GWD-1-Q40:

Until Now, 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?

1. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.

2. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as jnjectable vaccines do.

3. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.

4. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.排除削弱。原来说给小孩注射这种新疫苗对公众健康不会有多大好处，现在就说有好处来削弱。或者理解成GAP。children seldom develop serious complications from influenza = no significant public health benefit弥补这个GAP。这里有一个分类小孩和大人。结论只考虑了小孩，从大人入手。

5. The nasal spray vaccine is mot effective when administered to adults.[D]

答案应该是d没有错。问题问的这个结论：no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.是在哪个假设前提下？d选项，如果大人的病不是因为他们接触了小孩而感染的，小孩本来感染的就不多，那么让小孩打疫苗就不会对公众健康产生影响了。

what is your question?