Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.
See classesLearn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.
Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.
with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep
Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.
with
Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.
right wrong
Pick an answer to see how members did
Log this miss in the free GMAT error log
Get the error logGet one like this every day: the free 60-day plan
Start the plan
I choose E because sulfites exits in the wine before winemaker can inject more sulfite, the drinker will suffer allergic reation whether this wine contain sulfites (from injection) or not. So, weaken. This is the assumptionkvcpk wrote:Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that
are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several
wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who
would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by
these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect
produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any
potentially allergenic substances to their wine.
B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.
C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that
give rise to an allergic reaction.
E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine
makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone
who drinks these wines.
Please explain your answers.
Thanks!
It is crucial that we notice CHANGES IN SCOPE.kvcpk wrote:Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that
are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several
wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who
would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by
these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect
produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any
potentially allergenic substances to their wine.
B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.
C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that
give rise to an allergic reaction.
E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine
makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone
who drinks these wines.
Please explain your answers.
Thanks!
GMATGuruNY wrote:It is crucial that we notice CHANGES IN SCOPE.kvcpk wrote:Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that
are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several
wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who
would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by
these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect
produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any
potentially allergenic substances to their wine.
B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.
C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that
give rise to an allergic reaction.
E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine
makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone
who drinks these wines.
Please explain your answers.
Thanks!
The conclusion is very limited in its scope: people allergic to sulfites can drink WINES produced by these wine makers without risking AN ALLERGIC REACTION TO SULFITES.
Any answer choice that broadens the scope to other types of beverages, allergens or allergic reactions can be eliminated.
A broadens the scope to other potential allergens. Eliminate A.
C broadens the scope to other types of beverages. Eliminate C.
D broadens the scope to other types of allergic reactions. Eliminate D.
This CR exhibits a language shift.
The premise is about X: some winemakers do not ADD sulfites.
The conclusion is about Y: people allergic to sulfites can DRINK wines by these winemakers.
The argument assumes that if sulfites are not ADDED, then people allergic to sulfites can DRINK the wines by these winemakers.
The negation of E trashes this conclusion: Sulfites ARE naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone
who drinks these wines.
The negation of E trashes the conclusion that people allergic to sulfites will be able to drink the wines. Thus, E is the necessary assumption: WHAT MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion of the passage to be valid.
The correct answer is E.
The statement in red does not accurately paraphrase the conclusion.Neilsheth2 wrote:Hi Mitch,
I am still not able to understand , The conclusion explicitly states that 'People can drink wines since there would be no sulfites in the Wine.
I agree E is a correct answer. But I can't rule out D-since its not the wine but the other things COMMONLY present in that might cause Allergies too.
Thanks in Advance.
