@Dorinet_ said:
Can someone please explain to me what answer D is trying to say? I think I kind of understand, but do not fully get how it resolves the paradox
It doesn't.
People with acute W have lower fat levels.
Doctors recommend lowering fat levels to prevent acute W
D. Fat levels in people with W respond slower to changes in fat intake. So If you have W and you reduce your fat intake, your fat level may decrease but it would be slower than in someone without W.
That doesn't help us at all.
Ask yourself why the premises seem paradoxical. What assumption are they trying to get you to make?
Maybe simplify the premise further:Acute W correlates with low fat levels
Comments
It doesn't.
People with acute W have lower fat levels.
Doctors recommend lowering fat levels to prevent acute W
D. Fat levels in people with W respond slower to changes in fat intake. So If you have W and you reduce your fat intake, your fat level may decrease but it would be slower than in someone without W.
That doesn't help us at all.
Ask yourself why the premises seem paradoxical. What assumption are they trying to get you to make?
Maybe simplify the premise further:Acute W correlates with low fat levels
@canihazJD I wrote D instead of C. Can you please explain to me why C is right?
@Dorinet_
So, acute W requires absorption of large quantities of fat from the blood. (acute W → absorb large quantities of fat from blood)
So if you can't absorb large quantities of fat from blood (say because your blood fat levels have been lowered), you can't have acute W.
It might help to convert this to a weaken question:
Same AC to weaken:
So high fat actually enables the development of W.
@canihazJD thank you! I understand now