LSAT 147 – Section 1 – Question 12

LSAT 147 - Section 1 - Question 12

September 2016

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:24

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
PT147 S1 Q12
+LR
Strengthen +Streng
Fill in the blank +Fill
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
80%
163
B
2%
153
C
1%
153
D
3%
156
E
13%
156
141
149
157
 +Medium 147.09 +SubsectionMedium

Ampicillin and other modern antibiotics kill a much wider variety of bacteria than penicillin does. They also carry higher profit margins, so drug companies now have an incentive to stop manufacturing the older, less profitable antibiotics. This could cause a penicillin shortage, forcing doctors to use the much more powerful new antibiotics in cases where they might otherwise be unnecessary. Thus, these newer antibiotics are likely to result in an outbreak of diseases caused by drug-resistant bacteria, since _______.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that newer antibiotics which kill a wider range of bacteria than does penicillin will likely lead to drug-resistant bacterial disease outbreaks. The author supports this conclusion by claiming that the profitability of new antibiotics makes drug companies more likely to stop manufacturing older antibiotics like penicillin. In turn, doctors will have to prescribe newer antibiotics. There’s also a missing premise, which we need to fill in to strengthen.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that more widespread use of new antibiotics which target more types of bacteria has more potential to lead to antibiotic resistance compared to penicillin use.

A
drug-resistant bacteria flourish in the absence of competition from a wide variety of other bacteria
This strengthens by providing a mechanism by which the increased prescription of new antibiotics could cause drug-resistant bacterial disease outbreaks, by reducing the competition for drug-resistant bacteria due to killing a wider variety of other bacteria.
B
older antibiotics like penicillin have been widely used for many decades
This is irrelevant. The argument only claims that newer antibiotics will displace the older penicillin, regardless of how long penicillin has been in use. This also doesn’t tell us anything about how penicillin has affected antibiotic resistance so far.
C
a shortage of penicillin would drive up its price and profit margin
If anything, this weakens the argument by rebutting the author’s claim that drug manufacturers would only sell newer antibiotics—after all, if penicillin became more profitable, they’d probably put it back on the market. Either way, this doesn’t explain the antibiotic resistance.
D
treatment of diseases with the powerful new antibiotics is much more expensive than treatment with the older ones
This is irrelevant, because the penicillin shortage predicted by the author is a result of what products drug manufacturers choose to sell, not the cost of treatment down the line.
E
most bacteria that are resistant to penicillin are not resistant to ampicillin and other modern antibiotics
This weakens the argument, because it demonstrates how new antibiotics could actually reduce antibiotic resistance, by killing bacteria that resist penicillin. It certainly doesn’t strengthen the conclusion that new antibiotics would lead to more resistance.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 147 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply