Economist: On average, the emergency treatment for an elderly person for injuries resulting from a fall costs $11,000. A new therapeutic program can significantly reduce an elderly person's chances of falling. Though obviously desirable for many reasons, this treatment program will cost $12,500 and thus cannot be justified.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion of the argument?
Among elderly people who had followed the program for only a few months, the number of serious falls reported was higher than it was for people who had followed the program for its recommended minimum length of one year.
Falls resulting in serious injuries are less common among elderly people living in nursing homes than they are among elderly people who live alone at home.
A frequent result of injuries sustained in falls is long-term pain, medication for which is not counted among the average per-person costs of emergency treatment for elderly people's injuries from such falls.
The new therapeutic program focuses on therapies other than medication, since overmedication can cause disorientation and hence increase the likelihood that an elderly person will have a serious fall.
A significant portion of the cost of the new therapeutic program is represented by regular visits by health care professionals, the costs of which tend to increase more rapidly than do those of other elements of the program.
答案C和D都没有错,但是C是符合问题的,文章中提到了AB两个方案的金钱对比,对B不通过的解释是钱太贵,破坏结论可以从钱上来攻击。D 这句话其实是文章的premise,我犯的好多错误是在模考中时间有限抓住了说的对的话,但是有可能它只是premise的同义句而已,并不是对问题的回答。一定要注意文章问什么。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论