【每日逻辑练习第二季】【1-11】

ugly5552000

1、Background: the lobsters and other crustaceans which live in water that has been contaminated by sewage are likely to contract gill diseases.
Premise: in order to reduce the risk that lobsters catch the diseases, one proposed that millions of gallons of local sewage each day should be rerouted many kilometers offshore. Some others thought the proposal to be useless, for no lobster could live long enough to be harmed by those diseases.
Prephrase: the lobsters could be infected by other crustaceans that has contracted diseases. The lobsters’ offspring’s immune system is fragile when faces the diseases.
E
A: although contaminants in the harbor presents, the answer does not weaken the argument” the proposal is pointless”.
B: the argument concerns the lobsters caught in harbors, the longevity of lobsters living in open ocean has no impact on the argument.
C: lobsters’ breeding does not touch the argument.
D: irrelevant
E: if the proposal is pointless, the sewage is still touted in the harbor, then the lobsters are likely to contract gill diseases, and human often become ill as a result of eating lobsters with gill diseases, so the proposal is not pointless, it will reduce the chance that lobsters contract to gill diseases.
2、Background: in the following two years of 1989, the number of east German residents-owned cars and the total mileage covered by the east German cars has increased by 40 percent.
Premise: the east German casualties in car accidents has increased by 300 percent.
Prephrase: many west German traveled in East Germany, and many bad pile-up happened in East Germany
D
A: if it is true, the casualties might not increase by 300%, it does not explain the situation
B: if many residents moved out of East Germany, it is even harder to explain the reason of the accidents increase
C: it does not touch the argument
D: if it true, it is reasonable that the traffic accidents increase, which will lead to the rise of casualties.
E: this has no impact to the argument.
3、Background: some regulations has been imposed to demand the manufacturer to reduce a large amount of pollutants they discharge into the environment.
Premise: the manufacturers have to spend much money on reduction of pollutants and maintenance, which will cause the costs of goods to rise. Then the manufacturers would lose some export markets.
Prephrase: while the government imposes the regulations, it will give some reduction of tax to those manufacturers who comply with the regulations well, this will help the manufacturers to maintain the costs of goods, and the opponents in export market also experienced increasing cost, because their government implements the environment-friendly policies as well.
A
A: if it is true, the export market will not be lost because of the imposition of new regulations
B: it supports the argument, not weakens that.
C: it does not weaken the argument
D: irrelevant
E: it has nothing to do with export market.
4、Background: the new process of paint on new airliners cost much more than the old one
Premise: it will be a right decision to choose the new process when concerns of the long-term economic interest.
Prephrase: the airliners painted with the new process will take service much longer and the maintenance cost will be much lower than the airliners painted with the old process.

B
A: conflict with the conditions
B: if the loading-capacity is lowered by the old painting process, then in the long term, the profit of the airliners will be less
C: irrelevant
D: irrelevant
E: irrelevant
5、Background: some drugs in countries where they cannot be patented are sold at widely affordable prices, while in countries where they can be patented, they command premium prices.
Premise: the access to new drugs can be improved if the drug patent system were abolished.
Prephrase: if they is no patent system, no more new life-sustaining drug are to be manufactured.
D
A: irrelevant
B: irrelevant
C: irrelevant
D: if the patent system were abolished, the profits for manufacturers would steeply decline, the revenue could not afford the development of new drugs.
E: this is an assumption that the patent system had been abolished.

leewonting

59
Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage contaminates their water. Under a recent proposal, millions of gallons of local sewage each day would be rerouted many kilometers offshore. Although this would substantially reduce the amount of sewage in the harbor where lobsters are caught, the proposal is pointless, because hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by those diseases.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage are equally harmful to lobsters.
(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in the open ocean than in industrial harbors.
(C) Lobsters breed as readily in sewage contaminated water as in unpolluted water.
(D) Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining the surface of the lobster.
(E) Humans often become ill as a result of eating lobsters with gill diseases.
背景：Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage contaminates their water.
条件：Under a proposal, millions of gallons of local sewage each day would be rerouted many kilometers offshore.
结论：The proposal is pointless because lobsters can hardly live long enough to be harmed by those diseases.
推测：被sewage污染的海域，很难有lobster繁殖？
选B,在开放的水域会生活的比较久一点，而在污染的水域就短命一点。（D是迷糊项？）
That reference is to lobsters “eaten by humans.” The argument asserts that diverting the sewage in the harbor is a moot point because hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by the diseases caused by the sewage. This may be, but what about the humans who eat the lobsters that live in the sewage-contaminated environment? The author fails to address this point.
题目强调的是在harbor被抓的lobster，不是open area

