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!!!!!!!!!
[此贴子已经被作者于2008-1-18 12:05:35编辑过] |