LSAT 136 – Section 2 – Question 05

LSAT 136 - Section 2 - Question 05

June 2012

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:06

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
PT136 S2 Q05
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Link Assumption +LinkA
Analogy +An
A
1%
156
B
2%
156
C
91%
164
D
2%
156
E
4%
157
130
140
150
 +Easier 146.855 +SubsectionMedium

Bacteria that benefit human beings when they are present in the body are called commensals. The bacterium Helicobacter pylori plays a primary role in the development of stomach ulcers. But since stomach ulcers occur in less than 10 percent of those harboring H. pylori, and since it allegedly strengthens immune response, many scientists now consider it a commensal. But this is surely misguided. Only about 10 percent of the people who harbor Mycobacter tuberculosis—a bacterium that can cause tuberculosis—get sick from it, yet no one would call M. tuberculosis a commensal.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that H. pylori shouldn’t be considered a commensal. He supports this conclusion through an analogy, saying that M. tuberculosis, which causes tuberculosis in about 10% of people who harbor it, is not considered a commensal. Similarly, he argues, H. pylori, which allegedly strengthens immune response but causes stomach ulcers in less than 10% of the people who harbor it, shouldn’t be considered a commensal.

Notable Assumptions

In order for his analogy to support his conclusion, the author must assume that M. tuberculosis and H. pylori can be accurately compared to one another.

A
Stomach ulcers caused by H. pylori and tuberculosis can both be effectively treated with antibiotics.

This doesn’t weaken the argument because it doesn’t show that H. pylori and M. tuberculosis can’t be accurately compared to one another. The treatment of stomach ulcers caused by both bacteria is irrelevant to this argument.

B
Cases of tuberculosis usually last longer than ulcers caused by H. pylori.

Even if tuberculosis lasts longer than stomach ulcers, H. pylori still causes harmful stomach ulcers. So this doesn’t weaken the author’s conclusion that H. pylori shouldn’t be considered a commensal.

C
People who harbor M. tuberculosis derive no benefit from its presence.

(C) weakens the argument by showing that M. tuberculosis and H. pylori can’t be accurately compared to one another. Both cause illness in some people who harbor the bacterium, but M. tuberculosis is not beneficial at all, while H. pylori allegedly strengthens immune response.

D
There are more people who harbor M. tuberculosis than people who harbor H. pylori.

The number of people who harbor each bacterium is not relevant because we still need to know if the two bacteria can be accurately compared to one another.

E
There are more people who harbor H. pylori than people who harbor M. tuberculosis.

Like (D), the number of people who harbor each bacterium is not relevant because we still need to know if the two bacteria can be accurately compared to one another.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 136 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply