Logical Reasoning

PT114 · S1 · Q13 Recent research indicates that increased

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Recent research indicates that increased consumption of fruits and vegetables by middle-aged people reduces their susceptibility to stroke in later years.

Statements

Since we're primarily reading for Causal, Conditional, Comparative, or Pivot wording, we would want the causal verb in each sentence to stick out to us.

Eating more fruits susceptibility to and veggies during reduces stroke in later middle-aged years years

This might be because fruits and veggies have folic acid.

Low folic acid is associated with high homocysteine (correlation), and homocysteine contributes to blocked arteries.

If we were trying to assemble a causal chain, it might look like this:

eat lots of → high folic acid → fruit/vegetables low homocysteine

less blocked → less likely to arteries have a stroke

The one thing that might make us nervous about this is that the middle sentence says "researchers speculate that this may be because", so we don't want to sound overconfident.

Goal

Look for a safely worded answer that reinforces one (or more) of the causal connections we were told about.

13.

Which one of the following statements is most strongly supported by the information above?

  1. An increased risk of stroke

    Opposite

    We think high levels of homocysteine (which contribute to blocked arteries) would be correlated with an increased risk of stroke.

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    A decreased risk of stroke

    Why this is right

    This reinforces the causal chain this paragraph was putting together: You eat more fruits and veggies, you get more folic acid, you have lower homocysteine, you have less blocked arteries, you have reduced susceptibility to stroke.

    Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    83% picked this

  3. An increased propensity for blocked

    Opposite

    The last sentence makes it seem like an increased propensity for blocked arteries would be correlated with high levels of homocysteine.

    2% picked this

  4. A decreased propensity for blocked

    Opposite

    Low levels of folic acid are correlated with high homocysteine, which blocks arteries, so that would be an increased propensity for blocked arteries.

    6% picked this

  5. Stroke is prevented by ingestion

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: prevented Opposite: decline in homocysteine This is only about reducing susceptibility to stroke. The paragraph isn't saying that we can prevent stroke. More importantly, this is messing up the relationship between homocysteine and stroke. High homocysteine would lead to stroke (via blocked arteries). Low homocysteine would prevent stroke. This answer is saying, "If we can just eat enough folic acid to keep our homocysteine from getting low, we can prevent stroke". It's really, "if we can eat enough folic acid to MAKE a decline in levels of homocysteine, we'll be better at preventing stroke".

    5% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free