逻辑题，求大牛

小黛安

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？

小黛安

Thank you sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much!

sdcar2010

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.

小黛安

大牛，我还是不是很理解。。。不能用will...

sdcar2010

The word WILL in choice C kills it.

小黛安

我就是这么理解的。。。

msufcu

less than 9 => MORE than 25
不知道对不对

小黛安

I thought 9-34
SO we can't infer those information by ourselves? what's the tip here?

sdcar2010

Inference question is must-be-true.

Where can you find that 25% reduction of flu in the passage?