Critical Reasoning

Answer has to be C

E is wrong as

5) Some of the volunteers were given capsules that solely contained cellulose, an inert substance with no vitamins or other health inducing substances. Those volunteers reported no increase in alertness or energy

even if some volunteers were given capsules.. and there was no increase in alertness .. wht it has to do with the study....??

study was about Vita capsules and their effect

Some of the volunteers were given capsules that solely contained cellulose, an inert substance with no vitamins or other health inducing substances. Those volunteers reported no increase in alertness or energy
it means that it has to be the vita capsules thatis increasing the energy...........
so e

Jatinder wrote:

pre-gmat wrote:Ok check this:

What's the conclusion?

The advertisers claim that : vita-plus supplements make one more energetic and alert.

Option c does not strengthen this.

whereas e shows that the health inducing substance does increase energy or alertness.

E has num of problems

1. its talking about Some people----could be 1% or 99 %
if it would have been Most -- it would have some bearing
2. It is saying capsule contained no vitamins, thus ----> no energy gain...
this is oppposite to the stimulli, which says
capsule intake ---> high energy

C has no problems
As aditi pointed out, in a servey we need to bolster the evidence by showing that the survey is sound

Jatinder,
I think point 1 is wrong. The stimulus said that "some" ppl were given inert substand and "all those" reported no increase in energy. It does not matter what 'some' really is; the point is ALL of the 'some' did not show increase in energy. By removing the alternate cause, the causal argument is strengthened. So E

Please post the OA. Thanks.

IMO C

ronniecoleman wrote:IMO C

Please provide your posts with reasoning.

Simple IMO's are useless and act like flood

B is the best answer