Logical Reasoning

PT12 · S1 · Q15 Salmonella is a food‐borne microorganism

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

Start practicing free

Salmonella is a food‐borne microorganism that can cause intestinal illness.

Conclusion (clearly)

Public health officials would be well advised to replace the previous Salmonella tests with the new test.

Evidence

Salmonella is a food-borne microorganism that can cause intestinal illness, sometimes fatal if not treated quickly.

Conventional Salmonella tests on food samples are slow and can miss unusual strains of the microorganism.

A new test identifies the presence or absence of Salmonella by the one piece of genetic material common to all strains.

Evaluate

This argument presents a recommendation, which means the author thinks that the upsides of using the new test would outweigh the downsides.

The upside mentioned is that the new test searches for something common to all strains, whereas the old test can miss unusual strains.

Are there any downsides? Are there any upsides?

How do they compare when it comes to speed of diagnosis, accuracy of treatment, cost, ease of implementation, etc.

Goal

Let's find an answer that provides additional support for why the new test should replace the old one, focusing on making the recommendation more advantageous or ruling out a potential problem.

15.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

  1. The level of skill required

    Opposite Impact

    This says the new test is harder to administer, which is a downside, the opposite of what we're looking for.

    2% picked this

  2. Correct

    The new test returns results

    Why this is right

    The new test's ability to return results very soon after food samples are submitted is a good thing. And we know it's an advantage over the current test, because they told us the current test is "slow". This helps us argue in favor of the new test.

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

    92% picked this

  3. A proposed new treatment for

    Irrelevant Comparison

    This answer is comparing two different treatments for Salmonella, whereas we're trying to have conversation about two different tests for Salmonella. This doesn't give us any info about either type of test.

    5% picked this

  4. Salmonella poisoning is becoming less

    No Impact

    The frequency of Salmonella poisoning changing in the general population is irrelevant to the argument about whether the new test should replace the old one. The argument is more concerned with testing accuracy and speed than current infection rates.

    0% picked this

  5. Some remedies for Salmonella poisoning

    Irrelevant Quality

    The fact that some remedies for Salmonella also cure other intestinal disorders is unrelated to our conversation, which is about picking which test we should use to see if someone has Salmonella.

    1% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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