Medical columnist: Some doctors recommend taking vitamin C to help maintain overall health because vitamin C is an antioxidant, a substance that protects the body from certain types of oxygen particles that can trigger disease. People suffering from various ailments are encouraged to take vitamin C to guard against developing other health problems. However, doctors are now discouraging some cancer patients from taking vitamin C, even when they are undergoing therapies with side effects that are detrimental to their overall health.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why do doctors discourage some cancer patients from taking vitamin C, even though some doctors encourage people suffering from other illnesses to take vitamin C to guard against developing other health problems?

Objective

The correct answer should help suggest how taking vitamin C might be negative for cancer patients, even if it’s helpful for patients with other illnesses.

A
Some kinds of cancer cells absorb large amounts of vitamin C, which interferes with the oxidation mechanism by which many cancer therapies kill cancer cells.

This helps show that vitamin C could be negative for cancer patients. If some cancer cells interfere with cancer therapies by absorbing lots of vitamin C, taking vitamin C might undermine the effectiveness of cancer therapies.

B
Vitamin C has not been shown to reduce people’s risk of developing cancer, even at the very high dosage levels recommended by some doctors.

Vitamin C is recommended because it helps guard against developing “other health problems.” So, even if it doesn’t help with cancer, it can still guard against other illnesses in a cancer patient. We’d still expect doctors to recommend vitamin C to cancer patients.

C
Cancer cells that are susceptible to certain types of cancer therapies are not likely to be affected by the presence of vitamin C.

Vitamin C is recommended because it helps guard against developing “other health problems.” Even if it doesn’t help with killing cancer cells, it can still guard against other illnesses in a cancer patient. We’d still expect doctors to recommend vitamin C to cancer patients.

D
The better the overall health of cancer patients while undergoing therapy, the more likely they are to experience a full recovery.

This doesn’t tell us anything about vitamin C or how it might affect cancer patients.

E
Certain side effects of cancer therapies that are detrimental to patients’ overall health are not affected by vitamin C.

Vitamin C is recommended because it guards against developing “other health problems.” Even if it doesn’t help with side effects of therapies, it can still guard against other illnesses in a cancer patient. We’d still expect doctors to recommend vitamin C to cancer patients.


2 comments

Researcher: Accurate readings of air pollution are expensive to obtain. Lichens are complex plantlike organisms that absorb airborne pollutants and so may offer a cheaper way to monitor air quality. To investigate this, I harvested lichens at sites plagued by airborne copper pollution, determined the lichens’ copper concentration, and compared the results with those acquired using mechanical monitoring devices. The lichens were as accurate as the best equipment available. Thus, lichens can effectively replace expensive pollution-monitoring devices without loss of information.

Summarize Argument
The researcher concludes that lichens can replace expensive pollution monitors without losing accuracy. As evidence, he describes an experiment in which he collected lichens from areas with copper pollution, measured their copper concentration, and compared the results with mechanical monitors. He found that the lichens were as accurate as the best equipment.

Notable Assumptions
The researcher assumes that the lichens he tested are representative of all lichens. He also assumes that lichens can be used to accurately measure overall air pollution simply because they can be used to accurately measure copper pollution. He assumes that lichens absorb other pollutants, not just copper.

A
Mechanical monitoring devices have not already been installed in areas where air pollution is a serious problem.
Irrelevant. It doesn't matter where mechanical monitors have already been installed. This fails to address whether lichens can be used to accurately measure all air pollution or just copper pollution.
B
Copper particles are a component of air pollution in several locales.
Even if lichens can accurately measure one component of air pollution, we still need to know whether they can accurately measure the other components of air pollution.
C
Experiments have shown that lichens thrive in areas where air pollution is minimal.
This fails to address whether lichens can accurately measure overall air pollution.
D
Lichens can easily be grown in laboratories.
Lichens may be easy to grow, but we still don’t know whether they can accurately measure overall air pollution.
E
Lichens absorb all other significant air pollutants in a manner similar to their absorption of copper.
This suggests that lichens may indeed be an effective replacement for expensive pollution monitors. If lichens absorb all other major air pollutants like they do copper, then one can track the concentration of all the pollutants to measure overall air pollution.

