62 LR Two Question 11
- « 62 LR Two Question 10
- 2043 of 3815
- 62 LR Two Question 12 »
Comments
Can you explain why E is wrong? I think I have a grasp as to why it is wrong, but I think another explanation would clear things up even more.
The first thing I see is that the passage says that this act of resistance takes "a few years," and we don't know when any antibiotics have been used against X.
Make sense?
Hi Dave. Why is answer C not the right answer. The passage says that "no SINGLE antibiotic mow on the market is powerful enough" which leaves open the possibility that two antibiotics combined may be. And if that would be true then B would be wrong because there are antibiotics currently on the market that could eliminate it just not by themselves.
thanks
First, I see what you're saying. This is a good example of the (very small) difference between what must be true and what is only most strongly supported. So long as there is no combo of antibiotics that can eliminate X, then (B) is undeniably true, as per the first sentence of the passage. And there is no reason to believe that a combo would completely eliminate X. Such a thing may be possible, but we have no evidence to believe it's the case. (B) is thus very strongly supported.
In other words, you're right that (C) is possibly true. But we're not concerned here with what might possibly be true; we want an answer that is most completely supported by the passage. While (C) may be true, it also might not be true (maybe soemthing other than a combo would work, or maybe even a combination would not work!).
Clearer?