求解OG12 CR99

cptbtptp

99. 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 B1 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 B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is
(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded
不太理解这题，题目不是要weaken  （irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking）吗？为什么food that is both irradiated and cooked剩的B1是两者单独加起来的综合就能weaken?这应该是证明cooking也会损坏B1啊？。。。

socat123

proponents of irradiation 的assumption是，things will be irradiated, OR cooked to end up with the same amount of B1, so irradiation is no worse than cooking. 因此要weaken proponents的观点，可以attack the assumption, 即：things can be irradiated AND cooked来损害更多B1.

一家之言拉。

cptbtptp

是啊，是要证明this fact （irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking） is either beside the point  ，or else misleading吗？我表达错了。。这个E怎么可以证明呢？题目意思不太懂啊

glaxosmith

不是要证明irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking。
而是要证明this fact is either beside the point