Between 1951 and 1963, it was illegal

Answer choices

1. A

   Alternate Explanation8% picked this

   Death from an alcohol-related disease generally does not occur until five to ten years after the onset

   This is letting us know that alcohol deaths from 1951-1956 aren't caused by excessive drinking during 1951-1956. They're caused by heavy drinking that occurred 5-10 years prior. So the deaths in 1951-1956 were caused by heaving drinking that occurred in the 1940s, before Prohibition. Thus, the author would be wrong to interpret the uptick in alcohol deaths in the early 1950s as a sign that people were drinking more in the early 1950s.

   8%
2. B

   Alternate Explanation6% picked this

   The diseases that can be caused by excessive alcohol consumption can also be caused by other kinds of behavior that

   This is suggesting that the deaths from "disease related to excessive alcohol consumption" can also be caused by other (non-alcohol related) behavior. This other behavior increased between 1951 and 1963. Thus, the author may be wrong to think that an uptick in deaths from these diseases in 1951-1956 is a signal that people were drinking more. This uptick in deaths could really be from an increase in those "other kinds of behavior" that can also lead to dying from these diseases.

   6%
3. C

   Alternate Explanation13% picked this

   The death rate resulting from alcohol-related diseases increased just as sharply during the ten years before and the ten years after the prohibition of

   This is suggesting that the death rate from alcohol-related diseases has a lot of volatility, unrelated to Prohibition. The author is looking at higher death rates from these diseases in 1951-1956 and blaming this on "Prohibition causing people to drink more". But this answer is saying we saw similar spikes in 1941 and in 1973, neither of which were during Prohibition. So it suggests that these upticks in deaths from alcohol-related diseases are cyclical or random, but not connected to Prohibition.

   13%
4. D

   Correct61% picked this

   Many who died of alcohol-related diseases between 1951 and 1963 consumed illegally imported alcoholic beverages produced by the same methods

   Why this is right

   This doesn't really have any impact, which is why it's correct. It's talking about people dying from these alcohol-related diseases and saying that these people were consuming alcohol. So, if anything, it aligns with the author's argument.

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

   61%
5. E

   Alternate Explanation12% picked this

   Between 1951 and 1963, among the people with preexisting alcohol-related diseases, the percentage who obtained lifesaving medical attention declined because of a social

   This is suggesting that the reason deaths from alcohol related diseases went up from 1951-1956 isn't because people were drinking more during Prohibition. Rather, people were less inclined to seek medical help during Prohibition. If COVID rates stayed the same in a community, but community members stopped seeking medical help for COVID, then there would be an increase in deaths (because some deaths were no longer being averted by medical interventions). But that wouldn't mean that more people had COVID. This is saying that people were too ashamed to go to a doctor and say, "I have health problems from my alcohol consumption". They didn't get the medical assistance they needed, so they unnecessarily perished from those diseases.

   12%