I would think so. How about "I have been losing weight ever since I have been running 5 miles a day.".

Thank you Tani,

On OG 12 SC sample questions 7 and 17, two present tense clause/phrase apear. On 7, the answer made sense a bit because the object was singular. However, on 17, the answers made the question confusing. Your example made #17 very clear. Thank you again.

Tani, would you mind taking a look at my reasonings for #7 and #17

7. As its sales of computer products have surpassed those of measuring instruments, the company has become increasingly willing to compete for the mass market sales they would in the past have conceded to rivals.

"As its sales of computer products have surpassed those of measuring instruments" is the phrase modifier of "the company". The phrase modifier is the subject of the sentence and "the company" is the object of the sentence. Since "the company" is singular it takes a singular pronoun. Choices a, b, and c are out. In choice d, "it previously would have conceded to rivals in the past" is redundant because "previously" and "past" are overlapping. Answer e.

[/u]

17. The commision has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the word "natural" to foods that do not contain color or flavor additives, chemical preservatives, or nothing that has been synthesized.

Using your example, the answer becomes very clear. Divide the sentence to x and y, where x is "the commision has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the word "natural" to " and y is "foods that do not contain color or flavor additives, chemical preservatives, or nothing that has been synthesized" Replacing the underline portion with "or anything that has been" , the senctence can be read as follwed:

"The commision has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the word "natural" to foods that do not contain color or flaver additives, (and) chemical preservates"

"The commision has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the word "natural" to anything that has been synthesized"

Answer is d.

#7 - the answer is definitely E.
The subject "company" is singular so must take "it", which eliminates A and B.

"Previously" and "in the past" are synonyms so using both is redundant, which eliminates C and D.

You are left with E

#17 "not"..."nothing" is a double negative, which eliminates A and C.
B is unclear. It suggests that the food has been synthesized, when n fact it's synthesized additives they are worried about.

By using "and", E makes the sentence mean that products are restricted from using the term "natural" only if they have all three: additives, preservatives and synthesized substances.