求助 OG 13 CR 101~各种不明白！求解答~

chaos1026

101. Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of
many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin Bl a food may
contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this
fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since

(A) many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from foods' having a longer shelf life
(B) it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
(C) cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a
longer shelf life for perishable foods
(D) certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin Bl than carefully controlled
irradiation is
(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin Bl associated with either process
individually is compounded

答案选E，但是看了解析，自己还是琢磨不透啊。没看懂是个啥逻辑链啊~求各位帮忙分析下~谢谢

findjuhl

compounded这个单词很关键。考场上不到2分钟分析逻辑链不一定是一个适合所有人的方法。
A说irradiate可以让食物的一个长的保质期，B说irradiation对食物的作用，C说cooking和irradiate对食物的作用的不同，D说cooking比控制下的irradiate对食物VB1的损害更大，E说食物既irradiate又cook，VB1在这两个单独过程中的损害是有加成的。
原文的结论是：“irradiation在process food上对VBI的damage程度不会超过cooking在process food上对VB1的damage程度”这一说法并不靠谱。
用无关词排除法，留下D和E，D方向错了，因此选E。
硬要分析逻辑链也是ok的。
结论：“irradiation在process food上对VBI的damage程度不会超过cooking在process food上对VB1的damage程度”这一说法并不靠谱。
前提：irradiation会损害食物中的VB1；much irradiated food is eaten raw。
选E是因为，尽管much irradiated food is eaten raw，但是仍然存在个别irradiated food需要cooking。如果这两个过程都会损害VB1，那么irradiated+cooking对食物VB1的损害肯定大于只cooking对食物VB1的损害。

chaos1026

哇~谢谢你哇~我仔细想想，体会下~
谢谢！