LSAT 140 – Section 3 – Question 04

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 04

December 2013

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:20

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
PT140 S3 Q04
+LR
Strengthen +Streng
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Sampling +Smpl
Analogy +An
A
2%
155
B
4%
157
C
2%
154
D
3%
160
E
88%
166
135
145
154
 +Medium 149.74 +SubsectionMedium

Video of JY doing this

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

The Magno-Blanket is probably able to relieve arthritic pain in older dogs. A hospital study of people suffering from severe joint pain found that 76 percent of those who were treated with magnets reported reduced pain after just 3 weeks. Dogs and humans have similar physiologies and the Magno-Blanket brings magnets into the same proximity to the dog’s joints as they were to patients’ joints in the hospital study.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that the Magno-Blanket can probably relieve arthritic pain in older dogs. This is based on a study of people suffering from severe joint pain. 76 percent of the people treated with magnets reported reduced pain after 3 weeks. In addition, dogs and humans have similar physiologies, and the Magno-Blanket has magnets that would be as close to dog’s joints as the magnets in the study were to the people’s joints.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the magnets caused a reduction in joint pain among people in the study. This overlooks the possibility that there could be other explanations for the reduced pain — for example, maybe most joint pain reduces on its own over time.

A
The Magno-Blanket is likely to be effective on cats and other pets as well if it is effective at reducing joint pain in arthritic dogs.
We don’t know whether the blanket is effective on dogs. Learning that if it’s effective on dogs, it’ll be effective on other animals doesn’t help establish that it’s effective on dogs.
B
Magnets have been shown to be capable of intensifying the transmission of messages from people’s nerve cells to their brains.
If magnets can intensify messages from nerves to the brain, that suggests pain might be intensified. Alternatively, there’s no clear relationship between pain reduction and transmission of messages from nerves to the brain.
C
There are currently fewer means of safely alleviating arthritic pain in dogs than in humans.
The argument concerns whether magnets are a way to alleviate arthritic pain in dogs. The number of other ways available to do this has no effect on whether magnets can alleviate arthritic pain in dogs.
D
The patients in the hospital study suffering from severe joint pain who, after being treated with magnets, did not report reduced pain tended not to be those suffering from the most severe pain.
This suggests potential limitations on the effectiveness of magnets to treat humans.
E
Most of the patients in the hospital study suffering from severe joint pain who received a placebo rather than treatment with magnets did not report reduced pain.
This shows that a control group didn’t experience pain reduction in the same proportion as the group that got the magnets. This helps to eliminate the possibility that the pain reduction in the magnet group was due to something everyone had in common.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 140 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply