Critical Reasoning

Caffeine, such as that in coffee, must still be administered by the relatively cumbersome process of brewing and drinking. If caffeine is drunk, some of the caffeine gets partially digested and cannot reach the brain to cause alertness. However, certain inhaled non-caffeine stimulants contain magnetized elements, which are not subject to separation through digestion.

The statements above most strongly support a claim that a research procedure that successfully accomplishes which of the following would be beneficial to users of caffeine as a stimulant?
Choices

A) Turning coffee into a gaseous cloud of magnetized elements that is absorbed directly by brain cells.
B) Using proven laboratory procedures, converting into caffeine-like compounds the non-caffeine stimulants that may be inhaled.
C) Removing any chemicals that digest caffeine permanently from the stomach and intestine.
D) Systematically categorizing what separating enzymes and polypeptides exist normally in the digestive tract and how each tends to be absorbed by the body.
E) Timing the length of time that each non-caffeine stimulant takes to get to brain cells.

The OA is A. To me it looks dubious. The stimulus only talks about the magnetic elements method being beneficial for non-caffeine stimulants. In saying that option A is correct, the question composer at Grockit is bringing out of scope considerations into the question.

This is the official explanation for option C, which I had chosen - "Choice C is not the correct answer. This statement is contradictory; permanently removing everything that digests caffeine would be harmful."

Please tell me if I am wrong

The stimulus tells us that caffeine must go through digestion to reach the brain, causing some of the caffeine intake to be lost. We also know that there are other stimulants, containing magnetized elements, which can be absorbed via inhalation, which doesn't require digestion.

The question stem asks us to find the answer, supported by the stimulus, that would be most beneficial to caffeine users.

A--Correct. If coffee (and therefore caffeine) can be turned into a cloud of magnetized elements, it will function similar to the inhalants mentioned in the stimulus. This means that no caffeine is lost to digestion, and thus its stimulant effects will be greater.

B--Turning the non-caffeine stimulants into caffeine-like compounds does not help current caffeine users.

C--If the caffeine-digesting chemicals are removed, how will caffeine be processed reach the brain?

D--It's not clear how this would help caffeine users

E--The timing of non-caffeine stimulants and is irrelevant

IMO: A (1.45 mins)

you will not cut your foot to fit the shoe you like. The reasoning is similar on those line.

Premise says if it is subjected to digestion something is lost and also says about a different method which the body can accept.

A supports the alternate method in which the body can take. Hence AO: A

you will not cut your foot to fit the shoe you like. The reasoning is similar on those line.

A very nice example given by GMATkolaveri....

on the same funda option B gives you a nice example.

You want 9 number shoes, and the shoe store does not have it. But the shoe store has all the other numbers. So will you wait for the 9 number shoes or you will cut the 10 number shoes or you will ask him to increase the 8 number shoes.

I feel the most easy thing is to wait for the 9 number shoe.

In that same way you do not have any need to convert to convert the non-caffeine particles into caffeine type particles.

Instead create the coffee i.e caffeine particles into gaseous cloud so a lot of caffeine will not be wasted in the digestion procedure.

Hope this post really helps you by the way...

(A) gives the future opportunities...