PrepTest 156

[lcid:3721] Prep Test 156 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Medical researcher: Studies in Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Facts

Strategy Overview

Argument or facts? Always a set of facts Identify what is strange, discrepant, surprising, or paradoxical in the passage Anticipate additional facts that could be added that could make the passage make more sense Use anticipation to find the answer choice that, if added to the set of facts in the passage, would make the discrepancy/paradox make more sense

Answer Anticipation

We want to find the answer choice on Paradox questions that would make the discrepant, surprising, or paradoxical situation make more sense. To that end, it helps to clarify why the situation is discrepant, surprising, or paradoxical in the first place. For this passage, it's weird that heart disease occurs half as frequently in the French population, even though they consume as much fat as the North American population and fat consumption is related to heart disease. On many Paradox questions, the facts compare two different situations. We should consider the relevant differences between those two situations to resolve the paradox. In this case, the facts compare heart disease among the French and North American populations. Based on fat consumption alone, we'd expect the rate of heart disease in both places to be similar. But what about other differences between France and North America? The French population may have characteristics that lower their risk of heart disease. So, we'll look for an answer choice that describes differences between the French and North American populations that would explain France's lower rate of heart disease. It would not be a wise use of time to formulate a more exact prediction, but we can move on to the answer choices now that we at least know the shape of what we're looking for.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The average level of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    This doesn't explain France's lower rate of heart disease. In fact, this makes the situation all the weirder. If France's population was consuming even more fat decades ago, it's even more bizarre that they have a much lower rate of heart disease than North America. The cumulative effects of eating a diet this high in fat in one's 20s and 30s would be showing up in people in their 40s and 50s, no? We can cross off (A).

  2. B
    Other factors of diet Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    Like (A), this makes the situation even weirder. This answer choice says that fat consumption is the only known diet-related factor to influence the rate of heart disease. This rules out other explanations of France's lower rate of heart disease, like whether they consume more vegetables or antioxidants or something. If we rule out those explanations, we'd be more likely to expect the rate of heart disease in both places to be similar.

  3. C
    Heart disease takes years Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    As we anticipated, this presents a potential difference between the French and North American populations. If France has only recently increased their fat consumption to North American levels and heart disease takes years to develop, it makes sense that the French population doesn't suffer from North American levels of heart disease. Unless they engage in other ameliorating behaviors, they may see a significant rise in heart disease in the coming years. We certainly wouldn't have expected the gist of the correct answer to be they haven't gotten North American levels of heart disease *yet* (which is why making a precise anticipation is not a great use of time). Still, we can select this and give the remaining choices a quick read-through.

  4. D
    Certain diseases other than Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    Like (A) and (B), this makes the situation a little odder. This tells us that fat consumption influences other diseases, and the French population has a higher incidence of those diseases. So, they're consuming fats and suffering from other diseases at a high rate — so they may not be engaging in preventative behaviors that reduce the likelihood of both diseases. This rules out other explanations for France's lower rate of heart disease, like whether they exercise more or something. If we rule out those explanations, we'd be more likely to expect the rate of heart disease in both places to be similar.

  5. E
    Cigarette smoking significantly increases Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    This just introduces another paradox. According to (E), there are now two reasons we'd expect the rate of heart disease in France to be at least as high as that in North America. The French must be doing something to reduce their risk of heart disease, but this answer choice doesn't point to what that may be.

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion