Hi everyone,

I came across this sample "most strongly supported" question online. I found no record of it as an official LSAT question, so I suspect it's created by the website. I am having a hard time understanding the reasoning behind the credited answer (C) and would like some outsider advice on my own reasoning.

Here is the question:

When pregnant lab rats are given caffeine equivalent to the amount a human would consume by drinking six cups of coffee per day, an increase in the incidence of birth defects results. When asked if the government would require warning labels on products containing caffeine, a spokesperson stated that it would not because the government would lose credibility if the finding of these studies were to be refuted in the future.

(A) A warning that applies to a small population is inappropriate.

(B) Very few people drink as many as six cups of coffee a day.

(C) There are doubts about the conclusive nature of studies on animals.

(D) Studies on rats provide little data about human birth defects.

(E) The seriousness of birth defects involving caffeine is not clear.

I eliminated all but C and D, and my reasoning for weighing D over C is as follows:

I took C to mean "animals" as "all animals", in which case the statement can be negated and still be consistent with the government statement (if there aren't doubts about the conc nature of all animal studies, it simply means some are not... we don't know if this addresses rats in particular at all)

D did not seem great either but I figured it was better than C

However, if C said "some animals" then I would be completely in agreement.

Any input would be much appreciated, as well as whether you think the question is poorly devised or allows too much ambiguity (I have yet to come across an LSAT question like this).

Hi everyone,

New here so nice meeting you all. I'd like some advice on my next course of action given my situation.

I've written the LSAT twice and scored a 154 both times, once in September 2017 and once in December 2017. I've used a mix of self-studying, various books, and tutors, and my practice tests usually average around 156.

I'm signed up for February 2018 but I realize I have a lot of work to do, and there are just 35 days until the test.

I would love to focus on the June 2018 test instead, or even September 2018, because I find that despite what some others think, this test will take quite a long time and a lot of patience and practice to truly master. However, February is the last administration for this admission cycle of the schools I applied to.

I don't feel comfortable waiting another admission cycle because of the pressure at home and socially overall to be employed and have my career on track already. My family and friends are surprised it's taking so long to do well on a single test, and I sense that they don't think it's for me.

I honestly think I can do it if I have enough time and support, but I'm not sure those will be available after February.

Any tips will be appreciated!