- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:00 am
#63960
Complete Question Explanation
Weaken. The correct answer choice is (A)
The doctor quoted here makes a questionable argument: many alternative medicine-used herbs are
safe to consume, so they should always be allowed as prescribed remedies for serious illnesses,
because they won’t harm patients, and might help. We should note the doctor’s use of strong
language: the assertion is that alternative herb prescribed remedies should always be allowed.
The stimulus is followed by a weaken question, which means that we should look for the answer
choice which weakens the doctor’s conclusion. The correct answer choice will likely provide either a
previously unstated detriment that goes along with the use of such herbs, or a benefit associated with
their avoidance.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, providing a previously unstated detriment
associated with the use of such alternative medicine herbs. If the use of such herbs comes at the cost
of effective conventional medicine, then patients might indeed be harmed (by not having access to
conventional methods that have been proven effective).
Answer choice (B): This answer choice does not weaken the doctor’s argument, which allows for the
possibility that some are not effective, but concludes that their prescription should be allowed if they
do no harm.
Answer choice (C): The doctor discusses herbs that have been proven safe to consume, so the fact
that some people are allergic to some medicines does not weaken the doctor’s argument, and this
answer choice is incorrect.
Answer choice (D): The motivations of alternative medicine purveyors does not affect the strength of
the doctor’s conclusion, which is that such herbs should be allowed to be prescribed when they do no
harm and may do some good.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice would not weaken the author’s argument—it may strengthen
the conclusion, providing a benefit of such herbs and making it more likely that they might help.
Weaken. The correct answer choice is (A)
The doctor quoted here makes a questionable argument: many alternative medicine-used herbs are
safe to consume, so they should always be allowed as prescribed remedies for serious illnesses,
because they won’t harm patients, and might help. We should note the doctor’s use of strong
language: the assertion is that alternative herb prescribed remedies should always be allowed.
The stimulus is followed by a weaken question, which means that we should look for the answer
choice which weakens the doctor’s conclusion. The correct answer choice will likely provide either a
previously unstated detriment that goes along with the use of such herbs, or a benefit associated with
their avoidance.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, providing a previously unstated detriment
associated with the use of such alternative medicine herbs. If the use of such herbs comes at the cost
of effective conventional medicine, then patients might indeed be harmed (by not having access to
conventional methods that have been proven effective).
Answer choice (B): This answer choice does not weaken the doctor’s argument, which allows for the
possibility that some are not effective, but concludes that their prescription should be allowed if they
do no harm.
Answer choice (C): The doctor discusses herbs that have been proven safe to consume, so the fact
that some people are allergic to some medicines does not weaken the doctor’s argument, and this
answer choice is incorrect.
Answer choice (D): The motivations of alternative medicine purveyors does not affect the strength of
the doctor’s conclusion, which is that such herbs should be allowed to be prescribed when they do no
harm and may do some good.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice would not weaken the author’s argument—it may strengthen
the conclusion, providing a benefit of such herbs and making it more likely that they might help.
