返回列表 发帖

prep 109求NN解答~~

109.

Though sucking zinc lozenges has been promoted as a treatment for the common cold, research has revealed no consistent effect.Recently, however, a zinc gel applied nasally has been shown to greatly reduce the duration of colds.Since the gel contains zinc in the same form and concentration as the lozenges, the greater effectiveness of the gel must be due to the fact that cold viruses tend to concentrate in the nose, not the mouth.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Experimental subjects who used the zinc gel not only had colds of shorter duration but also had less severe symptoms than did those who used a gel that did not contain zinc.

B. The mechanism by which zinc affects the viruses that cause the common cold has not been conclusively established.

C. To make them palatable, zinc lozenges generally contain other ingredients, such as citric acid, that can interfere with the chemical activity of zinc.

D. No zinc-based cold remedy can have any effect unless it is taken or applied within 48 hours of the initial onset of cold symptoms.

E. Drug-company researchers experimenting with a nasal spray based on zinc have found that it has much the same effect on colds as the gel does.

这个题的A哪里错了啊?!!!
收藏 分享

conclusion: cold virus must concentrated in nose, because when zinc gel  applied to nose heal cold faster
a) fewer cold symptoms, when zinc gel applied.
this strongly strengthens the argument, not weaken

TOP

还是没懂啊
A不是说用第二种药的人本身病状就轻么?这样不就削弱了结论么?!

TOP

不可以削弱文章的前提,前提里说是zg greatly reduce the duration,

这是指的一个降低幅度问题,和duration的基数无关

口腔疾病:本来应该病4周
鼻腔疾病:本来应该病2周(shorter duration)

但是zg使鼻腔疾病用1周好了,而zl让口腔病用了3周才好,虽然鼻腔病没有

口腔病严重,但好的速度还是比口腔病快

这已久可以说明zg比zl更加的effective
所以不能削弱啊

TOP

我做这个题的思路是这样的,用的XDF老师的方法
这是一个现象解释型的削弱题,现象是,zg比zl更有效,解释:病菌在鼻子
里不在嘴里
这类题是要找到另外一个解释来解释这个现象
C:zg比zl更有效是因为zl含有可以一直z作用的其他物质
这就削弱了原文中解释的可能性,所以削弱了结论

TOP

现象解释性的削弱题大部分这样做,很有效

TOP

返回列表

站长推荐 关闭


美国top10 MBA VIP申请服务

自2003年开始提供 MBA 申请服务以来,保持着90% 以上的成功率,其中Top10 MBA服务成功率更是高达95%


查看