test 29

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:16 am
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:1 members

test 29

by vaivish » Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:43 am
Dietary researcher: A recent study reports that laboratory animals that were fed reduced-calorie diets lived longer than laboratory animals whose caloric intake was not reduced. In response, some doctors are advocating reduced-calorie diets, in the belief that North Americans’ life spans can thereby be extended. However, this conclusion is not supported. Laboratory animals tend to eat much more than animals in their natural habitats, which leads to their having a shorter life expectancy. Restricting their diets merely brings their caloric intake back to natural optimal levels and reinstates their normal life spans.
Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the dietary researcher’s argument?
(A) North Americans, on average, consume a higher number of calories than the optimal number of calories for a human diet.
(B) North Americans with high-fat, low-calorie diets generally have a shorter life expectancy than North Americans with low-fat, low-calorie diets.
(C) Not all scientific results that have important implications for human health are based on studies of laboratory animals.
(D) Some North Americans who follow reduced-calorie diets are long-lived.
(E) There is a strong correlation between diet and longevity in some species of animals.


OA is a.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:30 pm
Thanked: 16 times

by amitabhprasad » Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:22 pm
I will go with "A"
Here is my explanation,
Researcher assumption is animal in natural habitat eat proper diet. If any thing that can undermine this assumption will result in weakening author assumption.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 871
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 7:48 am
Thanked: 48 times

by stop@800 » Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:59 am
Ans is A

As per question, It is true that low (or in fact normal) calorie diet is needed for long life.


North American take high no of calories than human
so they have shorter life span

B: talks about fat
C: Not all results are based again out of context
D: Some long lived does not mean all will
E: We are talking about correlation between calorie and longevity

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 401
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 9:21 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

by NSNguyen » Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:29 pm
A) North Americans, on average, consume a higher number of calories than the optimal number of calories for a human diet.
A reveals that when americans eats this kind of food, they come back to normal of calory intake. that why they still live in short life expectancy

(B) North Americans with high-fat, low-calorie diets generally have a shorter life expectancy than North Americans with low-fat, low-calorie diets. - > Out of scope

(C) Not all scientific results that have important implications for human health are based on studies of laboratory animals.
Irrelevant
(D) Some North Americans who follow reduced-calorie diets are long-lived. (strengthen, however using some, do not represent for all)
(E) There is a strong correlation between diet and longevity in some species of animals. ( strenthen)
Please share your idea and your reasoning :D
https://bmnmed.com/home/
https://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:58 am

by peter.p.81 » Wed May 11, 2016 2:52 am
Cannot decide between A and B. Can anyone brake down these two choices for me please