Common sense tells me that different people possess different physical features that make them each adapt to different sort of medication.It is possible that those people prescribed of AE are particularly responsive to AE and thus AE has a better effect on that group of people.The author ignores the issue of  representativeness  and therefore make an oversimplified generalization.
  In conclusion,the author does not provide sufficient evidence to bolster his recommendation that patients should choose AE since it is more effective and milder.To better support his recommendatin.the author should first carry out a broad demographic survey of patients prescribed of AE by doctors to make clear whether AE is actually more effective in treating the disease.Moreover,the author should make clear whether those surveyors are representative of the overall patients in general in terms of the effectivness and side-effects of both kinds of medication.