再问gwd－3－8

huhai

以下是引用lypwilliam在2004-11-10 21:22:00的发言：

Q8:

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Garnet and RenCo each provide health care for their employees.  Garnet pays for both testing of its employees’ cholesterol levels and treatment of high cholesterol.  This policy saves Garnet money, since high cholesterol left untreated for many years leads to conditions that require very expensive treatment.  However, RenCo dose not have the same financial incentive to adopt such a policy, because ______.

A.     early treatment of high cholesterol dose not entirely eliminate the possibility of a stroke later in life

B.     the mass media regularly feature stories encouraging people to maintain diets that are low in cholesterol

C.     RenCo has significantly more employees than Garnet has

D.     RenCo’s employees are unlikely to have higher cholesterol levels than Garnet’s employees

E.      the average length of time an employee stays with RenCo is less than it is with Garnet

E说雇员工作的平均年限在rc比在gn的短，文章说如果那个病拖久了治起来就要花很多钱，可是E并没说平均年限短到什么程度呀，是不是短到了可以不花钱提前治疗的程度呢？比如gn平均年限20年rc19年，而那个病拖15年就很严重了，那么rc还是要支付治病费用的，因此它还是有理由（financial incentive ）采取提前治疗的策略的。

大家看呢

个人认为这个思路是有问题的。在ＧＭＡＴ驳斥里，经常有的情况是，有ＣＯＭＰＲＯＭＩＳＥ对方的意见就算驳斥，至于是否能完全比对方的意见作用大，能完全中和掉，就不必捉摸。好多题目都是这样，我一时难收集，望体会。

款且原文说的是，　RenCo dose not have the same financial incentive to adopt such a policy,  

就是没有那么有动力，没有说到完全没有必要。是相对而言的。请体会。

jenaimarre

在A中，does not entirely eliminate说明还是可以减少stroke的可能性的，这样对RenCo也会有利，不能成为其不采用这个措施的理由。但是我认为E也太不准确了。

roric

This policy saves Garnet money, since high cholesterol left untreated for many years leads to conditions that require very expensive treatment.

认为E针对了G公司策略原因中的FOR MANY YEARS，因此对了

cold2100

以下是引用lypwilliam在2004-11-10 21:22:00的发言：

Q8:

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Garnet and RenCo each provide health care for their employees.  Garnet pays for both testing of its employees’ cholesterol levels and treatment of high cholesterol.  This policy saves Garnet money, since high cholesterol left untreated for many years leads to conditions that require very expensive treatment.  However, RenCo dose not have the same financial incentive to adopt such a policy, because ______.

A.     early treatment of high cholesterol dose not entirely eliminate the possibility of a stroke later in life

B.     the mass media regularly feature stories encouraging people to maintain diets that are low in cholesterol

C.     RenCo has significantly more employees than Garnet has

D.     RenCo’s employees are unlikely to have higher cholesterol levels than Garnet’s employees

E.      the average length of time an employee stays with RenCo is less than it is with Garnet

E说雇员工作的平均年限在rc比在gn的短，文章说如果那个病拖久了治起来就要花很多钱，可是E并没说平均年限短到什么程度呀，是不是短到了可以不花钱提前治疗的程度呢？比如gn平均年限20年rc19年，而那个病拖15年就很严重了，那么rc还是要支付治病费用的，因此它还是有理由（financial incentive ）采取提前治疗的策略的。

大家看呢

说得有道理啊，我选A， E感觉是无关选项！

sinoversion

以下是引用jenaimarre在2006-8-9 15:54:00的发言：

在A中，does not entirely eliminate说明还是可以减少stroke的可能性的，这样对RenCo也会有利，不能成为其不采用这个措施的理由。但是我认为E也太不准确了。

同意,不能完全消除,但还是能消除,A是不能选了.

kennycatter

以下是引用lawyer_1在2004-11-11 5:20:00的发言：

1。用排除法可知E为答案。易混的是D。D错在胆固醇水平高点低点的影响如何，原文没信息，故D错。剩下E为答案。

2。在单位呆的时间长短对公司是否采用该法有影响，所以E对，虽然没讲界限，但对问题没影响，因为说出原因不需要充分性。请注意DE的区别。一个胆固醇高点低点有何影响原文没信息，一个时间长点短点有影响。

大牛一针见血： That the average length of time an employee stays with RenCo is less than it is with Garnet means that the average length of time is probably  shorter than the time high cholesterol needs to lead to conditions that require very expensive treatment. Although this reasoning is not so suffcient that it stiil can be attacked , the factor of time is both one of the determinants of the policy ( infered from left untreated for many years ) and a difference between Garnet and RenCo .

wangwei8581

D 选项肯定不对了！即使R公司的胆固醇水平不比G公司高也不能说明R公司的胆固醇水平不高，所以对R公司是否采取政策没有影响。

顶一下earlybird，我也是这么想的，呵呵，因为r不比g高不说明r is not as high as g，同时也不说明，r的level is

 not so high to suffer form 。。。

王一兔

ETS好狡猾。。。

EvaYuan

What is GWD?

skrachel

很神秘的一组真题，考前必做就对了。。。