5 comments

Some claim that migratory birds have an innate homing sense that allows them to return to the same areas year after year. However, there is little evidence to support this belief, since the studies testing whether the accuracy of birds’ migratory patterns is due to such an innate ability are inconclusive. After all, birds may simply navigate using landmarks, just as humans do, and we do not say that humans have an innate sense of direction simply because they find their way home time after time.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that there’s not much evidence to support the belief that migratory birds have an innate homing sense that allows them to return to the same places each year. The author supports her conclusion by pointing out that the studies exploring whether birds have an innate homing sense don’t rule out other potential explanations for how the birds might navigate. Because these studies are inconclusive, there’s not much evidence for the belief.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s assertion that there’s not much evidence to support the belief that migratory birds have an innate homing sense: “there is little evidence to support this belief.”

A
Neither migratory birds nor humans have an innate homing sense.
This goes too far. The author never asserted that birds don’t have an innate homing sense. Only that there’s not much evidence for it.
B
There is as yet little reason to accept that birds have an innate homing sense.
This is a paraphrase of the main conclusion that there’s not much evidence to support a belief in migratory birds’ innate homing sense.
C
Studies testing whether the accuracy of birds’ migratory patterns is due to an innate homing sense are inconclusive.
This is support for the author’s conclusion. The author uses the fact that the studies are inconclusive to argue that there’s little evidence to support a belief in migratory birds’ innate homing sense.
D
The ability to use landmarks to find one’s way home is probably not an innate ability in birds.
The author never stated or implied this, so it can’t be the conclusion. The author uses the possibility of navigation by landmarks to explain how the studies are inconclusive, which in turn supports the conclusion.
E
It is as false to claim that humans have an innate sense of direction as it is to claim that birds have an innate homing sense.
This goes too far. The author never suggests that it’s false to think birds have an innate homing sense. She concludes only that there’s not much evidence for this belief.

5 comments

All laundry detergents contain surfactants, which can harm aquatic life. However, the environmental effects of most ingredients in laundry detergents, including most of those in so-called “ecologically friendly” detergents, are unknown. Therefore, there is no reason to suppose that laundry detergents advertised as ecologically friendly are less damaging to the environment than other laundry detergents are.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that there is no reason to believe that laundry detergents advertised as “eco-friendly” are less damaging to the environment than other laundry detergents are. He supports this by saying that the environmental effects of most laundry detergent ingredients, including most ingredients in “eco-friendly” detergents, are unknown.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that because the environmental effects of most detergent ingredients are unknown, there is no reason to believe that "ecologically friendly" detergents are less damaging. This ignores the possibility there could be some other reason to believe that eco-friendly detergents are less damaging, such as the effects of those ingredients that are known, or the effects of some other factor like packaging or production.

A
Laundry detergents that are advertised as ecologically friendly contain much lower amounts of surfactants, on average, than do other laundry detergents.

If “eco-friendly” detergents contain much lower amounts of environmentally damaging surfactants than other detergents, this gives a reason to believe that they might be less damaging to the environment, even though the effects of most of their ingredients are unknown.

B
There is no reason to suppose that most of the ingredients in laundry detergents not advertised as ecologically friendly harm the environment significantly.

The columnist’s argument is about the environmental effects of those detergents that are advertised as eco-friendly. Whether or not there is reason to believe that regular laundry detergents harm the environment doesn’t weaken her conclusion about “eco-friendly” detergents.

C
Different kinds of laundry detergents contain different kinds of surfactants, which differ in the degree to which they could potentially harm aquatic life.

This is too vague to weaken the columnist’s conclusion because we don’t know which kinds of detergents contain which kinds of surfactants. Do “eco-friendly” detergents contain more harmful or less harmful surfactants? (C) doesn’t give us this information.

D
There is reason to suppose that ingredients in laundry detergents other than surfactants harm the environment more than surfactants do.

