I've been struggling with many of the strengthen/weaken questions, but for some reason this one was immediately apparent to me. To me the premise of the anti-inflammatory drug stuck out like a sore thumb because, left alone, it doesn't seem to relate to the argument at ALL, so it was clear to me that it was essential to strengthen that premise.
The video explanation in the previous section was confusing, but reading the summary at the end really helped with this question. I basically found the irrelevant "chain" and in the answer choices looked for the one that would make it relevant to the conclusion.
negate b and it presupposes another explanation for the mechanism by which Alzheimer's deleterious effects come out about, therefore, B isolates the mechanism to microglia
At first this question was a brain full, but got it right in a couple minutes. the actual process is not much harder than most of the prior questions, but the subject matter Definitely hits you if your not a Stem kind of person.
YESSIR. I was so confused at first but I reminded myself, Strengthen questions need to STRENGTHEN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PREMISES AND THE CONCLUSION, full stop.
PREMISE 1: This deterioration can be slowed by Acetylsalicyclic acid.
PREMISE 2: Patients with Alzheimers are unable to eliminate the protein BA from the brain, which then accumulates and forms deposit, then the Brain's own immune cells attack these deposits and accidentally poison the healthy brain cells surrounding the deposits.
CONCLUSION: The deterioriation of cognitive faculties associated with Alzheimers is caused by activities of the brain's own immune cells.
Premise 2 seems really solid. Premise 1 though? It's a bit irrelevant. But if we got more elaboration on it, any more support or further explanation to tie Acetylsalicycic Acid to the brain's own immune cells, that would then make it helpful.
Did I know what to look for before reading each answer? No. But as soon as I reminded myself to ask myself, "What answer choice here strengthens either of the premises with the conclusion?" I got it.
Still 50 seconds over time, but practice practice pratice
This might have been a bad way to lead me to the answer, but as I was reading the stimulus, I noticed the premise that included "a-acid" had no support. I automatically assumed one of the AC would give support to it. I justified it even more by thinking if this drug helps slow this disease, than this causal relationship in the conclusion is correct.
Got the causal chain breakdown of the stimulus correct, even noticing that the first premise, A-Acid--prevents--->lowered cog. function, seemed disconnected to the other premises supporting the conclusion. However, I got the answers wrong because I got distracted by reading into the confusing language.
If you know that you need to be looking for an answer that tries to make the premise about A-acid relevant to the conclusion, then every answer other than B is immediately eliminated.
Focus on which premise needs connecting to the conclusion, and find its resolution in the answers!
Hang with me here folks, I think I figured it out:
Conclusion: deterioration of cognitive faculties associated with Alzheimer's disease is caused by microglia (i.e. brain’s open immune cells).
Why: Microglia (brain’s open immune cells) attacks protein BA deposits by releasing poisons that destroy healthy brain cells which impairs brains cognitive functions; deterioration of cognitive faculties (caused by microglia) can be slowed by acetylsalicylic acid.
Assumption: AA slows down the deterioration caused by Microglia. It doesn't stop or eliminate it, it just slows it down. It's like adding an extra step (I'm just drawing it out here):
Initially, we had Microglia --> Deterioration.
Now, it's Microglia --> (AA) --> Deterioration.
How does AA, when slowing what is caused by Microglia, still reinforce the idea that Microglia still leads to deterioration (conclusion)?
Microglia = brain's open immune cells. OK.
AA = slows down the process of brain’s open immune cells --> deterioration, but still can/leads to deterioration.
Answer choice B --> Acetylsalicylic acid reduces the production of immune cells in the brain } So REDUCING the production of brain's open immune cells makes it so that there is LESS of them, so it won't lead to the deterioration as quickly, right? Logically: more bad/good cells = more reproduction of said cells; if brain’s open immune cells lead to deterioration, and this chain/process is slowed by AA, it makes sense that AA makes it so that there are LESS brain’s open immune cells (microglia).
So we have a lot of microglia (i.e. brain’s open immune cells) which leads to deterioration of faculties; taking AA slows this process (it doesn't stop or eliminate it). How can it do that? Well, logically, it has to impact Microglia somehow, if it makes longer to get from A (microglia) to B (deterioration). Answer choice B tells us: AA reduces number of Microglia = YES, there are less brain’s open immune cells, but this lower number still leading to deterioration REINFORCES the notion that those cells that were not reduced (which are still Microglia) by AA led to the deterioration of cognitive faculties.
I'm so proud I got this one right in 44 seconds. I didn't read the other questions after B since the worst thing I could do was to continue reading the other answers and start confusing myself.
My problem is if I took all day to build out the chain then I could get the question right but we won't have that time on the test. Has anyone noticed a increase of recognizing chains without having to write it out after building out the chains?
2
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
224 comments
I've been struggling with many of the strengthen/weaken questions, but for some reason this one was immediately apparent to me. To me the premise of the anti-inflammatory drug stuck out like a sore thumb because, left alone, it doesn't seem to relate to the argument at ALL, so it was clear to me that it was essential to strengthen that premise.
This one is so tricky!
The video explanation in the previous section was confusing, but reading the summary at the end really helped with this question. I basically found the irrelevant "chain" and in the answer choices looked for the one that would make it relevant to the conclusion.
