OG逻辑99题求助

yueyuevickie

99题irradiation支持者说irradiation在维生素破坏方面不会比cooking差，然后题干说这种说法是离题的，因为很多irradiated food is eaten raw,我觉得正是因为对于食物来说，irradiated的不经过cooking才使得两种手段在某种结果面前有可比性啊，怎么会是离题的呢？

不明白其中的逻辑，哪位大虾可以赐教一二呢？

melodyflying

请把题目贴出来

以便大家查看

[此贴子已经被作者于2009/10/5 11:53:05编辑过]

yueyuevickie

which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage .However,it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods.For example,irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain.Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However,this fact is either beside the point,since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since_____

我先在的问题不是选项的问题，而是题中的提法我就不是很明白，为什么beside the poin?