Like (C), this is too vague to impact the columnist’s argument. We don’t know which detergents contain these other, more harmful ingredients, so we can’t conclude anything about the effects of “eco-friendly” detergents.

E
Laundry detergents advertised as environmentally friendly are typically less effective than other detergents, so that larger amounts must be used.

If larger amounts of “eco-friendly” detergents must be used and these detergents contain harmful surfactants, (E) strengthens the columnist’s conclusion that there is no reason to believe that “eco-friendly” detergents are less damaging to the environment than other detergents.


18 comments

Fishery officials are still considering options for eliminating Lake Davis’s population of razor-toothed northern pike, a fierce game fish that could threaten salmon and trout populations if it slips into the adjoining river system. Introducing pike-specific diseases and draining the lake have been ruled out. Four years ago, poison was added to the lake in order to eliminate the pike. This outraged local residents, because the water remained tainted for months and the region’s tourism economy suffered.

Summary
Fishery officials are still considering options to eliminate a breed of pike from Lake Davis. Introducing disease and draining the lake have been ruled-out as options. Four years ago, poison was added to the lake and caused an outrage among residents.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
The poison added to Lake Davis four years earlier must not have been successful in eliminating the pike.

A
Draining the lake would not cause the region’s tourism economy to suffer.
We know that draining the lake is not an option for eliminating the pike from Lake Davis, but we do not know why this option was ruled out by Fishery officials.
B
Four years ago was the only time that poison was used against the pike in the lake.
We don’t know whether or not poison was introduced into Lake Davis only once in attempt to eliminate the pike.
C
The poison added to the lake four years ago was not successful in ridding the lake of the pike.
The poison added to Lake Davis must not have been successful in eliminating the pike, since Fishery officials are still considering options for the pike’s elimination.
D
Four years ago, fishery officials did not consider any options other than using poison.
We don’t know what options Fishery officials were considering four years ago in order to eliminate the pike from Lake Davis. We know that they eventually decided to use poison, but there could have been other options they were considering.
E
Salmon and trout populations in the Lake Davis area are essential to the region’s economy.
We know that the pike in Lake Davis threatens the lake’s population of salmon and trout, but we do not know if these two fish species are essential for the economy.

10 comments

Counselor: Many people assume that personal conflicts are inevitable, but that assumption is just not so. Personal conflicts arise primarily because people are being irrational. For instance, people often find it easier to ascribe bad qualities to a person than good ones—even when there is more evidence of the latter. If someone suspects that a friend is unreliable, for example, a single instance may turn this suspicion into a feeling of certainty, whereas a belief that someone is reliable is normally built up only after many years of personal interaction.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Personal conflicts aren’t unavoidable; they usually happen because people act irrationally. For example, it’s easier for people to assume someone has bad qualities rather than good ones, even if there is more evidence of the person’s good qualities. If someone thinks a friend is unreliable, one mistake can confirm that belief. However, it usually takes years of seeing a friend act reliably to feel certain that the friend is reliable.

Identify Conclusion
Personal conflicts are not inevitable.

A
Many people assume that personal conflicts are inevitable.
This is context. It explains a common belief, setting up the author’s argument that this belief is wrong. While many people think personal conflicts are unavoidable, the main conclusion is the author’s argument against this belief: that personal conflicts aren't inevitable.
B
Even when there is more evidence of good qualities than of bad ones, people find it easier to ascribe bad qualities than good ones.
This is a premise. It supports the author’s conclusion that personal conflicts aren't inevitable but arise because people act irrationally. The statement that people “find it easier to ascribe bad qualities than good ones” gives an example of this irrational behavior.
C
It is irrational to allow a single instance to turn one’s suspicion that a friend is unreliable into a feeling of certainty.
This is a premise. The idea that it's irrational to let one instance make one certain a friend is unreliable backs up the author’s claim that humans act irrationally. This, in turn, supports the main argument that personal conflicts happen because of this irrational behavior.
D
Personal conflicts are not inevitable.
This accurately rephrases the main conclusion. The author argues that personal conflicts are not inevitable, even though many people think they are, and concludes that the belief in their inevitability is "just not so."
E
Unlike a suspicion that a friend is unreliable, a belief that someone is reliable is normally built up only after many years of personal interaction.
This is a premise. It supports the conclusion that personal conflicts aren't inevitable but arise because people act irrationally. The idea that it takes years to trust a friend but only one mistake to doubt that friend provides an example of people’s irrational behavior.