60
背景：In the two years following the unification of Germany in 1989, the number of cars owned by East Germany and the total distance traveled by cars in East Germany both increased by about 40 percent.
条件：However, the number of East German residents killed as occupants in traffic accidents increased by about 300 percent
结论：Explain the disproportionate increase in the traffic fatalities
推测：拥有车的人和驾驶距离都提升40%，而因交通意外死亡的提升300%，以前用有车的人是否会travel far？以前的人即使有车，也不常开或者不会开太远？
选D


61
背景：Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment
条件：The pollution control equipment is expensive
结论：It leads to the exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished level
推测：what about the advantages that lead to another good result?遵循这些法规的产品符合其他国家对这种产品的要求，出口更多？
选A


62
背景：There is a new paint process which requires no primer, but instead used two layers of the same newly developed coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat.
条件：The price of new process is higher than the price of the old process.
结论：explain why the airline likes to use the new process
推测：more expensive but more advantages
选B


63
In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitors.  These facts show that future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacture is nevertheless（然而） a profitable enterprise.
(B) Countries that do not currently grant patents on life-sustaining drugs are, for the most part, countries with large populations.
(C) In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs can be patented even in cases in which the drugs themselves cannot be patented.
(D) Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.
(E) Countries that grant patents on life-sustaining drugs almost always ban their importation from countries that do not grant such patents.
背景：The price of life-sustaining drugs with no paten is lower than the price of life-sustaining drug with paten
条件：The practice of granting patens on newly developed life-sustaining drugs is going to abolished everywhere
结论：Future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved
推测：paten of the life-sustaining drugs is important! People did not buy those drug without paten
选A，not a profitable enterprise, then the companies do not produce new life-sustaining drugs.
应该选D，A的意思理解错了！！！Nevertheless是然而！！！D选项，有paten的公司，就能够调查研究提升新药，并且让他们能够获利的！！！

Rena张

今天状态不佳呀~
----------------------
1.
Time: 47''
Premise: lobster more likely to contract G-disease when S contaminates them.
       S be rerouted.
Conclusion: although this would reduce the amount of S in the harbor. The proposal is pointless because hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by the disease.
Type: weaken
Choice: C E
这题错在把premise和conclusion搞混在一起了~~~ because后面那个应该是premise的！！！

FB小贝

6. Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are
more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage
contaminates their water. Under a recent proposal,
millions of gallons of local sewage each day would
be rerouted many kilometers offshore. Although this
would substantially reduce the amount of sewage in
the harbor where lobsters are caught, the proposal is
pointless, because hardly any lobsters live long
enough to be harmed by those diseases.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously
weakens the argument?
背景：Lobsters and other cs eaten by humans are more likely to contract gill disease when sewage contaminates their water.
前提：Millions of gallons of local sewage each day would be rerouted many kms offshore. Reduce the amout of sewage in the harbor where lobsters are caught
结论：hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by those diseases--
the proposal is pointless.
Weaken: the proposal is useful


(A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage
are equally harmful to lobsters.
irrelevant

(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in
the open ocean than in industrial harbors.
irrelevant

(C) Lobsters breed as readily in sewagecontaminated
water as in unpolluted water.
Irrelevant , not breeding

(D) Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining
the surface of the lobster.
irrelevant

(E) Humans often become ill as a result of eating
lobsters with gill diseases.
The proposal  is useful . the arguer consider the proposal to be useless because he thinks it won’t effect the number of lobstes.
However, when the water is clearer, the possibility that lobsters get contracted by gill disease will reduce and thus, human won’t get sick.

dwindwin1106

(1)P and other c eaten by humans are more likely to have gill diseases when sewage contaminates water.
P:local sewage would be rerouted many km offshore à reduce the amount of sewage in the harbor where L are caught
C:the proposal is pointless, because hardly any L live long enough to be harmed by those disease.
Weaken:毒素会在掠食者体内积累，从而产生危害
Answer: E
A.Irrelevant ------ 即使有污染，结论说L活不到被污染的程度，对weaken结论没有帮助
B.Irrelevant ------ 无关比较，L in the open ocean和L in the industrial harbor没有关系
C.Irrelevant ------ 与L寿命与污染关系无关，对weaken结论没有帮助
D.Irrelevant ------ 检测手段与结论无关
E.Correct ------即使L本身因为寿命短不会受到危害，但是人类在eat L with gill disease会ill，所以proposal不是pointless的，它可以防止人类ill，从而weaken了结论


(2)F:the number of cars owned by residents of EG & the total distance traveled by cars in EG both increased by about 40%
F:the number of EG residents killed each year as occupants in traffic accidents increased by about 300%
Resolve:?
Answer: D

