求助各位大侠！搞不懂的一道GWD

gongbing66

Until mow, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available.  Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of serious complication并发症s from influenza, are commonly vaccinated.  A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children.  However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A.    Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.
B.    The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as jnjectable vaccines do.
C.    The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
D.    Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
E.    The nasal spray vaccine is mot effective when administered to adults.
请问答案是什么   并且能给个解释么   谢谢

LeannaChina

Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of seirous complications of influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spary, is effect for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal spray vaccine as well.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechnaism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do.
C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
E. The nasal spray vaccine is most effective when administred to adults.

The argument start off with adults take injections to combat influenza.
The conclusion is that "no significant public health benefit" would arise
as a result of administering the nasal spray to children.

So, the assumption is that the adults do not contract influenza from
children -- D clearly creates this link.

BTG上的回答。

gongbing66

大人们commonly vacinated through injection.  孩子们不用injection这个方法。   现在有一个新的nasal spray, 对孩子很有效。  但是孩子们得influenza这个病不会很严重。   因此nasal spray对社会的benefit不会很大。
D说  大人们不会被孩子们传染。  为什么选D还是不清楚

annieview

原文有一个很重要的关系要理清（疫苗vs.流感vs.流感并发症）：打疫苗的目的不是为了防止流感。流感是小病，并不值得为此就打疫苗。但，流感很容易引起严重的并发症，这才是人们所担心的。所以，人们注射疫苗，不是为了防止感冒，而是不想因为感冒而引起并发症。因此，防止因为染上感冒而引起并发症，才是人们注射防流感疫苗的最终目的。

原文：大人们注射疫苗，因为大人感冒后，很容易感染流感并发症。小孩因为怕疼，并且患上流感后并不像大人那样容易引起并发症，所以大人很少带孩子去打疫苗。现在，有一种不疼痛的nasal spray方式，可以给孩子打疫苗。但大人们还是很少带孩子去打，因为虽然nasal spray的方式不会给孩子带来疼痛，但由于孩子染上流感后引发并发症的可能性很小（也就是说，不打疫苗，孩子即使感冒，家长也不会担心，因为孩子很少会由感冒引起并发症），所以家长还是没有动力带孩子去打疫苗。由此，公共健康机构通过nasal spray的方式给孩子打疫苗所赚到的钱还是不多。

思路：家长不给孩子打疫苗的理由里，忽略了另一点。如果得了感冒的孩子，把感冒传染给大人，就会给大人带来麻烦。孩子得感冒不是问题，因为不会有并发症，大人则刚好相反，会因为被传染了感冒而引发并发症。所以，带孩子去打疫苗，就变成了是出于大人利益的考虑，而非出于孩子自身的需要。以此为出发点，大人就会积极地带孩子用nasal spray的方式去打疫苗。这样一来，公共健康机构就能够通过nasal spray给孩子打疫苗赚到很多钱。那么，原文的结论就被削弱。

选项D恰好是排除了这个理由的可能性（大人不会从患有流感的孩子那里染上流感），从而支持了结论。

ScentyGuy

楼上说的很清楚~
这道题要考虑{结论的特殊性}，也就是public health benefit。
从这个来看的话，其他几个选项无关，D是正解。且D取非后，原文不成立。

gongbing66

不查字典真心不知道那词儿是并发症，立马明白了，多谢