PrepTest 124, Section 3, Question 9
Tea made from camellia leaves is a popular(52 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(7 more words not shown)
- ASeveral other popular(12 more words not shown)
- BAddictive chemicals are(12 more words not shown)
- CSome people claim(10 more words not shown)
- DMost people who(9 more words not shown)
- EMany people who(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the tea drinkers have something else in common.
We know that regular camellia-tea drinkers are more likely than people in general to develop kidney damage. That gives us a reason to investigate the tea. It doesn't yet show that drinking it increases the risk.
Suppose people who favor this tea also tend to share a particular diet. If something else in that diet damages their kidneys, the tea could be getting blamed for a problem it didn't cause. We don't know that this is happening. It's a way the observed association could exist without the proposed explanation being right.
What we’re looking for
The withdrawal symptoms are a separate observation. They suggest an addictive feature of the tea, but addiction isn't the conclusion we're asked to challenge. We need to weaken the claim about kidney damage. I'd like evidence of another cause among these drinkers, or evidence that the apparent effect disappears when other differences are taken out of the comparison.
Working the answers
- A
The presence of the same addictive chemical in other drinks doesn't tell us what caused the kidney damage. It neither establishes that this chemical harms kidneys nor gives us a competing explanation for the higher risk among camellia-tea drinkers. The addiction detail is pulling us away from the claim we need to test.
- B
The argument doesn't require the tea to damage kidneys because it is addictive. A chemical could have an addictive quality and a separate harmful effect, or another ingredient could be responsible. Ruling out addiction itself as the mechanism leaves those possibilities open.
- C
A claimed benefit doesn't rule out a harmful effect. Even if the drink really does relieve stress, it could also increase the risk of kidney damage. The answer gives us no reason to think stress relief explains the study's result or prevents the alleged harm.
- D
Most drinkers can avoid kidney damage even if the tea increases risk. Imagine 10 percent of regular drinkers develop damage, compared with 1 percent of other people. In that example, most drinkers are fine, but the drinkers' risk is still higher. We aren't given those rates; they illustrate why “most don't” doesn't challenge “heightened risk.”
- ECorrect
These people also drink other beverages suspected of causing kidney damage. Now we have a specific competing explanation: perhaps those other drinks account for the elevated risk attributed to camellia tea. E doesn't prove the other drinks are responsible or establish that camellia tea is harmless. It makes the author's causal explanation less convincing, which is all a weakener needs to do.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.