Wow, I really understood this. The answer was so obvious to me with the exception of C, which I quickly realized did not strengthen the argument.
how the fuck am i suppost to know this. I didn't sign on for med school
negate b and it presupposes another explanation for the mechanism by which Alzheimer's deleterious effects come out about, therefore, B isolates the mechanism to microglia
Anyone else have a stroke trying to read this question ?
At first this question was a brain full, but got it right in a couple minutes. the actual process is not much harder than most of the prior questions, but the subject matter Definitely hits you if your not a Stem kind of person.
this question is gonna lead me to get alzheimers
my neuro biology classes well prepared me for this ngl
HUH
what the helly
YESSIR. I was so confused at first but I reminded myself, Strengthen questions need to STRENGTHEN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PREMISES AND THE CONCLUSION, full stop.
PREMISE 1: This deterioration can be slowed by Acetylsalicyclic acid.
PREMISE 2: Patients with Alzheimers are unable to eliminate the protein BA from the brain, which then accumulates and forms deposit, then the Brain's own immune cells attack these deposits and accidentally poison the healthy brain cells surrounding the deposits.
CONCLUSION: The deterioriation of cognitive faculties associated with Alzheimers is caused by activities of the brain's own immune cells.
Premise 2 seems really solid. Premise 1 though? It's a bit irrelevant. But if we got more elaboration on it, any more support or further explanation to tie Acetylsalicycic Acid to the brain's own immune cells, that would then make it helpful.
Did I know what to look for before reading each answer? No. But as soon as I reminded myself to ask myself, "What answer choice here strengthens either of the premises with the conclusion?" I got it.
Still 50 seconds over time, but practice practice pratice
This might have been a bad way to lead me to the answer, but as I was reading the stimulus, I noticed the premise that included "a-acid" had no support. I automatically assumed one of the AC would give support to it. I justified it even more by thinking if this drug helps slow this disease, than this causal relationship in the conclusion is correct.
don't think we have 7 min not break down the stimulus on test day. I'm skipping that question right away.
Got the causal chain breakdown of the stimulus correct, even noticing that the first premise, A-Acid--prevents--->lowered cog. function, seemed disconnected to the other premises supporting the conclusion. However, I got the answers wrong because I got distracted by reading into the confusing language.
If you know that you need to be looking for an answer that tries to make the premise about A-acid relevant to the conclusion, then every answer other than B is immediately eliminated.
Focus on which premise needs connecting to the conclusion, and find its resolution in the answers!
Got the causal chain breakdown of the stimulus correct. Still chose wrong answers the first time and for blind review...
Is A like saying AA-> reduct in M -> reduct in CD? If so, I thought you should not assume -X -> -Y
It’s just aspirin.
actually proud of myself. Got it wrong but then reread and took my time on the BR and got it right. small wins ladies and gents.
It's a good thing that the real LSAT isn't timed, or my strategy to get this question right wouldn't work...
Hang with me here folks, I think I figured it out:
Conclusion: deterioration of cognitive faculties associated with Alzheimer's disease is caused by microglia (i.e. brain’s open immune cells).
Why: Microglia (brain’s open immune cells) attacks protein BA deposits by releasing poisons that destroy healthy brain cells which impairs brains cognitive functions; deterioration of cognitive faculties (caused by microglia) can be slowed by acetylsalicylic acid.
Assumption: AA slows down the deterioration caused by Microglia. It doesn't stop or eliminate it, it just slows it down. It's like adding an extra step (I'm just drawing it out here):
Initially, we had Microglia --> Deterioration.
Now, it's Microglia --> (AA) --> Deterioration.
How does AA, when slowing what is caused by Microglia, still reinforce the idea that Microglia still leads to deterioration (conclusion)?
Microglia = brain's open immune cells. OK.
AA = slows down the process of brain’s open immune cells --> deterioration, but still can/leads to deterioration.
Answer choice B --> Acetylsalicylic acid reduces the production of immune cells in the brain } So REDUCING the production of brain's open immune cells makes it so that there is LESS of them, so it won't lead to the deterioration as quickly, right? Logically: more bad/good cells = more reproduction of said cells; if brain’s open immune cells lead to deterioration, and this chain/process is slowed by AA, it makes sense that AA makes it so that there are LESS brain’s open immune cells (microglia).
So we have a lot of microglia (i.e. brain’s open immune cells) which leads to deterioration of faculties; taking AA slows this process (it doesn't stop or eliminate it). How can it do that? Well, logically, it has to impact Microglia somehow, if it makes longer to get from A (microglia) to B (deterioration). Answer choice B tells us: AA reduces number of Microglia = YES, there are less brain’s open immune cells, but this lower number still leading to deterioration REINFORCES the notion that those cells that were not reduced (which are still Microglia) by AA led to the deterioration of cognitive faculties.
I'm so proud I got this one right in 44 seconds. I didn't read the other questions after B since the worst thing I could do was to continue reading the other answers and start confusing myself.
This is so time consuming... is there any way to do this faster..?
My problem is if I took all day to build out the chain then I could get the question right but we won't have that time on the test. Has anyone noticed a increase of recognizing chains without having to write it out after building out the chains?