PrepTest 114, Section 1, Question 13
Recent research indicates that increased consumption of fruits(49 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AAn increased risk(9 more words not shown)
- BA decreased risk(10 more words not shown)
- CAn increased propensity(10 more words not shown)
- DA decreased propensity(11 more words not shown)
- EStroke is prevented(17 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The research gives us a result about fruits and vegetables. The folic-acid explanation is still a possibility.
Maybe folic acid helps explain the lower stroke risk. Perhaps some other feature of the diet matters. The researchers themselves say they are speculating, so we shouldn't upgrade their proposed mechanism into a demonstrated cause.
What we’re looking for
To follow the proposal, keep the directions straight. Low folic acid goes with high homocysteine, and homocysteine contributes to blocked arteries. That makes low folic acid the unfavorable side of the suggested account, not the protective side. The question asks what is most strongly supported. My first thought is that the artery-blockage discussion must connect to the earlier point about strokes. I'd expect an answer about that connection, but we need support from the passage rather than an outside medical explanation.
Working the answers
- A
This links increased stroke risk with low homocysteine. The passage instead identifies high homocysteine as the condition associated with low folic acid and the substance contributing to blocked arteries. A points the proposed relationship in the wrong direction.
- BCorrect
This takes a different angle from my initial thought about arteries and strokes: it connects folic acid with stroke risk. That fits the pattern the researchers describe: eating more fruits and vegetables is associated with lower later stroke risk, and those foods are rich in folic acid. The proposed explanation also places low folic acid on the side associated with more of the artery-blocking amino acid. Together, these statements support a connection between higher folic acid and lower stroke risk.
Notice the limited claim: a correlation, not proof that folic acid alone caused the improvement or a guarantee that someone will avoid a stroke. B matches the suggested relationship while leaving the mechanism at the level of support the passage provides.
- C
Homocysteine contributes to blocked arteries. C pairs a greater tendency toward blockage with less homocysteine, reversing the direction suggested by the passage. We aren't given support for that pairing.
- D
Low folic acid is associated with high homocysteine, which contributes to blockage. D puts low folic acid together with a reduced tendency toward blockage. That is the opposite of the proposed account we were tracing.
- E
This promises that ingesting a certain amount prevents stroke, which goes beyond a reduced susceptibility and a speculative explanation. It also aims to prevent homocysteine from declining. But homocysteine is the substance described as contributing to blocked arteries; keeping its level from falling isn't the protective direction the passage suggests. E adds both an unsupported guarantee and the wrong target.
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.