LSAT 119 – Section 2 – Question 25

LSAT 119 - Section 2 - Question 25

June 2005

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:42

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT119 S2 Q25
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
1%
153
B
2%
152
C
93%
165
D
2%
154
E
2%
151
136
144
151
 +Medium 144.676 +SubsectionEasier

Studies have shown that specialty sports foods contain exactly the same nutrients in the same quantities as do common foods from the grocery store. Moreover, sports foods cost from two to three times more than regular foods. So very few athletes would buy sports foods were it not for expensive advertising campaigns.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that the factor driving athletes’ purchases of sports foods is expensive advertising campaigns. This is based on the phenomenon that sports food are nutritionally the same as normal foods, but cost two to three times more. From the stimulus alone, we can’t tell how many athletes are currently buying sports foods; we only have the author’s conclusion that without the expensive advertising campaigns, that number would be very low.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there are no factors other than expensive advertisements that could make sports foods more attractive to athletes than regular foods.

A
Sports foods are occasionally used by world-famous athletes.
This does not affect the argument. World-famous athletes could be occasionally using sports foods in private and consequently having no impact on how regular athletes perceive these foods.
B
Many grocery stores carry sports foods alongside traditional inventories.
This does not affect the argument. It merely reinforces the idea that athletes can choose between sports foods and regular foods at the grocery store.
C
Sports foods are easier than regular foods to carry and consume during training and competition.
This weakens the argument. It offers another explanation for why athletes are purchasing sports foods, outside of the advertising campaigns: convenience. The greater convenience of sports foods makes them more attractive than regular foods, despite the price difference.
D
Regular foods contain vitamins and minerals that are essential to developing strength and endurance.
This does not affect the argument. Sports foods and regular foods have identical nutrients in the same quantities.
E
Sports foods can nutritionally substitute for regular meals.
This does not affect the argument. Sports foods and regular foods have identical nutrients in the same quantities, so them being able to nutritionally substitute for regular meals is not new or useful information.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 119 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply