ChaseDream

标题: OG-105 [打印本页]

作者: lucysz 时间: 2006-9-28 18:13
标题: OG-105

105.

Treatment for hypertension forestalls certain medical expenses by preventing strokes and heart disease. Yet any money so saved amounts to only one-fourth of the expenditures required to treat the hypertensive population. Therefore, there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension.

Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the conclusion above?

(A) The many fatal strokes and heart attacks resulting from untreated hypertension cause insignificant medical expenditures but large economic losses of other sorts.

(B) The cost, per patient, of preventive treatment for hypertension would remain constant even if such treatment were instituted on a large scale.

(D) Effective prevention presupposes early diagnosis, and programs to ensure early diagnosis are costly.

(E) The net savings in medical resources achieved by some preventive health measures are smaller than the net losses attributable to certain other measures of this kind.

答案（A）

我想问一下OG关于选项C的解释：Choice C undermines a different conclusion-that society should not support treatment for hypertension-but does not damage the conclusion actually drawn.

选项C明明是说：在health care中，不应该过多考虑economic。怎么就undermines这个结论了：“society should not support treatment for hypertension”？

实在不明白。

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-9-30 10:40:49编辑过]

作者: sinoversion 时间: 2006-9-28 19:32

意思就是无关,if c ture means society should not support treatment for hypertension, (because we needs an

economic justification).but in fact, in matters of health care,ecnomic consideration should idealy not be dominant.

so society could support it.

作者: lucysz 时间: 2006-9-29 10:31
还是不明白，能否说得具体一点？

作者: bolodong 时间: 2006-9-29 10:41
2楼的是不是解释反了.but in fact, in matters of health care,ecnomic consideration should be dominant.so society could support it.

作者: lucysz 时间: 2006-9-29 11:55

2楼的解释能否说得清楚些，因果关系很奇怪哎。

作者: gonghao 时间: 2006-9-29 12:42

文章的结论是：there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension.。预防性的高血压治疗在经济上没有正当的理由。

C：In matters of health care, economic considerations should ideally not be dominant.在卫生治疗方面，经济的因素不应该占主要地位。即不管钱多钱少，治疗都应该进行。

Choice C undermines a different conclusion-that society should not support treatment for hypertension-but does not damage the conclusion actually drawn.

削弱了一个结论：结论是社会不应该支持对高血压的治疗。＝社会应该支持对高血压的治疗

－－－－－－－－－－

文章说是：预防性的高血压治疗在经济上没有正当的理由。

C说的是，预防性高血压治疗本身的支持与反对。

－－－－－－－－－

A说的也是经济上的，即不预防，其它的病就造成的损失更大。所以

作者: lucysz 时间: 2006-9-29 13:12

谢谢各位耐心指教，终于明白了！

作者: sinoversion 时间: 2006-9-29 18:42

以下是引用bolodong在2006-9-29 10:41:00的发言：
2楼的是不是解释反了.but in fact, in matters of health care,ecnomic consideration should be dominant.so society could support it.

不好意思,没说清楚,我想说明的是削弱C的逻辑.

作者: cccccc0 时间: 2006-11-11 12:50
up

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)