lsat 10(1。2) questions

1stzhang

25. Medical research finding s are customarily not made public prior to their publication in a medical journal that has had them reviewed by a panel of experts in a process called peer review. It is claimed that this practice delays public access to potentially beneficial information that, in extreme instances, could save lives. Yet prepublication peer review is the only way to prevent erroneous and therefore potentially harmful information from reaching a public that is ill equipped to evaluate medical claims on its own. Therefore, waiting until a medical journal has published the research finding s that have passed peer review is the price that must be paid to protect the public from making decisions based on possibly substandard research.

The argument assumes that

(A) unless medical research findings are brought to peer review by a medical journal, peer review will not occur

(B) anyone who does not serve on medical review panel does not have the necessary knowledge and expertise to evaluate medical research finding

(C) the general public does not have access to the medical journals in which research findings are published.

(D) all medical research findings are subjected to prepublication peer review

(E) peer review panels are sometimes subject to political and professional pressures that can make their judgments less than impartial


这个题目A/C我没有区分开来.答案是A

1stzhang

再来！

tocean0222

If peer review can occur in an alternative way other than by sending research findings to medical jounals, waiting for publication of such findings in medical jounals is unworthy.So choice A is necessary for the conclusion of the argument and thus is the best answer.
Contrary to C, even though the public have access to the medical jounals in which research findings are published,they cannot make decisions on basis of such findings which may be not passed by peer review.Thus C is not a fundamental basis for the conclusion.


Hope it will be helpful!

1stzhang

这个题目原文我读的不是很清楚，所以原文的逻辑关系和结论也不是很清楚，请帮我解释一下。谢谢！

lyricling

原文讲，发表在medical journal上的一些research finding 必须要经过peer review后才能公之于众。有些人认为这样浪费时间，而反对者则认为，这样做有必要。因为如果不经过peer review，一些未经证实的findings可能会误导公众。所以，这种在时间上的拖延是为了保护公众所必须付出的代价。
如果公众在peer review之前就接触到了这些findings，那么原文的推理也就不成立了。A项说的正是这个原因。
而C项指的是公众接触不到发表findings的medical journals，将其取非，公众接触得到发表findings的 medical journals（有可能是在peer review之前或之后），对原文的推理起不到驳斥作用。

albert

原文：Therefore, waiting until a medical journal has published the research finding s that have passed peer review is the price that .....
从这可以看出，peer review发生在前，medical journal publish才发生。。最后读者才看到

A  ASSUMPTION通过肯定了原文存在的前提。。强调了这种先后顺序。是原文的改写。

siebel

两个结论：浪费时间；有必要。问题：在什么基础之上，两人的争论才有意义。

C，最多只是“浪费时间派的假设”。对第二个结论没有丝毫作用。
A，当然是二者的假设。即所谓：“A可行，A有意义”这种假设套路。