A.Irrelevant
B.irrelevant
C.irrelevant
D.correct
E.irrelevant


(3)P:regulations of R call for reductions in the amount of pollutants that are allowed to discharge into the envir àcostly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance àprice increases for R goods àloss of some export markets
C:annual exports of R goods will occur at diminished levels in the future.
Weaken: loss of some markets不一定就减少了annual exports？
Answer: A
A.Correct
B.Irrelevant
C.Strengthen
D.Irrelevant
E.Irrelevant


(4)Fld process: a coat of primer + a top coat
F:new process: two layers of the same new coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat
F:new process increase the price of a new aircraft considerably
支持用new process而不是old process (long-term economic interest):更耐用？
Answer: B
A.Irrelevant
B.Correct ------ new process有更大的承载能力，长远来说使得每架飞机的承载效率提高，有利于经济发展
C.Irrelevant (支持用old process)
D.Irrelevant
E.Irrelevant


(5)P:countries in which drugs cannot be patented: affordable price
P:countries in which drugs are patented: premium prices (because patents protect patent-holding company from competitors)
C:if the practice of granting patents on new drugs were to be abolished everywhere, future access to new drugs can be improved
Weaken: no patent也不能使得获得药物的情况有所改进
Answer: CD

A.Irrelevant
B.Irrelevant
C.Correct irrelevant

D.Irrelevant correct 废除后得不到新药，情况没有好转？

E.Strengthen

spencerX

精练 29s
Background：
Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage contaminates their water.
Premise:
Proposal：Reroute sewage each day many km offshore would reduce the amount of sewage in the harbor where L are caught.
Conclusion：
The proposal is pointless because L cannot live long enough to be harmed by diseases.
Pre: ?
My answer: B
Analysis：
A.    Out of scope. What happens in other place cannot be applied to this situation.
B.    Correct. if L can live longer, then they may contract the disease, so what the proposal is not pointless.
C.    Irrelevant
D.    Irrelevant
E.    Irrelevant

The conclusion of the argument is near the end: “the proposal is pointless,” and this is based on the premise that “hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by those diseases.”（我把普通的premise和conclusion问题同结论中causal argument搞混了）
Answer choice (B): This answer has no impact because the argument is about lobsters that are caught in the harbor. So, while lobsters in the open ocean may live longer, the author’s point about lobsters in the harbor not living long enough to contract a gill disease is untouched.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. As discussed above, the author fails to address the effect of the contaminated lobsters on humans who consume them, and this answer attacks that hole. If humans become ill as a result of eating lobsters with gill diseases, and gill diseases are more likely to arise when the lobsters live in the sewage-contaminated waters, then the conclusion that the proposal is pointless is incorrect.（conclusion中说的是proposal是pointless，但是没有强调是从哪方面说的。我以为要攻击的就是L生活的时间不够长，不能够感染疾病，没有注意到background中说：“eaten by humans”）

逻辑链
1.    35s
Background：德国统一
Paradox：东德的汽车数量和里程数量上升40%，但是死亡人数上升了300%
pre：原来的拥有汽车的人比以前更容易出车祸而死亡。
My answer：D
Analysis：
A．    Opposite answer. This answer choice actually support the argument
B．    Irrelevant
C．    Irrelevant
D．    ? (如果是因为原来就有车的人但是不怎么开的人导致了总里程数的上升，那么死亡人数的上升就得到了合理的解释）
E．    Irrelevant.
2.    34s
Background：Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment
premise：It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.
Conclusion：Annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels
My answer：A
3.    40s
Background: Paint on a new airliner is usually applied in two stages:  first, a coat of primer, and then a top coat.
Premise: A new process requires no primer, but instead uses two layers of the same newly developed coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat
Conclusion: Using the new process instead of the old process increases the price of a new aircraft considerably.
Pre: the cost of using new layers will be much more than before.
A.    irrelevant
B.    correct. if the capacity of the airplane can be improved, then the profit may rise.
C.    irrelevant
D.    irrelevant
E.    opposite
B
4.    32s
background：In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitors.
Premise：不收专利费
Conclusion：future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved
Pre：如果不收，那么就没有人开发新的药，药少了，access也可能减少
D

baseboss

1.Lobster will be illed by sewage.Let the sewage pour far away from
offshore.No need due to lobster can not live so long to be harmed by sewage.
Presume:
people eat lobster will be illed.

