PrepTest 102

Incorrect. This answer brings up a relevant difference between the two groups. If the chewers are exercising more than the smokers, then that explains their lower rate of heart disease. (Yes, for a Paradox question, you're allowed to connect exercise with better heart health.)

Incorrect. This answer brings up a relevant difference between chewing and smoking. If chewing tobacco has some chemicals that protect the cardiovascular system, then that explains the better outcomes for chewers over smokers.

Incorrect. This answer brings up a relevant difference between the two groups. If the chewers eat a healthier diet than the smokers, then that explains their lower rate of heart disease. (And, just like (A), for a Paradox question, we can connect those concepts, especially since this answer specifically talks about a healthy diet.)

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Bizarro Paradox

Stimulus Summary:
Relationship - Nicotine causes heart attacks and high blood pressure

Smoker who doesn't chew vs. Chewer who doesn't smoke:
(1) Same nicotine exposure (for those studied)
(2) The former group has more heart attacks and high blood pressure than the latter

Answer Anticipation:
As with all Paradox questions, we should start by clearly defining the paradox. And as with many Paradox questions, this one involves a comparison.

For the paradox, the stimulus starts with a relationship—nicotine causes heart attacks and high blood pressure. From this, you'd expect that people with the same exposure to nicotine would have similar levels of these two diseases.

However, that's not what was found in a study. There, for those with equivalent nicotine exposure, the method of nicotine delivery seems to be relevant. Those who smoke cigarettes end up with a higher rate of these diseases than people who chew tobacco that provides an equivalent amount of nicotine.

So what gives? Well, since this argument is about a difference between nicotine and smoking, we should look for answers that bring up relevant differences between smoking and chewing tobacco (or the groups that smoke/chew) that would result in the former leading to more health issues than the latter.

Answer Explanation:
The stimulus is about heart disease, not cancer, so this answer is out of scope.

Key Takeaway:
Paradox questions frequently deal in comparisons. When attempting to explain a difference, a relevant difference is usually called for; a similarity, a relevant similarity.

Incorrect. This answer brings up a relevant difference between chewing and smoking. If smoking exposes people to blood pressure-raising chemicals not present in chewing tobacco, then that explains why smoking leads to more high blood pressure than chewing.