Page 3-5 question 8

[Adeline]

Hi!

I have a question regarding choice E of the logical reasoning question 8 on page 3-5 of lesson 3.
I thought that answer choice E was irrelevant when I was doing this question.

The author reaches the conclusion that the proposal is pointless because the lobsters will not live long enough to contract the disease, while choice E stated that humans become ill after eating lobsters with gill diseases.

Choice E to me seems like stating a fact that is parallel to the first sentence of the passage, which the author did not disagree with -- the point that humans would get sick after eating lobsters that have gill disease.

It would make more sense to me if the answer choice E states that "humans often become ill as a result of the eating lobsters in the industrial harbours", which would follow that logic that the lobsters did contract the diseases and that the proposal is not pointless, which in turn would weaken the author's conclusion. But the statement in E seems irrelevant to the author's point to me.

I am a bit confused now and I really want to make sure that I understand every point. Could you explain further on this question? Thank you in advance

Adeline

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Adeline,

Please see the Lesson 3 explanations here for a start on this: lsat/viewforum.php?f=1142

Thanks!