A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage
are equally harmful to lobsters.
-->irrelevant
(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in
the open ocean than in industrial harbors.
-->irrelevant
(C) Lobsters breed as readily in sewagecontaminated
water as in unpolluted water.
-->irrelevant
(D) Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining
the surface of the lobster.
-->irrelevant
(E) Humans often become ill as a result of eating
lobsters with gill diseases.
-->weaken.

2
Car owner and road increase 40%,but accident increase 300%.
presume:
Car owner do not obey the traffic rules.
A   d

3
Regulation will ask manufacture to reduce pollution by add equipment.This will increase the sales price.Sales price increase will lead export diminished.
Presume:
1 reduce pollution will not lead to increase the sales price.
A

4 Use newly paint instead of old one will increase of aircraft cost.
Presume:
1. Long-term consider when both top coating diminished,newly process will still have the top coating in side instead of old process to have primer left.
maintance cost saving.
E   B

5
new life-sustaining durg will be improve if allowed the patent.Due to patent drug can have premium prices.
presume:
1.price beyond the affordable price.people can not afford and died the comsumption population will reduce.
A  D

卖红薯a

【精练】
6.
1)计时：62s
2)逻辑链Situation
Background information: sewage contaminates their water→ L easy to contract gill diseases, huge gallons of local sewage rerouted many kilometers offshore
Premise: although this would reduce↓sewage in the harbor where L are caught
Conclusion: proposal is useless, cos lobsters can’t live long to be infected with those diseases
3)推测: no matter the water are polluted or not, L lives the same
4)选项分析：选C
A. Irrelevant.
B. Support.
C. Right.
D. Irrelevant. gill diseases won’t show up on the surface
E. Irrelevant. humans

41.
1)计时：33s
2)逻辑链Situation
Premise: the num of cars ↑40% owned by ppl of EG,
total distance traveled by cars in EG increased↑40%
Conclusion: however, the num of EG ppl killed in traffic accidents increased↑300%
3)推测: who ride bikes may died more than before
4)选项分析：选D
A. Opposite.
B. Irrelevant.
C. Opposite.
D. Right.
E. Irrelevant.

42.
1)计时：48s
2)逻辑链Situation
Background information: R’s regulations require huge reductions of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment
expensive maintenance to comply the regulation→ need costly new pollution control equipment
Premise: R’s goods price↑ → loss of some export markets
Conclusion: R’s annual export goods will be in diminished levels in the future
3)推测: some export markets ≠ will be in diminished levels
4)选项分析：选A
A. Right.
B. ?
C. Irrelevant.
D. Irrelevant.
E. Irrelevant.

43.
1)计时：56s
2)逻辑链Situation
Background information: paint on a new airliner needs 2 stages: 1. A coat of primer 2. A top coat
Premise: new process: no primer and 2 layers of new coating (each layer weight/ thickness = a traditional coating)
Conclusion: new process →increase the price of an aircraft
3)选项分析：选D
A. Irrelevant.
B. Opposite.
C. Opposite.
D. Right. temperature advantage
E. Irrelevant.

44.
1)计时：42s
2)逻辑链Situation
Background information: new life-sustaining drugs can’t be patented in some countries, the drugs are at affordable price;
where same drugs are patented, command extra prices cos the patents shield’s protection
Premise: if granting patents on these drugs are abolished everywhere
Conclusion: future access to these drugs can be improved
3)推测: will not be improved
4)选项分析：选A
A. Right.
B. Irrelevant.
C. Irrelevant.
D. Opposite.
E. Irrelevant.

Threesu

B: lobsters and crustaceans may contract gill to humans.
P: lobster won’t live long enough before get caught
C: the conclusion that reroute the sewage offshore kilometers away is pointless

(A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage
are equally harmful to lobsters.
(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in
the open ocean than in industrial harbors.
(C) irr
(D) irrelevant
(E) irrelevant
选E！！！仔细看题！！

B: after the east Germany and west Germany unification in 1989, the number of cars owned by east Germany and the total distance driven by west Germany increases a lot
P: the death rate of residents in Germany involved in car accident increases 300 percent

(A) opposite
(B) irrelevant
(C) After unification, a smaller proportion of the cars being purchased by East German residents were used vehicles.
(D) Drivers who had driven little or not at all before 1989 accounted for much of the increase in the total distance traveled by cars.
(E) 描述对象无关？

自习看题目。。。疯了，两题一样的错误

B: the government calls for a huge reduction of pollute by manufacturers
P: the new policy need new equipment which costs a lot, and that will increase the price of goods
C: the performance in export market will diminish
The customer calls for social responsibility
(A) The need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.
(B) The proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.
(C) support
(D) support
(E) irrelevant
感觉这个逻辑好牵强啊，东方不亮西方亮

