Q10 - Nutritionists believe that a person's

[robowarren]

Hi,

Aren't we trying to find a way to weaken the conclusion? So we need to find an answer that will weaken the fact that most people need to take vitamin pills?

Or is that my problem? That I am too focused on the conclusion?

I thought the answer had to be B because it allows for people to not know how many nutrients they are getting so it throws the "Serving size" piece out of the window...

Could someone explain why D is a better answer?

Thank you!

[timmydoeslsat]

This argument can be seen like this:

Eat 5 servings of F & V a day ---> Get enough vitamins.

Well, most people ~Eat 5 servings of F & V a day.

The conclusion is basically just a clever way of saying that people are not getting enough vitamins.

This is a classic LSAT argument in the fact that the arguer is not considering how else people may getting enough vitamins. While it is true that most people are not getting enough vitamins through the 5 servings way, they may still nonetheless be getting enough vitamins. That is how we want to weaken that conclusion of people needing vitamin pills.

Answer choice (D) shows us that these people are getting enough vitamins! They do not need the diet pills. They may be eating a lot of ice cream and chocolate, but they eventually reach those vitamin needs.

Answer choice B is not strong enough. Nutrients is not the same as vitamins.

[robowarren]

Thanks! So part of y issue was that I was too focused on the conclusion when I needed to weaken the entire argument?

[timmydoeslsat]

Well, I personally cannot forsee one concentrating too much on a conclusion...that is a good thing! We are given evidence that most people are not using that sufficient condition to arrive at having enough vitamins. The argument is concluding that since that is the case, these people are not having enough vitamins. Why else would the arguer conclude that these people should take vitamin pills?

We do want to attack the conclusion! We do want to show that those people do not need vitamin pills! Answer choice D shows that these people do not need the vitamin pills, they are already consuming enough vitamins.

[andrea.devas]

I was first drawn to (D) and then crossed it out because I felt the word " many" was not strong enough to be the correct answer to a weaken question. Can someone elaborate on this? I typically cross out answers that include some, many or sometimes because I am looking for a stronger word. Thanks!

[timmydoeslsat]

I would say that close to a majority of correct answer choices on strengthen/weaken question stems include the word many. The word many is a potentially very powerful word that cannot be ignored. I would agree that, depending on the wording of the argument and what the argument attempts to conclude, a some statement is unlikely to be of great value. This is due to a majority of arguments being able to withstand a situation of 1 thing not being consistent with what the argument says happens.

So you would agree with me that we know that eating 5 servings of veggies of fruits a day is sufficient to meeting the vitamin requirement according to the stimulus?

It is indeed true from the stimulus according to nutritionists.

Unfortunately though, a majority of people eat less than the 5 servings of fruits and veggies a day.

Does this mean that these people in question are in fact no meeting the vitamin requirement?

It does not. We know that they are not meeting the vitamin requirement by way of fruits and veggies. But as D points out, perhaps those people are meeting the vitamin requirement with other foods.

[shirando21]

what is a good reason to eliminate E?

Fruits and vegetables are also important sources of fiber, then we should still eat fruits and vegetables which vitamin pills don't contain.

is it because we are not talking about fiber in this argument? we are only talking about vitamin?

[timmydoeslsat]

what is a good reason to eliminate E?

Fruits and vegetables are also important sources of fiber, then we should still eat fruits and vegetables which vitamin pills don't contain.

is it because we are not talking about fiber in this argument? we are only talking about vitamin?

That is right. Fiber is not a vitamin.

We know that fruits and veggies are one way to get the vitamin requirements.

Although most people eat a lot less than the amount of fruits and veggies needed, that does not mean most people do not obtain the vitamin requirements.

[shirando21]

Yeah, right, fibre is really not the issue in this argument. The core is about intake of vitamin

[mchelle]

Is (C) incorrect because it disputes the premise and not the actual reasoning between the premise and conclusion?

[ohthatpatrick]

To answer the previous poster's questions, yes, (C) only calls into question premise-type stuff. It's also super weak to say that they SOMETIMES disagree about serving size. That could merely mean that a few nutritionists say we should have 15g of banana, not 14g. Big whoop.

Our job is to call into question the conclusion, whether most people need to take vitamin pills.

Since this is a Weaken question, we start by finding the core:

Prem:
Most ppl eat far less than the amount of fruits and veggies it would take to satisfy the daily requirement for vitamins.

Conc:
Thus, most people need to take vitamin pills.

Whenever I do Weaken questions, I always say the opposite of the Conclusion (the "Anti-Conclusion"). That's MY side of the debate. I have to accept that most ppl eat far less fruits/veggies than the amount needed to get your daily vitamins, BUT I still argue that most people do NOT need to take vitamin pills.

Which answer gives me a way to argue that?

(A) This is talking about a problem with getting your vitamins via the 5 fruits/veggies route. If you don't diversify, you don't get all the right vitamins. If it's hard/complicated to get your vitamins via the 5 fruits/veggies route, then maybe people DO need to take vitamin pills. This is helping my position at all. Eliminate.

(B) Some fruits/veggies are better than others. This is similar to (A), in that it suggests that some versions of 5 fruits/veggies are not as good as others. If it's hard/complicated to get your vitamins via the 5 fruits/veggies route, then maybe people DO need to take vitamin pills. This is helping my position at all. Eliminate.

(C) The fact that nutritionists SOMETIMES disagree about what is a complete serving still gives me no way to argue that most people do NOT need to take vitamin pills. Eliminate.

(D) Ah, here we go. If people are getting fruit/veggie vitamins in the OTHER foods they eat, then they don't need to take vitamin pills to get those vitamins. Keep it.

(E) This is almost tempting, because it sounds like there's a problem with vitamin pills. But wait, this is about fiber, not vitamins. The argument is about getting vitamins. Another problem with (E) is that it makes it seem like people should be eating fruits/veggies instead of vitamin pills. But that's the wrong context for this argument. We're not debating whether or not fruits/veggies are more ideal for vitamins. We're saying, if we accept that people are NOT getting their vitamins from 5 servings of fruits/veggies, do we have to accept that they need vitamin pills?

Any answer that makes fruit/veggies out to be bigger rock stars is irrelevant, since the premise we have to accept is that people don't eat enough fruits/veggies. They need to make up that vitamin deficiency somewhere. Does it HAVE to be vitamin pills as the conclusion says?

No, (D) implies, you can get those vitamins from fortified foods.

Someone earlier was commenting on the weak strength of the word 'many' in (D). I agree that 'many' is often not strong enough on Strengthen/Weaken questions. But if you have a strongly worded conclusion, such as "most people NEED to take vitamin pills", you really only have to suggest that there is SOME other option to make an effective objection.

Also, don't be afraid to pick the only answer that Weakens, even if it only Weakens a little bit.

Hope this helps.