Consumer advocate: In some countries, certain produce is routinely irradiated with gamma rays in order to extend shelf life. There are, however, good reasons to avoid irradiated foods. First, they are exposed to the radioactive substances that produce the gamma rays. Second, irradiation can reduce the vitamin content of fresh foods, leaving behind harmful chemical residues. Third, irradiation spawns unique radiolytic products that cause serious health problems, including cancer.
Summarize Argument
The consumer advocate concludes that irradiated foods should be avoided, based on three points: (1) irradiated foods are exposed to radioactive substances, (2) irradiation can reduce vitamins and leave harmful chemical residues, and (3) irradiation creates unique radiolytic products that may cause serious health issues, including cancer.
Notable Assumptions
The consumer advocate makes the following assumptions:
Irradiating foods causes unique radiolytic products to be in the produce itself.
Just because irradiation can reduce vitamins in produce, it does reduce vitamins in produce.
The amount of harmful chemical residue left after irradiation is more than the amount left without it.
Because irradiation creates unique radiolytic products and these products cause cancer, irradiated foods cause cancer.
A
Unique radiolytic products have seldom been found in any irradiated food.
The consumer advocate assumes that irradiation, which creates unique radiolytic products, causes those unique radiolytic products to be present in the produce itself. (A) weakens the argument by showing that this assumption is false.
B
Cancer and other serious health problems have many causes that are unrelated to radioactive substances and gamma rays.
This doesn't weaken the argument. The fact that cancer and other health problems have other causes doesn't mean that radioactive substances and gamma rays don't also cause these issues and need to be avoided.
C
A study showed that irradiation leaves the vitamin content of virtually all fruits and vegetables unchanged.
The consumer advocate assumes that, just because irradiation can reduce the vitamins in produce, it actually does reduce the vitamins in produce. (C) weakens the argument by showing that this assumption is false.
D
The amount of harmful chemicals found in irradiated foods is less than the amount that occurs naturally in most kinds of foods.
The consumer advocate assumes that the amount of harmful chemical residues left after irradiation is more than the amount of harmful chemical residues left without irradiation. (D) weakens the argument by showing that this assumption is false.
E
A study showed that the cancer rate is no higher among people who eat irradiated food than among those who do not.
The consumer advocate assumes that, because irradiation creates unique radiolytic products and these products cause cancer, irradiated foods cause cancer. (E) undermines this link by showing that cancer rates are not actually higher among people who eat irradiated food.
A
It describes a problem that the philosopher claims is caused by the social scientist’s need for certainty.
B
It is a premise used to support a general theoretical claim about the nature of cause and effect relationships.
C
It is a general hypothesis that is illustrated with an example showing that there is a causal relationship between political structures and environmental conditions.
D
It is a dilemma that, it is argued, is faced by every social scientist because of the difficulty of determining whether a given cultural phenomenon is the cause or the effect of a given factor.
E
It is a claim that the philosopher attempts to justify by appeal to the requirements for establishing the existence of one kind of causal relationship.
A
Major incidents of scientific fraud in a scientific discipline are deleterious to progress in that discipline.
B
Very few incidents of even minor scientific fraud have occurred in biology over the last 20 years.
C
No system of careful peer review is completely effective in preventing scientific fraud in any scientific discipline.
D
Twenty years ago the system of peer review in biology was less effective in preventing scientific fraud than the system of peer review in physics is today.
E
Over the years, there have been relatively few, if any, major incidents of scientific fraud in physics.
Priscilla: That futuristic science fiction writers more skillfully envisage radically new technologies than new social arrangements shows how writers’ imaginations are constrained by current realities. Because of this limitation, the most effective social criticism results from faithfully presenting the current social realities for critical examination, as happens in conventional fiction.