Dear All,
I need your help to clarify why answer C is irrelevant. Here is the question:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument given below?
People in isolated rain-forest communities tend to live on a largely vegetarian diet, and they eat little salt. Few of them suffer from high blood pressure, and their blood pressure does not tend to increase with age, as is common in industrialized countries. Such people often do develop high blood pressure when they move to cities and adopt high-salt diets. Though suggestive, these facts do not establish salt as the culprit in high blood pressure, however, because .
(A) genetic factors could account for the lack of increase of blood pressure with age among such people
(B) people eating high-salt diets and living from birth in cities in industrialized societies generally have a tendency to have high blood pressure
(C) it is possible to have a low-salt diet while living in a city in an industrialized country
(D) there are changes in other aspects of diet when such people move to the city
(E) salt is a necessity for human life, and death can occur when the body loses too much salt
OG explain:
Situation People in isolated communities who eat low-salt diets tend not to have high blood pressure or to experience age-related increases in blood pressure. When these people move to industrialized areas and adopt high-salt diets, many do develop high blood pressure. Nevertheless, (for a reason the argument omits) one cannot conclude that salt causes high blood pressure.
I got the idea that we need a factor to render the conclusion that salt is not responsible for high blood pressure.
I can understand the correct answer is (D), but I am have no idea about the reason of cross off (C)from OG.
OG explanation for answer (C)
the argument is concerned with what happens when people from rain-forest communities move to cities and adopt high-salt diets, so the fact that it is possible to have a low-salt diet in city is not relevant.
wait, this is because of "possible" why cross off (C)? but what we need is a reason, "possible" indicates the reason,
I am confused,
anyone here help me?
thanks a lot
have a nice day.
I need your help to clarify why answer C is irrelevant. Here is the question:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument given below?
People in isolated rain-forest communities tend to live on a largely vegetarian diet, and they eat little salt. Few of them suffer from high blood pressure, and their blood pressure does not tend to increase with age, as is common in industrialized countries. Such people often do develop high blood pressure when they move to cities and adopt high-salt diets. Though suggestive, these facts do not establish salt as the culprit in high blood pressure, however, because .
(A) genetic factors could account for the lack of increase of blood pressure with age among such people
(B) people eating high-salt diets and living from birth in cities in industrialized societies generally have a tendency to have high blood pressure
(C) it is possible to have a low-salt diet while living in a city in an industrialized country
(D) there are changes in other aspects of diet when such people move to the city
(E) salt is a necessity for human life, and death can occur when the body loses too much salt
OG explain:
Situation People in isolated communities who eat low-salt diets tend not to have high blood pressure or to experience age-related increases in blood pressure. When these people move to industrialized areas and adopt high-salt diets, many do develop high blood pressure. Nevertheless, (for a reason the argument omits) one cannot conclude that salt causes high blood pressure.
I got the idea that we need a factor to render the conclusion that salt is not responsible for high blood pressure.
I can understand the correct answer is (D), but I am have no idea about the reason of cross off (C)from OG.
OG explanation for answer (C)
the argument is concerned with what happens when people from rain-forest communities move to cities and adopt high-salt diets, so the fact that it is possible to have a low-salt diet in city is not relevant.
wait, this is because of "possible" why cross off (C)? but what we need is a reason, "possible" indicates the reason,
I am confused,
anyone here help me?
thanks a lot
have a nice day.
