14. A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that of a group of 600 people who regularly took 1,500 mg of vitamin C daily for a year, fewer than 9 percent suffered serious cases of flu; of a group of 600 people who took 250 mg of vitamin C (the standard recommended daily allowance) daily for a year, 34 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu; and of a group of 600 people who took no vitamin C for a year (other than that found in the foods in a balanced diet), 32 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu.

Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?

(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken.

(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease.

(C) Doses of vitamin C that exceed the standard recommended daily allowance by 500 percent will reduce the incidence of serious cases of flu by 25 percent.

(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu.（D）

(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C.

C答案錯 會是因為數字問題嗎 ?因為1500是250*600%而不是500%嗎

15. Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.

Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.

Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?

(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.

(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.

(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.

(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.（E）

(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.

想請問一下 A答案是為什麼不對

20. The city council will certainly vote to approve the new downtown redevelopment plan, despite the objections of environmentalists. After all, most of the campaign contributions received by members of the city council come from real estate development firms, which stand to benefit from the plan.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the argument above?

(A) Several members of the city council receive sizable campaign contributions from environmental lobbying groups.

(B) Members of the city council are required to report the size and source of each campaign contribution they receive.

(C) Not every real estate development firm in the city will be able to participate in, and profit from, the new downtown redevelopment plan.

(D) The members of the city council have often voted in ways that are opposed to the interests of their campaign contributors.（D）

(E) Some environmentalists have stated that the new downtown redevelopment plan might be environmentally sound if certain minor modifications are made.

想問A 為什麼不對 我的理解是如果environmental lobbying groups. 也有CONTRIBUTION 那表示 city council支持redevelopment不是因為 contribution 而是別的原因 因為既然兩邊都有contribution

14. I would think so, the numbers in C are all wrong.

15. A I don't think these two statements are contradicted. what I

understand is that the arguments in her first sentence and the second are

different. That's why E is correct.

20 A has some points to weaken. But you need to compare two to see which

does better.

A only weakens the argument partially. It has an implication that the

councils member are impacted by the contribution.

But D cited a fact that overturn the argument from the root. D is better.