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.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

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
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget 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