首页
登录
职称英语
Researchers in City X recently discovered low levels of several pharmaceutical d
Researchers in City X recently discovered low levels of several pharmaceutical d
游客
2024-01-12
66
管理
问题
Researchers in City X recently discovered low levels of several pharmaceutical drugs in public drinking water supplies. However, the researchers argued that the drugs in the water were not a significant public health hazard. They pointed out that the drug levels were so low that they could only be detected with the most recent technology, which suggested that the drugs may have already been present in the drinking water for decades, even though they have never had any discernible health effects.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the researchers’ reasoning?
选项
A、If a drug found in drinking water is not a significant public health hazard, then its presence in the water will not have any discernible heath effects.
B、There is no need to remove low levels of pharmaceutical drugs from public drinking water unless they present a significant public health hazard.
C、Even if a substance in drinking water is a public health hazard, scientists may not have discerned which adverse health effects, if any, it has caused.
D、Researchers using older, less sensitive technology detected the same drugs severa decades ago in the public drinking water of a neighboring town but could find no discernible health effects.
E、Samples of City X’s drinking water taken decades ago were tested with today’s most recent technology, and none of the pharmaceutical drugs were found.
答案
D
解析
This question asks us to find the answer choice that would most strengthen this argument.
Researchers in City X reason that because the levels of certain pharmaceutical drugs that have been found in the city’s drinking water are so low—detectable only by use of the most recent technology—these drugs may well have been in the drinking water for decades. Furthermore, the researchers point out that there have been no discernible health effects from the use of the drugs. They conclude that the drugs are probably not a significant concern.
As it stands, the argument is quite weak. The researchers conclude only that the drugs may have. . . been present for decades. This leaves open the possibility that they were not present for that long. If they were not, then obviously the current lack of discernible health effects does not imply that there will be no such effects in the future.
We can strengthen the argument if we find solid information indicating that these drugs can be
present in a city’s drinking water at the levels found in City X’s drinking water, or higher, for a long time without presenting any ill health effects.
A This choice does not strengthen the argument. Note that there have not been any discernible health effects from drinking the water; this fact is compatible with this statement as well as with the drug being a significant public health hazard. Perhaps the reason there have been no discernible health effects is that the drugs have only recently entered the water supply.
B This choice does not strengthen the argument’s reasoning. Until we can establish that there is no significant health hazard— what the argument sets out to prove—we cannot know whether there is a need to remove these drugs from the drinking water.
C This claim weakens the argument. It introduces the possibility that there may have been adverse health effects resulting from these drugs, yet the researchers have not been able to discern these effects, or have not been able to determine that they were effects of the drugs.
D Correct. Researchers several decades ago, using less sensitive technology, were able to detect the same drugs in another town’s public drinking water. This implies that the drug levels in that town were higher than those recently detected in City X’s drinking water. Given that there have been no discernible health effects in this previous case, this lends support to the researchers’ reasoning regarding City X.
E This claim weakens the argument; it suggests that the drugs are a relatively new presence in the water. Therefore, the effects of these drugs might not have had time to arise.
The correct answer is D.
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3357058.html
相关试题推荐
Untilrecently,scientistsdidnotknowofacloseverte-brateanaloguetothe
Theprimarypurposeofthepassageisto______[br]Theresearchers’conclusion
Thenexttwoquestionsrefertothefollowingpassage:Apharmaceuticalcompa
Australianresearchershavediscoveredelectroreceptors(sensoryorgansdesig
Australianresearchershavediscoveredelectroreceptors(sensoryorgansdesig
Australianresearchershavediscoveredelectroreceptors(sensoryorgansdesig
Australianresearchershavediscoveredelectroreceptors(sensoryorgansdesig
Excessinventory,amassiveproblemformanybusinesses,hasseveralcauses,
Excessinventory,amassiveproblemformanybusinesses,hasseveralcauses,
Excessinventory,amassiveproblemformanybusinesses,hasseveralcauses,
随机试题
【B1】[br]【B9】A、courseB、foodC、soapD、saladAcourse在此表示一道菜。
沙漠是人类最顽强的自然敌人之一。有史以来,人类就同沙漠不断地斗争。但是从古代的传说和史书的记载看来,过去人类没有能征服沙漠,若干住人的地区反而为沙漠所并
Citibankusedtolookforexecutivesforitsoperations______.[br]BankslikeC
男婴,早产,生后10天。母乳喂养,为预防佝偻病,家长来医院咨询。当小儿出现哪些表
甲采用武力威胁的方法,胁迫乙同其一道盗窃丙。乙万般无奈之下只能在甲实施盗窃的过程
酒的能量主要来源于( )。A.乙醇 B.糖 C.氨基酸 D.
筋瘤好发于A.四肢末梢 B.小腿下部 C.下肢 D.四肢或胸壁
勒·柯布西埃于1922年提出了“明日城市”的设想,下列表述中错误的是( )。A
根据2010年中国证监会公布的《证券投资基金参与股指期货交易指引》,可以参与股指
心理学家阿希研究从众行为时做了一项著名的实验,实验中的主要任务是( )。A.判
最新回复
(
0
)