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.

CR : irradiation

Expert replies
by spetznaz » Fri May 16, 2014 7:01 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 is 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 foods' 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

(D) certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin Bl than carefully controlled irradiation is

(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin Bl associated with either process individually is compounded

OA : E
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by ceilidh.erickson » Fri May 16, 2014 9:46 am
Given: Irradiation lowers the nutritional value of many foods

Proponents argue: no worse in this respect than cooking.

Our goal: What would make this argument misleading? Essentially, proponents imply that irradiation is ok because, although it lowers nutrients, so does cooking, so doing both won't be more harmful. Is that necessarily true? It's sort of like saying "getting hit in the head with a baseball bat is no worse than getting hit with a frying pan, so it doesn't matter if you do both." But isn't it possible that it will DOUBLE the negative impact?

(A) many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from foods' having a longer shelf life
Who they are or what their motivations are - these things are irrelevant to whether the argument is misleading.

(B) it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
This can be inferred from the statements. It does not make the connection to cooking misleading.

(C) cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
The chronology of when these things happen is irrelevant.

(D) certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin Bl than carefully controlled irradiation is
This would heighten the proponents' argument, not make it misleading.

(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin Bl associated with either process individually is compounded
Here, we're told that doing both will cause greater nutrient loss, not just the same nutrient loss. Correct.
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
Join the discussion