PrepTest 106, Section 1, Question 11
Sharks have a higher ratio of cartilage mass(67 more words not shown)
If the claims made above(11 more words not shown)
- ANo organism resists(13 more words not shown)
- BThe organism most(18 more words not shown)
- CThe substance in(11 more words not shown)
- DIn the past(14 more words not shown)
- ESome organisms have(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Sharks stand out in two ways: their bodies contain an unusually high proportion of cartilage, and they resist cancer unusually well. At first, I'd ask whether those facts are connected. Having both features doesn't by itself establish that one explains the other.
The next statement supplies a possible connection. A substance in shark cartilage inhibits tumor growth by blocking the development of a new blood network. Then we're given a comparison involving patients' responses to treatments. For this question, we take those statements as true rather than trying to settle real medical questions from them.
What we’re looking for
Now notice the task: each choice could be true except one. Four choices only need to remain possible. The answer we select must conflict with something the passage tells us. For example, a claim that some other organism resists cancer better than sharks would directly contradict the stated ranking. Let's test the choices for that kind of conflict, without assuming that an unmentioned fact is false.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The first half fits: nothing resists cancer better than sharks. But the second half says some organisms tie them. The passage says sharks have greater resistance than any other organism, which rules out a tie as well as a superior rival.
“Nothing is better” would leave room for equals. “Greater than any other” doesn't. That one distinction makes A incompatible with the passage. We don't have to use every fact about cartilage and treatment to establish the conflict.
- B
We know where sharks rank, not how cartilage percentages and cancer susceptibility line up among every other organism. The most susceptible organism could have more cartilage than another susceptible organism without challenging either of the claims about sharks.
For instance, two non-shark organisms could differ in many other ways that affect their resistance. Nothing says cartilage percentage by itself determines the entire ranking. B could be true.
- C
The passage identifies a substance in shark cartilage but doesn't say sharks are the only organisms that contain it. It could be widespread, perhaps in different amounts or circumstances. We needn't establish that explanation as fact; we only need to see that the passage doesn't rule this possibility out.
- D
The treatment comparison doesn't say other therapies failed. Many patients could have improved dramatically under several treatments while the response among those consuming cartilage was at least as positive.
“No more positive” also allows a tie; it doesn't require the cartilage response to be strictly better than every other response. D is possible, although the passage doesn't independently establish that dramatic improvement occurred.
- E
Resistance to cancer isn't a complete description of an immune system's efficiency. Another organism might be better at handling some other challenge while sharks resist cancer best. The passage gives no overall immune-system ranking that would make E impossible.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.