SajjadAhmad wrote:
Recent research into antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains suggests the need for a reexamination of the frequency with which doctors prescribe antibacterial therapy. One study demonstrated, for example, that most minor bacterial infections will resolve without treatment within 5 to 14 days of onset of symptoms; a course of antibiotics might reduce that time frame by only 1 to 2 days. A second study indicated that the incidence of “superbugs,” which have resistance to a wide variety of antibacterial agents, is increasing significantly and that these bugs are more likely to spread among those who have been treated with antibiotics within the past 5 years. In particular, researchers have become alarmed by NDM-1 (New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase), which is not a single bacterial species, but a multiple-antibiotic-resistant enzyme capable of infecting other strains of bacteria.
It is true that the proliferation of superbugs likely owes a great deal to the mistaken prescription of antibacterial treatment for viral infections, against which such treatment is ineffective, and to the routine addition of antibiotics to livestock feed in order to increase meat yields. Additionally, it is possible that ongoing research into the means by which resistance spreads among bacterial communities may lead to a new generation of antibiotics to which bacteria are unable to develop resistance. Yet these factors do not change the need for individual physicians to be more circumspect about drug therapy when treating cases of true bacterial infection.
1. The passage is primarily concerned with
(A) discussing research into the symptoms of bacterial infections
(B) explaining a change in the frequency with which antibacterial therapy is prescribed
(C) contrasting the views of doctors and medical researchers with respect to prescribing drugs
(D) questioning the routine prescription of antibiotics for bacterial infections
(E) contending that physicians need to be more careful about distinguishing between viral and bacterial infections
2. The research cited in the first paragraph suggests which of the following about antibacterial therapy?
(A) It frequently leads to infection with NDM-1.
(B) It is not generally used to treat minor bacterial infections.
(C) It may help to reduce the incidence of “superbugs” that are especially hard to treat.
(D) Reducing the rate at which such therapy is used would cause fewer bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics.
(E) Its short-term benefits, if they exist, may not outweigh the potential harm to the broader population.
5:15 seconds! Both correct!
1. The passage is primarily concerned with[/b]
(A) discussing research into the symptoms of bacterial infections-Incorrect, "research into symptoms"is not the central idea.
(B) explaining a change in the frequency with which antibacterial therapy is prescribed-Incorrect, "change in frequency" is not described. Change in frequency is advised.
(C) contrasting the views of doctors and medical researchers with respect to prescribing drugs-Incorrect,"views" are not contrasted.
(D) questioning the routine prescription of antibiotics for bacterial infections-
Correct, Author discussed with the disadvantages of prescribing anti-bacterial therapy frequently. He then substantiated his/her views with 2 studies. he then delved deeper into the main reasons behind the issue and in the end left the reader with a question of the usefulness of blindly prescribing antibiotics.
(E) contending that physicians need to be more careful about distinguishing between viral and bacterial infections-Incorrect, "viral and bacterial" is incorrect.
2. The research cited in the first paragraph suggests which of the following about antibacterial therapy?(A) It frequently leads to infection with NDM-1.-Incorrect, not mentioned.
(B) It is not generally used to treat minor bacterial infections.--Incorrect, not mentioned.
(C) It may help to reduce the incidence of “superbugs” that are especially hard to treat.-Incorrect, "may help to reduce "superbugs"" cant be proved.
(D) Reducing the rate at which such therapy is used would cause fewer bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics.-Incorrect, again cant be properly substantiated.
(E) Its short-term benefits, if they exist, may not outweigh the potential harm to the broader population-
Correct,, look at the language of the option. Its benefits may not outweigh the potential harm. Author does says its helpful(reducing bacterial infections by 1-2 days) but those benefits may not be good enough to prescribe antibiotics.
close
Updated on: 01 Oct 2019, 22:26
25%
(medium)
30%
(02:47) wrong 