B: the old one use a primer coat and a top coat, however, the new one use tow new coats having the same thickness and weight as the old top coat
P: the new cost more
The new one need less
(A) irrelevant
(B) support
(C) weaken
(D) weaken
(E) irrelevant

B: In countries in which life-sustaining drug are patented, the drugs are much too expensive; when the drugs are not patented, drugs are widely accepted.
P: the patent of life-sustaining drugs are abolished everywhere
C: no more people would not afford those kind of drug

(A) In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacture is nevertheless a profitable enterprise.
(B) irrelevant
(C) irrelevant
(D) Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.
(E) irrelevant

D比较直接，但是为什么A是错的呢？

二楼往下掉

1.
（1）45s weaken
（2）逻辑链
Background：
L is likely to contract gill disease when sewage contaminates their water
Plan：
Local sewage rerouted many KMs offshore
Conclusion:
The plan is helpless, because hardly any L lives long enough to be harmed by those diseases.
正确的逻辑链：
Background information:
Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage contaminates their water. Under a recent proposal, millions of gallons of local sewage each day would be rerouted many kilometers offshore.
Premise:
Hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by those diseases.
Conclusion:
Although this would substantially reduce the amount of sewage in the harbor where lobsters are caught, the proposal is pointless
View1: L is likely to contract gill disease, the proposal is necessary.
View2: L can’t live that long to be contract, the proposal is unnecessary.  ——weaken this
Answer：the proposal is necessary——L can really be contract / harm to human
（4）A：说明对L有影响的不只有sewage，所以proposal不一定能达到不让L被感染的效果。但是argument主要讨论的是sewage改道与否对L的影响，不讨论其他对L的影响，loser
B：文章讨论的重点是sewage改道对L是否有影响，L的存活年限只是在论据中的一个信息，不是讨论重点，loser
C：文章讨论的重点是sewage改道对L是否有影响，文中没有提到这影响与L的繁殖能力的关系，不是讨论重点，loser
D：G的特点不是讨论重点，重点是在sewage改道后是否G还会感染L，loser
E：人确实会被感染，所以proposal是necessary，contender

2.
（1）35s explain
（2）逻辑链：
Facts：
EG 有车的人和行车里程都增长了40%
由于车祸死亡的拥有车辆人数增长了300%
（3）很多新拥有车的人开车技术很差
（4）A：文中限定的是as car occupants，所以并没有吧passengers计算在内，loser
B：没有提到与traffic有关的信息，loser
C：少部分的二手车不会造成两组数据这么大的差距，loser
D：同预测，contender
E：举出其他交通方式的数据，并不能对argument中的问题进行解释，loser

3.
（1）1’ 20’’ weaken
（2）逻辑链
Background:
Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment.
Primes:
It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations.  Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.
Conclusion:
Annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
（3）有新方法可以很便宜的处理环境污染
处理环境污染的时候会改进生产工序，提高生产效率，不会造成价格增高
（4）A：新的控制污染的设备不会对文章讨论的条例对于出口的影响有影响，loser
B：条例具有强制性，再犯会加倍罚款，所以对价格增长有正作用，loser
C：证明设备很贵，support，loser
D：该国已经出了确定的条例，国际标准就没用了，loser
E：无关，不管是谁强制企业实施的，企业实施就会使得价格增高导致出口减少，loser
重新考虑，A新的设备的全世界的需求是很大的，会是的出口增加，所以选A

4.
（1）1’20’’
（2）逻辑链 support
Background：
Paint on a new airliner is usually applied in two stages:  first, a coat of primer, and then a top coat.  A new process requires no primer, but instead uses two layers of the same newly developed coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat.
Primes：
Using the new process instead of the old process increases the price of a new aircraft considerably.
conclusion：
It is in an airline's long-term economic interest to purchase new airliners painted using the new process rather than the old process.
（3）新方法的coat可以使用的时间要长很多，安全性好很多
（4）A：与long-term economic没关系，loser
B：说原来的方法好，loser
C：说原来的好，loser
D：新方法在应对极端温度是很厉害，contender
E：新的跟老的没啥区别，换不换都一样，loser
所以，选D

5.
（1）1’ weaken
（2）逻辑链
Background：
In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitors.
Primes：
If the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.
Conclusion：
Future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved.
（3）patent被废止会导致很多企业亏损倒闭，不利于improve
（4）A：说明不patent更好，又能improve又能profitable，loser
B：patent对improve的影响与该国人口无关，loser
C：过程可以patent，即使药物不能patent，说明可以废止药物patent，support，loser
D：patent保证profit，profit保证研发资金，所以patent是研发的根本，contender
E：无关选项，loser
所以，选D