PrepTest 149, Section 4, Question 5
Safety expert: Tuna is often treated with carbon(42 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(14 more words not shown)
- AWorkers in fish(21 more words not shown)
- BOver the last(12 more words not shown)
- CTuna that is(21 more words not shown)
- DTreating tuna with(15 more words not shown)
- EMost consumers strongly(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if we can no longer tell that the fish has spoiled?
Keeping tuna from turning brown could remove a warning people use when deciding whether to eat it. Imagine a piece that still looks appealing even though it has gone bad. Someone eats it and becomes ill, not because the treatment added a poison, but because the treatment hid a reason to throw the fish away.
What we’re looking for
That would reconcile the safety expert's two claims. The treatment needn't directly make tuna harmful in order to increase illness from eating it. I'd look for an answer showing that the preserved appearance conceals dangerous spoilage.
Working the answers
- A
Workers getting sick from exposure during processing is different from people getting sick from eating tuna. The question is about the safety of the treated food for the eater. A describes an occupational hazard without explaining that outcome.
- B
More tuna consumption could mean more opportunities for illness, but the passage attributes the danger to this treatment. A general rise in how much tuna people eat doesn't explain why preventing the color change would create that danger. The connection to treatment is still missing.
- CCorrect
Spoiled treated tuna can look fine even when it can cause food poisoning. The treatment hides a visible warning without making the spoiled fish safe. People could therefore eat tuna they otherwise would have avoided. That explains an indirect increase in illness while preserving the claim that the treatment itself doesn't make the tuna harmful.
- D
Whether this is the only way to prevent browning doesn't tell us why using it might make more eaters sick. There could be one color-preserving method or several, and we would still need an explanation of this method's effect on food safety.
- E
A preference for tuna that isn't brown explains why preserving the color could appeal to consumers. But a preference alone doesn't establish the health risk. If the attractive tuna remained safe to eat, that preference wouldn't create the discrepancy. C adds the crucial fact: tuna can look acceptable after it has become dangerously spoiled.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.