3 comments

The size of northern fur seals provides a reliable indication of their population levels—the smaller the average body size of seals in a population, the larger the population. Archaeologists studied seal fossils covering an 800-year period when the seals were hunted for food by Native peoples in North America and found that the average body size of the seals did not vary significantly.

Summary
The average body size of a certain seal type reveals information about their population levels. Smaller average body sizes in seal populations indicate a larger population. Fossils show that during an 800-year period when seals were hunted by Native Americans, the average body size of seals did not vary significantly.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
The population size of northern fur seals likely did not vary significantly over the 800-year period when they were hunted by Native Americans for food.

A
During the 800-year period studied, seal hunting practices did not vary substantially between different groups of Native peoples in North America.
This is unsupported because different hunting practices could occur at the same time that the seal body size and population remain constant.
B
The body size of northern fur seals is not strongly correlated with the overall health of the seals.
This is unsupported because the stimulus gives us no information to assess the health of the seals, which could be independent from population size.
C
Before the 800-year period studied, the average body size of northern fur seals fluctuated dramatically.
This is unsupported because the fossil evidence only covers the 800-year period, meaning we don’t know what happened before or after that period.
D
Native peoples in North America made an effort to limit their hunting of northern fur seals in order to prevent depletion of seal populations.
This is unsupported because there could be many other reasons that explain the constant body size of seals outside of intentionally limited hunting practices.
E
Hunting by Native peoples in North America did not significantly reduce the northern fur seal population over the 800-year period studied.
This is strongly supported because if the Native peoples had significantly reduced the population, we would expect the average size of the seals to have changed.

12 comments

Mayor: Our city faces a difficult environmental problem caused by the enormous amount of garbage that we must dispose of. Although new recycling projects could greatly reduce this amount, these projects would actually be counterproductive to the goal of minimizing the overall amount of environmental damage.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why would new recycling projects be counterprodutive to the goal of minimizing environmental damage, even though the high amount of garbage produced by the city causes environmental damage and the recycling projects would reduce the amount of garbage?

Objective

The correct answer will suggest some way that new recycling projects could lead to more overall environmental damage than forgoing those recycling projects. Perhaps, for example, new recycling projects end up harming the environment in other ways, even if they help by reducing the amount of garbage.

A
The vehicles that pick up materials for recycling create less pollution than would be caused by incinerating those materials.

We don’t know whether incineration is part of the new recycling projects. But even if it were, (A) suggests incineration could produce less environmental damage than the current recycling method. So, we’d still expect new recycling projects to produce less overall damage.

B
The great costs of new recycling projects would prevent other pollution-reducing projects from being undertaken.

Other pollution-reducing projects might reduce damage even more than the new recycling projects. If the new recycling projects prevent us from doing those other projects, this could be why the new recycling projects would be counterproductive.

C
The mayor’s city has nearly exhausted its landfill space and therefore must incinerate much of its garbage.

Is incineration a new recycling project? If it isn’t, it has no clear impact. If it is, then the lack of landfill space suggests incineration could be good for the environment. (C) doesn’t tell us something potentially negative about the new recycling projects.

D
More recycling would give industries in the mayor’s city a greater incentive to use recycled materials in their manufacturing processes.

If anything, this answer suggests another benefit of new recycling projects. That doesn’t help explain why new recyling projects could lead to more overall environmental damage.

E
People who recycle feel less justified in consuming more than they need than do people who do not recycle.

If anything, this suggests another benefit of new recycling projects. If we can get people to recycle, they might not use as many resources, which might be good for the environment. This doesn’t help explain why new recycling projects could lead to more environmental damage.


11 comments