动物30%那道逻辑提，请牛牛指点

纳丁Cat

GWD26-Q22
People who have spent a lot of
time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of
them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30
percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude
that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large
amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with
animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.

Which of the following, if true,
provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?支持

A. A zoo employee who develops a
serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other
occupation. T
B. A zoo employee is more
likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets
C. The percentage of the
general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo
employee is quite small.
D. Exposure to domestic pets
is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-induced allergy than exposure to
many of the animals kept in zoos.
E. Zoo employees seldom
wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care


求助啊

lonelyorchid

逻辑是，如果动物的饲养者患了过敏，那么他就会被调到其他岗位，因而减少了在调查范围内的动物饲养者患过敏的比例。说明患过敏的比例高于30%。如果平常人跟动物饲养者接触动物的频率相同，那么其患病比例也应高于30%

dengts

A is correct.If I faces this question,I will find a gap in the reasoning.In the conclusion sentence,where is the infomation relationg to zoo emplyee?We must eliminate the gap between zoo emplyees and members of the general population,thus choosing A.

纳丁Cat

谢谢啊~，明白咯

纳丁Cat

找gap.很好~~

spoon0212

lonelyorchid 发表于 2011-4-12 17:35
逻辑是，如果动物的饲养者患了过敏，那么他就会被调到其他岗位，因而减少了在调查范围内的动物饲养者患过敏 ...

懂了，说的挺明白的