#22 - In a study, one group of volunteers was fed a

[deck1134]

Just to be clear, (E) weakens the argument because it implies that you can lose body fat with a low-protein diet high-carb diet, you just might not notice because of the water weight that is gained. That means that a high-protein diet could actually be less effective against fat, even if it makes someone lose weight. Is that correct?

[Lauren Hartfiel]

Hi!

I think you mean answer choice (A) A low-protein, high-carbohydrate diet causes the human body to retain water, the added weight of which largely compensates for the weight of any body fat lost, whereas a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet does not.

This weakens the causal link between low carb and fat loss in the conclusion:the most effective way to lose body fat is to eat much protein and shun carbohydrates.

The problem is the low carb diet caused more weight loss, but (A) shows a reason why it might not have caused more fat loss---because of the retained water on the high carb diet.

I hope this helps:) Let me know if you need further explanation.

Best,
Lauren

[lsatretaker]

Hello. Why is C not correct? It says that the diet in question does not cause "any significant weight loss," when the conclusion says it does. I understand why A is correct.

Thank you.

[Adam Tyson]

The reason that doesn't matter, lsatretaker, is that the argument is not about weight loss. It's about losing body fat! If you convert fat to muscle and still weigh the same, then you have in fact lost body fat. Answer C therefore strengthens the argument that a high-protein, low-carb diet can help you lose fat!

Be careful about the authors switching terms on you from the premises to the conclusion, or from the stimulus to the answer chocies. This is a classic bait-and-switch. We've seen similar changes many, many times, like an argument that has premises about lowering heart disease and a conclusion about being healthier overall, or a stimulus that is about the cost of education and an answer choice that focuses on just tuition. Another example of a subtle switcheroo they sometimes pull is when they provide evidence about revenues and then conclude something about profits. Pay attention to every word, because when you conflate two things that are not the same, or mistake one idea (burning fat) for another (losing weight), you will fall right into their cleverly designed traps!

[lsatretaker]

Wow - yeah I did not see that. Thank you for explaining. I thought I was good about catching those - I guess I just have to read even closer!