LSAT 130 – Section 1 – Question 09

LSAT 130 - Section 1 - Question 09

September 2009

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:20

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
PT130 S1 Q09
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
0%
154
B
0%
151
C
5%
158
D
11%
159
E
84%
165
128
142
155
 +Medium 147.03 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

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

People who need to reduce their intake of fat and to consume fewer calories often turn to fat substitutes, especially those with zero calories such as N5. But studies indicate that N5 is of no use to such people. Subjects who ate foods prepared with N5 almost invariably reported feeling hungrier afterwards than after eating foods prepared with real fat and consequently they ate more, quickly making up for the calories initially saved by using N5.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that N5 is of no use to people who need to reduce their fat and calorie intake. She supports this by saying that studies show that people who ate foods with N5 felt hungrier afterward and ended up eating more, making up for the calories saved by using N5.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The author concludes that N5 is not useful for people who need to reduce fat and calorie intake based on evidence that it doesn’t help lower calorie intake. However, just because the subjects ate more calories doesn’t mean they ate more fat. N5 might still help reduce fat intake, even if it doesn’t lower calories. In this case, it could still be useful for people who need to reduce fat and calories.

A
many foods cannot be prepared with N5

Irrelevant— it doesn’t matter which foods can be prepared with N5 because this doesn’t affect the conclusion that N5 isn’t useful for people who need to reduce their fat and calories.

B
N5 has mild but unpleasant side effects

Irrelevant— it doesn’t matter what side effects N5 causes. The author is only addressing whether or not it helps people who need to reduce their fat and calories. If anything, having unpleasant side effects would likely make N5 even less useful for these people.

C
not everyone who eats foods prepared with N5 pays attention to caloric intake

Irrelevant— the author is only addressing those people who do need to pay attention to fat and calorie intake. Whether some other people also eat N5 doesn’t matter.

D
people who know N5 contains zero calories tend to eat more foods prepared with N5 than do people who are unaware that N5 is calorie-free

Whether people are aware that N5 is calorie-free doesn't change the fact that almost all people who ate it did not reduce their calorie intake in the long run. So (D) doesn't impact the author’s conclusion that N5 isn’t useful for people who need to reduce fat and calories.

E
the total fat intake of people who eat foods prepared with N5 tends to decrease even if their caloric intake does not

The author concludes that N5 isn’t useful for people who need to reduce calories and fat, simply because it doesn’t help people to reduce calories. But it’s possible that N5 does help people to reduce fat and so is still useful.

The question stem reads: The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on grounds that the argument fails to consider the possibility that… This is a Flaw question.

The author begins with context, claiming that people who need to decrease their fat intake and consume fewer calories often turn to fat substitutes, especially zero calory sweeteners such as N5. Next, we turn to the author’s argument with the context indicator “but.” The author concludes, “Studies indicate N5 is of no use to such people (people who need to decrease their fat intake and consume fewer calories).” As evidence, the author cites that subjects who ate foods prepared with N5 felt hungrier than those who ate foods prepared with real fat. Because they felt hungrier, those who used N5 consumed more calories, and their extra calories made up for the calories initially saved. So while preparing food with N5 might save you calories for that meal, you do not reduce the total calories consumed.

The study suggests that replacing fat with N5 would not save you calories in the long run. However, if we turn to the author’s conclusion, we see that the author said N5 was useless to both people who needed to save calories and reduce fat intake. While the study claims that subjects who used N5 did not reduce caloric intake, perhaps the subjects reduced total fat intake. They replaced fat with N5, and even though they ate more later, perhaps they ate fat-free foods. The calories that would have been spent on fat instead get spent on carbs and protein. As a result, N5 might be useful to people who need to reduce fat and consumer fewer calories, but only with respect to N5’s ability to reduce fat intake. Now that we have our flaws let’s move to the answer choices.

Answer Choice (A) is arbitrary. What foods can be prepared with N5 does not affect the argument. Additionally, (A) mildly helps the argument. As we increase the number of foods that cannot be prepared with N5, the less useful N5 becomes

Answer Choice (B) is arbitrary. The side effects of N5 are arbitrary to the argument. Similar to (A), (B) would mildly help the argument. As we increase the number of unpleasant side effects of N5, the less useful N5 becomes.

Answer Choice (C) is arbitrary. The argument is only concerned with people who need to reduce fat intake and consume fewer calories.

Answer Choice (D) is incorrect. (D) says that of the people who consumed food with N5, those who knew N5 contained zero calories tended to consume more food than those who didn’t know N5 was calorie-free. However, both groups are subsets of a superset: people who eat foods prepared with N5. And we know that people who ate N5 saved no calories in the long run. So while those who did not know N5 contained zero calories ate less food, they still will not have saved any calories.

Correct Answer Choice (E) is what we prephrased. While the N5 subjects might not have saved any calories, they were able to decrease fat intake. So even though they did not accomplish their goal of reducing calories, N5 was able to help them accomplish their other goal: reducing fat.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 130 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply