|
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
D Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.
E Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. OG解释是argument的结论没有说明过敏反应与其他物质关系，因此D选项不对，但是从自己的逻辑出发： 喝不含sulfites的酒就不会过敏：D 酒内不含别的导致过敏的物质 E酒内自然存在的sulfites不到导致过敏的水平 觉得两者都是应该成立的，想请问各位NN，是不是因为我的思维方式不对？求大神们指导
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2016-8-3 17:50:07
收藏
收藏
楼主