Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
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.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

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

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 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
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
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
GMATOnDemandStart 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

Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorDC » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:56 am
Timer
00:00
Your answer
Difficulty–

right wrong

Pick an answer to see how members did

Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.

OA B

Source: Magoosh
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by deloitte247 » Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:01 pm
We first need to know the standpoint of each parties concerning the argument to correctly address this question.
Here, the Nutritionist is more concerned about points the company present in their advertisement.

Option A :- INCORRECT
What the company presented about their product is the vitamin C content. The Nutritionist succeeded in flooding their argument that it is impossible that it is impossible for their product to be a very good supplier of vitamin C and still contain given element that absorbs it.

Option B :- CORRECT
Checking question A above, the company cannot effectively defend the content of their advertisement , how can something still be effective in the presence presence of some other things that will inevitably affect its effectiveness. Hence the manufactures's response was considered as inadequate enough for justification's sake.

Option C :- INCORRECT
The level of justification cannot be measured from here, it is therefore inconclusive. We don't know if the quantity of vitamin A present in the juice is even enough for the copper to absorb, The response should have been flawless if the manufacturer had supplied the quantity of each substance present,

Option D :- INCORRECT
the manufacturer generalized the benefits of copper but this does not contribute to the flaws. He was only unable to convince the nutritionist how the presence of copper in their product will not affect the supply of the vitamin C.

Option E :- INCORRECT
No, the Nutritionist's argument about copper remains valid and does not reflect the flaws in the Nutritionist's Argument.
Join the discussion