I thought weight bearing exercise is a medical therapy, apparently its not?

where does it say "most anthropologists"?

@alexbonaguidi I guess since this is a necessary assumption question though, we are looking for the bare minimum that must be true in order for the new system to reflect the distribution. Thus we need it to be true that the dissatisfied are not being overly represented, at minimum.

@RobertCarlson Doesn't this not reflect the distribution of student opinion if dissatisfied students are equally or less likely to submit as compared to satisfied who are equally or more likely to submit?

@LucasDiblasio I thought that at first too. But no, its because the kids in day care are around more kids which is the same conditions as larger families (the kids we know to have fewer allergies than children in smaller families). The underlying assumption is that more kids = more exposure to germs (its helpful to think of this as an experiment). The more exposure to other kids the fewer allergies the kid will have. Since the kids in smaller families gain more exposure to other kids when they enter day care earlier (before age one) they have fewer allergies than the kids who entered daycare later (less exposure to other kids).

I thought that we were supposed to match negation in the conclusion and structure in the AC?

This makes no sense:

How can we assume that daycare exposes kids to germs?

4 "and"s in one sentence is crazy

Why can't broadcast be subsidized in some other way? Why does the because have to indicate that one is and one isnt rather than one is in this specific way?

At 10:05 min I got confused because he says that the sufficient condition comes after the necessary condition in the contrapositive.

Rather, I believe the sufficient condition becomes the necessary condition in the contrapositive.

I asked the google and it said I was right, but I would like some confirmation from others.

@aayushi2001vani20877 I was between C and E. The reason I think that C is right and not E is because C isolates the main conclusion whereas E combines the main conclusion and sub conclusion.

Wouldn't increasing genetic capacity lead to the decrease in vulnerability of crops to pests and disease, therefore maximizing crop yields?

If small rats are more likely to suffer from other fatal diseases, but other fatal diseases = .0001% of deaths then they are still more likely to suffer from heart problems, right?

@am4ndapanda Why does it not work that the plan is an unequivocal benefit that can provide to new lawyers with new clients though?

Is "is" supposed to mean 'certain characteristics' or something akin in this situation?

Are we not supposed to assume that the author considered every counter argument and rejected it? And under this logic, wouldn't the benefits have already been considered?

Can we assume that advertising influences buying habits? Why?

I thought principle questions were not supposed to have answers as specific as D which is why I chose AC C.