LSAT 120 – Section 3 – Question 19

LSAT 120 - Section 3 - Question 19

October 2005

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:32

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT120 S3 Q19
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
19%
160
B
14%
160
C
63%
165
D
3%
155
E
2%
154
146
157
168
 +Harder 146.629 +SubsectionMedium

Although high cholesterol levels have been associated with the development of heart disease, many people with high cholesterol never develop heart disease, while many without high cholesterol do. Recently, above average concentrations of the blood particle lipoprotein(a) were found in the blood of many people whose heart disease was not attributable to other causes. Dietary changes that affect cholesterol levels have no effect on lipoprotein(a) levels. Hence, there is no reason for anyone to make dietary changes for the sake of preventing heart disease.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that there is no reason to make dietary changes for the sake of preventing heart disease. Why? Because one potential cause of heart disease, lipoprotein(a), isn’t affected by (some) dietary changes. Specifically, dietary changes that lower cholesterol, which we know can lead to heart disease.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author concludes that dietary changes don’t prevent heart disease, but his only support is that they don’t lower lipoprotein(a) levels. What if there were another cause of heart disease that dietary changes could reduce?
In fact, the author already gave us a good candidate for this: cholesterol, which has been associated with heart disease. And which, the author tells us, dietary changes can affect.

A
It fails to consider the possibility that lipoprotein(a) raises cholesterol levels.
We have no reason to believe that this is true. But suppose it were: reducing lipoprotein(a) could reduce cholesterol, which would reduce the risk of heart disease. But we already know that we could make dietary changes that reduce cholesterol (the actual flaw in the argument).
B
It provides no evidence for a link between lipoprotein(a) and heart disease.
Suppose there is a link between lipoprotein(a) and heart disease. Dietary changes might not reduce the risk from lipoprotein(a). But what about other potential causes of heart disease—like cholesterol? Diet could potentially reduce those. The argument still has a major flaw.
C
It presents but ignores evidence that, for some people, high cholesterol contributes to heart disease.
The author presents evidence that high cholesterol contributes to heart disease—namely, that the two have been associated. (Note, this is evidence, not definitive proof.) The author then ignores the possibility that a low cholesterol diet could prevent heart disease.
D
It fails to consider the possibility that poor diets cause some people to develop health problems other than heart disease.
The conclusion is about the effect of diet on heart disease, so other health problems are irrelevant.
E
It offers no explanation for why some people with high cholesterol levels never develop heart disease.
The conclusion is about the effect of diet on heart disease, so why some people with high cholesterol levels never develop heart disease is irrelevant.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 120 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply