PP-T1-2

[Huang Hsin-Yi]

2. (24227-!-item-!-188;#058&000711)

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?

(A) 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. 無關
(B) 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.無關
(C) 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.
(D) 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.
(E) 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. 無關

Ans:C

結論:新療程雖然比舊療程可以減少老人跌倒的次數,但成本較高, 所以不好
weaken 結論：　新療程是好的

原本選Ｄ,認為新療程提供了更好的治療方式
看了Ｃ以後,發現它針對成本問題,直接做反駁

ＧＭＡＴ真是考聚焦的思考邏輯

[julanlu808]

C選項有點不懂它的意思...

可以再解釋清楚一點嗎??

謝謝~~

[julanlu808]

我來自問自答好了~

C應該是說老人跌倒所照成的傷害通常是長期的病痛,而傳統的emergency treatment又不包括了醫藥治療...
言下之意指的就是老人除了要花emergency treatment的費用,還要再花medication的費用-->非常花錢!

故消弱結論~

[Philosophia]

C 以揭示其實老人跌倒的成本並不如原本的前提所述的 $11,000 那麼低來 weaken the conclusion.