Logical Reasoning

PT14 · S4 · Q6 The number of hospital emergency room

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

The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew by more than 25 percent during the 1980s.

Conclusion (clearly then)

The use of heroin rose during the 1980s.

Evidence

Hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew by more than 25 percent during the 1980s.

Evaluate

The #1 argument pattern in Strengthen / Weaken is Explain Curious Fact, and when we see words like "hypothesis / explanation / account for" in the question stem, we know we're dealing with that sort of "Solve the Causal Mystery" style of argument.

The causal mystery (i.e. curious fact) is almost always a Comparative idea, and in this case it's a comparison over time.

CURIOUS FACT Why did the number of ER visits by heroin users go up by 25% in the 80's?

EXPLANATION More people were using heroin (so more people were overdosing, so more people had to go to the ER to be treated).

Whenever we are evaluating an Explain Curious Fact argument, we know to consider these two pressure points: 1. Alternate Explanations for the curious fact 2. the Plausibility of the author's explanation

It's already way more common on Weaken to get an answer providing an alternate explanation, but in this case the question stem specifically demands one. It wants a way to explain the curious statistic such that we're NOT supporting the conclusion.

Goal

We need an alternate explanation for why there were more ER visits from heroin users by the end of the 1980's compared to the beginning of the 1980's.

6.

Which one of the following, if true, would account for the statistic above without supporting the author’s conclusion?

  1. Correct

    Widespread use of automatic weapons

    Why this is right

    Here's an alternate storyline. It's not that more people were using heroin and needing emergency medical treatment for heroin overdoses. It's that heroin users were increasingly needing emergency medical treatment for gunshot wounds. The same number of users could have ended up in the ER more frequently because of injuries from a more dangerous drug-trade environment.

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

    75% picked this

  2. The introduction of a smokable

    No Impact

    A reduced risk of infection would lead to fewer ER trips, so this is the opposite of what we're looking for.

    4% picked this

  3. Many hospital emergency rooms were

    Restates Paradox

    This discusses the effects of having more ER visits from heroin users, but we're trying to look for a story about what caused there to be more ER visits from heroin users.

    3% picked this

  4. Heroin use increased much more

    Premise Support

    This supports the author's conclusion, which is the opposite of what the question stem told us to do. It's saying, "heroin use went up even more than you're already thinking!"

    2% picked this

  5. Viral and bacterial infections, malnourishment,

    No Impact

    Because this doesn't say whether those conditions became more frequent in the 1980s, it doesn't offer a new storyline for why there are more ER visits than before.

    17% 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