Shellfish Allergies!

[XLogic]

Some people suffer an allergic reaction to certain phosphates found in shellfish, such as shrimp, crab and lobster. However, since Clyde's restaurant serves its special dish #4 with beef, and no shellfish, people who are allergic to shellfish can eat Clyde's special dish #4 without risking an allergic reaction to phosphates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) The Chefs at Clyde's restaurant have been able to duplicate the savoring effects of shellfish in special dish #4 without using shrimp, crab or lobster

(B) Not all forms of phosphates are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction

(C) Clyde's restaurant commonly uses shellfish in dishes served to patrons

(D) Apart from phosphates, there are no substances commonly present in food that give rise to an allergic reaction

(E) Phosphates are not naturally occurring substances in the vegetables served in special dish #4

[user123321]

Some people suffer an allergic reaction to certain phosphates found in shellfish, such as shrimp, crab and lobster. However, since Clyde's restaurant serves its special dish #4 with beef, and no shellfish, people who are allergic to shellfish can eat Clyde's special dish #4 without risking an allergic reaction to phosphates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) The Chefs at Clyde's restaurant have been able to duplicate the savoring effects of shellfish in special dish #4 without using shrimp, crab or lobster

(B) Not all forms of phosphates are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction

(C) Clyde's restaurant commonly uses shellfish in dishes served to patrons

(D) Apart from phosphates, there are no substances commonly present in food that give rise to an allergic reaction

(E) Phosphates are not naturally occurring substances in the vegetables served in special dish #4

IMO E

if we negate, it says phosphates are naturally occuring substances in special dish. this breaks the conclusion which says special dish is free of phosphates and safe for eating.

user123321

[niazsna786]

IMO C

(A) The Chefs at Clyde's restaurant have been able to duplicate the savoring effects of shellfish in special dish #4 without using shrimp, crab or lobster -Wrong - argument doesnt say similar or same dish with beef it says special disk

(B) Not all forms of phosphates are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction - Out of score

(C) Clyde's restaurant commonly uses shellfish in dishes served to patrons - look better

(D) Apart from phosphates, there are no substances commonly present in food that give rise to an allergic reaction - Out of scope

(E) Phosphates are not naturally occurring substances in the vegetables served in special dish #4. - wrong - argument speaks about beef and not vegetables

[XLogic]

IMO C

(A) The Chefs at Clyde's restaurant have been able to duplicate the savoring effects of shellfish in special dish #4 without using shrimp, crab or lobster -Wrong - argument doesnt say similar or same dish with beef it says special disk

(B) Not all forms of phosphates are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction - Out of score

(C) Clyde's restaurant commonly uses shellfish in dishes served to patrons - look better

(D) Apart from phosphates, there are no substances commonly present in food that give rise to an allergic reaction - Out of scope

(E) Phosphates are not naturally occurring substances in the vegetables served in special dish #4. - wrong - argument speaks about beef and not vegetables

Thanks for responding. Let me challenge you on (C). If Clyde's restaurant does not commonly use shellfish in food served to patrons, what does this mean? It means that it is possible that they sometimes use shellfish in food served. But how does this relate to the particular situation in the argument where shellfish is not served in special dish #4?

The author concludes that because shellfish is not served in special dish #4, patrons will not suffer from allergies due to phosphates. What's the gap between the premise and conclusion?

OA Next

[XLogic]

IMO E

if we negate, it says phosphates are naturally occurring substances in special dish. this breaks the conclusion which says special dish is free of phosphates and safe for eating.

user123321

Challenge: Assuming the answer you chose is correct, can you come with another correct answer choice? Also explain why it performs the same function as the answer you chose.

[amit2k9]

its a call between D and E.
D : expands the scope by using Food. hence loses out upon negating.
Had it been just dish #4 then probably it will be a stronger answer than E.

E: brings about a fact with respect to dish #4.Hence an OA.

[XLogic]

its a call between D and E.
D : expands the scope by using Food. hence loses out upon negating.
Had it been just dish #4 then probably it will be a stronger answer than E.

E: brings about a fact with respect to dish #4.Hence an OA.

That makes sense, though I would argue that (D) would still be wrong even if it read "Apart from phosphates, there are no substances commonly present in special dish #4 that give rise to an allergic reaction"

> What do you say?

[XLogic]

OA = E

The argument basically takes the form of:

If shellfish is present in dish X, then phosphates is present dish X. And if phosphates is present, then some people will have an allergic reaction to phosphates. Note that this is not a general allergic reaction, but rather a specific allergic reaction to "phosphates".

The flaw in the argument is that if shellfish is not present, then there will be no phosphates present, hence no specific allergic reaction to phosphates. But, what if phosphates is also present in some other food sub-component in special dish #4? What if phosphates is present in the beef, or the carrots, or some other item in special dish #4? If this were true, then the argument would no longer hold because phosphates would still be present in special dish #4, though from a different source (not shellfish). This in turn means that some people would still be allergic to "phosphates" regardless of the source...

The correct answer, if negated, would show that phosphates could just as easily come from another source present in special dish #4. And that is exactly what option E shows.

[spoiler](D)[/spoiler] is close but out of scope. We do not care about allergic reactions in general, rather we are concerned with allergic reactions to "phosphates".

A,B, and C are either irrelevant, out of scope, or both.