NOTES:

Explain It
Key Terms:
A man in this context, a doctor
Cannot unable
Hypodermic needle means of administering drugs
Narcotic drugs/medications
Inversely proportional to your skill the more you do it,
the less skill you have
Therefore:
Martin Fischer is suggesting that a doctor unable to
work without administering drugs is bad at their job, and
that those who administer large amounts of drugs have
less skill than those who administer less. (35 words)
Argue Objectively
Arguments to the contrary, i.e. that the use of narcotics
does not represent a lack of skill:

Narcotics are a very important part of medicine

Some fields, like anaesthesia, rely more heavily on narcotics than others

Administering of narcotics is a very precise skill e.g. controlling blood pressure

Express an Opinion
Arguments for being able to work without a hypodermic
needle being the mark of a good doctor:

Some doctors might be over-reliant on narcotics at the expense of other skills

Overuse of drugs has negative consequences, e.g. resistance

Conclusion
Narcotics are necessary but should be used sensibly
Good doctors know when and how to administer
SAMPLE ANSWER:
Martin Fischer is suggesting that a doctor unable to
work without administering drugs is bad at their job, and

that those who administer large amounts of drugs have

less skill than those who administer less.
However, there are many cases where the administering
of large amounts of narcotics to various patients does
not represent a lack of skill.
Narcotics are a very important part of modern medicine.
They can be used to control and cure ailments that
otherwise would progress to the detriment of the patient.
For example, drugs are often used to control blood
pressure. This has many benefits, such as reducing the
chances of suffering from a stroke.
There are also some medical fields that rely more
heavily on the administering of narcotics than others.
For example, the job of the anaesthetist is to administer
drugs so that the patient remains unconscious during
serious operations. In this case, the ability to do this well
is the mark of a good doctor not a bad one.
In general medicine, the administering of narcotics is
extremely important. Being able to give the right doses
of the right drugs in the right situation is a precise art.
Nonetheless, Fischer does raise an important point.
Many doctors might be considered to rely too heavily
upon the administering of narcotics. This might be to the
detriment of other skills that a good doctor should have,
such as providing a precise diagnosis.
In some cases, using drugs where they are unnecessary
might have undesirable consequences. For instance, if
antibiotics are given too readily when they are not
needed, then harmful bacteria can develop resistance to
them.
In conclusion, narcotics are a necessary and important
part of modern medicine. However, they should be used
sensibly. The skill of a good doctor comes in knowing

when to use narcotics, and when not to, in order to

benefit the patient.