Critical Reasoning

One of the possible results of the further depletion of the ozone in the atmosphere
would be a sharp increase in the demand for sunscreens. Many of the ingredients in
sunscreens are natural, and the demand for these products will require strict
conservation laws. This will represent the victory for those who desire greater protection
for the environment.
Which one of the following best states the conclusion in the passage above?
A. Industries that produce ozone-depleting chemicals should be encouraged to
continue doing so.
B. Regulation of ozone-depleting chemicals should be handled on a federal level.
C. The natural ingredients in sunscreen products should be replaced by synthetic
substitutes.
D. The effects of ozone depletion on the environment are not categorically negative.
E. The few positive effects of ozone depletion are far outweighed by the myriad
negative effects.

OA after some discussion!

Let me attempt to solve this...

As per the stimulus, there may be sharp increase in the demand for sunscreens. But the sunscreens product need natural ingredient and ll require strict conservation law which will represent victory of people who seek greater protection for environment. Based on this we need to identify which among the following could be best possible conclusion..

A. Industries that produce ozone-depleting chemicals should be encouraged to
continue doing so. This can certainly not concluded as the stimulus does not talk about ozone-depleting chemicals... It best talks about the depletion of ozone and protection of environment. Ruled out...

B. Regulation of ozone-depleting chemicals should be handled on a federal level. Appears to be two far from the scope of stimulus

C. The natural ingredients in sunscreen products should be replaced by synthetic.
substitutes. This seems to be closest possible bet based on elimination...

D. The effects of ozone depletion on the environment are not categorically negative. Irrelevant...

E. The few positive effects of ozone depletion are far outweighed by the myriad
negative effects. We do not talk about positives and negative of ozone...so ruled out...

eccentric wrote:Let me attempt to solve this...

As per the stimulus, there may be sharp increase in the demand for sunscreens. But the sunscreens product need natural ingredient and ll require strict conservation law which will represent victory of people who seek greater protection for environment. Based on this we need to identify which among the following could be best possible conclusion..

A. Industries that produce ozone-depleting chemicals should be encouraged to
continue doing so. This can certainly not concluded as the stimulus does not talk about ozone-depleting chemicals... It best talks about the depletion of ozone and protection of environment. Ruled out...

B. Regulation of ozone-depleting chemicals should be handled on a federal level. Appears to be two far from the scope of stimulus

C. The natural ingredients in sunscreen products should be replaced by synthetic.
substitutes. This seems to be closest possible bet based on elimination...

D. The effects of ozone depletion on the environment are not categorically negative. Irrelevant...

E. The few positive effects of ozone depletion are far outweighed by the myriad
negative effects. We do not talk about positives and negative of ozone...so ruled out...

Hi,

wont C contradict the passage, that products need natural ingredients?

thanks,
GK

I think D is correct
A:the stimuli is not around the production of the chemicals.
B:federal level is not relevant.
C:there is no should in changing to this policy and synthetic is not mentioned anywhere
D: is the correct one. because it clearly is saying that the effect of the depletion are not totally adverse
E:there is no indication that which one is outweighing the other

I go for 'D'. Any expert to give his thoughts on this?

D sounds as the most likely and safest answer as it stays within the limits of the arguments made.
D

D is the correct choice IMO

A: No where in the argument.
B: Irrelevant/ Out of Scope.
C: If they did this. Stricter laws would not follow and the people who want them would lose out. Good trap but not correct.
D: This is true. People want stricter rules for environment. They think ozone depletion will help get these. This can only be so if ozone depletion leads to bad environment.
E: Irrelevant.

I hope my post helps.. OA plz!!

OA : D

IMO D

Not able to understand what is happening in the given question. Someone please explain.

Thanks.

If someone could help with what is happening in the statements given. Not able to follow.

Thanks.

IMO, the answer is D. Other options are irrelevant as they simple state things which are irrelevant and not even mentioned in the stated argument.
A. Industries that produce ozone-depleting chemicals should be encouraged to....(Farfetched)
continue doing so.
B. Regulation of ozone-depleting chemicals should be handled on a federal level......Not mentioned
C. The natural ingredients in sunscreen products should be replaced by synthetic.....Not mentioned
substitutes.
D. The effects of ozone depletion on the environment are not categorically negative....Correct
E. The few positive effects of ozone depletion are far outweighed by the myriad...Comparison has not been made anywhere in the argument.
negative effects.

If someone could please explain what is that author is trying to say in the argument? I am somehow not able to follow the argument.

Please help.

Thanks.

GmatKiss wrote:One of the possible results of the further depletion of the ozone in the atmosphere
would be a sharp increase in the demand for sunscreens. Many of the ingredients in
sunscreens are natural, and the demand for these products will require strict
conservation laws. This will represent the victory for those who desire greater protection
for the environment.
Which one of the following best states the conclusion in the passage above?
A. Industries that produce ozone-depleting chemicals should be encouraged to
continue doing so.
B. Regulation of ozone-depleting chemicals should be handled on a federal level.
C. The natural ingredients in sunscreen products should be replaced by synthetic
substitutes.
D. The effects of ozone depletion on the environment are not categorically negative.
E. The few positive effects of ozone depletion are far outweighed by the myriad
negative effects.

OA after some discussion!

Conclusion:
There is an UPSIDE to the depletion of the ozone layer: STRICT LAWS regarding the conservation of the natural products used in sunscreens.

Answer choice D correctly paraphrases the conclusion: The effects of ozone depletion...are not categorically negative.

The correct answer is D.

Using process of elimination:

The argument does not make a recommendation. Hence, any answer choice that discusses what SHOULD happen can be eliminated.
Eliminate A, B, and C.

Whereas E says that the negative effects of ozone depletion outweigh the positive effects, the passage states the opposite.
Eliminate E.

Thanks Guru, as always very crisp and precise!

Regards
Mankey