It is controversial whether AID Advocacy Groups(AGGs)'s ideas for helping hleping the people in developing countries get the health care for AIDs is reasonable or not. The lecture argues that they are the idea is not really possible to realize in the real world, and makes points against the reading's claims that those plans will be helpful for those AIDS patients in developing countries.
To begin with, the reading asserts that the drug companies are making too high profits out of these developing countires. The author mentions that such high pricing is immoral. This differs from the listening's lecturer's position that it is fair for them to make profit just like any other companies. The speaker insists that more money will cause more investment investing, which means the companies can develop develope more and better drugs.
Second, the author contends that governments should pay for AIDS drugs instead of individual people. The passage explains that buying in large quantities of drug will make the price go down. This opposes the professor's claim that this is a basic academic problem. The lecture says that these governments in developing countries are as poor as their citizens, so they cannot affort to buy drugs.
The writer argues that we should encourage these poor countries to make their own cheap versions of AIDS drugs. The reading insists that although it is illegal, it will reduce shipping costs, and also create plenty of jobs for the poor citizens living in the countury. This contradicts the lecture's contention that it is not only stealing, but also really dangerous. The speaker explains that the quality of the drugs won't be good, so it can sicken worsen or kill patients.
To sum up, the author argues that AGGs' plans for the AIDS patients in developing countires will bring them hope. This casts doubt on the professor's opinion that they are not reasonable and will not work in the real world.
내용 정리에 필요한 요소들을 잘 노트테이킹해주신 것 같습니다. 다른 분이 댓글로 설명하셨듯이 통합형에서는 주제에 대해서 두 지문이 어떻게 다른 입장을 보이고 있는지를 일목요연하게 정리하는 것이 목적이므로 결론까지 갖추지 않아도 괜찮습니다. 현재 결론에 제시된 내용으로 서론을 간결하게 대체하는 것도 좋을 것 같습니다. 통합형의 경우 85%가량이 주장-반박 유형이므로(15%는 문제-해결유형), 이 경우에 쓰일 수 있는 템플릿을 하나 정해서 외워두고 노트테이킹한 내용을 집어넣는 방식으로 글을 구성하면 시간을 많이 절약할 수 있으니 참고하세요^^ 문제지의 답안과 직접 확인하셔서 노트테이킹에서 빠진 부분이나 잘못 이해된 부분은 없는지 다시 한 번 내용 체크해주세요. 수고 많으셨습니다. 화이팅!