Section 15 opens with a factual claim , “AA claims that circumstances or conditions exist beyond doubt”. Trials are being held to see if MDMA, a drug containing ecstasy, will help people that are suffering from PTSD. The goal is that this drug will help them verbalize their emotions in effort to create a less frightening association with the event. 

The author states a numerical claim when he says “In one small study, trauma victims given beta-blockers within six hours of the incident had a 40 percent less likelihood of developing PTSD.”

A credibility claim is when the author cannot take direct credit for the claim. The author does this when quoting Alain Brunet. “But as of yet, “pharmacologically, there’s no magic bullet,” he says”.

The author ends paragraph one of section 15 with stating the evaluative claim, “‘we’re much less effective at treating more complex PTSD’ with traditional therapy”.  An evaluative claim evaluates “ the effectiveness of a course of action”. 

Paragraph two of section 15 begins with an Analogy claims that states “Like traumatic brain injury. Researchers posit that TBI can make the brain more vulnerable to PTSD”. This specific claim refers to the findings of similarities. That same sentence then ends with a categorical claim saying, “it can exacerbate its symptoms of exhaustion, agitation, confusion, headaches”. In this example it’s specifically listing symptoms of PTSD

A causal claim is made when the author says “as for TBI, well, “there is no cure”. A causal claim is asserts the cause and effect.