PrepTest 111

Incorrect. This answer is too extreme. There's evidence that some toxin production is genetically controlled, but not that all toxin production is. There's no statement that strong in the stimulus!

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Gene splicing can lead to new varieties of farm animals, but it can add good as well as bad traits (toxins, carcinogens), and the latter can be hard to detect.

Answer Anticipation:
When a Must Be True question (especially a Most Strongly Supported one) doesn't involve conditional logic or a lot of overlapping/chaining terms, and it has a lot of weak language ("can" "can" "might") the correct answer tends to be a weak generalization from the situation (or sometimes a slight rephrasing of a statement that was made). Let's head into the answers with the stimulus in mind but without a specific anticipation as there's not much that suggests a specific answer!

Answer Explanation:
While it's rare that a "should" answer can be supported by a stimulus that doesn't use matching language this is an example where it can happen. There are two things that allow us to do so. First this is a weak answer—the recommendation is to "be cautious" which isn't saying much. It's not saying something should be stopped or avoided, just done with caution. Second, the stimulus establishes that gene splicing can result in very bad things—hard to detect carcinogens. The combination of the Very Bad Thing established in the stimulus and the very weak nature of this "should" statement allows for this answer to be supported in this Most Strongly Supported question.

Key Takeaway:
When the stimulus in a Must Be True question features many weak statements don't pick a strong answer! Weak statements can support only other weak statements.

Also note that an answer can be weak despite using strong language. "Should" is a word that carries logical weight to it but if it's attached to a weak idea—like being cautious—it can actually be in a very weak answer.

Incorrect. The stimulus notes that gene splicing can give rise to new varieties of farm animals. Sure, they may have toxins and carcinogens, but they may not, and in any case, they exist, so this answer is contradicted by the stimulus.

Incorrect. First, there's no indication that "most" gene—spliced animals produce carcinogens. Second there's no indication that these carcinogens can cause cancer in the animals that produce them. Third there's definitely no indication that these carcinogens cause cancer in most animals that produce them.

Incorrect. The stimulus doesn't present any type of prediction of what will happen with the technology in the future.