Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT132 S4 Q17 Explanation

A 24-year study of 1,500 adults

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

TopicsParadox

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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.

Stimulus

A 24-year study of 1,500 adults showed that those subjects with a high intake of foods rich in beta­ carotene were much less likely to die from cancer or heart disease than were those with a low intake of such foods. On the other hand, taking beta-carotene supplements for 12 health of subjects in a separate study of 20,000 adults.

What this question is testing

Paradox

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
17.

Each of the following, if true, would help to resolve the apparent discrepancy between the results of the

Answer choices

  1. Resolves the Discrepancy2% picked this

    The human body processes the beta-carotene present in foods much more efficiently than it

    This provides a difference between food and a supplement that could explain the difference in outcomes for the two studies.

  2. Resolves the Discrepancy3% picked this

    Beta-carotene must be taken for longer than 12 years to have

    This provides a difference between the two studies that could explain the difference in outcome.

  3. Resolves the Discrepancy4% picked this

    Foods rich in beta-carotene also tend to contain other nutrients that assist in the human

    This provides a difference between food and a supplement that could explain the difference in outcomes for the two studies.

  4. Correct69% picked this

    In the 12-year study, half of the subjects were given beta-carotene supplements and half were

    Why this is right

    This only affects the study of beta-carotene supplements and does not provide a reason why beta-carotene taken by supplement may not be as effective as beta-carotene consumed through food.

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

  5. Resolves the Discrepancy22% picked this

    In the 24-year study, the percentage of the subjects who had a high intake of beta­ carotene-rich foods who smoked cigarettes was much smaller

    This provides a difference between the two groups that could explain the difference in outcomes.

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