LSAT12-4-19

dr_green

The propesal to extend clinical trials, which are routinely rused as systematic tests of pharmaceutical innovations, to new surgical procedures should not be implemented.The point is that surgical procedures differ in one important respect from medical drugs: a correctly prescribed drug depends for its effectiveness only on the drug's composition, wheras the effectiveness of even the most appropriate surgical procedure is transparently related to the skills of the surgeon who uses it.
The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
A.  does not consider that new surgical procedures might be found to be intrinsically more harmful than the best treatment previously available.
B. ignores the possibility that the challenged proposal is deliberately crude in a way designed to elicit criticism to be used in relining the proposal.
C. assumes that a surgeon's skills remain unchanged throughout the surgeon's professional life.
D. describes a dissimilarity without citing any scientific evidence for the existence of that dissimilarity.
E. rejects a proposal presumably advanced in good faith without acknowledging any such faith.

正确答案是A   对到答案我就当场石化了。。。 这为什么啊  我觉得A 纯属无关选项阿~~
有人明白这道题吗
麻烦你解答一下~~ 谢谢啦！！

dr_green

顶一下 请问有人明白这道题吗

yboo

this Weaken problem is a little tricky.  here is my two cents:

Stimulus:
- Conclusion: new surgical procedures (SP) shall not be extended as a new clinical trial.
- Argument: SP is different from drugs.  while a drug's effectiveness ONLY depends on its composition, an SP TRANSPARENLY  (nearly equal to ONLY) relies on a surgeon's skills.

only choice a DIRECTLY points out another possibility - an SP may have another internal property, i.e.INTRINSICALLY harmful - that leaves it out of pure control of a surgeon's skills.