Treatment for hypertension forestalls certain medical expanses by preventing strokes and heart disease.Yet any money so saved amounts to only one-fourth of the expenditures required to treat the hypertensive population.Therefore, there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension. Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the conclusion above? (a) The many fatal strokes and hearts attacks resulting form untreated hypertension cause insignificant medical expenditures but large economic losses of other sorts. (b) The cost , per patient, of preventive treatment for hypertension would remain constant even if such treatment were institute on a large scale. (c) In matters of health care , economic consideratioins should ideally not be dominant. (d) Effictive prevention presupposes early diagnosis, and programs to ensure early diagnosisi are costly. (e) the net saving in medical resources achieved by some preventive health measure are smaller that hte net losses attibutable to certain other measure of this kind. 我对题目不是很懂 第一句说 预防高血压的治疗减少一些防止中风及心血管疾病的开销 那第2句要怎麽解释比较顺阿 我的想法是 然而,只有1/4节省下来的钱被去治疗高血压的人口 <--字面上翻译 可是我还是不懂 题目想问我什麽 请牛人解释一下吧 谢谢 答案是A -- 日情蒐点名--郭勇志︰会怕就好 〔记者罗惠龄／台中报导〕今年日本出版的新球季日本职棒球员名监，在分析亚锦赛议 题中，将郭勇志列为台湾队注目投手之一，郭勇志不好意思地表示，大概是去年成绩不错 ，被注意到了。将郭勇志列入要特别注意的球员，是因为他去年获得联盟救援王，控球 、直球速度及压制能力都不错，有机会获国家队青睐。看到自己被日本人注意到，郭勇 志意外之余也表示︰「会怕就好。」 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 203.70.94.224 ※ 编辑: lovekyoko 来自: 203.70.94.224 (04/15 18:23)