ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

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 _______.

正确答案: E

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 2436|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

呼唤NN~!帮忙解决下问题~ 叩谢!

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2010-4-16 00:20:41 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
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 _______.

A.many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life

B.it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has

C.cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods

D.certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is

E.for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2010-4-16 00:44:43 | 只看该作者
答案选E.煮熟和放射对VB1的减少有加成作用
板凳
发表于 2010-4-16 00:55:53 | 只看该作者
OG12-99

Reasoning
Which option most logically completes the argument? For the proponents’ claim to be
misleading it needs to be suggesting something about irradiation that is false. By stating
that irradiation destroys no more B1 than cooking does, the proponent seems to be
suggesting that any food that is going to be cooked might as well be irradiated because it
will end up with the same amount of B1 either way. But if the eff ects of radiation and
cooking combine to destroy more B1 than cooking or irradiation alone would, then the
proponents’ claim suggests something that is false.
A This might make the assurances of the proponents less credible but it does not make their claim
misleading.
B Nothing about the proponents claim suggests that the only eff ect irradiation has is to kill
bacteria.
C The fact that cooking and irradiation have diff erent purposes does not indicate that the
proponents’ claim suggests something that is false.
D If anything, this strengthens the proponents’ point by minimizing the relative damage caused by
irradiation.
E Correct. This option most logically completes the argument.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-26 23:34
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部