Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT120 S2 P4 Q26 Explanation

Pathogens

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsPrimary PurposeScience

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathogens—disease-causing parasites—have evolved to incapacitate, and often overwhelm, their hosts. Such behavior is at odds with the prevailing view of host-parasite relations—that, in general, host and parasite ultimately develop a benign coexistence. This view is based on the idea that parasites that resulting from the host’s incapacitation. This scenario suggests that even death-causing pathogens can achieve evolutionary success.

One implication of this perspective is that a pathogen’s virulence—its capacity to overcome a host’s defenses and incapacitate it—is a function of its mode of transmission. For example, rhinoviruses, which cause the common cold, require physical proximity for transmission to occur. If a rhinovirus reproduces so extensively in a solitary host that because it is transmitted directly, the common cold is unlikely to disable its victims.

The opposite can occur when pathogens are transported by a vector—an organism that can carry and transmit an infectious agent. If, for example, a pathogen capable of being transported by a mosquito reproduces so extensively that its human host is immobilized, it can still pass along its genes if a mosquito bites mosquito obtains a high dose of the pathogen, increasing the level of transmission to new hosts.

While medical literature generally supports the hypothesis that vector-borne pathogens tend to be more virulent than directly transmitted pathogens—witness the lethal nature of malaria, yellow fever, typhus, and sleeping sickness, all carried by biting insects—a few directly transmitted pathogens such as diphtheria and tuberculosis bacteria can be just as lethal. Scientists call to an average rhinovirus life span of hours—makes them among the most dangerous of all pathogens.

What this question is testing

Primary Purpose

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
26.

The primary purpose of the passage

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Emphasis: comparison29% picked this

    compare examples challenging the prevailing view of host-parasite relations with examples

    This is fairly tempting since the author does cite examples challenging the prevailing view (malaria, yellow fever, typhus, and sleeping sickness) and does cite examples supporting it (rhinoviruses like the common cold). This answer wouldn't have anything to say about the final paragraph, where author shows examples that neither fit the prevailing view nor fit the revised "virulence is a function of mode of transmission" view. So this answer is less comprehensive than the correct answer. It also just misses the purpose to say the author merely wanted to compare these examples with those examples. The #1 reason the author sat down to write this is to talk about the new view: "virulence is a function of mode of transmission: direct will normally be milder and vector will normally be more severe".

  2. Out of Scope: mistaken rationale4% picked this

    argue that the prevailing view of host-parasite relations is correct but is based on

    The author's final paragraph shows that there are some exceptions to the new view that "vector-borne pathogens tend to be more virulent than directly transmitted pathogens". But that final paragraph isn't saying that the new view is wrong and therefore that prevailing view was essentially correct but based on a mistaken rationale. The prevailing view was that parasites won't evolve to incapacitate their hosts, but both the 3rd and 4th paragraph are talking about parasites that do incapacitate / kill their hosts. The prevailing view "is based on the idea that parasites that do not harm their hosts have the best chance for long-term survival; they thrive because their hosts thrive". Our author never tries to argue that there's anything mistaken about that. She's just presenting the new perspective that, "even if that's the best chance for long-term survival, there are other evolutionary strategies that can still work, such as replicating enough that the transmission into new hosts exceeds the loss of pathogens resulting from the host being incapacitated."

  3. Correct62% picked this

    offer a modification to the prevailing view of

    Why this is right

    Many of us may not be in love with modification of the prevailing view, but it seems to be the best available option. If we were looking for some Old / New language like, "to present this new perspective on host-parasite relations", then we can at least be pleased that "offering a modification" can match up with "discussing this new view". The prevailing view was that "in general, host and parasite ultimately develop a benign coexistence". The modification being offered recently by some biologists focuses on those atypical cases in which the parasite incapacitates the host. It adds this concept that if the mode of transmission is vector based, then the parasite could evolve towards greater virulence, so that the vector gets a nice dose of the disease to take to the next host.

    Skill tested: Primary Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  4. Out of Scope: attack evidence2% picked this

    attack evidence that supports the prevailing view of

    The evidence for the prevailing view was the concept that "parasites that don't harm their hosts have the best chance for long-term survival" and that mild diseases like rhinoviruses demonstrate how a parasite 'wants' its host to not be harmed, to still go to work so that the rhinovirus can spread to new hosts. The passage isn't trying to attack any of those ideas. Rather, it's finding a way to deal with the fact that there seem to be exceptions to that rule. There seem to be parasites that do have evolutionary success, even while causing death. So the passage is attempting to explain how that's possible and to help us appreciate this overall correlation between mode of transmission and virulence, which we're just now appreciating.

  5. Wrong Emphasis: the origins3% picked this

    examine the origins of the prevailing view of

    While the first half of the 1st paragraph gives us some of the underpinnings of the prevailing view, the passage then moves onto talking about this New view, and does so for the rest of the passage. This passage is primarily about the New view, not the prevailing view.

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