A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that of a group of 600 people who regularly took 1,500 mg of vitamin C daily for a year, fewer than 9 percent suffered serious cases of flu; of a group of 600 people who took 250 mg of vitamin C (the standard recommended daily allowance) daily for a year, 34 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu; and of a group of 600 people who took no vitamin C for a year (other than that found in the foods in a balanced diet), 32 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu. Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above? (A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken. (B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease. (C) Doses of vitamin C that exceed the standard recommended daily allowance by 500 percent will reduce the incidence of serious cases of flu by 25 percent. (D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu.（D） (E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C. 非常理解D是对的，但是想问问C的漏洞在哪里？
WILL is absolute, definite, a very strong word. A hypothesis with strong words needs strong evidence to back it up. The evidence we have is not strong, only one study. Based on the study, are you sure eating 500% VC WILL (definitely) reduce serious cases of flue by 25%?
D), on the other hand, uses weak language --can-- and is, thus, the correct choice for inference.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-8-17 11:12:22
收藏
收藏
楼主
