GWD27-Q28

People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, a significant percentage of which are quite serious.  In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies.  However, a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.

Which of the following hypotheses receives the strongest support from the information given?

A.     The incidence of serious animal-induced allergies among current zoo employees is lower than that among the general population.

B.      Zoo employees tend to develop animal-induced allergies that are more serious than those of other people who spend equally large amounts of time with animals.

C.     Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-induced allergy than is exposure to the kinds of animals that are kept in zoos.

D.     There is no occupation for which the risk of developing an animal-induced allergy is higher than 30 percent.

E.     Among members of the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is significantly more than 30 percent.

Answer: E

这题苦思冥想好久拉，还是不知道为什么要选E。当时虽然用排除法选对了，不过就不知其所以然，还请nn指教。

这个题的意思是，那些在动物园工作的人，因为长期接触动物而患过敏的人很可能换了工作，之后他们就归于general population了。而在general population里，显然能够have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have的人中，这帮换了工作的人占的比例相当大，所以符合Among members of the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have的人中，很大一部分是有过敏的人。

不知道说清楚没有……

谢谢啊！！

我又找到了另外一个解释，大家看看哪个才对呀  ^-^

现在动物园里的employee经调查是30%，而且题目又讲了严重过敏的employee大多数换了工作，这说明对于调查结果是被低估的，应该大于30%，因为过敏的人换工作而重新招聘进去的人不一定过敏。

  所以对于一般的人来说，如果花同样的时间和动物在一块，其过敏的概率应当大于30%。结合题目的表述，应该是要得到这样的结论比较合适。

继续讨论

1、  People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?

A.    A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.

B.     A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home

C.     The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.

D.    Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.

A/B/C/D 就不解释了。

关键就是E怎么个理解法。

目前动物园内的比例是30％，这是建立在很多人换了工作之后的比例，“重新招聘进去的人不一定过敏。”，因此，如果这些人不换工作，一直在动物园工作的话，这个比例会高于30％。

而，与动物接触时间与动物园内工作的人一样的普通人（the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have），不存在“换工作”的问题。因此，就相当于“感染了的动物园工作人员，一直还留在动物园里面继续保持与动物的接触，虽然不断有新人补充进来，但是整个比例肯定高于30％”

继续讨论。

谢谢阿，终于懂了，应该就是这样理解没错