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

Redeem

Irradiation

Expert replies
by sam2304 » Sat Apr 14, 2012 5:42 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 B1 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 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
D. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 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

Can someone explain me what is given and what is asked ? I got way too confused with this question. I didn't understand what we are supposed to do. :(
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by sureshkanagala » Sat Apr 14, 2012 7:34 am
I think answer is E.

The passage says that irradiated food is either eaten raw or .....
So it's not cooked. The only option which talks about cooking irradiated food is E
Join the discussion

by GMAT Kolaveri » Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:15 am
Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, [We have to argue against irradiation]

We have to use argument structure in order to find the correct AO.
Correc AO: E
Regards and Thanks,
Vinoth@GMAT Kolaveri
https://www.facebook.com/GmatKolaveri
https://gmatkolaveri.tumblr.com/

Click the thank you button if you like my reply :)
Join the discussion

by GmatKiss » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:30 pm
Good one, IMO: E
Join the discussion

by klmehta03 » Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:02 am
I agree and IMO is E , but can any one explain why the answer is not A. IS it out of context? please explain
Join the discussion

by patanjali.purpose » Sun Jun 10, 2012 6:52 am
sam2304 wrote: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 B1 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 _______.

Can someone explain me what is given and what is asked ? I got way too confused with this question. I didn't understand what we are supposed to do. :(
IRRIDATION destroys Bacteria; IRRIDATION destroys Vitamin; IRRIDATION is NO WORSE THAN Cooking;

Proponents conclusion: Irridation is NOT BAD

Then comes "However,.."

Mark the TRANSITION WORD "HOWEVER" coming immediately after PROPONENTS THEORY - the presence of HOWEVER CLEARLY shows we need to show something against PROPONENTS THEORY. In order words, we have to show SOMETHING OPPOSITE OF what proponents think. That is, we have to pick an option that shows "IRRIDATION IS BAD". With this we should check each option. E is pop-up.
Join the discussion