Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of seirous complications of influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spary, is effect for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal spray vaccine as well.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechnaism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do.
C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
E. The nasal spray vaccine is most effective when administred to adults.
==> I guess D, which is right, but not sure why...i tried using the negation test..hmm
Kim
Let's me try on the 1st question.
You have to ASSUME that influenza will not pass on from children without vaccination to Adults. Otherwise it is hard to conclue that "no significant public health" will benefit..