N62,O98第一篇arguement，求指导

GALAAA

16号就考了，现在才作文，希望不晚。。。求大神们指导第一篇习作
TOPIC: ARGUMENT98 - The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.


"In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps, a concentrated solution of Nadasept killed 40 percent more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During a subsequent test of Nadasept at our hospital in Saluda, that hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection than did any of the other hospitals in our group. Therefore, to prevent serious patient infections, we should supply Nadasept at all hand washing stations throughout our hospital system."
WORDS: 515TIME: 00:30:00DATE: 2012/6/3 16:00:27


In this argument, the arguer recommends supplying Nadasept at all hand washing stations throughout the hospital system. To bolster the assertion, the arguer cites the data in a laboratory study suggesting that a concentrated solution of Nadasept killed 40 percent more bacteria than the liquid hand soaps currently used in the hospital. The arguer also points out that in the test of Nadasept at the hospital in Saluda, the hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection than did any of the other hospitals in the group. The argument seems reasonable at first glance, but it is in fact ill-conceived. The reasons are as follows.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly compares the concentrated solution of Nadasept with the hand soap used in the hospitals. It is possible that the hand soap used currently in the hospitals are not concentrated. And the arguer provides no evidence that the actual function of Nadasept is as similar as it is in the laboratory. Without extra information, the ability to kill bacteria between the two kinds of hand soap is uncomparable.


In the second place, the arguer assumes that all the bacteria that have been killed by the Nadasept are bad bacteria. Common sense tells me that not all bacteria are bad, there are good bacteria at the same time. So it is entirely possible that Nadasept kills more good bacteria and no more bad bacteria than the liquid hand soaps currently used in the hospitals. In this case, the infection cannot be reduced as the arguer recommend.


The last but not the least important, the arguer assumes that in the test of Nadasept used hospital, the significantly fewer cases of patient infection than did any other hosptial indicate the stronger ability to kill bacteria. it maybe possible, but the arguer ignores other possible factors due to the fewer cases of patient infection. perhaps the patients in the Nadasept used hopital are less susceptible than in the other hospitals. Or perhaps the latter did not use hand soap during the time. Even if the Nadasept is stronger than other hand soap, there is no evidence that it can prevent serious patient infection. Whether there will be an infection and how serious it is are irrelevant to the hand soap used. There are other factors taking responsibility for the infection, such as the doctor’s medical treatment level, the whole health condition in the hospital and forth. without accounting for these or other possible explanations, the conclusion based on the possibility is flawed indeed.


Moreover, whether Nadasept can be extend to the whole hospital system can not be determined by the single statistic the arguer refers. for example, perhaps the hospital in other regions are abundant of a kind of bacterium that the Nadasept can not kill, or there are other hand soaps more stronger than Nadasept. without accounting for these possibilities, the recommendation is flawed.


To sum up, the arguer need to cite more evidence that is reasonable to convince us to use Nadasept instead of the liquid hand soaps currently used in the hospitals throughout the hospital system.

GALAAA

咋都没人指导啊？写的很烂也得请大家给出改进的意见啊！大家尽管指出烂在哪里没关系，我下次改进，这样才有进步嘛

普渡哥

最后一段need应该是needs.组织好内容3-3.5分应该没问题。

GALAAA

谢谢斑竹大人！百忙之中抽空莅临，小女子感激涕零！拜谢

zhouyue0223

http://forum.chasedream.com/GRE_AW/thread-705250-1-1.html
这是当时我写的，可以看看提纲。。