Jilin civil servants test preparation: result comparison is the key - clever solution to "placebo" topics such as the following question: Let's take a look at this question again:

In the line test argument reasoning class, we often see the stem reasoning in the form of a control experiment. In controlled experiments, one type of concept often arises: placebo. Many students do not know much about this concept and do not know how to deal with such a topic. Today, I will take you to see how to deal with the "placebo" problem in the topic.

Placebo refers to tablets, pills, and injections that do not have a therapeutic effect. It has a substitution and comforting effect on people who take a certain drug for a long time with adverse consequences. There is no therapeutic effect on its own. However, because the patient trusts the doctor, the patient calls self-suggestion, and the expectation of the efficacy of a certain drug, it plays an analgesic, dampening, or relieving symptoms.

In the control experiments we examined, it was often set that one experimental group would eat the target drug and another control group would take a placebo for the drug. If, after a period of time, we find that there is no difference in the physical condition of the two groups of people, we will think that it is not the target drug that really works, but the psychological effect of the person that plays an effect. This is known as the placebo effect. In fact, the key to the placebo effect is that after a period of time, is there really no difference in the situation of the subject? Is there a problem with the comparison of this result? Often our weakening and strengthening begin with the results.

Fetal brain development requires an important nutrient, w-3 lipid acid protection, known as docosahexaenoic acid (dha). It has been suggested that pregnant women taking DHA-rich fish oil supplements during pregnancy is beneficial to fetal brain development. In clinical trials, two groups of pregnant women took a supplement or placebo containing 800 mg of DHA daily. There was no difference between the average cognitive, language and motor scores between the two groups of children at 18 months of age. The researchers have since followed up on how well the children are at age 4, with the majority (91.9 percent) of families participating in the study. The researchers found no significant differences between the two groups in their tests of cognition, complex thought processing, language, and executive functions such as memory, reasoning, and problem solving. Researchers believe that mothers supplementing with DHA during pregnancy did not make children smarter.

Which of the following, if true, would best refute the researchers' views?

A. Fetal DHA comes from the mother's diet, but the exact amount of DHA that the mother needs to ingest is currently difficult to determine

B.DHA supplementation may reduce the risk of preterm birth and may also reduce the risk of allergies in children with a family history of allergies

C. 7 years old is the earliest age to predict intelligence, and the influence of various factors on development at age 4 has not yet been fully expressed and cannot be reliably assessed

D. Studies have demonstrated that supplementation with DHA after birth is beneficial for cognitive development, and babies in the country routinely take DHA-rich supplements after birth

Analysis: In this question, the experimenter designed two groups of objects, one group to eat DHA supplements, the other group just to eat placebo. We found no difference in the performance of the 18-month-old baby and the 4-year-old, and we thought that DHA did not make the fetus smarter. In fact, the crux of the matter is that the 18-month-old baby and the 4-year-old child have no difference in their performance in these aspects, can it mean that the experimental results of the two groups are the same? The c option of this question points out this problem very well. Since 7 years old is the earliest age to predict intelligence, it means that neither the 18-month nor 4-year-old measurements can mean that the experimental group and the control group have the same results in measuring intelligence, and of course, they cannot support the conclusion that the stem is trying to achieve with a placebo - dha cannot make the child smarter. Therefore, it can play a good weakening effect. Therefore, I chose c for this topic.

Through this question, we can see that for placebo topics, the key lies in whether the experimental group and the control group using placebo are really the same in terms of experimental results, and we only need to point out that the experimental results of the stem are not necessarily the same, which can play a good weakening effect.

There were 70 patients, all of whom suffered from incurable diseases and had taken the same conventional medications. The patients were divided into two equal groups, the first taking the trial drug k-su for the treatment of r, and the second taking a placebo without k-su. Statistics 10 years later showed 34 deaths in both groups. Therefore, this drug is ineffective.

The following options, if true, would most weaken the above argument:

Among the above-mentioned living patients, the second group was older than the first group

b. Among the above-mentioned deceased patients, the average life expectancy of the second group was two years younger than that of the first group

c. Among the above-mentioned living patients, the second group was more serious than the first group

Among the above-mentioned deaths, the average year of death in the second group was two years earlier than that in the first group

Analysis: In this question, among the two groups of objects set by the experimental group, the experimental group ate k vegetarian, and the control group ate a placebo without k vegetarian, and found that 34 people died after 10 years, and it was concluded that the drug was ineffective. In fact, the problem also occurs in the results. Does the fact that 34 people die after 10 years mean that there is no difference in the results of the two groups? Option d shows that although 34 people died in these two groups, the second group using placebo died on average two years earlier than the first group that ate k-vegetarian, which does not mean that k-hormone can still relatively prolong the life of patients with R disease. It also shows that in fact, the treatment effect of the experimental group that ate k-vegetarian was better than that of the control group that ate placebo. It also has a good weakening effect. So the answer is d.

Through these two questions, we hope that everyone understands that in fact, the "placebo" type of questions looks very professional and difficult. But in fact, understanding the intermediate thinking process is not complicated. We only need to weaken or strengthen whether the final result is really the same, and it can have a good effect.