When a patient failed to respond

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: healthfulness1% picked this

   They establish that the doctor's concerns about the healthfulness of the beverage

   The doctor was never assessing whether or not the herbal drink was healthful or unhealthful, just whether it was interfering with the meds she was prescribing. (grapefruit juice, for example, is healthful but is known to interfere with the efficacy of certain heart medications)

   1%
2. B

   True, But Not the Best9% picked this

   They make it less plausible that the beverage actually contributed to the ineffectiveness of

   This is an obnoxious answer, because it's technically correct, but it doesn't do the most accurate job of capturing how the 2nd test and its results impacted the ultimate hypothesis. In the moment, the fact that "initial dosage / no herb drink" still failed made it less plausible that the beverage was contributing to the ineffectiveness of the meds. But ultimately, we know that the herb drink was contributing (simply quitting the herb drink and doubling the dosage didn't make the meds work, so we know that herb drink was doing something). Since we know that the beverage did contribute to the ineffectiveness, this answer inaccurately describes our eventual takeaway. The question stem is specifically asking us, "How did this 2nd test support the idea that the initial dosage was too little?" And our answer to that would be, "It showed that you couldn't just fix the problem by eliminating the herbal drink. It showed that something else beyond just whether or not the herbal drink was being consumed was causing the meds to be ineffective."

   9%
3. C

   Too Strong: was responsible Opposite14% picked this

   They give evidence that the beverage was responsible for the ineffectiveness of

   Ultimately, we learn that the beverage and the dosage were each partially responsible for the ineffectiveness of the meds initially. So we don't want to use language for dosage or beverage like "THAT thing was responsible." That language implies that only one thing was responsible, when we know dosage and herbal drink made a difference. Also, the results of the 2nd test made it seem like the beverage was not responsible. It was the results of the 3rd test (no herbal drink, double dosage) that made us realize that 1st test (herbal drink, double dosage) was ineffective because of the herbal drink. The combo of the 1st (herbal / double / didn't work) and the 3rd (no herbal / double / did work) show that the herbal beverage has an effect. The combo of the 2nd (no herbal / single / didn't work) and the 3rd (no herbal / double / did work) show that the double dosage has an effect.

   14%
4. D

   Correct71% picked this

   They suggest that the beverage was not the only cause of the ineffectiveness of

   Why this is right

   If the beverage had been the only reason that the initial dosage failed, then the 2nd test (single dosage, no herbal) would have worked. But the meds were still ineffective. That showed us that, "If the herbal drink is doing something at all, it's definitely not the only thing that's having an effect". The results of the 2nd test supported the author's notion that the initial dosage was insufficient by showing that clearly something beyond just the herbal beverage was causing the single dosage to fail.

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

   71%
5. E

   Out of Scope: wrong medication Opposite5% picked this

   They rule out the possibility that the doctor had initially prescribed the wrong medication for

   The doctor was never really entertaining the possibility that she had prescribed the wrong meds, only whether the initial dosage was insufficient. Beyond being out of scope, this answer goes backwards. The fact that the 2nd test showed that "even if you quit your herbal drink, the meds still don't work" would increase the possibility that the wrong meds are being prescribed.

   5%