PrepTest 132, Section 2, Question 6
Although some nutritional facts about soft drinks are(49 more words not shown)
If all the statements above(10 more words not shown)
- AThe health of(15 more words not shown)
- BMany people will(17 more words not shown)
- CMany people will(22 more words not shown)
- DPeople who wish(20 more words not shown)
- EThe health of(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Knowing the caffeine amount could help me cut back. If one drink contains much more than another, the label gives me information I can use when choosing between them.
But the passage separates limiting caffeine from eliminating it. I might wonder why the labels wouldn't also help someone eliminate caffeine. For this question, that isn't something we need to resolve: we're told to accept all the statements. Keep the benefit tied to cutting back.
What we’re looking for
Now follow the connections. Exact labels would make limiting intake easier. If it became easier, many people would limit their intake. That change would improve their health. So the labels would improve some people's health through a change in behavior. We don't need a new scientific claim; we just need to connect the statements already given.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Listing exact caffeine amounts would lead to health improvements for at least some people. The passage supplies each link: easier to limit intake, people actually doing so, and improved health as a result. Since many people would make that beneficial change, “at least some” follows.
- B
Making something easier isn't the same as making it possible for the first time. Without exact labels, someone might still cut back by drinking fewer caffeinated drinks. The passage gives us a helpful method, not the only method. We cannot conclude that people would be unable to limit intake without it.
- C
We don't know how difficult eliminating caffeine is when people must guess the amounts. The passage says what exact labels would make easier: limiting intake. Saying a change wouldn't make elimination easier doesn't tell us whether elimination was easy or difficult to begin with.
- D
The stated benefit concerns people limiting their intake, and the passage expressly sets eliminating it aside. We aren't given a benefit for people pursuing that different goal. That doesn't prove they could never benefit in any way; it means this conclusion doesn't follow from the information provided.
- E
The information establishes a benefit for people who reduce their intake. It gives us no group whose health would worsen from knowing the amounts. We can't invent someone who reacts badly to the labels and treat that possibility as something that must happen.
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.