People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, a significant percentage of which are quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. However, a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
Which of the following hypotheses receives the strongest support from the information given?
A. The incidence of serious animal-induced allergies among current zoo employees is lower than that among the general population.
B. Zoo employees tend to develop animal-induced allergies that are more serious than those of other people who spend equally large amounts of time with animals.
C. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-induced allergy than is exposure to the kinds of animals that are kept in zoos.
D. There is no occupation for which the risk of developing an animal-induced allergy is higher than 30 percent.
E. Among members of the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is significantly more than 30 percent.
很勉强地选了C,觉得每个选项都错.
A. ZOO%和GP%进行比较,完全没有涉及.
B. 根据第一句只能判断people who spend equally large amounts of time with animals的%高,它跟ZOOees的比较,也没有涉及.
C.宠物和动物园动物的比较,什么东西哦?
D.职业的RISK,结论确实说到了OCCUPATION,但该否定没有根据.
E.GPwhospend equally large amounts of time with animals的% 和ZOO的%再次进行比较,如何说明了高于30%? 不能从文中推理ZOO employee转去的OCCUPATION就是去跟GPwhospend equally large amounts of time with animals的人相处啊..人家不能转行的哦?
正确答案是E, 我认为E要对的话,必须原文中有说明这些过敏的ZOOees是转去跟动物大量相处的行业.难道"SOME OTHER"implies了这一information?还是根据在文中哪里我没有发现呢??
马上就考试了 恳求NN指点!!!!!!!!!
Yeah..ans: A is right!!
如果这么解释的话..那么E又错在哪里呢?
谢谢~~
注意结论: However, a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
我们要找这个结论的assumption, 因为这句表示发病的动物园员工较可能转换工作, 这暗含一般大众发病率高, 所以E表示一般大众与动物园员工一样非整篇论证assumption
请指教
LS讲的..ER...是不是偶太笨,不明白??
A说的是GENERAL POPULATION,题干中并没有提到GP的感染指数,如果有涉及GP的也就是这一句..People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies
至于However, a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.确实ZOOees有可能转行变成general population里的一员,但因为不见得他们会接触动物(我认为不能自行assumeZOOees转行还是玩动物),所以,根据题目中讲的,People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies---也就是说多接触动物才有可能会动物过敏,A中只是简单地提到GP...似乎在题干中找不到证据呢?
A. The incidence of serious animal-induced allergies among current zoo employees is lower than that among the general population.
general population应该是指的普通人群吧？如果是的话，没有办法得出current zoo employees is lower than that among the general population.
B. Zoo employees tend to develop animal-induced allergies that are more serious than those of other people who spend equally large amounts of time with animals.
从理论上讲，是否develop animal-induced allergies只跟接触时间有关，跟职业无关
C. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-induced allergy than is exposure to the kinds of animals that are kept in zoos.
animal是否是zoo里面的无关紧要
D. There is no occupation for which the risk of developing an animal-induced allergy is higher than 30 percent.
由于zoo的人员有可能换岗位，所以大于30%的可能性还是有的.
E. Among members of the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is significantly more than 30 percent.
按照接触animal时间相同，cause animal-induced allergy的概率也相同的原则；另外，zoo的人员还会shift到其它岗位，因此大于30%是可能的 .
LS讲的..ER...是不是偶太笨,不明白??
A说的是GENERAL POPULATION,题干中并没有提到GP的感染指数,如果有涉及GP的也就是这一句..People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies
至于However, a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.确实ZOOees有可能转行变成general population里的一员,但因为不见得他们会接触动物(我认为不能自行assumeZOOees转行还是玩动物),所以,根据题目中讲的,People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies---也就是说多接触动物才有可能会动物过敏,A中只是简单地提到GP...似乎在题干中找不到证据呢?
晕倒…. 我的意思不是动物园员工转行还是玩动物.
而是文意表示会发生严重过敏的动物园员工是非常很可能转换到其它职业,
这不就意谓如A所述目前员工the incidence of serious animal-induced allergies会低于一般大众,因为患病率高的都转到其它行业啦…
请指教
A. The incidence of serious animal-induced allergies among current zoo employees is lower than that among the general population.
general population应该是指的普通人群吧？如果是的话，没有办法得出current zoo employees is lower than that among the general population.
再来说一下A
LS的解释我觉得不大对：
这里面没有具体说general population 到底有多少，有多少人有pet，能够长时间接触pet，所以到底哪个更lower还不好说，文中只是说有可能switch到其他行业，不是一定的！
However, a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
晕….文章已清楚表述会发生严重过敏的动物园员工易于转换行业, 这不就意谓目前员工患病率会较低
造lz选的E认为
E. Among members of the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is significantly more than 30 percent.
按照接触animal时间相同，cause animal-induced allergy的概率也相同的原则；另外，zoo的人员还会shift到其它岗位，因此大于30%是可能的 .
我觉得有个问题点是E选已限定这是与动物接触跟动物园员工一样多时间的一般大众怎可推断是动物园员工转换的那一批人咧???
EX:若我是动物园员工, 也许因为我患病率高而不再与动物接触
所以, 我觉得A才是正确选项
个人思路,请指教
呼呼…经过一天的思考再加上与战友讨论后, 这题ANS: E没错
这题找的是下列哪个假设可支持上述信息, 我觉得与找上述的信息可得出何种结论相似
理由是因为目前动物园员工有allergy的比率是30% ,加上大部份的allergy都会变严重, 而造成动物园员工换工作,
可以推出实际比率应该是更高的
希望被我误导的weiheyin MM, 考试顺利…真不好意思…
我同意是E，但是理由有點不一樣。
這裡可以分成兩組，第一組是"members of the general population who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have"，第二組是"zoo employees"。
既然題目說到"a zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation"，代表這些zoo employee會從第二組跳到第一組去
而這些跳槽的zoo employee正符合第一組的定義"who have spent as much time with animals as zoo employees typically have"，因此第一組的比率就從原本的3/10變成, 比如說, (3+1)/(10+1)=4/11好了,從數學原理得知分子分母加同一個數，值一定是變大,就可推出他的比率一定比原本的30％還要大
支持楼上的，GWD还有一道相关的题也证实了E是对的：
GWD26-Q22
People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?
A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.正确答案
B. A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home削弱
C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.无关
D. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.削弱
E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.削弱
这两题简直就是相互佐证的啊。
这题选E，道理很简单，我希望大家不要用复杂的话来解释逻辑问题，容易让人越看越糊涂
很多人患病后辞职了，但仍然有30%的zoo人员被查出来有病，说明实际的情况要严重的多（感染率远超过30%）
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |