#17 - After monitoring blood levels of lycopene (a nutrient

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[lsat12345]

I posted on here before about this question, but I still don't feel confident about it. Just because Lycopene is more abundant in fruits and vegetables, doesn't mean that the people in the study got their lycopene dose from fruits and vegetables. The stimulus never states that the people in the study got their lycopene doses from fruits/veggies, so how can we make that leap in answer choice A?

[Malila Robinson]

Hi LSAT12345,
Since this is a Weaken question you can bring in outside information in order to highlight a problem in the argument. Answer A attacks the conclusion of the argument which says that lycopenes reduce the risk of stroke. Specifically, Answer A is saying that it may be other things that are reducing the risk of stroke, so the lycopenes may have nothing to do with it.
Hope that helps!
-Malila

[taylorharris24]

Hi LSAT12345,
Since this is a Weaken question you can bring in outside information in order to highlight a problem in the argument. Answer A attacks the conclusion of the argument which says that lycopenes reduce the risk of stroke. Specifically, Answer A is saying that it may be other things that are reducing the risk of stroke, so the lycopenes may have nothing to do with it.
Hope that helps!
-Malila

How can we assume that any of the participants were eating the fruits and vegetables as mentioned before? All the info we have is that it is found in fruits and vegetables, we have no idea where the source of the participants lycopenes came from?

[James Finch]

Hi Taylor,

When we have a specific scientific reference for which there isn't any "common sense" outside knowledge that can be brought in, we have to use only the information in the stimulus as a guide. Here, we know we have a large study (1k people) over a 12-year period; the ones with more lycopene in their system are less likely to suffer a stroke. From that, we can make a likely inference that at least some of these thousand people are regularly eating the fruits and vegetables that are high in lycopene, as we know of no other way for a human to obtain it.

The main takeaway is to keep your eyes on the prize; this is a weaken question, with a causal conclusion, so we should be looking for answer choices that weaken causal conclusions: alternate causes, cause without effect (or vice versa), mere correlation, reverse causation. Here, (A) immediately give us an alternate cause, making it the correct answer choice.

Hope this clears things up!

[lalalala]

Hi,

I understand from the previous replies that we can assume that people are eating the fruits and vegetables. However, I thought answer choice D was better than A because it actually tells us that people with high lyco were eating more fruits/vegetables, and provides an alternate cause––perhaps it's the other benefits in the fruits and vegetables, not necessarily the lyco, that made them less likely to have a stroke. I realize that's an assumption I'm making, but we also had to make an assumption in ac A, so I would just like some guidance on how to know when the assumption is warranted.

Thanks for all your help!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi lalala!

The argument in this stimulus is causal. The author is specifically arguing that "lycopene reduces the risk of stroke."

With that in mind, consider a difference between answer choice (A) versus (D). (D) is missing any mention of stroke, so it's unlikely to weaken/strengthen or do anything to an argument making a causal connection between lycopene and stroke risk. By contrast, both lycopene and strokes are discussed in answer choice (A). More specifically, (A) suggests an alternate cause, thus weakening the causal argument in the stimulus.

[lalalala]

Hi lalala!

The argument in this stimulus is causal. The author is specifically arguing that "lycopene reduces the risk of stroke."

With that in mind, consider a difference between answer choice (A) versus (D). (D) is missing any mention of stroke, so it's unlikely to weaken/strengthen or do anything to an argument making a causal connection between lycopene and stroke risk. By contrast, both lycopene and strokes are discussed in answer choice (A). More specifically, (A) suggests an alternate cause, thus weakening the causal argument in the stimulus.

Thank you, Luke. That helps a lot!