[讨论] 急问AA139 (近日常考题目)

139.

The following appeared as part of an article in a trade magazine.

“During a recent trial period in which government inspections at selected meat-processing plants were more frequent, the amount of bacteria in samples of processed chicken decreased by 50 percent on average from the previous year’s level. These results indicate that the trial schedule should be made permanent: by continuing with more frequent inspections, the government could thus cut in half the incidence of stomach and intestinal infections throughout the country. In the meantime, consumers of Excel Meats should be safe from infection because Excel’s main processing plant has shown more improvement in eliminating bacterial contamination than any other plant cited in the government report.”

139. 行业杂志上的文章：
最近的试用期内，政府增加了检测被选肉处理设备(还是工厂)的频率，处理过的鸡肉样本内的细菌数量比前一年的水平下降了50％。如果政府早就开始更频繁的检测，国内的肠胃感染范围应该可以缩减一半。同时，Excel Meats 的消费者应该不会被感染了，因为政府报告显示，Excel的主要处理设备在灭菌方面的提高比其他任何设备都多

1.此段话怎么理解好?几个should, could 的虚拟语气怎么理解?后半段是否应理解为:  政府若进行频繁的检测，国内的肠胃感染范围应该可以缩减一半。同时，Excel Meats 的消费者不会被感染，因为政府报告显示，Excel的主要处理设备在灭菌方面的提高比其他任何设备都多政府这样做会

2.结论是不是有两层意思:1.政府应频繁检测,2.Excel Meats 的消费者不会被感染?

请指点.谢谢!

是有两层意思，其论证错误如下:

1. 政府频繁检测不一定就是bacteria减少的原因，无因果关系。

2. plant有重大进步不一定表明消费者就安全了，还有其他的因素没有考虑，属于causal oversimplification.

AA就是逻辑，把握了因果关系，就能够有思路了。

还有一个错误：经常检查不一定就使全国肠胃病发病率下降一半，因为不卫生的肉食并不是导致肠胃病的唯一原因。