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.

E.      Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals

in their care.

参考答案是A。这也是CD17－22题，偶实在有点不明就里，这里对动物有敏感症的动物公园员工转换工作

对结论有什么support作用呢？谢谢！

哦，想想又好像明白啦！就是说动物公园的员工染上病的不少都转换工作啦，亦就是说现在survey已经是underestimate了那个比例啦，所以在一般人之中，如果也像公园员工一样频繁接触动物的染上病的比例就应该更高啦！偶的理解不知对不对，谢谢指教！

lz的想法虽然能做出答案,但我认为想法是不对滴!

支持题的前提是没有这个支持条件原文推论也成立,所以不存在lz说的survey被understimate的问题.

a 答案加入题干中可使普通人群中动物过敏的人数增加,那么此类人的比例增大,从而加强expert的结论