A
Rice-importing countries reduce purchases of rice when the price increases dramatically.
B
In times of decreased rice production, governments store more of the rice they control and reduce their local distribution of rice.
C
In times of decreased rice production, governments export some of the rice originally intended for local distribution to countries with free grain markets.
D
Governments that distribute the rice crop for local consumption purchase the grain commercially in the event of production shortfalls.
E
During reduced rice harvests, rice-importing countries import other kinds of crops, although this fails to compensate for decreased rice imports.
Health officials now recommend that people reduce their intake of foods that are high in cholesterol, such as red meat. The recent decline in the total consumption of beef indicates that many people are following this recommendation. But restaurants specializing in steak are flourishing despite an overall decline in the restaurant industry. So clearly there still are a lot of people completely ignoring the health recommendation.
A
It neglects to consider whether restaurants that specialize in steak try to attract customers by offering steak dinners at low prices.
It doesn’t matter how steak restaurants attract customers. Like (C), the author doesn’t need to explain why steak restaurants are flourishing. Instead, she needs to explain why the flourishing of these restaurants proves that many people are ignoring the health recommendation.
B
It assumes without warrant that people who eat steak at steak restaurants do not need to reduce their intake of foods that are high in cholesterol.
If anything, the author assumes that people who eat steak do need to follow the advice to reduce high-cholesterol food. People with low cholesterol might be intentionally eating steak, but (B) doesn’t make this attack. Either way, they would still be ignoring the recommendation.
C
It presupposes that the popularity of restaurants that specialize in steaks is a result of a decrease in the price of beef.
The author doesn’t assume that beef prices dropped or that this caused steak restaurants to be popular. Like (A), she doesn't need to explain why these restaurants are thriving. Instead, she needs to explain how their success shows that many people are ignoring the health advice.
D
It mistakes the correlation of the decline in beef consumption and the decline in the restaurant industry for a causal relation.
The author never assumes that the decline in beef consumption caused the decline in the restaurant industry or vice versa.
E
It fails to consider whether the people who patronize steak restaurants have heeded the health officials by reducing their cholesterol intake in their at-home diets.
The author draws a conclusion about overall eating habits from one instance of eating high-cholesterol food. She assumes that since people go to steak restaurants, they’re ignoring the advice to avoid high-cholesterol food. But they might follow that advice in their other meals.
Film critic: There has been a recent spate of so-called “documentary” films purporting to give the “true story” of one historical event or another. But most of these films have been inaccurate and filled with wild speculations, usually about conspiracies. The filmmakers defend their works by claiming that freedom of speech entitles them to express their views. Although that claim is true, it does not support the conclusion that anyone ought to pay attention to the absurd views expressed in the films.
Summary
There are a lot of purported “documentary” films that contain inaccurate accounts of historical events. Even though the filmmakers have the right to create these inaccurate films, that doesn’t mean anyone should pay attention to the views in those films.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
People can be entitled to create films that are inaccurate.
Some films contain views that people don’t need to pay attention to.
A
Although filmmakers are entitled to express absurd views, they are not justified in doing so.
This isn’t supported, because the author doesn’t suggest that the filmmakers were not justified in making their films. The author doesn’t suggest that they shouldn’t have made the films; only that people don’t need to pay attention to them.
B
Everyone ought to ignore films containing wild speculations about conspiracies.
This isn’t supported. The author doesn’t say that people should ignore the films. He just says that people don’t need to pay attention to them. “Shouldn’t do” and “don’t need to do” are different. Also, the facts only refer to “documentary” films, not all films with conspiracies.
C
Freedom of speech sometimes makes the expression of absurd views necessary.
Not supported, because the author doesn’t suggest that the filmmakers need to express the views in the films. They are entitled to do so, but that doesn’t mean they have to.
D
Freedom of speech does not entitle filmmakers to present inaccurate speculations as truth.
This is anti-supported, because the author says the filmmakers are entitled to make inaccurate films.
E
Views that people are entitled to express need not be views to which anyone is obliged to pay attention.
This is strongly supported by the last two sentences. The filmmakers are entitled to express their views, but that doesn’t imply people need to pay attention to them. So people need not (which means “don’t need to”) pay attention to hem.