※ 引述《lovekyoko (匹兹堡的天空)》之铭言： : 24-35: The milk of many mammals contains cannabinoids, substances that are : known to stimulate certain receptors in the brain. To investigate the : function of cannabinoids, researchers injected newborn mice with a chemical : that is known to block cannabinoides from reaching their receptors in the : brain. The injected mice showed far less interest in feeding than normal : newborn mice do. Therefore, cannabinoids probably function to stimulate the : appetite. : Which of the following is an assumption ok which the argument depends? : A)Newborn mice do not normally ingest any substance other than their mothers’ : milk. : B)Cannabinoids are the only substances in mammals’ milk that stimulate the : appetite. : C)The mothers of newborn mice do not normally make any effort to encourage : their babies to feed. : D)The mild of mammals would be less nutritious if it did not contain : cannabinoids. : E)The chemical that blocks cannabinoids from stimulating their brain : receptors does not independently inhibit the appetite. : 我被B跟E给迷惑了 : B取非 还有其他的物质可以刺激食慾 : E取非 这化学物质可以独立的抑制食欲 : 请问BE取非有反驳节论吗 我觉得都没有耶 : 答案是E : 谢 E取非有反驳结论 E取非的意思代表的是 食慾被抑制 不是因为cannabinoids被block 而是因为这个後来注射的化学物质本身就会抑制食慾 使得食慾跟cannabinoids之间的关连被打断 因此会反驳cannabinoids有刺激食慾效用的结论 B取非则没有办法明确的反驳。 「可能有其他物质能刺激食慾」 这句话代表的是 可能後来注射的化学物质block的是那一些其他物质 使得食慾下降 但是在这边仍然无法明确的知道 究竟cannabinoids有没有刺激食慾的功用 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.216.0.208