[求助]LSAT-2-4-12

两个疑问： 一是CANCEL OUT做何解释？取消/补偿似乎都不通。。。另一个是此题答案A看不出与题干有多少关系？

12. “Though they soon will, patients should not have a legal right to see their medical records. As a doctor, I see two reasons for this. First, giving them access will be time-wasting because it will significantly reduce the amount of time that medical staff can spend on more important duties, by forcing them to retrieve and return files. Second, if my experience is anything to go by, no patients are going to ask for access to their records anyway.”

Which one of the following, if true, establishes that the doctor’s second reason does not cancel out the first?

(A) The new law will require that doctors, when seeing a patient in their office, must be ready to produce the patient’s records immediately, not just ready to retrieve them.

(B) The task of retrieving and returning files would fall to the lowest-paid member of a doctor’s office staff.

(C) Any patients who asked to see their medical records would also insist on having details they did not understand explained to them.

(D) The new law does not rule out that doctors may charge patients for extra expenses incurred specifically in order to comply with the new law.

(E) Some doctors have all allowing their patients access to their medical records, but those doctors’ patients took no advantage of this policy

1.CANCEL OUT是抵消，取消的意思。

2。如果病人将（be going to）没有此要求（第二个理由），则第一个理由不存在（既然病人没要求看病历了，当然不存在看记录浪费时间的问题）所以CANCEL OUT

3。当写病历和病历随时让病人看成为医生的义务时（A选项），第二个理由的情况不一定存在。当然第一个理由的情况就有可能讨论。反正第二个理由不能CANCEL OUT第一个理由了。因为病人有可能看病历了。

重新看看医生的两个理由，理由2本来就是cancel out理由1的；所以问题问does not establish...理由2 cancel 理由1...就是对原文论证的消弱，我的理解对吗？IF SO, 我觉得以下的解释也OK.

选项A是新法律要求医生主动出示病例给病人，而不是让病人有一个LEGAL RIGHT来要，这与原文要驳斥的“PATIENTS SHOULD NOT HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO SEE THEIR MEDICAL RECORD" 是背道而驰的，自然原文驳斥的理由就不成立，原因2就不CANCEL OUT 原因1。