BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Confusing

Expert replies
by gmatjeet » Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:26 am
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards
spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin Bl a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation are no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since

A. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food's having a longer shelf life
B. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
C. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
U. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin Bi than carefully controlled irradiation is
E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OA : E

I am totally clueless about this question. Tried understanding the same from OG's explanation but its not clear. Can someone please help.

If the aim is to try to prove that the proponents are telling wrong then should't we prove that either irradiation is really bad or cooking is not bad.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by bubbliiiiiiii » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:38 am
I initially chose C.

Can you post OE please?
Regards,

Pranay
Join the discussion

by kevincanspain » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:28 am
Proponents of irradiation try to defend it by saying that cooking destroys just as many nutrients as irradiation: in other words, what difference does it make that irradiation destroys nutrients when cooking is at least as bad in this respect? E points out that the effects are cumulative, meaning that irradiation and cooking is worse than cooking alone.

Here's an analogy: there's no point in taking your Mastercard on your holiday to Greece: after all, you also have a Visa, which is accepted in 3 times as many restaurants and shops as is Mastercard.
Kevin Armstrong
GMAT Instructor
Gmatclasses
Madrid
Join the discussion

by amit2k9 » Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:43 am
Well !! you should catch the statement that irradiated foods are eaten raw.This gives a hint rightly justified by the statement E.

E states that the cumulative effect of cooking and irradiating is much worse.
Hence the OA.
For Understanding Sustainability,Green Businesses and Social Entrepreneurship visit -https://aamthoughts.blocked/
(Featured Best Green Site Worldwide-https://bloggers.com/green/popular/page2)
Join the discussion