求教： GWD-1-18

Q18:

It is illegal to advertise prescription medications in Hedland except in professional medical journals or by mail directly to physicians.        A proposed law would allow general advertising of prescription medications.        Opponents object that, in general, laypersons lack the specialized knowledge to evaluate such advertisements and might ask their physicians for inappropriate medications.        But since physicians have the final say as to whether to prescribe a medication for a patient, the objection provides no grounds for concern.

Which of the following would it be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the argument?

1. Whether nonprescription medications can interact with and block the action of any prescription medications that could be advertised to the general public
   
2. Whether most prescription medication advertisements directed at the general public would be advertisements for recently developed medications newly available by prescription
   
3. Whether prescription medication advertisements directed at the general public would appear on television and radio as well as in print
   
4. Whether physicians are more likely to pay attention to advertising directed to the general public than to advertising directed to physicians
   
5. Whether physicians are likely to succumb to pressure from patients to prescribe inappropriate medications

         Answer: D

我觉得这题答案是E。有人能说说为什么是D吗？谢谢。

为什么选E，那位大牛能给出解题思路啊？

评价题按加强题做，E应该是反对结论的呀，为什么答案是它？苦闷！求解题思路！！！

苦求,TOO

最后的结果是医生决定给不给

那如果医生屈从了就给了，那就反对结论

如果医生按照规定作，那就支持

题目是说,在H城为处方药做广告是违法的,除了在专业的杂志或者直接发E-MAIL给药师.一个提议的法案允许公开的作广告.反对者就说,普通人一般没有专业知识去识别,就可能要求他们的药师去开那种广告上宣传的不合适的药.但是因为药师有最后开药的生杀大权,所以反对无效.

大概的意思就是这样,呵呵,^0^