Until mow, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available.Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated.A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children.However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.
The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as jnjectable vaccines do.
The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
The nasal spray vaccine is mot effective when administered to adults.
我怎么感觉选E呢？ 求教为何选D，， 谢谢
作者: bennywang2usa 时间: 2010-7-20 23:58
因为假设题的答案必然都是否定句。。。。只有D是否定句。。。作者: 2008115061 时间: 2010-7-21 00:32
楼上的正确的做题方法。 要解释的话，选项D在取非之后，可以对原文构成削弱：尽管小孩子由于influlenza不会得到并发症（children seldom develop serious complications from influenza），但如果小孩子能把病传给大人的话，大人会结果很严重（ who are at risk of serious complications from influenza）。因此，针对原文中的结论即社会的健康状况不会得到改善，前提就是小孩的病不会传给大人。 E，我们只要知道小孩可以用这种新药就好 和大人没关系作者: wangsiwei 时间: 2010-7-21 02:13
我是这样解题的。 在结论中的no significant public health benefit没有在前面铺垫中出现，这样的情况通常是要吧这个和前面小孩不打针连起来，就是小孩不打针＝ no significant public health benefit。D是这个委婉的说法，小孩不会传染大人，就不会有significant public health benefit。文章中如果没有比较，答案就没有比较。 不过，我不是很同一1楼的说法，假设的题型中有一种是连桥，这种题型不一定是否定句。而且就算是排除它因或它果，有时候也是非常委婉的表达，也不一定是否定句。 我自己总结的，不一定对哈，大家讨论。