Q9 - High blood cholesterol levels are ...

[ban2110]

To be honest, I'm not sure I understand the structure of this stimulus. I would greatly appreciate if someone could break down the argument and how to differentiate between (C) and (D).

Conclusion: Shellfish is not necessarily bad for the heart

Premise: It is very low in unsaturated fat, which affects blood cholesterol levels much more than dietary cholesterol does.

Premise: High blood cholesterol levels are bad for the heart. Like meat, eggs and poultry, shellfish contains cholesterol.

[ohthatpatrick]

You almost nailed the argument core.

Conclusion: Shellfish is not necessarily bad for the heart
correct

Premise: It is very low in unsaturated fat, which affects blood cholesterol levels much more than dietary cholesterol does.
correct

Premise: High blood cholesterol levels are bad for the heart. Like meat, eggs and poultry, shellfish contains cholesterol.
incorrect

This says that shellfish contains cholesterol, which can be bad for the heart. Would that support the idea that "shellfish is NOT bad for the heart"?

No, that sounds more like "shellfish IS bad for the heart".

These ideas are counterpoints; they oppose what the author is ultimately arguing.

What word in the stimulus gives us the signal that these ideas are counterpoints?

But!

Whenever we see but/yet/however, we know that the previous idea goes against the forthcoming idea.

But/yet/however are very frequently keywords that introduce the main conclusion.

We most often see them with this sort of structure:
i. Counterpoint(s)
ii. But/yet/however Main Conclusion
iii. Premise

For example:
Kobe has won more championships than Lebron. But Lebron is the better player. He has more all around talent than Kobe.

So back to our argument here.

We are trying to establish that shellfish is okay for the heart, based on the fact that it has little saturated fat, and apparently saturated fat is affects blood cholesterol levels more than dietary cholestrol does.

(C) compares shellfish to meat, eggs, and poultry. Does that help us establish that shellfish is okay for the heart? Not really, because I have no idea whether meat, eggs, and poultry are good or bad for the heart.

If I knew that meat/eggs/poultry were okay for the heart, then hearing that shellfish has even LESS cholesterol per gram would make it sound like it was okay for the heart.

But I don't know that.

And if meat/eggs/poultry are BAD for the heart, hearing that shellfish has LESS cholesterol per gram does not necessarily make it okay for the heart.

Maybe arsenic has less poison per molecule than anthrax. That doesn't mean that arsenic is necessarily safe or non-toxic.

(D) says that shellfish (in virtue of being low in saturated fat) promotes low blood cholesterol. Does that help us establish that shellfish is okay for the heart? Sure, because the first sentence tells us that HIGH blood cholesterol levels are BAD for the heart. That implies that LOW blood cholesterol is BETTER for the heart.

Let me know if any questions remain about this one.