According to a study of more than 50,000 Norwegian smokers,

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

According to a study of more than 50,000 Norwegian smokers, smokers who reduced their nicotine intake from cigarettes, even by up to 50 percent, did not achieve significant health benefits. The mortality rate for those who cut back on cigarettes was not lower than that for heavier smokers; moreover, the rate of cardiovascular disease was similar across all subsets of smokers in the study. As a result, the sponsors of the study claim that reducing nicotine intake does not improve one's health.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously jeopardizes the findings of the study described above?

(A) The majority of study participants minimized their nicotine withdrawal symptoms through the use of skin patches and chewing gum that provide nicotine to the body.

(B) Many of the study's participants periodically dined in restaurants in which smoking was permitted.

(C) The study's participants started smoking at different ages and had varied initial nicotine intake.

(D) Quitting smoking entirely results in a marked reduction in the ill effects of smoking.

(E) Men and women who smoked pipes and cigars were excluded from the study.

OA A

Source: Manhattan Prep
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:22 pm
Followed by:5 members

by deloitte247 » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:43 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

We need to find what calls the finding of the study to question.
Premise: The mortality rate for those who cut back in cigarettes is not lower than that for heavy smokers.
Conclusion: Reducing nicotine intake does not improve one's health.

OPTION A - CORRECT
If true, it means that the finding of the study is wrong. The study participants did not reduce their nicotine intake due to the use of skin patches and chewing gum, and this jeopardizes the conclusion to the argument.

OPTION B - INCORRECT
If true, it does not explain how dining in such restaurants jeopardizes the findings of the argument.

OPTION C - INCORRECT
It doesn't explain how reducing nicotine intake does not improve one's health.

OPTION D - INCORRECT
The argument is more concerned with the reduction of nicotine intake from smoking cigarettes and no entirely quitting it.

OPTION E - INCORRECT
There is no indication or evidence to back up this claim in the argument.